UK Election 2010

[DocRorlach 25]

Originally posted by: warrior

I think we should let the conservatives in and then in 6 months or a year we can vote them in or out.

In the US you vote every 2 years right? That would be best in England as well.quote>

There is no way (short of massive demonstrations/strikes/petitions in the millions) to ensure a vote: the power to set the voting date is up to the Prime Minister who can only be forced by the parliament.

As for the US: it only appears that way. In fact the voting cycle is four years for the president as well as both houses (senate = upper house here, congress = parliament). But the voting cycles overlap. Hence 2009 saw the presidential election for a start in 2010 (January), and the next congressional election (as well as governors & all manners of minor minions) will be held in 2011 for the 2012 legislature.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: DocRorlach

As for the US: it only appears that way. In fact the voting cycle is four years for the president as well as both houses (senate = upper house here, congress = parliament). But the voting cycles overlap. Hence 2009 saw the presidential election for a start in 2010 (January), and the next congressional election (as well as governors & all manners of minor minions) will be held in 2011 for the 2012 legislature.quote>

Nonono, you've got it all wrong.

First of all, the national elections are in even-numbered years. Obama was elected November 2008 and took office January 2009. The same goes for the current congress, next election for them is this fall.

Secondly, the voting cycle for president is four years, but it is not four years for everyone. For congressmen, it's only two years. Every other year, all 435 house seats go on the ballots. The senate, meanwhile, uses six year terms, with one-third of the seats being on the ballots every other year. 33 or 34 of the 100 senate seats will be up for grabs this fall.

And we actually do have an election every year, though in odd-numbered years only state, county, and local positions are on the ballot. My city elected a new mayor last fall, as well as some new city councilmen. And two states elected a new governor.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

I didn't know when the local elections are, however I assume you all have permanent polling places that are used universally and all your electoral districts coincide.

In most Commonwealth countries, the physical election machinery is temporary, only laid out when an election is called.  Some counties have regular terms for municipal elections, but other legislatures/parliaments are at the will of the premier/prime minister who traditionally calls an election every five years or less.  There is then a short hop to the election on the order of two or three months, then the vote.  No primaries since the Leader of the party with the most seats will be Premier or Prime Minister.  Party Leaders are chosen by a convention of the party called for the purpose, and in one case I can think of, by a mail ballot.

In Canada, electoral districts (ridings) in Provinces and for the Federal Government may or may not coincide.  As population changes, there is a lot of Gerrymandering, usually in favour of the party in power.  I believe the U.K. does this, also.

[DocRorlach 25]

Oops, apologies for getting the US voting system wrong. I had assumed alternate 4-year cycles.

Firmer ground here in the UK, since rather recent. I don't think there are any "permanent" polling places. Nor is there a fixed cycle. And even the constituencies change, according to population density changes, I understand.

The trouble this time around was that a quite a few people got turned away; the law states that polling ends at 10pm, but the high turnout flumoxed a lot of places. Not enough ballots in some places; another place told young voters to let older folks vote first, but by the time the young were up, the station closed on them. In some areas, where the winning margins were close, this might still prompt legal challenges, although with little chance of success.

I know of a village where roughly 2000 voters had nine polling places, as much as some districts put up for twenty times that many voters. And even the vulcanic dust clound played its part: postal votes got delayed too much to be counted, especially form ex-pat Brits in southern Europe and Asia.

Hardly a fair and even voting system.

[Boggy1 45]

Another day, another incredible breaking story in this election; the most important and changing in decades.

