General Chat

Oh, but as far as "what the electorate wanted" - gotta agree with that one, I mean disagree with that one. ;)

1/3 of the electorate wanted one thing, 1/3 wanted another thing, and 1/3 wanted something else, roughly speaking. Just like where I am. They're all different things, at least within a certain fairly narrow spectrum.

If I want an apple and you want a grapefuit, it doesn't mean either of us wants fruit salad!

You folks do make me chuckle sometimes.

Up for a google? Try

thatcher deregulation banks

and maybe your memories will be refreshed.


Canada didn't drink too deeply the Thatcher/Reagan deregulation koolaid. Our banks are pretty well reined in still, in the public interest. We don't have any of the problems the US and UK and other places are having. Canada's banking system is being consistently held up as the model that everybody should have been following.

Should Labour have cleaned up the foul mess created by the right wing? Difficult to do with the right wing still in power in the US until last year ... Gotta stay competitive, you know. Heaven knows you wouldn't want the business world making disapproving noises of your economic policy. Gosh, the pound might drop, the stock market might sprain an ankle ...

I really really really wish that all these politicians and political pundits would stop saying, this is what the electorate wanted.

No you idiots, not one person who voted WANTED a hung parliament, it is NOT what we voted for.

Libs stand with a intrested foot in both camps as regards each of their manifestos...long term is a whole new ball game,,,Nick Clegg or Lib dems stands to loose a future foot hold should his party mis-manage its position,,,,he only needs 2/3rds yes from its MPs to go Lab/Con...

Hes a new kid on the block and must have near dirty pants in making the right choices.

Which ever we'll feel again like the punchbag of a wife beater,,,each election regardless of what party gets in, end up being abused by the system,,,,
can we get on track by the end of 4 years,,,,,??

That's why I don't think it will happen Muffy. I really do think that it will go the tories way, even though compromises will have to be made within both parties, like it or not.

I would rather see a tory lib agreement arise out of this, for two reasons. First it gets rid of Brown, which it already has done, and hsi government, and secondly, I am no tory, never have been but an agreement will prevent the hardline radical Thatcherite tory government which we will have had, had they had a clear majority this election. There is enough common ground for both parties to form a stable enough government to last at least until the budget. Then it should be put back to the electorate.

Electoral reform can come later, and as big a sticking point as it is in these negotiations, it's not the most urgent problem we face. Once all parties recognise that, we can move forward.

I could understand it if it was going to be a clear lib/lab coalition..in fact I thought all the way through if it was going to be a hung parliament that would be the outcome..BUT the fact is the numbers don't add up and as was said earlier..we'd be at the mercy of the smaller nationalist parties to make up the numbers for the lib/lab pact...a four or five way coalition is NOT in the best interests of the UK as a whole and should it come to pass ...god help us. x

Sue, Clegg has always said he is not prepared to even discuss coalition with labour while Gordon Brown is still leader. While they are so close to a tory lib agreement at the very least,Clegg has offered to talk to Labour on his terms.

Now Gordon Brown has offered to resign, whether or not he was told to go (which I happen to think is the case) Clegg will now talk to see what terms are on offer from Labour, which in all fairness is absolutely right. the liberals cannot fully agree with the tories on some policies, especially on PR, and on that point they can make an agreement with Labour at least. it's only right, that they should offer to negotiate with the party who has the constitutional right and obligation to try to form a stable government, and like it or not, that is Labour.

But I do believe it's only rhetoric, Clegg will be most interested in the tory agreement, as long as he can get his own liberals behind him. Either way, they have a chance to govern, and they need to take it for the sake of their own future in politics.


It's a unique situation at the moment. The person with the most power in his hands is not the incumbent PM, Gordon Brown, its not the leader of the party with the most seats, David Cameron, but the leader of the party with the smallest number of seats, Nick Clegg, and boy! is he using it.

Off to watch the news to see if I can get my head round it.

Teresa

Haven't a clue Sue.

I have always voted...every election so far...and I'm seriously wondering why the hell I bothered x

Will someone hit me on the head, I must have lost the plot!!

Would someone please tell me why the Lib Dems would wish to associate with Labour other than the self serving discussions on changes in the voting system. The differences in each manifesto could be addressed, in my view, and legislation passed, even with a minority government. Stalling would just seem like sour grapes!

So the Lib Dems seem to be selling their soul to the highest bidder.

Sue x

Ah Saint Winnie that top bloke that pulled us though the war years,,,,,,,,he got his butt kicked out though lack of no confidence..:}}}}yep fickle aint the word.....

Too true

Teresa

Anyone remember what happened to Winston Churchill at the general election after WW2? We voters are a fickle lot, don't you think?

I was hoping he would lump him one.

Would've made my day...Alistair Campbell is a ...

Nope I won't say it lol xx

***It certainly looks that way Kay xx

So we end up with another potential none voted elected PM if Lib Dems go with Labour.....!!!!!!!!!!!

I thought it was coming to blows, and it wasnt' managed too well by the directors either. Boulton had clearly lost it, and the cameras should be gone elsewhere then, not waited.

Was funny though.

...and Brown sold our gold when it was at it's lowest!

IMO, Brown should have 'Gone to the Country' to see if the members of the Labout Party wanted him as a leader, after sidling in by the back door.

Oh Adam did get out his pram,,

thought he was gonna launch AC,,, Muffy,,,,,,:}}}}}

Banks and lending for mortgages in particular are regulated by a body accountable to the government - the FSA.

The buck therefore stops firmly, fairly and squarely with the labour administration. No if's, buts or other questions. No get out clause, no wriggling or squirming, no mealy mouthed excuses allowed. The labour government let it happen through sheer gross incompetence. Nay, worse - they encouraged it. They stood back and let the banks lend more than they could afford and run up high risk debts in a grotesque competition to see who could lend the most at the cheapest rates to anyone who walked through the doors. Now we are paying the price for that dereliction of responsibility.

They couldn't govern a kids playground.

OMG just watching the biggest verbal punch up I've ever seen between Adam Boulton and Alistair Campbell....Adam Boulton very nearly lost his temper with him.

I've waited years for this ! Just a shame I'm not enjoying it. The whole thing is a sick joke xx