Just what's so bad about a hung parliament?

[Mad hatters in jeans]

Just what's so bad about a hung parliament?

We'll need a magnifying glass to see it.

I don't get it...

Just sit and think for a bit. It'll come to you.

Yes it comes to everyone eventually.

[Lackadaisical2]

Just what's so bad about a hung parliament?

We'll need a magnifying glass to see it.

I don't get it...

Just sit and think for a bit. It'll come to you.

Yes it comes to everyone eventually.

I got it right away, but I'm always kind of premature.

[Fartsniffage]

srsly? you got a picture of this?

Picture as promised.

[Soheran]

How exactly does it damage the economy, for a start?

Presumably by virtue of there being no strong government.

And why is everyone's idea of strong government an outright majority? In America, for example, hasn't there been quite a lot of partisanship slowing down government despite (well, probably because of) the "strong government" of an outright majority?

No, in the US, it is "despite", not "because of", and the reason is that we have an absurd Senate procedure called the filibuster, which means that for important bills you need sixty votes of a hundred, not fifty-one. Effectively, then, in a sense we have a "hung parliament" because the Senate is only divided 59-41 (!), and some of the more conservative Democrats are not reliable. (Actually, this is even worse than a hung parliament, but this is not the place to rant about the US political system.)

Wouldn't a hung parliament encourage the parties to finally agree on something instead of letting the country fall apart while they quibble?

The problem is that this can lead to perverse incentives. It depends somewhat on whether you get a real coalition government (which would be better) or a minority government, but the risk is that the other parties will have reason to oppose whatever the government does, on grounds that people will probably blame the government in power for the country's problems, not the parties out of government. Incentives for compromise rely on parties being held accountable for not compromising, but without single-party control responsibility is less clear, and if the responsibility is mutual (or just ambiguous) nobody can be held accountable (because there is no alternative).

Edit: As far as this election goes, however, a hung parliament may be the best option, if only because it will go a long way toward ensuring that you will actually get electoral reform.

[FreeSatania]

srsly? you got a picture of this?

Picture as promised.

WTF? is this seriously a part of their platform?

[The Imperial Navy]

Are we sure thats not a joke poster?

[Fartsniffage]

Are we sure thats not a joke poster?

It's the same format as all the other Tory posters in the area. I'm guessing it isn't as the others have sensible, to a conservative, messages.

[My 3rd Floor Flat]

Let me make this absolutely clear because it infuriates me when people spew nonsense about this.

There is nothing bad about a hung parliament. Hung parliaments work just fine in other countries and provided the various parties co-operated together as they should for the benefit of the people rather than the benefit of themselves then it will be fine if not better than past governments. Is it a good thing to have a Labour majority government? No. Is it a good thing to have a Conservative majority government? NO. Is it a good thing to have a Liberal Democrat majority government? No. Why?

I'll tell you why, because in the last cases of those majority governments thanks to our first past the post system only 1/3 of the nation AT MOST has been represented, how is this good? It is not.

As for the claims that "a double dip recession would happen" and that "a hung parliament is weak" let me clear these lies up.

A "double dip recession" is a claim put about by Gordon Brown saying that the Tory policies would weaken Britain and send it back into recession. This is scare scaremongering, we do not know if this would happen.

As for the "hung parliament is weak claim" this is nothing more than Tory scaremongering, trying to stop people from voting for who they want, whether it be Labour, Lib Dem, or any of the minority parties, to ensure that people vote Tory. It is shameless scare tactics.

For the record I'm voting Lib Dem. Why? Because I want reform. And the only way to do that is through proportional representation, the Lib Dems may not win this, but they'll gain a massive support base throughout the country and will hand hold a Labour government to reforming politics.

Better this than the Conservatives removing support for tens of thousands of families and giving tax cuts to the rich. I mean, come on, i'm am, in the end, something of an OBJECTIVIST and even I see this as being colossally unfair in a welfare state.

[Soheran]

Better this than the Conservatives removing support for tens of thousands of families and giving tax cuts to the rich.

Agreed: keeping the Conservatives out of power is far more important than worries about hung parliaments.

Technically, not being British, I have no dog in this fight... but every time a right-wing party wins an election while advocating the kind of bullshit you describe, a little part of me dies.

[Person012345]

Nothing, the tories want you to think there is so they can win.

