BBC News - Block on dissolving parliament is an outrage - Adonis.
As the BBC notes:
The Lib Dem-Tory plan will mean that 55% of MPs must approve such a move to get it through the House of Commons.
This changes the entire basis of operation of the UK parliament.
No longer is a majority enough.
No referendum.
No consultation.
Just the dismantling of democracy as we know it.
That's the Tory aim.
That's what they're delivering.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
[…] just referred to one attack on democracy by the […]
I would be interested to know how you know so much of what the Tories want or don’t want?
Anyway, you talk a lot of tripe on how “This changes the entire basis of operation of the UK parliament.” – all it does it require a 55% vote of no confidence to collapse a fixed term parliament.
How does this change the ENTIRE BASIS of operation of parliament.
Anyway, don’t be surprised if the Lords bounce it back pretty promptly – and they of course are all horrid heriditary Tories.
Looks like you have completely misunderstood the proposal. If you have fixed term parliaments you need a mechanism o stop the ruling party calling an election whenever they want. The purpose of this – and the 55% required – is to prevent the Tories dissolving parliament at a convenient time during the coalition. It ties the Tories in for 5 years.
However, if there is a vote of no confidence in the government, which requires a simple majority, then the government will fall and there will be a general election. So if the rainbow alliance wants to bring down the Tories it can do.
In other words, the point of the provision is to fetter the power of the majority party. Only someone who believes, as the left seems to, that the party is the state could object to that.
and strangely it appears it was the smaller part of the coalition that wanted it. Perhaps its time to listen rather than rant?
@alastair
I really don’t care if the Lib Dems did want it
I was attacking the ConDems
also, we might note that the LibLab coalition in Scotland brought in the same provision only with a 66% majority required. But of course it is “supporting the progressive majority to keep the Tory scum out of power for ever” whe Labour do it, and an attack on democracy when the Tories do it.
@mad foetus
And I reiterate – I object in principle to this – I don’t care who did it
I am not a member of a political party
I think you are misunderstanding the difference between a vote of dissolution and a vote of no confidence. If there was a vote of no confidence then th PM would have to resign and the Queen would call an election. All this proposal does is stop the majority party from dissolving parliament itself. And in fact, you could argue that the percentage should be higher to prevent this.
No point having fixed term parliaments if the majority party can still call an election whenever it wants.
I see my local Tory MP appears to support Richard.
“Just the dismantling of democracy as we know it”
So, according to this logic, the United States, which does not have a constitutional process to dissolve its legislative branch during its term, is not a democracy.
Oh fear, Richard, oh dear….
@Ted G
Note “as we know it”
Not “as the US knows it”
Not the same at all
@Richard Murphy
The fact that the greatest democracy on Earth works just fine without it should indicate to you that it is really not a big deal, and certainly not an assault on democracy itself.
@Ted G
If anyone thinks the US is the greatest democracy on earth they’re clearly quite mad
As evidence – the sheer insanity of a country that can create 3 strikes and you’re out
Ans still refuses to believe that universal health care is a pre-requisite for a just society