http://www.economist.com/node/21560256?zid=310&ah=4326ea44f22236ea534e2010ccce1932
Please read the article linked above and comment. What does this say about the potential for constitutional reform in Britain? What does this imply for the Tories and future elections? What will the Lib Dems get out of this coalition? Will
10 Comments
Liz Costa
22/10/2012 11:18:11 am
This article says that for both parties the constitutional reform in Britain is a suicide pact between both the conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. After both the prime minister and the liberal democrat deputy canceled two constitutional reforms they both weekend the political parties and the government. The impasses include the idea of making the House of Lords smaller and largely elected which was not embraced by the Tories. In a second attempt Mr.Clegg proposed all of the constituents to have about the same number of votes and trimmed the number of MP’s, this idea would have hurt the Liberal Democrats. In summary both attempts of reform were failed. The Tories on the next election have a chance of loosing to the Labor party or having to share power with the Liberal Democrats due to the coalition they created that, instead of merging ideas is being held together by fear of losing power completely. Although the coalition ended up being a suicidal pact the Liberal Democrats will at least gain, if the Tories win the election, the right to share power.
Daniel
24/10/2012 02:34:32 pm
First, the Lib Dems proved they can be as contradictory as Brazilian politicians when it comes to "sharing the same ideologies as the party you stand for", by colliding with the Conservatives. Which enforces the idea that politics is not a matter of "getting things done" or "doing the best for the people", and yes, a matter of who gets the power or not. And yes, it is 'Maquiavelic'. Notwithstanding, Conservatives who are also being maquiavelic in this sense, by ruining a good bill for the government just because of, as written in the article: “a fear of what would happen if it dissolved: the Tories trail Labour in the polls, and the Liberal Democrats are floundering”.
Gabriella Goldenstein
24/10/2012 10:06:41 pm
David Cameron and Nick Clegg destroyed two possible beneficial reforms. This eventually weakened the government and harmed both their political parties. One of the reforms was a government bill that would make the House of Lords smaller and largely elected. Many Conservative MPs are against it because the Lib Dems are so fond of it and also because they think an elected Lords would defy the superiority of the House of Commons.
Leonardo
25/10/2012 06:11:48 am
The Lib Dem and the Conservative party actually made a decision that will both harm Britain and their parties. The government bills would promote good constitutional reforms, and by “killing” them, the two parties have now much weaker coalition. Politics is the answer. Many Tory benchers strongly opposed the bill, which would also diminish the number of seats in the House of Commons. Of course, they were not willing to give up their power, which leads us to think about the meaning of politics. The excessive need to keep power in this situation, not only harmed the country as a whole, but themselves, as both of parties could loose support at least in the next election. As the article mentions, “you saved the Lords and lost the election”. Much attention was given to their own party, and besides preventing, it has just postponed a further conflict inside the government. This is very crucial too, because the proposals would correct the bias in favor of the Labour party in the electoral system, as seen in 2005, when Blair achieved a majority of 65, leading only 2.8 points over the Tories.
Tiago Fonseca
25/10/2012 08:57:26 am
This suicide pact is very destructive towards British politics. It not only weakensthe government, but also destroys their coalition. Tories, according to Nick Clegg, backed down on their initial agreement, which was signed in 2010. That shows the Conservatives lack of commitement on an agreement, and this backdown has initiated a possibility of the Labour Party taking over in the next election. All of this because some are more concerned on selfish needs rather than the needs of the people. Now the coalition only exists in a bond of fear, fear of losing Power. They are no longer connected by ideas, which is what made them strong in the first place. This new bond will not last, and then the prediction of the Labour party taking over will happen, all because some backed out on a reform that would benefit them in the long term, but apperently, the present has once again prevailed over the future.