[Crabulonia]

^ Very pleased that 3rd Floor Flat is voting same as I.

[The blessed Chris]

Because they simply will not work in a political system where a LibDem/Tory coalition would force St. Clegg the europhile consensus builder and St. Cable the putative Cassandraic economist to co-operate in cabinet with the likes of Liam Fox and William Hague. Or where Statist authoritarians like Balls and McBroon will have to co-exist the liberals. Either prospect is laughable, as is the likelihood that a coalition government could pass legislation satisfactory to the Tory right and LibDem left on the backbenches.

British politics simply is too antagonistic, adversarial and tribal, and no amount of liberal, milquetoast Guardianista hand-wringing and moralising will change that, thankfully. Having watched the European parliament in session, its consensus and compromise based, polite and well-mannered modus operandi is simply less entertaining, and less conducive to good policy, than Westminster.

[Mad hatters in jeans]

srsly? you got a picture of this?

Picture as promised.

thanks.
well i'm glad i'm no longer 16.

[Mad hatters in jeans]

^ Very pleased that 3rd Floor Flat is voting same as I.

3rd floor flat is pretty sharp so you can count yourself lucky.

[Mirkana]

After a while, the bodies start to smell.

[Fartsniffage]

After a while, the bodies start to smell.

Not if you use Febreeze.

[Nimzonia]

Anyway, everyone in the UK seems afraid of a hung parliament for some reason. Those that actually cite one say it's because it'll damage the economy or because there's no strong government in a hung parliament.
I see a couple of problems with this. How exactly does it damage the economy, for a start? And why is everyone's idea of strong government an outright majority?

It's mostly just Tory propaganda. It's what the Tory cheerleading newspapers tell people, so they believe it.

It's a lot like the issue with proportional representation, which a lot of people seem to be opposed to without even understanding what it is. I saw a comment on Times Online the other day where someone was attacking the Lib Dems for trying to bring in PR, while in the same paragraph complaining that it was unfair that the Tories needed like 5% more of the popular vote to win the same number of seats as Labour.

[Angleter]

srsly? you got a picture of this?

Picture as promised.

WTF? is this seriously a part of their platform?

Yes, it was Michael Caine's idea. It's voluntary, by the looks of things, and it involves community work. I suppose it'd be good for thick kids in comprehensives what with the gangs and the crime and the violence and that, but I'd refuse myself. I'm already 16, so I assume I won't have to refuse.

As for a Hung Parliament, the problem is that we could remain without a government for a few weeks, so there'd be less action on the economy, there's a good chance of a minority government- a lack of a majority would seriously slow down the lawmaking process as the (assumedly) Tories bribe the various Celtic factions and a few Lib Dem MPs to support them, and the alternative is a coalition government- so the Lib Dems and their partner spend ages squabbling over everything until the Lib Dems threaten to leave and get their way, thus slowing down the lawmaking process.

[North Suran]

srsly? you got a picture of this?

Picture as promised.

WTF? is this seriously a part of their platform?

Yes, it was Michael Caine's idea. It's voluntary, by the looks of things, and it involves community work. I suppose it'd be good for thick kids in comprehensives what with the gangs and the crime and the violence and that, but I'd refuse myself. I'm already 16, so I assume I won't have to refuse.

Surely being voluntary totally defeats the purpose of the whole thing? Considering it aims to reform 'hooligans', how will it achieve its aims, being that it is highly unlikely that the aforementioned hooligans would ever volunteer for community service?

[Angleter]

srsly? you got a picture of this?

Picture as promised.

WTF? is this seriously a part of their platform?

Yes, it was Michael Caine's idea. It's voluntary, by the looks of things, and it involves community work. I suppose it'd be good for thick kids in comprehensives what with the gangs and the crime and the violence and that, but I'd refuse myself. I'm already 16, so I assume I won't have to refuse.

Surely being voluntary totally defeats the purpose of the whole thing? Considering it aims to reform 'hooligans', how will it achieve its aims, being that it is highly unlikely that the aforementioned hooligans would ever volunteer for community service?

I'm assuming they'll try and repackage it as a DofE scheme sort of thing, make it an opt-out system, and get schools and the parents who can be arsed to try and pressure their children to do it. As I say, it's Michael Caine's idea, and Dave the Wave probably only adopted it so he could go round claiming Michael Caine supports him.

[Crabulonia]

^ Very pleased that 3rd Floor Flat is voting same as I.

