You are ignoring the effect of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act which makes it very difficult to remove a minority government, lacking a majority, but at the same time lacking a super majority against it.
Section 2 of the Act also provides for two ways in which a general election can be held before the end of this five-year period:
If the House of Commons resolves “That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government”, an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves “That this House has confidence in Her Majesty’s Government”. This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first.
If the House of Commons, with the support of two-thirds of its total membership (including vacant seats), resolves “That there shall be an early parliamentary general election”.
It requires a no-confidence vote. Neither unprecedented nor disastrous. Do you think Miliband is a good enough politician to manage a 5-way coalition? Especially when plenty of his own MPs will disagree with what needs to be done to keep it?
A no confidence vote is a simple majority. It does not count abstentions. It also needs to be not withdrawn within fourteen days- quite a long time of looking down the barrel of an unaffordable general election.
If Labour has a small advantage in seats over a Tory UKIP bloc, it would take votes against the government rather than abstentions to remove a minority government.
No five party coalition is required, merely the abstention of the leftist parties on policies with which they disagree.
Examples:
Labour 280 seats, Tories 270 seats
SNP 40, Green 2, Plaid 4, LibDem 30, UKIP 2
Labour minority government
Even Labour 260, Tories 280
SNP 40, Green 2, Plaid 4, LibDem 30, UKIP 2
Still a Labour minority government.
All it takes is the minor parties deciding not to risk a Tory election victory.
Oh, is that all :smack: In other words, Miliband would have to keep all the minor parties on his side, rather than the Tories wooing them. Do you really think the Lib Dems, UKIP, and the DUP are utterly immune from that?
Blow for Farage as polls reveal Ukip is poised to lose ALL its key marginal battles against the Tories
Polls by Tory peer Lord Ashcroft show Ukip trailing in four target seats
Party is behind in Ukip stronghold of Boston and Skegness, Lincolnshire
Ukip is also trailing in key seats in Cambridgeshire, Essex and Kent
Ukip’s vote is likely to be squeezed between now and May, pollsters believe
Read more: Ukip poised to lose ALL its key marginal battles against the Tories | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
That’s depending on his ability to doubletalk: as Mayor of London he is rather more muted on the bad effects of immigrants than Tories of the Shires. Kippers are unlikely to call him ‘Our Great Man’ a la Guise…
Still, an all that, there have been swiftly denied rumours of Tory-SNP discussions. One ex-SNP candidate claimed in late December that he had been questioned regarding a change of heart on the awful Bedroom Tax…
*Murray claimed Nationalist officials asked if he would consider backing the hated bedroom tax policy as part of the vetting process to stand in the general election.
Murray said: “I replied ‘No’. End of SNP political career.”*
…
- Labour MP Margaret Curran said: “Yesterday, the inner workings of the SNP party machine were exposed, when a potential SNP candidate said he was rejected by the party because he said he would not support the bedroom tax if the party leadership told him to.
“The candidate was told that the scenario might occur as part of a ‘Westminster deal with another party’.
“There’s only one party that can be – the Tories.*
…
*Murray, a former UK ambassador, revealed what happened in the vetting process on his personal blog.
He also told the selection panel he would not support any deal to prop up a Labour government in London.
He accused the officials - which included MEP Ian Hudghton - of “bullying” him in a “truly unpleasant experience”.
Murray wrote: “My analysis is that those in the SNP who make a fat living out of it are terrified the energy of the Yes campaign may come to threaten their comfy position.”
An SNP spokeswoman would not go into details of the selection panel, describing it as “an internal party matter.”*
Daily Record
Very, very probably, they would claim the right not to implement it in Scotland due to those marvellous devolved welfare etc. powers, but assist the Tories in inflicting it and whatever further measures they come up with, on the rest of Britain. Then wash their hands.
As nationalist chancers, the SNP have to consider all options, no matter what grannie they have to shove undae a bus. The present Lib-Dems have shown the way.
More amusingly, — and shades of His Excellency’s other outlet, Fox News — I saw a headline in The Sun hinting Miliband was in talks with Sinn Féin as coalition partners.
As:
I/ Labour, despite it’s patriotism has a deadly antipathy to nationalism ( which includes Kipper English, SNP Scots, and IRA Proxies [ who all share the same intellectual precepts on The Nation ] )
II/ Sinn Féin MPs haven’t taken their seats at Westminster in yonks.
III/ There’s only one of them at present.
IV/ Labour has always been harder on Irish Nats since Callaghan’s day, than the conservatives, who were always ready to talk with them more.
… the prospect of Gerry Adams as British Home Secretary recedes.
Given a hamstrung Labour Government running a broadly left wing government, just when do you think that the generally leftist SNP, Green, LibDem or Plaid are going to vote to give the Tory party the chance to use its massive financial advantage in a second election. Turkeys voting for Christmas.
