politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Antifrank guest slot: How the monarchy might suffer in the

First?

The Queen has already been exiled from the Westminster Abbey VE celebration on the 8th as it will be full of politicians, so I think they are alert to the risks.

CarlottaVance said:

First!

Where Jezki will finish in the Champion Hurdle today at Cheltenham? I hope so anyway. Would be great for AP McCoy at his final Cheltenham festival.

JEZKI.

"STJOHN"s Cheltenham daily special.

So lets get this right... If the politicians cannot agree (thats 'the politicians') then its the monarchy that gets the blame?
Ultimately since its the voters that would have got us there then I fail to see why its so difficult to put the blame if any where it belongs.

If the latest view from Jack's ARSE is correct, Her Maj will have little to worry about as Con will be easily capable of forming a minority government and might even inch over the line to a tiny majority.

This is just another positive effect of the likely outcome. The more damage the monarchy suffers the sooner we can get rid of the ridiculous institution.

Con 280
Lab 260
LD 30
SNP 50

Appeals to my anarchist tendencies

Sunil_Prasannan said:

FPT
Broken, sleazy Labour on the slide?

https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/574994996128014336

A simple average of all of March's polls puts the Conservatives 0.7% ahead, although I'm not sure what figure ELBOW comes out with.

Sean_F said:

If the politicians cannot agree among themselves who will form a government, I don't think they have good grounds for complaint if the Queen chooses the party with the most seats.

I think that would be the constitutionally correct thing to do.

The Queen acts on the recommendation of her Ministers - and her First Minister is David Cameron until he either tells her otherwise or he loses the confidence of the house. Then Cameron will advise her who to ask - which can only be Miliband - if he then loses a vote of confidence, the FTPA steps in....

GIN1138 said:

If the latest view from Jack's ARSE is correct, Her Maj will have little to worry about as Con will be easily capable of forming a minority government and might even inch over the line to a tiny majority.

Unfortunately for the rest of us, we will then have to endure said tiny majority wibbling on ad nauseam about Europe while the country goes to the proverbials.

Then we'll have the much-vaunted referendum, the result of which is likely to please one side much more than the other and we'll either have a lame-duck PM with his credibility and reputation in tatters or a PM having to govern a fractious Party.

Great prospect, eh ? Makes the idea of Ed M and Balls look passably attractive.

Indigo said:

If Lab+SNP+LD have over 326 votes then on the first day they put down a Motion of Confidence in the government and have the votes to pull it down.

Farron may well want to bide his time.

Pulpstar said:

Indigo said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Pulpstar said:

Do you think there is a good possibility the Lib Dems might abstein... or even Labour... ?

I think the SNP least likely of the lot to abstein of the leftish parties personally. Though I wouldn't 100% rule it out.

I think any of them might abstain. All parties will be wanting to try to bring about another election at the time which they calculate is best for them, which may not be immediately. The SNP in particular will be focusing on the next prize, which is Holyrood 2016.

Any party which isn't yet ready to pull the plug can always dress it up with some cant about stability.

Indeed. Most of the parties (probably not the SNP with all their recent recruits) will be broke as well and will want some time to raise some cash for the next election.

More to the point the Kippers probably will have just for 100 or so second places in northern Labour seats, the sitting MPs there are not going to be in a hurry to call a new election and risk losing the seat they just won.

Yes I think Labour may well be the ones to abstain. If there was a market up the SNP would probably be a false favourite I reckon.

It's a basic rule of hung Parliaments that it's rarely in the interest of a majority to have a general election straight away.

Richard_Nabavi said:

antifrank said:

Of course the Queen isn't going to be having cups of tea with the eminences grises to find out whether Blue Buggins or Red Buggins is best placed to hold the reins of power. It won't stop the decision being made in her name or the role of the monarchy coming under intense scrutiny.

There won't be a decision made in her name, there will be an announcement that assurances have been given that X commands a majority in the House, and a vote of confidence to demonstrate that (or not) very soon afterwards.

In the meantime, David Cameron remains Prime Minister.

The onus would be on David Cameron to suggest who commands a majority.