Gordon Brown resigns as UK prime minister

Gordon Brown has announced he is resigning as UK prime minister. Mr Brown has officially tendered his resignation to the Queen at Buckingham Palace, and recommended Conservative leader David Cameron succeed him. Speaking alongside his wife Sarah outside No 10 Downing Street, he said the job had been "a privilege" and wished his successor well. Mr Brown is also stepping down as Labour leader and as an MP with immediate effect. His decision comes as the Tories and Liberal Democrats are poised to agree a deal to form a government. Mr Brown said he had taken the decision to resign after concluding he would not be able to form a government after days of talks between the parties. 'Privilege to serve' In an emotional farewell speech outside No 10, Mr Brown said he had "loved the job" and it had been "a privilege to serve".   BROWN STANDS DOWN Gordon Brown's rise and fall Labour leader: Runners and riders In quotes: Resignation reaction In pictures: Gordon Brown "I loved the job for its potential to make this country I love fairer, more tolerant, more green, more democratic, more prosperous and more just - truly a greater Britain. "In the face of many years, challenges up to and including the global financial meltdown, I have always tried to serve, to do my best in the interests of Britain, its values and its people." David Cameron is expected to go to Buckingham Palace later on Tuesday to accept the Queen's invitation to form a government. Anticipating that, Mr Brown said: "I wish the next prime minister well as he makes the important choices for the future." His two young sons joined him and wife Sarah for his brief statement which ended with the words: "Thank you and goodbye." Failed talks Mr Brown also said he would stand down as Labour leader with immediate effect. Mr Brown succeeded Tony Blair as prime minister in June 2007 after spending ten years as chancellor of the exchequer. His resignation follows Thursday's general election in which no party won an overall majority but the Conservatives won the most seats and votes. Both Labour and the Tories have since been trying to persuade the Lib Dems to join them in a coalition government to run the country. Mr Brown had previously said he would resign as Labour leader, but stay on as prime minister until September, if Labour could agree a deal with the Lib Dems. But after this possibility ended, the BBC's Political Editor Nick Robinson said Mr Brown decided he could not form a government and should stand down. Nick Robinson said Mr Brown had made his announcement before the Conservatives and Lib Dems had formally announced they would be combining to form a government. Before making his announcement, Mr Brown consulted with his wife Sarah and close colleagues including Lord Mandelson, Douglas Alexander, Ed Balls and Ed Miliband. Mr Brown also spoke to former prime minister Tony Blair by phone. Labour's ruling National Executive Committee has indicated it wants Mr Brown's successor as leader to be chosen as soon as possible, possibly by the end of July.

 

[DocRorlach 25]

If indeed Cameron (sorry, in my mind he does not deserve the title Mr.) moves into No. 10 in the next few days, I predict that the voters of Britain will regret their votes within a matter of months. While the local markets will, of course, react upbeat for a few days, the hard-liners he brings along will ensure that the already growing chasm between the upper classes (i.e. monied sector, bankers, industrialists, lawyers, politicians) and the rest of the country (middle and lower classes in terms of income & wealth) will grow ten-fold over the next five years.

[Boggy1 45]

 David Cameron has now become the new Prime Minister. He has left Buckingham Palace with approval from the Queen, and has arrived at Downing Street. Already all the old Labour staff from the Number 10 complex have left; with the new Conservative one already in place. From Gordon Brown resigning, to David Cameron being instilled as our new leader; only two hours has past.

David Cameron is UK's new prime minister

Mr Cameron has been Conservative leader since 2005 Conservative leader David Cameron is the new UK prime minister after the resignation of Gordon Brown. Mr Cameron, 43, has left Buckingham Palace after formally accepting the Queen's request to form a government. Mr Cameron's Conservative Party won the most seats in the UK general election last week, but not an overall majority and have been in coalition talks. It is not yet known whether they have reached a formal agreement with the Lib Dems to form a coalition. The Conservatives have been in days of negotiations with the Lib Dems - who were also negotiating with Labour - after the UK election resulted in a hung parliament. But the Lib Dems said talks with Labour failed because "the Labour Party never took seriously the prospects of forming a progressive, reforming government". Formal agreement A spokesman said key members of the Labour team "gave every impression of wanting the process to fail" and the party had made "no attempt at all" to agree a common approach on issues like schools funding and tax reform. "Certain key Labour cabinet ministers were determined to undermine any agreement by holding out on policy issues and suggesting that Labour would not deliver on proportional representation and might not marshal the votes to secure even the most modest form of electoral reform," he said.    I loved the job not for its prestige, its titles and its ceremony - which I do not love at all. No, I loved the job for its potential to make this country I love fairer  Gordon Brown Brown resigns as prime minister Gordon Brown's rise and fall Brown resignation: Reaction in quotes However Labour's Lord Mandelson told the BBC they had been "up for" a deal with the Lib Dems, but they had "created so many barriers and obstacles that perhaps they thought their interests lay on the Tory side, on the Conservative side, rather than the progressive side". After it became clear the talks had failed, Mr Brown tendered his resignation and said he wished the next prime minister well. In an emotional resignation statement outside Number Ten, Mr Brown thanked his staff, his wife Sarah and their children, who joined the couple as they left for Buckingham Palace. Mr Brown said it had been "a privilege to serve" adding: "I loved the job not for its prestige, its titles and its ceremony - which I do not love at all. No, I loved the job for its potential to make this country I love fairer, more tolerant, more green, more democratic, more prosperous and more just - truly a greater Britain." 'My fault' He also paid tribute to the courage of the armed forces, adding: "I will never forget all those who have died in honour and whose families today live in grief." Later he thanked Labour activists and MPs for all their efforts and told them Labour's general election performance was "my fault, and my fault alone". The Lib Dem and Conservative teams met for hours of negotiations at the Cabinet Office on Tuesday - four days after the UK general election resulted in a hung parliament. The talks resumed after Lib Dem negotiators met a Labour team, which followed Mr Brown's announcement on Monday that he would step down as Labour leader by September. But there were signs throughout the afternoon that the two parties - who together would still not command an overall majority in the House of Commons - would not reach a deal. Several senior Labour figures, including John Reid and David Blunkett, warned against a coalition with the Lib Dems, particularly if the price involved offering them a referendum on changing the voting system to proportional representation. After Mr Brown announced he would be stepping down and would see if Labour could do a deal with the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives upped their offer to a promise of a referendum on changing the voting system from existing first past the post system to AV.

