Options
Sturgeon: "We will prop up a Labour government even if Tories have a 40 seat lead...
because if Conservatives can't command a majority they can't be a government"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32442151
So she is saying on one hand The Tories can't be a government without a majority but Labour can
So it is fine for Labour not to win a majority and govern but not for the Tories?
How is this justified?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32442151
So she is saying on one hand The Tories can't be a government without a majority but Labour can
So it is fine for Labour not to win a majority and govern but not for the Tories?
How is this justified?
0
Comments
She is saying the Tories have no right to govern without a majority but it is fine for Labour to?
Surely forgetting our system that is not right?
personally I still think that the SNP would prefer to see a tory minority government as it will allow them to push for independence easier than if they are actually part of the government beside labour
the underlying theme of the whole independence campaign was about Scotland not getting the government it votes for, well that argument wont stand up as well should the SNP be the Westminster power brokers sturgeon and salmond keep insisting they will be
Simple. Because that's how our election system works.
Just another desperate haggis who hasn't worked it out.
40 seats is a lot to claim that they have no right to govern though.
Let me put this to you imagine if Labour had 320 seats and Conservatives and Lib Dems and others got together to stop them forming a government, DS politics would go into meltdown with claims of Tories doing this to Labour and that and nasty party forcing poor Ed from power and we didn't vote for it etc etc.
whats your alternative ?
force the smaller parties to support whoever has the most seats ?
The idea is now to undermine that government, so perhaps to allow the Conservatives to return as soon as possible.
It's irrelevant if they can't cobble together a coalition of whoever to get them over the majority line. The point is if more people voted against their policies than for them. SNP are more aligned with Labour than Tories therefore more people voted for 'anti tory' parties.
If there is no clear majority for anyone then it's the sitting prime minister that will be asked by the Queen if he can form a government.
Only if he thinks the answer to that is "No" will Milliband even get an opportunity.
Now of course Cameron could cobble something together only to be defeated in the house on their first Queen's Speech.
But it really depends on the mathematics of it and what sort of arrangement Cameron can pull together.
It all could get very messy indeed, which really cant be good for the country or the economy.
The Lib Dems said in 2010 that they would talk to the party with most seats first, is this still a policy of theirs?
Yeah, as DS politics is the most important thing!
So Was Gordon Brown asked by the Queen, as sitting PM, 'can you form a governmen? '. Only for him to answer 'no', let the other guy have a go.
I must have missed that.
it wasn't a policy , it was something they were under no obligation to do and they were not forced into
so I repeat whats your alternative ?
We are as important as Twitter or Facebook our views are just as valid as anyone else on the streets you seem to think this place is some underground unknown cave where no one else sees what is written.
Maybe so, but it would still be the rules as long as things stay as they are and we keep our current voting system.
He wasn't officially asked, but he stayed in downing street for several days trying to form a government.
He didn't pack up and leave until all his options had gone
Because Labour would command a majority in the House. That is how Westminster works
Except going to the Queen and having a go. The point I was making is that there is now precedent for ignoring this bit of protocol.
I love the way you misquoted Nicola Sturgeon. You shouldn't be using quotation marks when those weren't the actual words or indeed correct sense of what Nicola said.
She said that she would support an anti-Tory majority within the new Parliament. Which is a legitimate point of view within a voting system based on FPTP.
"If there is an anti-Tory majority, yes... we would work with Labour to stop the Tories getting into Downing Street."
Interesting point about the nature of political legitimacy in the notes section of the article.
I am not disputing it what I am asking in principal is it fair?
Would the public accept a scenario where a party got say 323 seats and some of the others ganged together and formed a rainbow coalition to keep them out?
Are we heading for trouble with this kind of talk that we will prop you up whatever happens if we can?
She told the BBC's Newsnight that "if [the Conservatives] can't command a majority, they can't be a government".