Indigo said:

stodge said:

Indigo said:

Much better to follow the LD view and decide that there is no point in asking the electorate about the EU, after all it costs so little and does so much good they can't possibly want to leave, and if they do it must be delusions or false conciousness.

Whereas paradise, utopia and nirvana await them if they vote to leave...yeah, right.

Who knows, we live in a democracy. I am not afraid of asking the people, are you ?

If we must have another EU vote to satisfy Tory right wingers and UKIP little Englanders, then I guess we'll have to. Once we've voted to stay in again, will you shut up about it? Or will you just continue like the SNP?

Richard_Nabavi said:

antifrank said:

Of course the Queen isn't going to be having cups of tea with the eminences grises to find out whether Blue Buggins or Red Buggins is best placed to hold the reins of power. It won't stop the decision being made in her name or the role of the monarchy coming under intense scrutiny.

There won't be a decision made in her name, there will be an announcement that assurances have been given that X commands a majority in the House, and a vote of confidence to demonstrate that (or not) very soon afterwards.

In the meantime, David Cameron remains Prime Minister.

I don't think it will necessarily be anything like as clear cut as that. If the Lib Dems stick by their "coalition or nothing" approach and the SNP and Labour can't find a modus vivendi, the Queen (and her advisers) may have the problem detailed in the link above:

"But what happens if the politicians simply cannot decide who has the strongest claim to become prime minister?"

The BBC article nonchalantly states:

"The fervent wish within Buckingham Palace will be that the political leaders can determine amongst themselves who is in the best position to command the support of the House of Commons.

It may take some days, and the Palace will not seek unduly to hasten the process.

There are other, to some extent intangible, factors which should help the party leaders to come to an agreement amongst themselves.

They are all familiar with the principles upon which the British constitution rests. They are aware of the high importance of having a House of Commons which is independent from the Crown.

Equally, they will be aware of the high public regard for the way in which this particular monarch has carried out her public responsibilities from a time before virtually all of them were born. None of them, I suspect, would wish to place such a widely respected constitutional monarch in a difficult position. "

Except this time round, at least one of them will be quite keen to put the widely respected constitutional monarch in a difficult position. Indeed, that might be the SNP's main objective of this particular hung Parliament.

Part-ELBOW for the three polls so far this week:

Con 33.6
Lab 31.7
UKIP 14.3
LD 7.9
Green 6.2

Lab Con lead 1.9%!

We've been here before sort of, but this is by far the biggest "early in the week" Tory lead in ELBOW!

Pulpstar said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Unusually I think the great antifrank has got this wrong. It won't be a case of Her Majesty deciding who is to be Prime Minister. It will be a case of palace officials and civil servants sounding out the various political parties to try to find who could survive a confidence vote. It will still, ultimately, be elected MPs who make the decision, which the Queen will then rubber-stamp.

Of course it may still be an unholy mess, but I don't see the monarchy getting the blame for that.

Do you think there is a good possibility the Lib Dems might abstein... or even Labour... ?

I think the SNP least likely of the lot to abstein of the leftish parties personally. Though I wouldn't 100% rule it out.

Sorry to be picky , but it's 'abstain'.

antifrank said:

Except this time round, at least one of them will be quite keen to put the widely respected constitutional monarch in a difficult position. Indeed, that might be the SNP's main objective of this particular hung Parliament.

True in part, but I'd expect that the SNP's main objective is not going to be damaging the monarchy, but grinding Scottish Labour even further into the dust.

logical_song said:

Pulpstar said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Unusually I think the great antifrank has got this wrong. It won't be a case of Her Majesty deciding who is to be Prime Minister. It will be a case of palace officials and civil servants sounding out the various political parties to try to find who could survive a confidence vote. It will still, ultimately, be elected MPs who make the decision, which the Queen will then rubber-stamp.

Of course it may still be an unholy mess, but I don't see the monarchy getting the blame for that.

Do you think there is a good possibility the Lib Dems might abstein... or even Labour... ?

I think the SNP least likely of the lot to abstein of the leftish parties personally. Though I wouldn't 100% rule it out.

Sorry to be picky , but it's 'abstain'.

Yes my spelling is atrocious, my apologies.

What do you think about my proposition though.

stodge said:

GIN1138 said:

If the latest view from Jack's ARSE is correct, Her Maj will have little to worry about as Con will be easily capable of forming a minority government and might even inch over the line to a tiny majority.

