Downing Street Rejects Hague Call For Snap Election

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39188042

At least Mrs May has the sense to ignore this siren call from Hague. The Fixed Term Parliament Act was brought in, by the Tories, precisely to stop such snap elections and ensure that Britain has a stable Government, at least for 5 years.

[youngmafbog]

Well people are entitled to call for it. I'm pretty sure if labour was any sort of party it would be calling for it but let's face it it would be like turkeys voting for xmas with total annihilation.

I suppose that is the real reason why you are behind Mrs May.

[Jackdaw33]

It was brought in reluctantly under pressure from the Liberals. It is a bad act as it deprives the PM of room to manoeuvre and in no way guarantees stable government, quite the opposite.

[Gromit]

If there were an election now, the Conservatives would annilate Labour and have a huge majority.

Which is precisely why it won't happen. Under the fixed term, the Government would have to lose a vote of no confidence, which won't happen, or the Government and Opposition would have to agree to it and get a two thirds majority in Parliament, which won't happen.

Hague went a bit bonkers when he was Foreign Secretary, and it sounds like he is still in Cloud Cuckoo Land.

[Peter Pedant]

// It was brought in reluctantly under pressure from the Liberals. It is a bad act........blah blah blah the opposite.//
yes jackie quite right

yeah sorry mikey - your interpretation that it was a selfless gesture by the tories bidding soulfully and in a lonely fashion for parliamentary stability

.... is a trumpic alternative fact. ( = true as the Gospel of our crucified Lord and otherwise somewhat fanciful)

forced on the tories by the libz as a price to join a coalition. 'embedded' and can only be repealed by 2/3 majority

a sort of american import that didnt really work

[ichkeria]

Hague is talking about repealing the Act. It's a daft idea anyway: from a Tory point of view yes they'd probably end up with a huge majority but it would reopen the Brexit argument agsin and expose the divisions in the Tories too. It would leave them open to accusations of blatant opportunism although I guess they'd ride those out. It would also hasten the end of Corbyn.

[Jackdaw33]

It is not quite correct to say the Act can only be repealed by 2/3 majority. It, like any other Act, can be repealed by s simple majority. The 2/3 bit applies to calling an election under the existing Act.

[Gromit]

I actually think the fixed term is a good idea.

It stops politicians like Blair calling an election early when the opposition was floundering under a really poor leader. The 2001 landslide was more about Blair being able to manipulate the timing of the election, and catching the Hague led Conservatives at their worst.

[mikey4444]

Mrs May has no need to repeal the Act, so I am unsure why Hague is suggesting that she does !

She has a workable majority in the House, she herself has a mandate given her by her Party, and, as rightly been pointed out, Labour may not gain from an Election at this time.

But Hague was part of the Tory Government that brought in the the Act, in 2011, so his bleating about it now is even more inexplicable.

[New Judge]

Of course the government could Prime Minister could always call a vote of “No Confidence” in her own government. Under the FTPA this would require just a 50% + 1 majority.

The FTPA is a ridiculous piece of legislation which was introduced simply to guarantee Nick Clegg the spare keys to No 10 for five years. Without it a fresh election would have been called by Mr Cameron before the end of 2010.

[Jackdaw33]

For the hard of thinking, the Act was FORCED on the Tories.

[mikey4444]

The Tories were not "forced" to do anything at all......they were the senior partner in the so-called Coalition Government. They could simply have ignored the Libs when they asked for the Act.

They brought in the FTPA with their eyes fully wide open.

[ToraToraTora]

well for one thing, you can't just call a general election thanks to the Limp Dums, so it sounds like a spell in the luds has dimmed the great man! Anyway if we had a GE now it would basically become a second neverendum on the EU. NO!

[mikey4444]

TTT....even if we were to have a second GE now, I can't see that we then require a second Referendum on the EU.

I agree about Hague....he was once one of the brightest stars in the Tory firmament, but he appears to be babbling pure nonsense these days.

Perhaps all those pints he used to drink, delivering beer to pubs have finally caught up with him.

[ToraToraTora]

it was not forced JD, it was one of several baubles to get the Limp dums to coalesce with the Tories. Another was the disasterous AV system, thankfully rejected.

[ToraToraTora]

no mikey I'm saying it would be hijacked and effectively become a fight over the EU withdrawal, which is what the remainiacs have been harping on about since June.

[-Talbot-]

Will Corbyn reject Stephen's call to step down.?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/07/stephen-hawking-jeremy-corbyn-disastrous-labour-resign


Didn't think it worth starting a new thread as it is just an opinion from Mr Hawking ... just like this is just an opinion from Hague.

[Gromit]

Hague was never bright, but he was young and showed promise. He was probably promoted beyond his ability when he became Tory leader, and was frankly awful. Blair cleaned the floor with him, and he nver really recovered.
When he was Foreign Secretary he fell in love with Angelina Jolie and tried to take us into war with Syria. on his last day in the Commons, he tried to remove Bercow, and was humiliated.

[Jackdaw33]

Hague was never bright? First from Oxford,written the definitive biography of Pitt the Younger. I beg to differ.

[Samjenko]

I took it this was meant as a warning shot across the bows of the remainer MPs. A veiled threat, if you like.

[mikey4444]

Gromit....Hague took on the burden of Leadership of the Tory Party at a time when it was a poisoned chalice ! There was a series of these ,and if you recall, it was only when Cameron was elected, that the Tories stood a real chance of getting into power again.

Somebody had to do the job, so he stepped up to the plate.

But he is totally wrong about the FTPA. This Act was set in stone, just so it couldn't be abandoned when it became politically necessary to do so.