[warrior 169]

Time for some change, hopefully for better.

Hopefully the NHS and schools will actually get more money and etc, because they need it.

[DocRorlach 25]

Sorry to disappoint your hopes, Jonathan, but the Tories plan the exact opposite: slash-and-burn civil service to reduce the deficit, raise VAT & taxes, and reduce benefits on all fronts, including health & education, and privatise the rest. Maggie Milksnatcher is back, if only in spirit.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

CBC New's take on this.

And this just in, Mr. Clegg to be Deputy PM.  Not quite the Warden of the Cinque Ports.  Considering that Mr. Clegg was third, he has just moved up to a very strong second.

I dislike coalitions intensely.  They keep getting in each other's way unless there is a clear division of powers.  Considering Mr. Cameron's track record as a management figure, I expect this is not the case.  However, it will be interesting to see if the tail can wag the dog.

Austerity is never easy, and the Conservative party has lots of historical experience in coping in tough times, so expect the people to get the government they deserve.  I suspect Mr. Clegg is about to get an education that he could never have got unless he was PM.  I hope he isn't treated the same way that John Nance Gardiner was when he was VP of the U.S.A.

Good luck to the U.K.  You are going to need it.

[Boggy1 45]

Cabinet positions are being filled.. policies are being scrutinized. The next few months will be the most interesting in British politics in a very very long time.

The BBC Produced this lovely, stirring, piece; showing the "Ninety Minutes That Made History".

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

A nice summary video.  It will be wonderful when all the furor fades.

[DocRorlach 25]

From where I am sitting, in the backyard of London, the furore is about to begin. Master Clegg will certainly learn a lot in a very short order. Such as the fact that a fixed term parliament is not the same as an election reform. And that coalitions have a habit of breaking up. Especially when the deputy finds that his job has no real function and that the tea lady in the office has more power.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Originally posted by: DocRorlach

From where I am sitting, in the backyard of London, the furore is about to begin. Master Clegg will certainly learn a lot in a very short order. Such as the fact that a fixed term parliament is not the same as an election reform. And that coalitions have a habit of breaking up. Especially when the deputy finds that his job has no real function and that the tea lady in the office has more power.quote>

Is the Deputy PM such a powerless lot?  In the absence of the POTUS, the VP has the clout in the U.S.  So is the Deputy PM post less powerful than Warden of the Cinque Ports (once held by WSC).  If it is really as bad as all that isn't it likely that a new expression will enter the vernacular?  E.g.  pull a Clegger?

[warrior 169]

Well surely it's in Cameron's best interest to make sure that Clegg has a powerful job. If Clegg walks away it could lead to a reelection, which Cameron won't want, especially after the bad press he will have gotten if Clegg leaves the coalition.

Hopefully this coalition will make the politician's more edgy and transparent. and the 2 parties will keep each other somewhat at bay. I think this will be a good change. And if it's bad then it will so bad that people will loose faith in the system altogether and give a big shake up to politician's.

