"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Norman Wells wrote:
On 05/09/2019 12:28, dennis@home wrote:

Whose silly idea was it to change the rules about governments being
able to call general elections at a time of their choosing? If the
Conservatives are returned with a greater majority, I wonder if that
rule will be reversed - or at least changed to ignore anyone who
abstains: the result of the vote was 298 votes in favour of an
election to 56 against, this was less than the 2/3 of the *total*
number of MPs. In any election, those who abstain should be
disregarded; not to do so is to implicitly add their numbers to the
losing side.

The rules haven't changed.
boris would like them to.

Perhaps he or his predecessor should have done it already. Its repeal
was a pledge in the Conservative Party's 2017 manifesto.

and yet it only became law a few years earlier - when Cameron was PM.

Because the LimpDims forced it on him when they were in coalition.

because they, quite reasonably, didn't want him cutting and running (from
the coalition) at a point convenient to him, not necessarily because they
ideologically wanted it.

I like the idea in principle, but the legislation does seem to be lacking:

1) it doesn't seem to define who it is who gets the first attempt at forming
a new government after a VoC, and even if that were to be stated, there
should perhaps be a legislated possibility for more than one person to try.

2) there does seem to be a gap where a lame duck minority government (which
can't get through normal business) also cannot call an election because the
opposition (who also can't form a minority government) wont agree to it.
Not a situation that anyone envisaged happening, but it is the one we are in
now. Not, that I'm suggesting that any solution to this question should
allow Boris (in this case) to call a snap election, but a time out period of
3 months after which there is a lesser threshold might be appropriate.

tim