qatsi (qatsi) wrote,

Undecided ...

... whether to title this post Everyone agrees with Nick, but not many people voted for him or possibly Were you up for Lembit Opik?. At least I don't have to title it 1992 And All That.

For the record, I voted early and whilst I would say there was brisk activity, the only queue I had to stand in was because Mrs Q was in front of me. The result here in Wokingham was not in doubt; alas, the mother ship has not yet returned to take Mr Redwood away.

The exit poll was bad, especially for the Lib Dems, but in fact its saving grace was perhaps its accuracy. It was interesting that all the Labour grandees were immediately talking about doing a deal, and the Tories outraged at the possibility of Brown staying at No. 10 when they vehemently oppose any constitutional change. We stayed up until about 2.30, when it really wasn't interesting anymore because there was still no particularly discernible pattern, and it was plain that not getting any sleep wouldn't lead to the furthering of our knowledge.

I suppose my main fear was for a Conservative majority; fortunately the exit poll hadn't under-estimated the number of seats for them. The first few results didn't make much sense with their large swings, especially after Cameron specifically identified the North East as one of the areas in which the axe would loom large.

Other results of interest to me: pleased that there was virtually no swing in Tynemouth; pleased to see the Greens getting a seat in Brighton, though I wonder what is supposed to happen to Caroline Lucas' seat in the European Parliament; surprise disappointment on Oxford West and Abingdon but neutral on Oxford East; Mr & Mrs Q senior will be especially pleased with the result in Westmorland and Lonsdale.

I wondered this morning whether Nick Clegg would regret his comments about the party with the largest number of seats/votes having the moral right to seek to form a government, and was surprised to hear him repeat that position, though, ahem, I agree with Nick, and I admire him for sticking to that line - though obviously the right is to seek to form rather than to form. For a while it looked as though things might get ugly with the announcement of Cameron's planned statement, but Brown managed to put in a few reasonable and dignified words beforehand which settled the position. Channel 4 News seemed to be taking the line that it was pretty clear that some sort of Con-Lib deal would emerge, but I think (a referendum on) electoral reform has to be a real orange line and probably poses the main sticking point. (I would have no problem with the Conservatives opposing a Yes vote, provided they agreed to honour and act on whatever the outcome of such a referendum was). Maybe there are devious means by which it could be established - a Private Member's Bill that could be given government time and a free vote? I'm no constitutional scholar so I don't know. I don't think a Lab-Lib deal is entirely out of the question, though as in particular it doesn't ensure a majority of itself, it seems less likely, even though both parties might be more willing. Brown would have to go, I think, which would be a further difficulty.

Obviously I'd prefer Vince Cable as Chancellor rather than George Osborne (then again, there are an awful lot of people I'd prefer as Chancellor rather than George Osborne. I'm not really in favour of tax breaks for dead millionaires). I see the one thing that was perhaps wildly out was the suggestion that the markets had "factored in" a hung parliament. Well, if today's performance demonstrates "factored in", then I really have to wonder ...
Tags: news, politics
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.