Marina Oliveira
25/10/2012 10:02:21 am
The article highlights the bad decision taken by the Conservative prime minister David Cameron and Liberal Democratic leader Nick Clegg when ending two constitutional reforms that would positively affect Britain. One of the constitutional reforms was a bill that would make the House of Lords smaller and largely elected, which the Liberal Democrats were excited about. The fact that the tories rejected this bill, represented a breaking of the coalition agreement made with the Liberal Democrats. In response the Liberal Democrats opposed to the electoral boundaries that would ensure that all constituencies would have the same number of voters. Not only did the parties reject two bills that would represent beneficial reforms to Britain, but they deprived the constitutional reform, which now seems further away, and weakened their coalition. These events may have hurt the Conservatives in future elections, favoring the Labour party that has an advantage due to the constituency boundaries that remain in place and the atmosphere of a coalition falling apart between the Liberals and the Conservatives. The Labour Party's chance of winning the next election has definitely increased.
Andrea
25/10/2012 10:40:01 am
Two constitutional reforms were unaccomplished. The first one was a bill that would have made the House of Lords smaller and largely elected. The second one was a reform in the House of Common to change the constituency boundaries. The first reform creates a break in the coalition agreement with the Tories and the Lib Dems. Given such antagonism the Lib Dems opposed the second reform that would ensure all constituencies to have the same proportion of votes. Both David Cameron and Nick Clegg lost the opportunity of possible beneficial retribution from these reforms and weakened their political parties and the government. Such happening have, however, increased the Labor’s chance of winning the next elections, in 2015, given that the constituency boundaries will still exist and the coalition between the Liberals and the Conservatives is falling apart.
Julia Souza
25/10/2012 11:38:04 pm
A coalition government seemed to be at the Tories best interest in 2010 when they risked losing the election. However, now it seems that it was a high price to pay. The Liberal Democratic party has always been more aligned with the Labour Party and the coalition government forced them to lose part of their identity and their popularity to decrease. The Conservatives are also losing opportunities to make sure they maintain in power for at least five more years. One example of that is the constituency reform that would probably give the Tories 20 more seats in the House of Commons. But since it would also affect the LibDems, Nick Clegg opposed such reform. It even seems as if the two parties are in a game of power to see who can do more, when they should actually be working as a joint govern on what’s best for Britain. The failure of the coalition government can only have one certain effect; it will surely help the Labour Party image and give them an advantage in the next elections.
Alana Cavalcanti
28/10/2012 06:22:28 am
The benefits of the possible and emerging constitutional reform was destroyed before it was put into action. This caused not only into the suicide of the reform but harmed the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats, due to the fact that the Prime Minister and the Liberal Democrats deputy canceled two constitutional reforms. The proposes had the main idea of making the House of Lords smaller and largely elected. A clear majority of the Conservatives MPs were against of this idea because the Liberal Democrats are caring and tender and also because the idea of an elected Lord would defy the superiority of the House of Commons. Nick Clegg also proposed for all the constituents to have the same number of voted and reduce the number of MPs, which would negatively effect the Liberal Democrats. On the next elections, the Tories will have a chance of loosing to the Labour Party or having to divide and/or share the power with the Liberal Democrats because of the coalition. The coalition was created instead of joining the ideas but because of both not wanting to loosed the power absolutely so the suicidal pact was created.
Nevo
29/10/2012 08:40:02 am
In this article, we can see that both the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats, will get harmed with the suicide pact that they implemanted. Both David Cameron and Nicke Clegg, canceled two constitutional reforms that would help Britain, and was already being accepted by the people and some parties. One of the constitutional reforms was a response from the Liberal Democrats where they ensured that all the constituencies that will be voted at need to have the same number of voters. Before that response David Cameron's party, or the Conservative Party, decided to make the House of Lords smaller and largely elected, which caused in a coalition after it was rejected by the Tories. This coalition was created because of ambition, of having power or maintaining power for at least five more years. Leave a Reply. | Ms. Garrett“I'm not a teacher: only a fellow traveler of whom you asked the way. I pointed ahead - ahead of myself as well as you.” ArchivesApril 2013 CategoriesAll |
RSS Feed