ChatterBank2 mins ago
For Mikey And Other's
It would appear that there is a very real possibility that the General Election planned for May 2015 would have to be postponed for a year if the Scottish people vote "Yes" next week.As there are about 40 Labour MP's in Scotland the chances of a Labour Government after that election would be very much reduced.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by grumpy01. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
.
I dont see why it should be delayed. I am sure the elected scots MPs would say " we have been elected so we are damn well gonna vote on English affairs. as ever "
I think it would require primary legislation to delay as the life of the parliament of this lot is set in stone ( ie primary legislation ) - and was set up so that it couldnt be changed by dictat / minister's pen / order in council.
I dont see why it should be delayed. I am sure the elected scots MPs would say " we have been elected so we are damn well gonna vote on English affairs. as ever "
I think it would require primary legislation to delay as the life of the parliament of this lot is set in stone ( ie primary legislation ) - and was set up so that it couldnt be changed by dictat / minister's pen / order in council.
I have been warning about the effect to the Westminster Parliament if Scotland goes independent for ages now here on AB ! So it hardly a new concern.
Scotland sends 59 MPs down south and 58 of them are not Tory. So the LibDems will be affected, as well as Labour. Tories supporters on here will no doubt cheer this prospect but it will further disenfranchise working class voters in the rest of the UK ( or whatever we will be called if Salmond has his way) Having an automatic majority doesn't sound very democratic or sensible to me, and that includes the situation if the politics were reversed.
As regards postponing the 2015 Election, I am not sure. It would be a very serious constitutional change and can only come about if all Parties agree, and why would the Opposition agree to this ?
One for the pointy heads it would seem, and another good reason for Scotland to stay in the Union, where it has done very nicely for centuries.
Scotland sends 59 MPs down south and 58 of them are not Tory. So the LibDems will be affected, as well as Labour. Tories supporters on here will no doubt cheer this prospect but it will further disenfranchise working class voters in the rest of the UK ( or whatever we will be called if Salmond has his way) Having an automatic majority doesn't sound very democratic or sensible to me, and that includes the situation if the politics were reversed.
As regards postponing the 2015 Election, I am not sure. It would be a very serious constitutional change and can only come about if all Parties agree, and why would the Opposition agree to this ?
One for the pointy heads it would seem, and another good reason for Scotland to stay in the Union, where it has done very nicely for centuries.
The United Kingdom General Election is a fixed term of 5 years, - No more, no less. The life of the present Government would not be extended.
If the Scottish MPs had to leave the Commons, then another General would take place without the Scottish constituencies probably when the Scots have separated in acouple of years.
Despite the recent polls, I doubt the Scots will vote for independence.
If the Scottish MPs had to leave the Commons, then another General would take place without the Scottish constituencies probably when the Scots have separated in acouple of years.
Despite the recent polls, I doubt the Scots will vote for independence.
PP, I've asked this question on AB more than once in the past and have NEVER received an answer from you or any other 'West Lothian Question' complainer...
Can you tell me of an occasion when ANY vote on purely English matters has been successful or unsuccessful because of Scottish MPs' votes though all the English MPs voted the other way? In other words, is there any relevance to this constant complaint whatsoever?
And, as usual when I ask this, I will add, "Why do 26 Englishmen at Westminster get to vote on matters affecting legislation in Scotland when there is no similar group of Scots anywhere in a position to affect legislation in England in such a way?"
These are, of course, the bishops of the Church of England which is certainly NOT the established church north of the border.
Can you tell me of an occasion when ANY vote on purely English matters has been successful or unsuccessful because of Scottish MPs' votes though all the English MPs voted the other way? In other words, is there any relevance to this constant complaint whatsoever?
And, as usual when I ask this, I will add, "Why do 26 Englishmen at Westminster get to vote on matters affecting legislation in Scotland when there is no similar group of Scots anywhere in a position to affect legislation in England in such a way?"
These are, of course, the bishops of the Church of England which is certainly NOT the established church north of the border.
there is no mechanism for moving the election. Unless there is a further act of parliament specifically to do so, which, given the current demography of parliament is unlikely. There will be an election in May 2015. If later Scotland leaves the UK then the 59 MPs will have no seats and the party strengths at westminster will be thus effected. Probably removing any Labour majority and possibly creating a Tory one. It will then be up to the commons to vote an early election or limp on with whatever the new landscape provides. However all the above is academic because I doubt the Yes side will win.
