|
|
Subject:
An Andrew Marr type question.
Category: Relationships and Society > Politics Asked by: mongolia-ga List Price: $13.31 |
Posted:
05 Apr 2005 17:35 PDT
Expires: 05 May 2005 17:35 PDT Question ID: 505501 |
If the results of the upcoming British General election were to be a hung parliament with a large Lib-Dem showing (lets say they got 100 seats), then they would be able to form a coalition goverment? Yes /no?? And they could choose which party to go into coalition with ( Tories or Blairites) ? Yes/No ?? And been part of a coalition goverment, they would jointly rule with the party of their choice? i.e. they would have a share of the ministers in the cabinet? They could (i.e. Lib Dems) introduce Proportional Representation as a method of voting in the UK? Cheers Mongolia |
|
There is no answer at this time. |
|
Subject:
Re: An Andrew Marr type question.
From: probonopublico-ga on 05 Apr 2005 21:37 PDT |
Unlikely! The Liberals were a minority party in 1924 & supported a Labour Government ... and did nothing. It's all talk! |
Subject:
Re: An Andrew Marr type question.
From: badger75-ga on 06 Apr 2005 17:46 PDT |
In theory parliamentary systems are more flexible and able to respond quickly to events than the U.S. system. But coalition governments almost never take decisive actions. They lack an overwhelming mandate from the voters for bold deeds. |
Subject:
Re: An Andrew Marr type question.
From: myoarin-ga on 06 Apr 2005 20:32 PDT |
Hi, Mongolia - and Tibet, China and Siberian Russia :-) Your Lib-Dem's would be able to join in a coalition, but the impulse would come from the stronger of the main parties, Tory or Labour. In Germany, we have lots of experience with this, and Badger is right, especially if the competition between the major parties to form a coalition was rather even. The coalition agreement, a sort of contract, between the parties would define the principles they agreed to, also concerning the distribution of ministers. The harder the competition, the more detailed the agreement would be, with a dilution of significant election promises. But we can be sure that the major party in any coalition would never agree to the introduction of proportional representation, because that would undermine its own position. Twenty year ago, The Economist magazine flirted with the idea that pro - rep was good, but it seems to have learned better, maybe from observing the situation in Germany. |
If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you. |
Search Google Answers for |
Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy |