Whoever gets in, the next five years could be a massive change for all of us. Firstly there's the uncertainty of what a minority Government will bring. Secondly there's the risk of an SNP majority Government at Holyrood. There could ultimately be another Indy Ref. There may also be a rise of English Nationalism, mainly stoked up by The Tories and UKIP. There's the economy, the welfare state, the NHS, there's Trident, there could also be a major Royal Death that will bring some gloomy times and possibly a change of monarch (after all the Queen is 89 years old). This can affect the Nations mood and the public feeling towards the current Government - either positively or negatively depending on how they react. Of course we could also have a Coronation too and maybe Harry might get married too. It is certainly going to be a very interesting 5 years - one of the most unpredictable 5 years in any of our lifetimes.

I was thinking the exact same. I suppose they may take some of the Lib Dem's but they will also lose seats so it will counter act it. Most of the Lib Dem losses will be to the SNP.

Only thing these polls prove is that if they reflect reality its going to be harder for the parties to form a coalition than it was in 2010.

I said it last night. Who ever wins is going to have a government that is unworkable.

And SNP mps do not vote on English only matters at Westminster, they haven't for years..

People need to grasp that all mps are equal in our national parliament you can't delegitmise their right to have a say on non English only matters.

You don't seen to understand how Politics in this country works.

Lol! That is the whole point of Labour relying on SNP to get their policies passed. They (the SNP) will HAVE to vote on English only matters in order to get policies through. That's why people in England are worried, that's where the legitimacy question becomes relevant. It has nothing to do with the Scots voting for who they want. It has nothing to do with voting together on UK wide affairs. Of course all MP's have an equal vote and right. But when the SNP will be expected to vote on English only affairs that may or may not benefit Scotland more than the English in return for the votes, that is the problem. That is what is going to cause the problems. And, neither Nicola Sturgeon nor John Swinney have said they won't participate in English only votes. Their stance is "if it's in Scotland's interest".

That's a really fantastic analysis, wizzywick. It could be quite a dark five years to come, especially with how cuts impact public services. I hope that wages do increase at the very least. I'm worried about my generation (I'll be 23 this year) and how we'll face all of this. The future looks pretty terrifying!

On a less dark note, I found this from PB:


I still think there's been a swing to the Tories, but looking at this it could still very well be close.

I agree with you, what people must realise they are businesses and there to make a profit, I think the daily polls are pretty pointless, weekly ones should be the minimum....and I think everyone puts to much meaning into them, including the media that love to create stories us out of nothing.....

Agreed, I'm 19 and feel similar however I'm hopeful that the next 5 years will be positive on the whole.

I hope you're right! Two things that really worry me are wage levels and getting a mortgage. I wonder how long our generation will have to wait until we can own a home, and just at what we'll be, when we pay off our mortgage, if we can even get one!

I'm also seriously worried about the cuts:tax ratio of the incoming government - especially how cuts could impact mental health.

Not the right thread I know, but giving the people the chance of having affordable homes is the one issue ALL parties are failing at. It's easy to say "no tax on new homes for first time buyers" or "let's persecute landlords by asking them not to increase the rent even though their expenses may go up anyway". It is easy to say "Council tenants can buy their homes or we will help with a bond to give you a leg up" but what does it actually mean? nothing. It is all nonsense.

What is needed is action. Ideas from ordinary people. For politicians to listen and to genuinely care.

Re homes you are definitely right about that its getting more difficult, People who have no financial support from family members will certainly struggle unless we sort the housing problem out.

Agreed.


Unfortunately (like with a lot of other things) it seems the main political parties have no real solution to the housing problem. And on top of that, you then have to question just how competent they'd be at making their plan a success!

Agree none of the parties have a credible plan on this in my view.

Housing could be sorted relatively quickly and reasonably cheaply.

I would allocate money to each local authority in the form of housing loans which local authorities could pay back by the method explained later.

This money would be used to build apartment blocks that would be owned by the council. However, they would not be for social housing tenants. These would be helped differently. Again, I'll explain later. These apartment blocks would be for people who are having difficulty in finding affordable rent in the private sector. You would need to go on a waiting list to get one, but priority would be given to young people seeking to buy their own property in the future or families or both. There is a catch though, tenancies would last three years maximum because they are designed to give people a stepping stone to appropriate accommodation or their own home. How does it work?

You would not need a deposit. Instead you pay the council a set fee + rent each month for maintenance and repairs. The rent would be affordable but not as cheap as those in social housing. You would then have the home for three years and you would need to find alternative accommodation after 2 and half - 3 years. As I say, the homes are designed to be a stepping stone to your own home. The cheaper rents and no hefty deposits mean you will be able to save and prepare for finding your own place more easily than facing pressure or worrying about whether your landlord will sell next year.

The money from the rents would then be used to repay the Government and the money from rents once the Government has been repaid will be used to build new social housing in compliance with the amount of people in urgent need of housing that are on housing lists. This would ensure social housing being readily available for anyone in desperate need. It would also save money on B&B's and hostels that so many people are being forced to live in.

It would only take 14% of those who say they will vote UKIP to vote Conservative on May 7th. Or in other words the UKIP share to go down c 3% from 15% to 12% which I think it entirely possible.

There us the "Help To Buy" scheme which has got thousands on the propert ladder.

It's a 3% national swing to Labour, but here's the thing, if Labour are truly doing badly in Scotland yet within reach nationally it means the swing in England must be greater than that. And of course at every election since 1997 Labour have out performed the national swing.

Parties getting a reduced share of the vote just don't end up getting more seats - it doesn't happen. Based on a lower share of the vote, there will be fewer, and not more, Conservative MPs in the 2015-2020 parliament.


According to the latest poll of polls, UKIP support is holding steady and it is not bleeding back to any party, Labour or Conservative. Although I would not necessarily expect to see any spiral of silence effect in this election, UKIP is the one party it is most likely to happen to given the vilification of that party in the press.

Thing is UKIP want a referendum on Europe preferably quicker but the only way that is going to happen is with a Conservative led government at least - how many UKIP voters are likely to make the same consideration and vote Conservative?

Yes they do, they use a weak argument that issues can still affect Scotland even if its England only

My thoughts exactly

Why is that a weak argument? First, it is based on the principle that has not been changed that all MP's are equal in Westminster. Second it stands on its own in that as long as there is a financial linkage between matters agreed in Westminster and funding of Scotland within the UK, then Scottish MPs are justified in influencing the decision. Is it just SNP MP's that are 'sub-standard' or would Labour and Conservatives fail to use any Scottish MP's in a close called vote?

But you see it isn't actually a weak argument unless you can give me an example or argument for how something that has direct implications for Scotland is none of Scotland's business...?

Many of the things characterised as England only by the media actually aren't. It has to be England only in fact not just in spin and hype.

I understand the point you are making - that the national polls include Scotland and, therefore, Labour in England and Wales must be performing a couple of points up to compensate - but what do you mean by the last sentence?

But they would like to


Not helpful