This would suit our government right down to the ground, it would give them another year in which to fleece more money out of the populous. l think the vote and hope the vote will be a resounding NO, what is the point of cutting your nose to spite your face just so that a politician can get more money in his pockets.
"Can you tell me of an occasion when ANY vote on purely English matters has been successful or unsuccessful because of Scottish MPs' votes..."
Doesn't matter. The fact that they could do so is a scandal.
We've done the Lords bit a few times before now and you know that the Lords (especially the 26 - out of 800-odd you speak about) cannot initiate legislation and ultimately cannot prevent its enactment against the will of the Commons. A "Red Herring" I think.
Doesn't matter. The fact that they could do so is a scandal.
We've done the Lords bit a few times before now and you know that the Lords (especially the 26 - out of 800-odd you speak about) cannot initiate legislation and ultimately cannot prevent its enactment against the will of the Commons. A "Red Herring" I think.
Whilst I suspect in the short term a loss of staunch Labour constituencies would allow the right to stay in power for a period, I suspect that in time the apparent lack of alternative would see many 'swing to the left' until there is the usual 2 party system once more.
Pity really, it would be an opportunity lost to have a complete reform and bar official parties, and ensure each of the people's representatives genuinely were free to represent the views of the folk they are supposed to represent.
Pity really, it would be an opportunity lost to have a complete reform and bar official parties, and ensure each of the people's representatives genuinely were free to represent the views of the folk they are supposed to represent.
QM - I think - any vote which is carried by less than 58...
answers your question dunnit ?
So I was gonna say vote of no confidence 1978 which brought Thatcher to power - but that would have been not a majority of one but a majority of 59. But you can see what I am saying.
Scotland splitting dooms us to perpetual tory administrations dunnit ?
answers your question dunnit ?
So I was gonna say vote of no confidence 1978 which brought Thatcher to power - but that would have been not a majority of one but a majority of 59. But you can see what I am saying.
Scotland splitting dooms us to perpetual tory administrations dunnit ?
So, PP, do you mean, "No, I cannot think of a single occasion when the West Lothian Question had any relevance at all"? Does that mean you intend to stop whingeing on about it, then, and encouraging others to follow your lead?
It's no red herring, NJ. The plain fact remains that these people DO - beyond a shadow of a doubt - have an input into legislation affecting Scotland. That they may not have initiated it or that they are few in number is an irrelevance. The same two factors are equally relevant as regards Scottish MPs in the Commons. In your own words, "the fact that they could do so is a scandal."
It's no red herring, NJ. The plain fact remains that these people DO - beyond a shadow of a doubt - have an input into legislation affecting Scotland. That they may not have initiated it or that they are few in number is an irrelevance. The same two factors are equally relevant as regards Scottish MPs in the Commons. In your own words, "the fact that they could do so is a scandal."
//The United Kingdom General Election is a fixed term of 5 years, - No more, no less// Not so, Gromit. It cannot be extended beyond 5 years without some major legislation that would have to get past both houses of Parliament and[i The Queen. This is one of the very few times she's actually allowed to get5 involved in the business of Parliament. They simply [i]cannot] extend it at will.
However, there have been loads of instances of elections taking place at less than 5-year intervals - 1974 is a good example.
However, there have been loads of instances of elections taking place at less than 5-year intervals - 1974 is a good example.
No QM I probably wont stop whingeing.
You're voting for independence from your vantage point in the Mid-west arent you, so doubtless you may be right.
Palmerston commented on the 1867 reforms - what all the wisehead said would happen, has not and what all the damned fools said would occur has now come to pass.....
I put myself clearly as one of the damned fools
You're voting for independence from your vantage point in the Mid-west arent you, so doubtless you may be right.
Palmerston commented on the 1867 reforms - what all the wisehead said would happen, has not and what all the damned fools said would occur has now come to pass.....
I put myself clearly as one of the damned fools
Latest Posts
Road rules6 mins ago
News7 mins ago
Crosswords11 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles15 mins ago
Business & Finance16 mins ago