Unfortunately for the rest of us, we will then have to endure said tiny majority wibbling on ad nauseam about Europe while the country goes to the proverbials.

Then we'll have the much-vaunted referendum, the result of which is likely to please one side much more than the other and we'll either have a lame-duck PM with his credibility and reputation in tatters or a PM having to govern a fractious Party.

Great prospect, eh ? Makes the idea of Ed M and Balls look passably attractive.

The country is not going to the proverbials though is it? Its proceeding along well enough. The next issue is renegotiating with the EU and then a referendum. This too offers no great problem. It will depend on the outcome of the negotiations, but either we stay in on the new terms or joint the EEA like Norway. Even of the terms for staying in were quite plausible but still rejected there is no great issue with joining (or remaining in??) the EEA. It should maintain our broad status quo which is one of being outside a political and monetary EU.

stodge said:

GIN1138 said:

If the latest view from Jack's ARSE is correct, Her Maj will have little to worry about as Con will be easily capable of forming a minority government and might even inch over the line to a tiny majority.

Unfortunately for the rest of us, we will then have to endure said tiny majority wibbling on ad nauseam about Europe while the country goes to the proverbials.

Then we'll have the much-vaunted referendum, the result of which is likely to please one side much more than the other and we'll either have a lame-duck PM with his credibility and reputation in tatters or a PM having to govern a fractious Party.

Great prospect, eh ? Makes the idea of Ed M and Balls look passably attractive.

Goodness me, Stodge, you're becoming all mega-brittle these days.

All this nit picking makes my brain hurt. Let's just bring in the Prince with capital powers and go back to passivity.

Richard_Nabavi said:

antifrank said:

Except this time round, at least one of them will be quite keen to put the widely respected constitutional monarch in a difficult position. Indeed, that might be the SNP's main objective of this particular hung Parliament.

True in part, but I'd expect that the SNP's main objective is not going to be damaging the monarchy, but grinding Scottish Labour even further into the dust.

SNP 1979
Lib Dems coalition agreement
Labour "Better Together"

All have a toxifying theme of (effectively) working with a certain party...

This is why I think the SNP least likely to abstain from a Conservative confidence motion. Labour will probably vote against, and pray the Lib Dems abstain

CarlottaVance said:

Jonathan said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

antifrank said:

Of course the Queen isn't going to be having cups of tea with the eminences grises to find out whether Blue Buggins or Red Buggins is best placed to hold the reins of power. It won't stop the decision being made in her name or the role of the monarchy coming under intense scrutiny.

There won't be a decision made in her name, there will be an announcement that assurances have been given that X commands a majority in the House, and a vote of confidence to demonstrate that (or not) very soon afterwards.

In the meantime, David Cameron remains Prime Minister.

The onus would be on David Cameron to suggest who commands a majority.

And until the house decides it isn't him he doesn't have to do anything if matters are unclear.

But that's not how politics works and not how it worked in February 1974 for example. IF Cameron cannot (and he will know that soon enough) form a majority or get enough abstentions to ensure the passage of urgent legislation, he will walk - he won't wait for a vote of No Confidence.

He will walk and advise the Queen to ask the leader of the second largest Party to form an administration.

Brown waited in 2010 because there was a chance that IF negotiations between the Conservatives and the LDs failed, a Labour-LD minority Government (which had more votes in the Commons than the Conservatives) could be formed and he perhaps thought he could continue as Prime Minister.

It was only when it became apparent that negotiations were proceeding and an agreement was going to be reached that he resigned.

Unless Cameron is able to reach out to the SNP, DUP or whoever and tries to form a Government on that basis, he won't prolong the uncertainty but give Ed M a chance to form his own Government.

Pulpstar said:

Has anyone checked what "Game theory" says the parties should do in Antifrank's scenario above ?

Game of THRONES of course

stodge said:

Indigo said:

stodge said:

Indigo said:

Much better to follow the LD view and decide that there is no point in asking the electorate about the EU, after all it costs so little and does so much good they can't possibly want to leave, and if they do it must be delusions or false conciousness.

Whereas paradise, utopia and nirvana await them if they vote to leave...yeah, right.

