Result of the UK election points to … WHAT? A National Government, OBVIOUSLY!

by
  • Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog
  • Current Latest Page
  • All Contents of Site – Index
  • Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here. “He’s not a war criminal. He’s not evil. He didn’t lie. He didn’t sell out Britain or commit treason. He wasn’t Bush’s poodle. He hasn’t got blood on his hands. The anti-war nutters must not be allowed to damage Blair’s reputation further. He was a great PM, a great statesman and a great leader.”
  • Comment at end

    7th May 2010

    No, the people haven’t spoken.

    Or if they have, it is in an obscure way. Very obscure.  I put that down to lack of inspired leadership from ANY of the parties. You’d expect me to say that.  The voters are all speaking together and in different voices, so that we can’t really decipher what they mean.  Is anyone really listening to anyone else?

    So, what do we need? Given that two of the main parties think we have “a broken society” and “a broken political/voting system”; given that one of them wants to get us out of a war on foreign land; given that all three agree, [whispering] that the country is in danger of collapsing in financial distress, it’s clear to me –

    WE NEED A NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. A COALITION OF THREE (at least).

    When do we need it? NOW.

    After all, people often say they want politicians to work together don’t they? Do they say they only want TWO of the parties to work together? If so, I have never heard that uttered.

    As David Cameron agrees with Nick on this, that and the other, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats (parties who have HUGE ideological and policy differences – immigration, Europe, nuclear power/defence) have suddenly discovered they have SO-O-O much in common.

    Gordon Brown says they should have time to work through their negotiations. A wise move. Give the Tories and Lib Dems long enough and the differences will start to surface from within their parties.

    So if I were Mr Brown, I would suggest that he holds his horses even longer and allows the negotiations to develop. BOTH parties, but particularly the Lib Dems, half of whom instinctively face much farther to the Left than does Labour, will soon enough start to notice certain little incompatibilities between themselves and the Tories.

    According to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg (http://twitter.com/BBCLauraK) there are already rumbles in the Tory jungle. That is probably nothing as compared to the rumbles that might surface soon within the Liberal Democrats. Remember, Nick Clegg, who failed to make any breakthrough – in fact fell back – has another hand he can play in his “not the kingmaker” role. Some of his own people may soon remind him of that. The Tories have no other fallback support.

    The leading party, the Conservatives, has not reached the required 326 seats, though they have gained 97. (It WAS Blair they were fighting in 2005, remember.)

    The present governing party, the Labour Party has lost 91 seats.

    The end result of all the juvenile Cleggmania pop star business? A loss of 5 seats for the Liberal Democrats!

    NO PARTY HAS AN OUTRIGHT MAJORITY.

    Final Result:

    • Conservatives 306
    • Labour 258
    • Liberal Democrats 57
    • Others 28

    By the way, I’d like to congratulate the Sky/BBC Exit Poll which suggested – 307/255/59/29. They were remarkably close to being absolutely correct. The political hacks and blogosphere was wrong to question them.

    (One constituency, Thirsk and Malton, has had the election delayed until 27 May following the death of a candidate.)

    Watch live BBC coverage here
    A commenter writes: “The hung parliament means that neither the Labour party nor the Conservatives chose the right people to lead them. Neither of them commands the confidence of a substantial number of the electorate. The coalition government is the only choice but requires tact – we wait to see whether the politicians have what it takes. May the best negotiator win.”




    Free Hit Counter


    Advertisements

    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

    4 Responses to “Result of the UK election points to … WHAT? A National Government, OBVIOUSLY!”

    1. We Happy Hung Voters. By the way, I disagree with Nick « Tony Blair Says:

      […] Result of the UK election points to … WHAT? A National Government, OBVIOUSLY! […]

    2. Supplying Confidence. Nick & Dave-it’s the economy, stupid (not voting reform). Give Gordon a ring. « Tony Blair Says:

      […] Just heard on BBC Radio4′s Any Answers, several commenters  suggestions of a government of national unity. Nice to know that I am not the only one suggesting that. You heard it here first. […]

    3. ‘Unlocking’ Democracy? A can of worms « Tony Blair Says:

      […] Result of the UK election points to … WHAT? A National Government, OBVIOUSLY! […]

    4. Gordon Brown resigns. Or does he? « Tony Blair Says:

      […] of the public is for ALL three main parties to get it together in a national government as I first suggested here on May 7, 2010 @ 17:38. After all it’s the economy, stupid, isn’t […]

    Leave a Reply

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

    WordPress.com Logo

    You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

    Google+ photo

    You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

    Connecting to %s