OK, could somebody help me out here?

[non sociopath skin]

The Guardian, reporting tonight on the Tory-Lib Dem coalition talks, says:

Clegg has been surprised by the Tories flexibility in the negotiations. Cameron has suggested reductions in the number of MPs, an elected House of Lords and a fixed-term parliament – all major concessions.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/09/general-election-2010-conservative-lib-dem

OK, I KNOW that the Tories already had a reduction in MP numbers as policy so it surely can't be right that Clegg sees this as a "concession", can it? But did the LibDems actually have the reduction of MPs in their manifesto?

Sorry to be cynical, but it really is beginning to look as if Clegg sees the deprioritisation of electoral reform as a strategy well worth the chance to climb into bed with his new friend Dave.

In fact, a much more cynical person than I might well be wondering as if this has been Clegg's personal game plan all along.

I'm bloody glad I voted as I did.

The Skin

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. It really is ridiculous that the Lib Dems want to be with the tories only

It would make more sense for all parties to have a part in the coalition.

[TheBigotBasher]

2. Thta is not what the Liberal Democrats are saying or doing.

He said before the election he would negotiate with the Party that had won the largest number of seats and the largest number of votes first. The Liberal Democrats are sticking to that but making clear that they are open for alternative discussions. Nick Clegg and Gordon Brown have met an have spoken, there s however a difference with Brown. He clearly lost. Labour needs to come up with a new Leader. At the moment that new Leader is likely to be David Millibrat.

[dipsydoodle]

4. Moribund

to me is just another of the liars I wish to see disappear without trace. Balls I would prefer despite the fact he might be evasive at times but then aren't they all. I'm also hoping they might consider using that **** Mandelson to plug the BP oil leak and just leave him there.

[non sociopath skin]

5. Please elucidate, BB.

You haven't answered my question BTW.

The Skin

[TheBigotBasher]

11. Prospects of any deal with Labour depend on the following

Gordon Brown is not yet in a position that would allow him to resign as Prime Minister, there is no one there to replace him. If he resigned it would mean that the Queen would have to choose a PM and that is not going to happen.

If there was going to be a Lib Dem deal with Labour that met the demand Brown must go, he would still be unable to resign as of yet. He could however resign as Labour Leader, not as PM (eg Major resigning as Party Leader in 1995). An accelerated Leadership process would take place inside of the Labour Party, that yet again may not give the Party a choice of who leads the Party. Once the Leader is chosen Brown would be in a position to resin as PM.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

8. I don't think the Tory-Lib pact would work (chalk and cheese)

[FunkyLeprechaun]

9. I think it will

Not trying to compare to American presidents, some of the best presidents, such as Lincoln, had bipartisan cabinets (he listened to both sides). Sounds like Cameron will form a bipartisan cabinet (Clegg getting foreign secretary most likely with his pro-European stance). We don't know how he will do as PM so we shall see.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

13. you have to think of their voters and their members too

I think it will be a atormy road. I think it is very different situation in the UK than here.

I think if the Tories had got a huge majority Cameron wouldn't have lasted long.

[FunkyLeprechaun]

14. I thought the same prior to the 2005 election

With the disaster known as Iraq underway, I thought Blair would be out, but that didn't happen. I wasn't living in the UK then and I didn't like the Tories at all, because of what I've heard and experienced during the Troubles in Ireland (used to go to Ireland every year from 1981-1992, sporadically now). I hated Thatcher's handling of the hunger strikers in 1981 as I knew that the RUC routinely arrested people with some link, but not actively involved in, to the IRA. My parents survived the troubles of 1968-1977 (my mother saw the carnage of Bloody Friday, 1972) and did not like DUP/UUP and the idiot Paisley.

Now, Ireland has changed quite a bit, the DUP/UUP now beginning to work with Sinn Fein/SDLP and Ian Paisley is gone (although his son is an MP now). The Tories have changed positions on several issues. Some say that the Tories are anti-immigrant yet my new Tory MP from Cannock Chase was born in New Zealand. Some say that they are stricter on NHS but Cameron has praised the NHS for the treatment of his disabled son, Ivan.