Who knows, we live in a democracy. I am not afraid of asking the people, are you ?

Of course, the IndyRef showed the degree to which one side will create a sense of irrational fear and panic to make people vote their way.

Yes, the SNP shroud waving over the devolved NHS in the last weeks was disgraceful and dishonest......

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Pulpstar said:

Has anyone checked what "Game theory" says the parties should do in Antifrank's scenario above ?

Game of THRONES of course

Who will be NED STARK ?

Indigo said:

stodge said:

That's not to deride democracy or the referendum process - just we all know what's going to happen so how do we conduct a free and fair process without both sides resorting to threat, innuendo and intimidation to make their point ?

That bit is easy. Hold the referendum tomorrow (metaphorically speaking) gives less time for the kippers to wibble about dangers and less time for europhiles to ra-ra the benefits. The people just vote.

The problem is without at least some semblance of a renegotiation we will never be able to demonstrate how un-reformable the EU is in practise. If Dave goes to Brussels and is basically told to piss off, or given some obvious bit of flim-flam which is called out by the sceptics for being such, its obvious that the EU is what it is and we have to decide it we want to be part of it.

If we don't ask the question the europhiles will whine for ever more that we could have stayed in because we would have got concessions if we had asked for them (in the face of all experience and evidence!).

If most MPs are opposed to a referendum on EU membership, then it won't go through, even if the Conservatives form a minority government. Cameron must be hoping for that outcome.

Did George V get involved in 1923 by the way ?

Sean_F said:

Indigo said:

stodge said:

That's not to deride democracy or the referendum process - just we all know what's going to happen so how do we conduct a free and fair process without both sides resorting to threat, innuendo and intimidation to make their point ?

That bit is easy. Hold the referendum tomorrow (metaphorically speaking) gives less time for the kippers to wibble about dangers and less time for europhiles to ra-ra the benefits. The people just vote.

The problem is without at least some semblance of a renegotiation we will never be able to demonstrate how un-reformable the EU is in practise. If Dave goes to Brussels and is basically told to piss off, or given some obvious bit of flim-flam which is called out by the sceptics for being such, its obvious that the EU is what it is and we have to decide it we want to be part of it.

If we don't ask the question the europhiles will whine for ever more that we could have stayed in because we would have got concessions if we had asked for them (in the face of all experience and evidence!).

If most MPs are opposed to a referendum on EU membership, then it won't go through, even if the Conservatives form a minority government. Cameron must be hoping for that outcome.

He's made it a promise that is he's leader there will be one.

I can't remember if it's a cast iron or a copper bottomed or a "No ifs, no buts" one though.

Sean_F said:

Casino_Royale said:

If it comes to this (and I don't think it will, for the reasons Jonathan outlines) then I really hope it is The Queen and not Charles doing the choosing.

He might actually want to get involved in the coalition negotiations Himself.

He'd probably want to make Caroline Lucas Prime Minister.

Lol!

A third of young people think social media will influence their vote
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3539/A-third-of-young-people-think-social-media-will-influence-their-vote.aspx

https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/kings-social-media-2015-charts.pdf

Pulpstar said:

Sean_F said:

Indigo said:

stodge said:

That's not to deride democracy or the referendum process - just we all know what's going to happen so how do we conduct a free and fair process without both sides resorting to threat, innuendo and intimidation to make their point ?

That bit is easy. Hold the referendum tomorrow (metaphorically speaking) gives less time for the kippers to wibble about dangers and less time for europhiles to ra-ra the benefits. The people just vote.

The problem is without at least some semblance of a renegotiation we will never be able to demonstrate how un-reformable the EU is in practise. If Dave goes to Brussels and is basically told to piss off, or given some obvious bit of flim-flam which is called out by the sceptics for being such, its obvious that the EU is what it is and we have to decide it we want to be part of it.

If we don't ask the question the europhiles will whine for ever more that we could have stayed in because we would have got concessions if we had asked for them (in the face of all experience and evidence!).

If most MPs are opposed to a referendum on EU membership, then it won't go through, even if the Conservatives form a minority government. Cameron must be hoping for that outcome.

He's made it a promise that is he's leader there will be one.

