Soleron said:
No, because the resulting election would swing massively against which ever party's MPs were seen to bring down the government. The public (as we've seen in previous no-confidence-vote caused elections) do not like being asked to vote twice in a year.
|
I doubt that, if it is needed and the public have lost faith in the government there should be no reason why a government should try and hold onto power but then I also doubt in the first year Lib Dems and Conservatives want to get into the situation where a Vote of No Confidence occurs. If any it will be Lib Dem MPs swapping sides and even if all of them side with Labour and then all less parties side with Labour it's still not enough in that 55%, you need like 30 Tories to side with with them as well.
To me this screams of Tories trying to keep power in a government they have a minor majority in knowing full well it might crumble. Less power to us, more power to them. They even want to force a 5 year fixed term, is that so they can keep that power longer too? Would a vote of no confidence still exist if there was a fixed term?
Hmm, pie.
