lying politicians

BillieTheBot

It seems in light of some politicians and their inability to tell the truth, I'd quite like to see an early election.
Of course tony won't allow that and apparently he's trying to cling onto power for as long as possible, I have a question.
Can the people demand an election, or are we stuck with him for a few years yet?

Former Member

I don't think you can force him to have an election. However sometimes pressure does the trick. If the politician thinks he's becoming increasingly unpopular he might be inclined to cut his losses and have an early election instead of waiting another year or two and seeing the majority he has now evaporate.

I doubt this will be the case with Blair though, since he obviously thinks of himself as the best thing that's happened to Britain, and I'm sure he believes the electorate will see the errors of their ways in disagreeing with The Vicar sooner or later. :rolleyes:

Former Member

By law general elections are held every four or five years.

Former Member

Ive always voted Labour, I wont next time

Former Member

.

Former Member

he has to call on withinh 5 years so possibly another 3 years yet.

Alternatively an election can be forced if the govt can no longer command a majority in the house i.e if there was a massive Labour rebellion and they passed a vote of no confidence in the PM (I think thats how it works) Not really likely with the backbenches stuffed out with new labour cattle...............

Former Member

Originally posted by Toadborg
i.e if there was a massive Labour rebellion and they passed a vote of no confidence in the PM (I think thats how it works) Not really likely with the backbenches stuffed out with new labour cattle...............

That would just lead to a change in Labour leadership, it would need a vote on confidence in the Govt as a whole to force a general election - and for that to happen Labour's majority would need to be reduced dramatically...

Former Member

Thats the one, can that actually happen if there is a split within the party ie labour still have their majority but few of them actaully agree with the govt so they can't pass any policy? Or is it still a choice form the govt?

Former Member

Originally posted by Toadborg
Thats the one, can that actually happen if there is a split within the party ie labour still have their majority but few of them actaully agree with the govt so they can't pass any policy? Or is it still a choice form the govt?

You could vote against your own party in such an instance, but I can't ever see that happening...

Former Member

The traditional view is that if the government loses a vote on its legislation it is supposed to call a general election which happened frequently in the 19th Century. However, today there has to be a special vote of confidence in the government, not the PM but the government as a whole, if they lose this vote they have to call a general election. It did in fact happen in 1997 just before the general election when John Major was relying on the Ulster Unionists to pass policy but given its proximity to the election it has gone largely unnoticed. The more famous example is the fall of the Callaghan government in 1979 which was caused by exactly these methods - although again it was close to a general election anyway so has done largely unnoticed.

If there is a big enough demonstration by the people the pressure on a government can be enough to force a general election. But this is just political pressure, there's nothing constitutional to force it. The nearest we came to that was during the Poll Tax incident when the media and opposition were demanding a general election to legitimise the Poll Tax which of course wasn't going to happen because of Thatcher's huge majority from the 1987 election and because the matter was eventually settled when she was kicked out of office.

Former Member

Thanks for clarifying that guys, doesn't seem very likely in this parlaiment.......

Former Member

Originally posted by kevlar85


If there is a big enough demonstration by the people the pressure on a government can be enough to force a general election. But this is just political pressure, there's nothing constitutional to force it. The nearest we came to that was during the Poll Tax incident when the media and opposition were demanding a general election to legitimise the Poll Tax which of course wasn't going to happen because of Thatcher's huge majority from the 1987 election and because the matter was eventually settled when she was kicked out of office.

The community charge was in the Tories' manifesto. In that sense, there was nothing the people could do in order to stop it becoming law.

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat
By law general elections are held every four or five years.

No -- by law a general election must be held within five years of its predecessor; equivalently, no parliament may sit for more than five years. This rule can be circumvented by emergency legislation usually enacted in time of war. There is nothing to say that the period between election has to be four to five years -- the Queen can dissolve parliament and call a new election as she wishes, and so the PM could request that any time s/he found it convenient, before the five year deadline.

Former Member

Originally posted by monocrat
The community charge was in the Tories' manifesto. In that sense, there was nothing the people could do in order to stop it becoming law.

It was 106 words out of 17,971: -
"We will legislate in the first Session of the new Parliament to abolish the unfair domestic rating system and replace rates with a fairer Community Charge.

This will be a fixed rate charge for local services paid by those over the age of 18, except the mentally ill and elderly people living in homes and hospitals. The less-well-off and students will not have to pay the full charge but everyone will be aware of the costs as well as the benefits of local services. This should encourage people to take a greater interest in the policies of their local council and in getting value for money. "
- Conservative Party Manifesto: The Next Moves Forward (1987)

I'd especially like to draw your attention to "The less-well-off and students will not have to pay the full charge..." which can be said to give an impression of a fairer tax than it actually was. Also how many people in an election would be especially concerned with the small issue of local government finance as opposed to the big issues of the economy, foreign policy and the NHS. A vote for a manifesto is based on a broad brush of all policies not just individual areas therefore it was the government's duty to react to public opinion and repeal the Poll Tax which they did in 1991.

Former Member

Originally posted by kevlar85
"The less-well-off and students will not have to pay the full charge..."

And they didn't.

Former Member

Originally posted by kevlar85
A vote for a manifesto is based on a broad brush of all policies not just individual areas therefore it was the government's duty to react to public opinion and repeal the Poll Tax which they did in 1991.

But the manifesto as a whole is the basis of how a party gains its mandate. All parts therefore are relevant.