It seems that the old Thatcher view is still being upheld by the critics of the Tory party yet we haven't seen what the new Tory party would be like. I've worked with the LibDems once on disability issues, appearing with Malcolm Bruce, a LibDem minster from Gordon in Scotland, in support of a software developed for deaf children and I'm married to a man whose grandfather was Michael Roberts, the Junior Minister for Wales in Margaret Thatcher's cabinet. Some of the Britons here might remember his death in 1983, as he broke one of the rules of the Houses of Parliament by dying in the House of Commons.

So I'm really quite open in UK politics. It was a very difficult decision to make and I really wouldn't mind a Tory/Lib Dem alliance as I was aligned to both their manifestos (Agreeing with some of their points and disagreeing with others) as well as Labour's manifesto. I don't think it'll be as bad as you say.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. its not unheard of for more than two parties to form a coalition?

I would like to see the Green member to have some influence too.

I worry about the Tories, once they get in they will change back to what they really are, I don't think Clegg is strong enough.

[FunkyLeprechaun]

17. I really don't know about that

Since the last hung parliament was in 1974. This is how I came to decide on how I voted, I liked the policies of Labour but I did not like Brown at all which turned me away from Labour (and the Labour candidates in my area seemed very nice). My American friends wanted me to vote Labour and I said I could if Brown wasn't the leader.

If I had been living here in 2001, I'd have heartily voted Labour because I liked how Blair helped with the Good Friday Accords. It's a shame that he's now known for the disastrous war than that.

Maybe the Green member may have some influence but right now there's discussions on what long-term energy sources are possible and one of those is the research into Nuclear Power. I support research into Nuclear Power as one of the alternatives to oil. I support keeping Wind Power/Solar Power as viable power sources but they are only good for short-term bursts of power. Labour and Tory supported this idea and LibDems were against Nuclear Power, as well as Greens. The Labour party had the troubling ID Card Scheme (very similar to Arizona's new law) which the Tories and LibDems hated. Many positions each parties agreed with on and many positions they disagreed on.

If I were Nick Clegg, I'd consider forming a coalition with the Tories because I'd get a greater share of the vote whereas I'd have to deal with a multiparty coalition under Labour with many parties of different ideas.

Still no news on it yet!

[FunkyLeprechaun]

12. Just wanted to respond

The pundits at the BBC and on the BBC Have Your Say message board likens a multi-party coalition (Lab/LibDem/SNP/PC/Green/etc) to herding cats. I think it'd be very difficult to keep these parties views in line in order to have a successful, running government.

The best bet is a Tory/LibDem alliance. If it was different (Labour getting majority of seats and Tory losing), I'd support a Lab/LibDem coalition as well.

[dipsydoodle]

3. Given that there will be a referendum

on electoral reform and the substance and details of proposed change have yet to announced it really makes any discussion on the subject a bit arbitary. It could even transpire that given those full details, whatever they may be , that the majority of the general population just vote to stay as is.

[non sociopath skin]

6. Will there? Says who?

The Skin

[dipsydoodle]

7. OK then

eventually.

Good night.

[tjwmason]

10. There is lots of dissimulation going on

The elision of 'electoral reform' into a broader 'political reform' is quietly taking place. Tory policy has included (as you note) a reduction in the number of M.P.s, and I would certainly imagine Mr. Cameron being up for fixed term Parliaments and so forth - but on the big issue the Tories are firmly behind First Part the Post, and I don't see how that particular circle can be squared...so it looks like it's going to be ducked.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. However, the next paragraph is:

But Clegg still regards electoral reform as the main prize he can secure from the last Thursday's general election, which left his party holding the balance of power, albeit with a reduced number of MPs.

I don't think you should take the first one without the 2nd; and this is also how one paper is reporting it, not the precise words of the Lib Dems.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

18. Lib Dems are now negotiating with Labour

Tories are likely grumbling that they've been "had" knowing that Clegg has been talking to Brown all along.

The Lib Dem MPs are sceptical about Lib-Con as are the membership. I think there's a good chance of a rainbow coalition this week, more so than I previously gave credit for.