Heres what a hung Parliament will do

[lincstash]

WE have been there before, with both Wilson and Heath.

No one can rule with a minority government. Its an abortion. Nothing radical, nothing decisive can get passed into law. Nothing gets decided, no real advancement can be made, everything is fudge and a compromise.

IF we get a hung parliament, Labour will retain power (as the incumbent governments right to), completely unable to do anything decisive about the economy, and eventually, after being defeated in multiple votes government will collapse with a year, and another election will ensue. You only need a major bill such as the Finance Bill to get destroyed by the opposition, and thats thats.

Meanwhile, the militant left wing unions (UNITE and GMB) will set about ejecting Labours Blairites and Brownites from the party , (as they have promised they can and will), and whilst labour struggles along in the minority in westminster, civil war will rip the party apart as the unions seize control and force the party back to socialist far left. Policy making and decision making will cease within the government

Meanwhile, the worlds financial markets will see the political chaos, pull the plug on our credit rating and that will be it, game set an match. The economy will collapse, and the World Bank will be forced to step in, as it did with the Wilson Government. We will then be a prime target for the EU vultures to take further control of us.

THis is not speculation, this is based on previous times in our history when we have been in this position. We are the 5th largest economy because we always have had majority governments. If you want examples of what happens to countries with minority rules, look at places like Italy, Argentina, Brazil. 3rd rate counties because they cant be ruled decisively.

'Unite have promised a winter of discontent' - well they can promise what they like, they won't be able to deliver it because the workforce is largely de-unionised (more's the pity IMO).

Re. fiscal crisis in the event of a hung parliament - I don't doubt that there would be short-term jitters. WHat I do doubt is that there would be any serious long-term consequences. What's the worst that could happen - Vince Cable as Chancellor? Don't tell me the international markets would run off screaming at the prospect. They'd be perfectly happy. So long as any coalition government kept the wheels turning, everyone would settle down v quickly.

100x -
I think Labour is bouncing along the bottomest bit of the barrel bottom cash wise.
I haven't seen a single scrap of Labour paperwork through my door, no window posters, nothing in front gardens. It is utterly weird at this stage of an election round here.

No you didn't actually.

you said 'whilst labour struggles along in the minority in westminster, civil war will rip the party apart as the unions seize control and force the party back to socialist far left. Policy making and decision making will cease within the government'

I understand that is what you meant to say, but you didn't. Because a civil war is a war between CITIZENS of THE SAME COUNTRY. That's what it means.

You were using over-excited, inaccurate language to drive your point home but you used the wrong words. Possibly because you don't know what civil war means?

PW - I think you need to mobilise very few bodies these days to make things vv difficult actually now. Train drivers? Firemen? Petrol tanker drivers?At the same time? WOUld be interesting.

Not really, no I don't. I would agree that there was 'more going on' post 1500, though! Though my son, passionate about the early Plantaganets, tells me I am simply ignorant of history pre Henry VII.

Cat - meanwhile I've had lots of leaflets from my Conservative ppc courtesy of Mr Ashcroft

i think the volcano is a tory troublemaker, fo' sho'.

Ah well, indeed!
I have been admiring the high quality fence posts (big enough for a horse paddock)being used to support the little cardboard Libdem diamond posters. MOney to burn.

If you read the original posts, Unite and the GMB provides a majority chunk of Labours funding. They have Labour by the balls, because they command 167 MP's.

The worst that will happen is labour are forced to adopt more left wing policies that the LibDems find unacceptable and agreement breaks down. Furthermore, UNITE want to sieze power from the Brownites and Blairites, and place ther eown men in all those posts. Can you see that happening?

The money markets are only interested in our ability to repay the EPIC nation debt labour has run up, if the government look even slightly unable to stay in control, they will panic and run. A hung Parliament would create a dangerous power vacuum that will seriously put the willies up the stock market.

UBS have also warned that the lack of clarity would trigger a run on sterling that could result in a debt crisis similar to that in Greece. Sterling hit a seven week high against the dollar yesterday closing at $1.54.

Furthermore, if the epic national debt in not cut, Britain will lose its top grade credit rating. Last month, Standard & Poors, the leading rating agency, kept a negative outlook on the UK's AAA rating which it said was "in the absence of a strong fiscal consolidation plan."

A hung parliament governed by a minority party riven by internal civil war is going to be a death knoll to us. We had a Liberal-Labour pact in 1977-78, it was nothing less than war, and a disaster.