Because people had gradually been losing faith of politics however this election and the live TV debates made people more interested so should they do something wrong we know know what is was like when people ignored politcs more.

[DocRorlach 25]

Deputy PM is a title, not much more. The hierarchy in the UK government is still delineated by the street numbers at downing street: the boss sits at #10, the second in command at #11 - and that's the Chancellor of the Exchequer (fancy-schmancy for Finance Minister), ergo George Osborne. Next in line are Foreign Minister, W. Haque - an absolute Euro-phobe, and Ken Clark as Justice Minister (a Thatcherite hard liner).

Will Clegg will be present in cabinet meetings, the final say over anything important lies not even with Cameron but with the members of parliament & the House of Lords. And while the so-called Whips are going to be busy to keep the elected party members in line, they may not always succeed. There is still a lot of opposition, public & private, to Clegg's presence in the first place.

Cameron & the Tories needed the boy to get the key to the castle. Now they have that, it will be a different ball came altogether. And unlike the Liberals Democrats during a recent parliamentary football (soccer) game, this time Clegg's boys do not get to walk off with the ball.

British Election (no comment required, Cameron is the chap on the left, the other ran for the Monster Raving Lunatic Party - no joke!):

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Well, well, well.  In Canada, the deputy PM is usually a minister holding another major portfolio (usually Finance)  and he simply becomes the main whipping boy in Question Period when the PM is away.  Doesn't much matter because the PMO usually has the bit in its teeth.  Our main problem at that level is making sure the PM knows what his staff have decided for him.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

Unfortunately, the majority of UKers (by vote) will get what they asked for, and they will probably learn the hard way that they don't like it. But then, I am American, so take that with a big, fat grain of salt.

Barbarossaquote>

I, of course, am a Canadian and I see the goings on in the U.K. as reprehensible.  We have had minority governments many times over our history and these are the times when the people get more of what they really want.  A minority government has to please everybody, including themselves.  A majority government is a wild stallion with no harness.

[DocRorlach 25]

While it is, of course, easy to think that all this crazy stuff across the Atlantic hardly matters. Unfortunately, it does, and hugely so: Britain, although a miniscule dot on the planetary map, is still influential politically, and its political and economical decisions will affect not only the markets everywhere, but even US & Canadian policies, internal & external.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Actually, we are more attuned to what is happening in Britain than most.  We haven't been truly independent of them for over 100 year yet.  And, our Parliament is modelled after theirs, and has many of the same traditions including obsolete ideas like The Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod.

If you watch a Canadian speech from the throne it is only slightly less pompous and circumstantial than the British one.  Like most ex-British dominions, we are attached to our ceremonial, pomp, and circumstance.  But our fanfares are written by Canadian composers, not casting any aspersions on Walton and Elgar.

[DocRorlach 25]

I like Elgar, and I'm not even English. But I can do without the pomp

[hym 358]

Originally posted by: DocRorlach

While it is, of course, easy to think that all this crazy stuff across the Atlantic hardly matters. Unfortunately, it does, and hugely so: Britain, although a miniscule dot on the planetary map, is still influential politically, and its political and economical decisions will affect not only the markets everywhere, but even US & Canadian policies, internal & external.

quote>

I'm curious what internal US policies Britain is going to influence.  Care to share some ideas?

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Originally posted by: DocRorlach

I like Elgar, and I'm not even English. But I can do without the pompquote>

Well, it is all enigmatic.  My wife and I used the march section from Pomp and Circumstance No. 4 in place of the Lohengrin.  This is one of the themes of the RAF, but we had no connection there.  It is just a nice march.

But getting back to your previous post, like Hym, I am interested in what internal policies the U.K. might influence from across the pond.

[DocRorlach 25]

Originally posted by: hym

I'm curious what internal US policies Britain is going to influence.  Care to share some ideas?

quote>

On the simplest level: US attitude towards banking (recent White House proclamations bear this out) and possible legislation dealing with the same.

Military spending, in terms of Afghanistan, is a direct result of Nato's commitment to self-same region. Although Britain no longer panders to Bush's Iraqi extravaganza, commitment to the fight in Afghanistan, is directly resultant of what the UK government decides. In the same vein, the Trident submarine issue will - if it goes the LibDem way - affect US suppliers and their lobbyists will raise a stink in Washington. Jobs are on the line here.