3rd floor flat is pretty sharp so you can count yourself lucky.

Yeah, I've noticed. Also we do several RP's and it might be awkward if it turned out he was was voting BNP or something.

[My 3rd Floor Flat]

^ Very pleased that 3rd Floor Flat is voting same as I.

3rd floor flat is pretty sharp so you can count yourself lucky.

I'll be sigging this chaps


And yes Crabulonia, Lib Dem isn't perfect, but it's the lesser of three evils. At the moment I'm against further integration into the EU (until it's streamlined and it's domineering powers of interference are taken away) and whilst this is a big issue for me the pros outweight the cons.

As for the national service thing guys... No. Simply no. No way on earth would we allow such a thing to happen. People forget, with our warped government, that Britain is in fact a rather liberal nation. Yes we could be considered rather socially conservative with our uptight tea drinking common sense nature but the fundamental roots of every Brit comes down to having your own home as your castle and having the state keeps it's nose out of your private life. Generally speaking the government could probably get away with lining every street and shopping centre with security cameras and we simply wouldn't give a dam beyond getting annoyed, provided they keep out of our house we are pretty content. Not to mention the fact that not other nation on earth spawns and embraces eccentrics like Britain.

Whenever someone mentions implementing national service for kids I have a Bioshock flashback.

"People fooled themselves into believing that they were the masters of the system, that their homes were their castles. But the State said NO! Your child will be sent to WAR to DIE for the State!"

Bah... talk about violating the most basic tenant of human liberty... I turned out fine thank you very god dam much and I went to a school so crap that it was closed down the year after I left, if I'd been sent to the army rather than doing my A Levels I swear I would have committed suicide. Conformity depresses me (clinically) and a lack of stimulus also depresses me.

[Nadkor]

I'll be sigging this chaps

Do not even begin to dare to remove me from your sig.

I've only just noticed I'm even there (and I think it's the one and only time I've ever been sigged), and I will be most disappointed if it goes.

[North Suran]

As for the national service thing guys... No. Simply no. No way on earth would we allow such a thing to happen. People forget, with our warped government, that Britain is in fact a rather liberal nation. Yes we could be considered rather socially conservative with our uptight tea drinking common sense nature but the fundamental roots of every Brit comes down to having your own home as your castle and having the state keeps it's nose out of your private life. Generally speaking the government could probably get away with lining every street and shopping centre with security cameras and we simply wouldn't give a dam beyond getting annoyed, provided they keep out of our house we are pretty content. Not to mention the fact that not other nation on earth spawns and embraces eccentrics like Britain.

Whenever someone mentions implementing national service for kids I have a Bioshock flashback.

"People fooled themselves into believing that they were the masters of the system, that their homes were their castles. But the State said NO! Your child will be sent to WAR to DIE for the State!"

Bah... talk about violating the most basic tenant of human liberty... I turned out fine thank you very god dam much and I went to a school so crap that it was closed down the year after I left, if I'd been sent to the army rather than doing my A Levels I swear I would have committed suicide. Conformity depresses me (clinically) and a lack of stimulus also depresses me.

You do realise its totally optional and voluntary, right?

[Angleter]

As for the national service thing guys... No. Simply no. No way on earth would we allow such a thing to happen. People forget, with our warped government, that Britain is in fact a rather liberal nation. Yes we could be considered rather socially conservative with our uptight tea drinking common sense nature but the fundamental roots of every Brit comes down to having your own home as your castle and having the state keeps it's nose out of your private life. Generally speaking the government could probably get away with lining every street and shopping centre with security cameras and we simply wouldn't give a dam beyond getting annoyed, provided they keep out of our house we are pretty content. Not to mention the fact that not other nation on earth spawns and embraces eccentrics like Britain.

Whenever someone mentions implementing national service for kids I have a Bioshock flashback.

"People fooled themselves into believing that they were the masters of the system, that their homes were their castles. But the State said NO! Your child will be sent to WAR to DIE for the State!"

Bah... talk about violating the most basic tenant of human liberty... I turned out fine thank you very god dam much and I went to a school so crap that it was closed down the year after I left, if I'd been sent to the army rather than doing my A Levels I swear I would have committed suicide. Conformity depresses me (clinically) and a lack of stimulus also depresses me.

You do realise its totally optional and voluntary, right?

And completely unrelated to the military.