Remember, they need a repeated no confidence vote to cause the fall of the government. Or 2/3 majority.
The LibDems would want to support Labour for as long as possible to detoxify their coalition history.
Even with fewer seats than the Tories I can see a Labour minority government lasting several years and probably a whole parliament.
That would be the same “left wing” Lib-Dems currently part of a centre-right coalition, yes? They’d do the same again in a heartbeat, if it was better for them. And where do you get the idea they need a repeated no-confidence vote? My reading of the rules is simply that they need a no-confidence vote, with no vote restoring confidence in the 2 weeks following.
I can’t see the majority of Britain putting up with the Scots trying to run everything, and take an even greater unfair share than they already have. If Labour could survive without the SNP, then they have a chance of a decent run. If not, the Labour MPs who put ethics above politics will leave the party, or at least vote against them. Add the growing demand for EVEL, which will have to happen if the nationalists are in government, and you have a hugely unstable government. Quite possibly one that won’t actually have any power over 85% of the country.
That is, unless the SNP actually attempts to vote for what is best for Britain. Which isn’t impossible, but certainly unprecedented.
You miss several points.
If the LibDems are to survive at the next election after 2015 they need to detoxify. They can do this best by supporting or joining a Labour Government.
The repeated vote is at the discretion of the Government. If there is a vote of no confidence that gives the Government a two week grace period where when it can make smaller parties consider their position and chances at an election that they may be perceived to have caused; the British electorate has been unforgiving towards those who cause unnecessary elections.
The ‘rest of the UK’ have no standing in deciding how the SNP votes; sub-racist politicking would just increase the demand for home rule or independence.
The SNP will not be in Government- Nicola Sturgeon has said that firmly. They may allow a Labour minority government to form, requiring some quid pro quo for support. This will probably involve allowing decisions about the future of Scotland to be decided in Hollywood- time and question in the next referendum; among other matters like welfare and employment law including minimum wage.
A minority government does have control over the whole country, even if England is out of kilter with the politics of Scotland and Wales. Having the probable leftist majority in the National vote will help maintain legitimacy.
Which should be ignored, which is my point. The SNP, if they join the Government (which is what they plan to do, despite the protestations) they have a responsibility to govern for the benefit of the whole country, not just one region.
My hope is that the rest of the UK will show sense, and not allow the representatives of about 4% of the population set the agenda for the next Parliament. The best way to do that would be to form a government that doesn’t rely on them, whether as a formal coalition partner, or an informal agreement.
I hope, and expect, an outcry among Labour supporters if their agenda is hijacked. All that could really come from voting SNP, in the long run, is a lack of representation, because the majority will not put up with a small, single issue party pulling the strings for long.
It’s really a damn shame that this is what will dominate the next Parliament, as it was supposed to have been settled last year, but the SNP are a bunch of sore losers who want to make things worse for everybody if they can’t get their way. Much like the Republicans in America, really.
Where do you get you Scottish news from. Nicola has been completely clear that she will not govern with anyone, but will support a Labour minority administration by voting for confidence and supply motions. This is for two reasons- mutual distrust, not to say hatred, between SNP and Labour supporters, and a wish to avoid collective responsibility of the cabinet. There will be a cost for that support in meeting some SNP goals such as controlling its own constitutional position via future referendums and amendments to welfare and employment law.
No one can complain that they refuse to vote against a Labour Government- that is not a requirement for any party.
The SNP is not too far away from the centre left of the Labour Party.
The LibDems may well enter a coalition with Labour to detoxify their brand.
If they are only providing support in exchange for help in breaking up the Union, they are acting against the interest of the country, and Labour should refuse to provide that help.
Now, it’s possible that SNP MPs would vote with Labour anyway, but they should not be pandered to.
The Lib Dems will form a coalition with anyone, if they get to stay in Government, that much is clear. A Tory/Lib coalition is probably close to my ideal government, as the Libs can temper any tendency towards too much social conservatism without having much power over the economy. I don’t know how likely it is to happen again, but if they can form a majority coalition they will.
But they will deal with them. It is not about breaking up the union, but deciding whether an historic nation that entered a union freely can leave it again if the people demand it. It would only be authorising a referendum to assess the views of a sovereign people. That is what the constitution says- two nations in one state by agreement.
We’ve already had the referendum. We chose to keep the Union.
Which does not preclude another one. That is a simple fact.
Now people may not like it, but it is the case.
‘We will keep asking the question until the stupid people give us the right answer !’
And the decision whether they can leave, like the decision to join, should be made by the Union.
But that’s irrelevant, as the SNP pledged to be bound by the result of last year’s vote, and the other parties should not allow them to break that pledge and disrupt the government of the Union.
The other parties would sell their grandmothers for power.
That is the reality.
There is really little that can be done to prevent an effective repeat referendum within the decade. All the wishing otherwise will not change that truth.