I can't remember if it's a cast iron or a copper bottomed or a "No ifs, no buts" one though.

Don't forget: "I will get what Britain needs."

It is interesting how his firmest commitments have been on europe and immigration. Never in the field of UK politics have so many promises been made to so many by a Prime Minister who's delivered so few.

By my calculations (which are sometimes correct!), Ipsos MORI should be out by midday on March 12th.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

By my calculations (which are sometimes correct!), Ipsos MORI should be out by midday on March 12th.

With ComRes due on Saturday 14th and ICM due on Monday 16th!

A big week coming up!

GIN1138 said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

By my calculations (which are sometimes correct!), Ipsos MORI should be out by midday on March 12th.

With ComRes due on Saturday 14th and ICM due on Monday 16th!

A big week coming up!

The next poll is the most important.

Casino_Royale said:

Indigo said:

Sean_F said:

If most MPs are opposed to a referendum on EU membership, then it won't go through, even if the Conservatives form a minority government. Cameron must be hoping for that outcome.

The uncharitable might think that Cameron would prefer another coalition because he vastly prefers throwing bits of yellow meat to the LDs compared to throwing blue meat to the natural conservatives on his right.

Cameron would probably be a Cleggite Lib Dem had he gone to a slightly less posh school. His politics is social, not political.

Matthew D'Ancona says as much in his book.

I'm not convinced he's got much political conviction at all.

CarlottaVance said:

stodge said:

Indigo said:

stodge said:

Indigo said:

Much better to follow the LD view and decide that there is no point in asking the electorate about the EU, after all it costs so little and does so much good they can't possibly want to leave, and if they do it must be delusions or false conciousness.

Whereas paradise, utopia and nirvana await them if they vote to leave...yeah, right.

Who knows, we live in a democracy. I am not afraid of asking the people, are you ?

Of course, the IndyRef showed the degree to which one side will create a sense of irrational fear and panic to make people vote their way.

Yes, the SNP shroud waving over the devolved NHS in the last weeks was disgraceful and dishonest......

Not near your constant whining about the SNP.

Now that the Nats have set their expectation bar so high at the level they will dictate the shots, if Cameron does scrape through will the howls of anguish be louder than the lost referendum ?

In the scenario where neither party can put together anything resembling a stable government I think both the Conservatives and Labour would settle for the Conservatives continuing as a minority government until a second election.

For the Conservatives they can continue to look and act as the ruling party, Cameron would further enhance his status as PM and they can try and convince voters to give them the full reigns next time.

For Labour, they would need time to rebuild under a new leader, as well as getting the funds together for a second election. It'd be easier to do this in opposition and they could engineer the timing of the second election when it best suited them.

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

stodge said:

Indigo said:

stodge said:

Indigo said:

Much better to follow the LD view and decide that there is no point in asking the electorate about the EU, after all it costs so little and does so much good they can't possibly want to leave, and if they do it must be delusions or false conciousness.

Whereas paradise, utopia and nirvana await them if they vote to leave...yeah, right.

Who knows, we live in a democracy. I am not afraid of asking the people, are you ?

Of course, the IndyRef showed the degree to which one side will create a sense of irrational fear and panic to make people vote their way.

Yes, the SNP shroud waving over the devolved NHS in the last weeks was disgraceful and dishonest......

Not near your constant whining about the SNP.

So how are Scottish NHS A&E numbers doing? :|InnocentFace|:

Alanbrooke said:

Now that the Nats have set their expectation bar so high at the level they will dictate the shots, if Cameron does scrape through will the howls of anguish be louder than the lost referendum ?

Alan, double whammy , Tory minority government and horde of SNP MP's, it will be cheering to the rafters time.

No money on the first race, might give an indication as to which yard is in form...

If the Cons have anywhere north of 300 seats they will just sit and wait for anyone to try and challenge them and cobble together a coalition of Lab/Nats/ex-IRA scum/PC for government. Labour would be betraying the union by going into a coalition with any of these separatist groups. I still don't understand why Ed hasn't ruled out a coalition with them to ensure that wavering SLAB supporters at least go and vote. If a coalition between Lab and SNP seems like a foregone conclusion lazy SLAB voters just won't bother to go and vote.