For quite a lot of the period between 1000 and 1500, we were ruled by France

I have been putting my tinfoil hat on and off hourly reagrding that volcano!

lincstash, that's one scenario. But that's all it is - a scenario. I disagree with you about how things would play out, and I'm not the only one (somebody posted a link today to a blog by the Daily Telegraph's finance correspondent, basically saying that a coalition government wouldn't be any big deal).

Oh, and re. Unite forcing Labour so far left that a coalition breaks down - can I see that happening - no. a) Because Unite, from what I can see, really isn't very left wing; and b) because there are about four properly left-wing MPs in the Labour party.

"By ahundredtimes Mon 19-Apr-10 20:29:28
No you didn't actually."

Yes i did, actually, i said it several times in several posts. What part of

"whilst labour struggles along in the minority in westminster, civil war will rip the party apart as the unions seize control and force the party back to socialist far left."

doesnt refer to the labour party? Its quiet clear the entire sentence refers to civil war within labour.

DEFINITION: CIVIL WAR
war between factions in the same body, organisation or country.

Seems to fit as far as i can see.

Now, you got an intelligent points to make, or are you operating at full intellectual debating capacity?

I think british history is FASCINATING abride

But I wouldn't want my understanding of that history to lead me to a narrow, brittle, scared and vulnerable position whereby I now thought myself UNDER THREAT. It's a scared, limited view point.

My understanding of our conflicted, bloody, fascinating history of wars, land grabs, democracies and power-broking leads me to realize this really isn't the case.

'now you got an intelligent points to make?'

do you mean

now, have you got any intelligent points to make?

You can be VERY difficult to understand. I just want to be clear.

how do you want this internet conversation to go, lincstash? what do you seek to gain here?

re Civil War. I should have said

It's going to lead to civil war in the labour party PW.

Then you'd have felt better and not misunderstood and misquoted. Okay. I understand.

Well, I don't mind telling you all; I'm confused. I don't want to vote Labour or Tory and I'm worried about any of the others getting in, so what do I X against?

Well hang on, who do you want to rule the country? You've eliminated everybody there. Are you Prince Charles?

I know! I bloody hate politics at any given time, but I want my vote to count ~ just don't know how to this time.

Solo, I think lots of people feel this way tbh.

re Lincs last post. My understanding is that if there is a run on the pound - which there so easily could be - then there's a run on the pound.

If we've learnt anything recently, it's that the government simply don't control the money market or individual traders, and it could happen just as easily the day George Osborne steps into number 11 with a majority in parliament.

But I do expect to hear this talk a lot between now and polling day. If in doubt, get 'em scared.

I don't care about Lincstash's spelling, it is some of his ideas and knowledge that is interesting. He makes a good point about Britain's tremendous influence in the world over the last few centuries, I think that only France comes close in its influence. Bad things were done by both countries, but it cannot be denied that these countries changed the history of the world.

Lincstash is knowledgeable and brings in interesting facts about Charles Babbage, the industrial revolution and the history of the country. He makes an interesting point about the influence of the Unite union, which is a good point to debate. I am not a Labour fan, but I think Lincstash is wrong about Unite's power to change events, but I don't think Lincstash should be criticised so harshly for bringing this topic up. On Unite I agree with policywonk. I think that Brown et al. are not really very left-wing, I think they work for the establishment, and I think that the Unite bosses and most other union bosses do the same, with their £200,000 odd salaries. The end result is that they both screw the workers everytime. However, Brown will have to make more concessions to the unions to keep up the pretence that he is a socialist.

I think that all of the parties follow the same globalist agenda, which is not really to the benefit of the people. That is why computers and TVs are now made in the Far East. The British people are easily capable of making any of these goods, and are an ingenious people as stated by Lincstash who cited all of the inventions created by the British. However, globalisation has deliberately destroyed the manufacturing capacity of Britain and handed it over to other countries and allowed them to supply the market. All parties have carried out the same policy. It is also in the interests of globalisation to underplay and deny the historical achievements of the people of Britain. I think many people are being duped by the globalisation agenda of all of the parties.

I don't think anyone was underplaying the historical achievements of Britain Claig. I think they were picking up on the combination of patriotic fervour and a desperate fear of the future - which often makes for a queasy and uncomfortable mix, and it's fine to point that out.

I don't NEVER comment on peoples spelling btw. I just felt the need because he was so quick to dismiss us as dumbasses who have been badly educated due to left wing nutty teachers. Just saying. Quite tough to tell everyone else they are less well educated than himself, and then erm, well, you know.

Thanks 100x.
The only leaflet I've had was Labour and I've had no one knock to ask for my vote.