Moreover, Britain is still a net importer of US goods, both in terms of public as well as discretionary (government) spending.

But most importantly, the handling of UK's deficit and trade imbalances will hit global markets and Federal monetary policies like a ton of bricks. What happens with Greece will look like a walk in Central Park by comparison.

Hague is already - only three days in office - meeting with H. Clinton, because the UK's stance towards the EU was thrown in question by a recent draft letter from Hague's office. If the UK retreats further from the EU, the trade balance will change, and the US might find itself in a tariff battle with what it calls "it's closest ally". Again, that will affect the internal economic recovery of the US and hence policies.

The world economy is becoming more and more like the Internet: fart in the remotest Hebrides island and someone in Minnesota complains about the stink.

Edit: I know to little about Canada and its political & economic stance to come up with direct examples. But the mapled country is still in the Commonwealth and therefore possibly even more directly involved with what happens economically in the UK.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Originally posted by: DocRorlach

I know to little about Canada and its political & economic stance to come up with direct examples. But the mapled country is still in the Commonwealth and therefore possibly even more directly involved with what happens economically in the UK.

quote>

Well, our No. 1 trading partner is the U.S.  In fact, we have control of their energy sector, so without our oil and electricity they would probably freeze to death in the dark.  They conveniently ignore this when Canada bashing in Congress.

While we really can get along without inported foodstuffs, the majority of ours comes from the U.S. and we ship ours to them.  Most interesting.  Our meat goes south, then comes back after processing.

Our trade relations with the U.K. are on a "most favoured nation" basis.  However, we do more with the Commonwealth.  Our sheep products come mostly from New Zealand or from local herds.  I think a lot of Canadian wheat goes to the U.K. and other European destinations, and a lot of manufactured product comes back from there.

In spite of our urban appearance along the border, we are basically an agricultural and raw materials outfit.  We sell everyone a lot of fish, especially salmon, and have a glut of seal products that we can't sell because of the stupidity of PETA.

Our east coast fishery is in a mess due to the PETA activity and the restrictions on fishing caused by the raids, notably by Spain, on the Grand Banks.  Our current exploitation/protection target is the arctic: diamonds, minerals, innuit art, the northwest passage may soon become a viable reality (then who needs Panama).

[DocRorlach 25]

These days you also seem to be the spoiler in the Stanley Cup! Thanks for defeating the Penguins.

But back to topic: if you are a large producer of commodities, then London is of utmost impotants because it is still the chief trading post & market maker for commodities world-wide. Hence market regulations will have a direct impact on the big C. And I believe Canada is a NATO member - again, Downing Street policy and spending cuts will influence the same back in your neck of the woods.

And you are one of the top five UK tourist destinations, together with Australia, Spain, the US, New Zealand - not necessarily in that order. And while nobody will ever replace US citizens as No. 1 border crossers in C, a drop of only fifty percent in UK tourism will show up on the local balance sheets.

We're all connected, like it or not. This debate is proof of that. Look at retail: the world's largest Virgin store is in the US, T-Mobile, the phone & broadband provider is now 40% UK owned; we even have US ownership of UK's sacred soccer teams. Borders only truly exist to keep employees in passport office on a paycheck, and allow politicians the world over some leeway for childish posturing. The reality is in the money, and that ignores borders.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

You are welcome.  Bean town is next, I hope.

It is hard to have a debate when everyone is on the same side.  The global village is getting smaller and more crowded.  The various village cops are falling over each other, so maybe it is time for Interpol to have more clout.

[Merlin of Flyote 8]

Just a point to note. Britain has had more years of Conservative government than Labour, nothing new there then!

The conservatives believe in small government, low taxes, paying off the country's debts.

Labour believe in Centralised government, high taxes, borrowing more, and state spending. (Communism by another name).

[TheQuiltedLlama 34]

Originally posted by: Merlin of Flyote

Just a point to note. Britain has had more years of Conservative government than Labour, nothing new there then!

The conservatives believe in small government, low taxes, paying off the country's debts.

Labour believe in Centralised government, high taxes, borrowing more, and state spending. (Communism by another name).quote>

I'm really hoping you're joking or something. Otherwise you're just an idiot.