55% supermajority for dissolution of parliament vote

marklv

kennyboy66 wrote: »

Why stop there ? Why not 75% ?

If this was Gordon Brown, we would have had dozens of posts comparing him with Robert Mugabe.

It's xxxxxx outrageous - although I suspect its not true.

It is true. Reported on the BBC as well.

kennyboy66_2

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

Oooh, not happy with that. Very unhappy with that full stop. I am not going to defend that if true.

Part of my excitement at this coalition was the thought of the repeal of years of invasive, intrusive, assaults on civil liberties, ID cards, DNA Database etc etc.

And yes, Gordon Brown had a massive problem with democracy.

This is just the kind of thing that will lose the Liberals huge numbers of votes - particularly if the next Labour leader is move civil libertarian than Brown (would be hard not to).

Sir_Humphrey

I notice that MarkLV is arguing for this over at:

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2697?cp=8

I wonder who might be paying his wages...

tomterm8

I don't remember this being in the manifesto of either party. Shows how much they trust the public.

chucky

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

According to the Telegraph, the new Lib Dem and Conservative government plans to make it necessary to have a 55% vote to pass a motion of no confidence in the House of Commons to remove the government.

And you thought Gordon Brown had a problem with democracy...

Utterly bonkers.

this is all starting to give the impression that the DC and NC want to enjoy the limelight and be in power for as long as possible...

abaxas

tomterm8 wrote: »

I don't remember this being in the manifesto of either party. Shows how much they trust the public.

Irrelevent.

Manifestos are not legally binding and are mearly a document stating what they might do.

The beleif that have any value, lies only with the stupid.

Spartacus_Mills

chucky wrote: »

this is all starting to give the impression that the DC and NC want to enjoy the limelight and be in power for as long as possible...

It is not starting as we mean to go on, certainly. I thought we wanted to reform sleazy politics not make it worse.

I am hoping it is not true.

Sir_Humphrey

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

It is not starting as we mean to go on, certainly. I thought we wanted to reform sleazy politics not make it worse.

I am hoping it is not true.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/12/lib-dem-tory-deal-coalition

6. Political Reform

The parties agree to the establishment of five-year fixed-term parliaments. A Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government will put a binding motion before the House of Commons in the first days following this agreement stating that the next general election will be held on the first Thursday of May 2015.

Following this motion, legislation will be brought forward to make provision for fixed-term parliaments of five years. This legislation will also provide for dissolution if 55% or more of the House votes in favour.

So what are you Liberals going to do then?

Really2

The last no confidence vote was 1979. Only 3 in the 20th century (1924,1924 and 1979 all were carried with a majority of 311 or more.)

Is this not just to bolster to the outside world that the coalition will be a stable government for the term.

Degenerate

People called Brown a "Megalomaniac" for no reason.

Now Dave and Nick have launched a direct assault on our democracy for the sake of their political convenience.