Friday, May 14, 2010

Election results: ConDem-nable?

Well, the vote share was roughly what I predicted as already noted. Plus, I was right on there being a hung Parliament with no party in overall control.

Where I was wrong was thinking that the Conservative Party would form an alliance with the Liberal Democrats. Anyone who knows anything about the election would have heard various calls from senior figures in the Lib Dem camp (and even Labour) who appealed to voters to vote tactically in order to ensure the Conservatives did not take power. The big shock was that --- after campaigning on a "vote for us: we will keep the Tories out of No. 10 Downing Street" --- the Lib Dems then, well, form a coalition government with the Tories that has the effect of contradicting a key election theme. This Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition is already being referred to as "ConDem" with many Lib Dem supporters disillusioned as a result.

The coalition and its policies appears ever alarming:
1. The Cabinet has a mere 4 women
2. 23 Cabinet ministers are millionaires (so much for the claim of "new politics")

And there's more. The ConDem coalition is pushing for a new law that would see Parliament dissolved only if supported by 55% of the House of Commons (see here). This is a constitutional outrage in more ways than one. This might mean that the Prime Minister would -- for the first time -- be able to lose a vote of confidence, but this would not be enough to trigger a new election (and the Tories might be able to hang on to power . . . even if the Liberal Democrats deserted them). Expect to hear a lot of opposition to this legislation shortly.

So far, not so good. I continue to believe we will see (a) a rise in top up fees for university students by this government and (b) elections by the end of the year. We shall see if this turns out to be true soon enough . . .

No comments: