Coalition collapse?

[FontSnob]

At the risk of sounding awfully thick. What would happen if the coalition broke down at this point? Is that possible?

From what I can gather (and I'm increadably thick ) is that we would get a general election.

Sounds like just what we need at the moment. Just wish there was a way we could make it happen

They'd be dancing on the streets!

What would happen though, if we got a general election and then they won, outright. There are a whole lot of people who support them arent there?

What do you mean by broke down?

If you mean that one of the two parties announced it was no longer bound by the coalition agreement, then DC would continue as PM and would have to find consensus with the minor parties on everything that was put to the vote in the House. They might have to suspend proposed legislation, but could continue to govern in all ways that did not require fresh legislation.

At some point, the Opposition would call a vote of no confidence, then DC would have to step down. In theory, EM could take over as PM if he could form a plausible Government (just as Brown might have stayed on if a different coalition had been formed). But in practice, that won't happen. Parliament would be dissolved and a General Election would be called straight away. The current administration (like all outgoing Governments) would still hold office during the election campaign (we are never left without a government, unlike Belgium) but by convention wouldn't do anything (other than deal with unavoidable urgent business and crises) from that point.

I would rejoice. REJOICE and sing and dance and skip and sing some more, and crack open the champers.

Yes, it is possible (theoretically) and if that happened there would be a general election.

'them' getting in, in their own right wouldn't worry me at all, wouldn't happen. No chance.

And I agree with FontSnob - if this happened in the short term, I think an outright Tory majority is on the cards, from a very low turnout. Labour is simply not ready with an alternative programme to put to the electorate; they really do need to get on with that if they want to look like serious contenders.

Thank you Edith, that was really helpful. I am quite new to the whole politics malarky (that's pretty poor at 34yrs old) but am starting to get really fucked off and worried about it all. I think that the conservatives have a massive amount of followers. :(

I think there is no chance of the Coalition splitting. I think the whole reason that we have a Coalition is to ensure that a stable government sees its term through and implements the planned austerity, which is fairly similar to what Labour would also implement, whatever they now claim.

The Coalition set things up originally to make it very diffcult for either party to pull out and trigger a vote of no confidence. As we saw yesterday, Labour do not have any solid alternatives to the measures proposed and this is reflected in Milliband's very poor poll-ratings. The coalition may be taking unpopular steps but I think there is a general appreciation that if Labour was still in charge with their 'spend, spend, spend' approach, we'd really be up shit creek because there would be no confidence in our government internationally. They aren't doing themselves any favours by sitting, arms folded, blowing raspberries from the sidelines. Notice how they haven't supported the union strike either?

I agree. Labour simply don't have any credible alternative plans. The plans they proposed before the election are in effect exactly what the coalition have done now.

Since the election, all Labour have done is suck air through their teeth and say "Ooooh we wouldn't do that....." to every single cut. In fact, I can't remember any cut they've supported. All whilst saying that cuts must be made. How is that credible?

The coalition will last the full five years. The lib dems simply cannot afford to pull out. If they do so now, their support is so low that I think even the monster raving loony party would be taking their seats!

The plans Darling proposed were based on a 3.2% growth forecast for the next three years. That was always their problem. Brown's team consistently over-estimated growth and spent accordingly. When the real numbers came out they glossed over them and hoped we'd be rendered too lazy & apathetic by having money thrown at us to notice... and we were. Remember how 'voter apathy' used to be a big concern? At least the Coalition has the balls to adjust the plans to reality rather than keep living in la-la land.

'we are never left without a government, unlike Belgium)', but do you know what? Belgium functions perfectly well without one, and I have to say that having lived in Belgium since 2006, I see no difference between having one and not. Perhaps we should try it in the UK.

The polls are consistently giving labour an overall majority in response to the question "who would you vote for if there was a general election tomorrow"

ukpollingreport.co.uk/

Given the cuts are on a scale practically unheard of and are deeper than even Maggie implemented back in the day, it's a surprise Labour are not ahead even more.

Remember when the MP scandal broke and the Tories popularity shot up? This is no different. What matters is in 3.5 years time when the election is near again.

Hopefully by then, Labour will have some policy's to debate. Judging by yesterday's appearance on MN chat, Ed's sole policy at the moment is to tax the bankers £2billion to pay for Youth Unemployment. Fair enough but it's hardly a coherent answer to our economic woes is it?

It's hard to take seriously a party whom in 18 months has but one policy, claims they'd cut the deficit too yet opposes every single cut proposed and then criticises the government for "failing".

Oh and I thought the bankers tax was going to be invested in housebuilding and restarting the economy. But i guess the £2 billion will pay for whatever Ed wants to at any given time of the day. Cos it's a magic £2billion!

scaryteacher - i'm sure you're right re no govt - after all, most of what the govt come up with is crap and designed so egotistical minsters can say this is 'their' legacy - doesn't actually improve anything or meet any real needs - eg govt tinkering with eduation policy every 5 minutes. just creates huge amounts of extra work and hassle for everyone - actually gets in the way of running the country efficiently. Just a small case in point - every time the Dept for Education has had a name change (3? in the last decade at least), taxpayers are shelling out for a new logo, new stationery etc. Net benefit = zero.

You know what I'd love to see.

A government which says "Right, we've put all the laws & stuff in place we think we need. What's needed now is time for the changes to take effect. So we're not going to fuck about forever bringing in new laws and new initiatives, we'll just all go home and come back if something urgent happens (like a bomb/war)."

I wouldn't even mind if they sat at home on full pay. At least they aren't buggering around all the time. Sometimes the right thing to do is nothing.

New Labour used to be the worst at this. They'd try to bring a law/rule in for everything. Even when the crisis hit, their flagship idea? Bring a law in to halve the deficit in four years. Why need a law??? Do I need a law to tell me to stop overspending? No...JFDI!!!

seeing as the original question has been answered, i just wanted to chip in and say that the tories didn't win outright and have definitely got less supporters now the middle class are struggling under them. no way would they win if an election was brought about by a coalition split. doubt the lib dems would have as much support as during the last election either.

It looks unlikely at the moment that the coalition will break down. The latest ICM poll has the Tories in the lead by 2% and a total coalition lead of 16%.