Divided by a common language…
archer = 2000 UK Pounds
monkey = 500 ditto
The etymology of the archer deserves a thread of its own.
What’s most intriguing to this Yank is the compressed schedule. Here, the presidential election dominates the news from January to November of the quadrennial election year. And the commercials…good lord. You should count your blessings.
Just because it’s only been officially announced recently doesn’t mean that the campaigns didn’t start about 6 months ago…
Thanks for all of the debate.
One other questions which popped into my head over the weekend. While going through my old movies, I happened upon the “The Mouse that Roared”, and wondered what happens if the Grand Dutchy of Fenwick (or some other country) decided to invade the UK while there is no sitting Government?
My understanding is that the government is dissolved and a new one must be elected. So actually, the question is can the government get re-established / re-seated in the case of an emergency? I assume there is some policy/procedure, as I believe the UK government went through at least one change during WWII.
It’s Her Majesty’s armed forces. They don’t belong to the government, and so they don’t cease to exist when the government is dissolved.
Whether there’s specific procedures in place for a major emergency, I don’t know. But the WW2 changes were through regular elections, albeit in extraordinary circumstances.
Blair remains as PM and continues in Downing Street for the duration. The fact that he currently doesn’t have a government (nor is an MP for that matter) means that he has no legislative powers at the moment. He still retains his executive powers - most of which he technically exercises on behalf of the Queen directly. It’s conventional that he shouldn’t use these to really do anything with these during the campaign, but the authority is there should an emergency arise.
There were actually two major changes during WWII: Chamberlain giving way to Churchill in 1940 and the general election in 1945. The latter is the more relevant parallel. Parliament was dissolved after VE Day and the campaign took place while the country remained at war with Japan. The parties fought a relatively normal election, though much of the electorate were in the forces and hence overseas, with Churchill and the Conservatives losing to Attlee’s Labour Party in an historic landslide come the actual vote.
One obvious effect was that election day itself fell in the middle of the Potsdam Conference. That therefore started with Churchill negotiating as PM (despite Parliament having been dissolved), with Attlee then taking over the role during the conference. Though the glitch was minimised by the fact that Attlee was Churchill’s deputy prime minister during the wartime coalition and had already been at Potsdam in that capacity.
You can see how the diplomats phrased the transition in the opening paragraphs of the Potsdam Declaration.
from the official monster raving loony website:
Um, can I move to York & stand for election there? I know I’m not a British subject, but I used to watch All Creatures Great & Small, so I think I can suss out the accent…
There is a government. It is parliament that has been dissolved, not the government. All ministers, including the Prime Minister technically remain in post and retain their executive responsibilities. If there was need for emergency reaction by the ministers, it would be under the royal prerogative which confers virtually unlimited powers on the sitting PM. Orders in Counsel can be used to make most decisions. Even effectively new legislation can be passed using this in the absence of a sitting parliament.
If you listen to the news, they refer now to ex-MPs but to, say, the Foreign Secretary, not ex-foreign secretary.
Note that in the event of a defeat by the country, a losing PM does not cease to be PM, nor lead a government until he goes to see the monarch and resign- witness Ted Heath in 1974 who tried to arrange a pact with the Liberals for several days before giving in.
The Governement, and hence the position of the ministers, remains until the PM says to the monarch that the government is resigning.
In all seriousness, any Commonwealth or Irish citizen can stand - and as far as I can work out, they don’t need to be a British resident. (The laws are rather vague about eligibility.) However, nominations have closed…
Or for that matter, in the example I already pointed to of the Potsdam Declaration:
Eden had remained as Foreign Secretary despite Parliament having been dissolved on June 15th.
And I should pedantically correct myself: election day in the sense of the voting itself was on July 5th, before Potsdam. Because of the unusual geographic spread of the electorate, it’s the counting that didn’t take place until the end of the month.
Actually you do need to be a British citizen to stand for election. You only need to be a Commonwealth or Irish citzen to vote. It’s a holdover from before the UK had a seperate nationality law from the dominions and everone in the Empire was essentially a British subject.
Nope, I’m afraid you’re wrong.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/QuickFind/GuideToGovernment/G2GMenu1/G2GArticle1/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4003199&chk=KK7DPz (Which also concludes my earlier uncertainty about residency.)
Well, I’ve had my first pamphlet from the Conservatives and yet another from the Lib Dems. The Lib Dems are making a concerted effort here; this is the first mail I’ve had from the Tories in nearly 3 years. It’s still the case that none of the parties have told me how their policies will benefit me.
this is an essentially dull contest, because (i) the result is in no serious doubt (ii) there are fewer ideological differences between Labour and Conservatives than ever before. Liberals haven’t formed a government in 80 years and don’t look like doing so now, nonetheless the media go along with the fiction that it is a three-horse race, or at least a two-plus-one. For some decades they have been complaining - with some justice - that the winner-takes-all electoral system means that their number of seats does not reflect their share of the popular vote. Blair had talked about electoral reform before his first win but once the size of Labour’s victory became apparent there was no more talk of such things.
One of the worst sins you can accuse a British politician of is conducting an ‘American Presidential-style campaign’. It’s supposed to be the Party which is running, not the Leader. Of course they all do the cult-of-personality thing to a great extent these days, but like to pretend they don’t.
The conventional wisdom here is that long campaigns bore and anger the voters, who then refuse to turn out at all. Most elections last between three and five weeks. The interminable American Presidential election process, which seems to last a full year from the New Hampshire primaries, and much longer in the phony war before, is widely held up as an example of how not to do it.
The ‘hustings’ were originally (before the secret ballot) the tribune on which the candidates stood to make their address to the electors.
It’s curious that British politicians stand for office while Americans run for it. 
“Ask not what your country can do for you . . .” 
That’s because you Brits have no sense of fun! 
Be patient. A few more decades of the “special relationship” and we’ll teach you to speak English properly!
Probably the easiest point where the parties might ‘do something for you’ is council tax?
Good point. But the local Tory candidate is a complete cipher who’s hardly bothering to campaign.
Same here. Except he’s also our MP :rolleyes: (John Gummer)
Actually, now I think about it, I’ve had nothing through my door from the Tories or Labour. However I’ve had plenty of stuff from the Lib Dems (we’ve got local elections as well, which means they’ve got a lot to lose, including influence in the county council), Ukip, the Greens, and there’s somebody around here who pins up “Why are the BNP discriminated against?” posters on parish council noticeboards.
In Scotland the lines have been re-drawn and the number of MPs will go down from 72 to 59; several ‘names’, including Gordon Brown, have had to find another seat to stand in.
This will bring our Westminster constituency size into line with the rest of the UK - around 70,000 per MP.
Sadly, our Hollyrood-based MSPs have voted not to follow suit (although it had been widely understood that they would) and we will continue to have 159 of them. I’d much rather have got rid of some of these jokers and kept the Westminster ones - that’s how good they are!