Why a #progressivemajority - latest
One terrible danger of a Tory government is a snap election this autumn (in which the Tories' big cash-bank - and Cashcroft himself - would swamp the rest of us, who are all out of cash after this election-campaign). A rainbow progressive-majority government could prevent this hazard. This is a key reason for Labour, the LibDems, the Nats and the Greens to welcome the idea.
Furthermore, if the LibDems go in with the Tories, they will have to get a form of PR which is kind to small Parties - because they may well BE a small Party, after propping up the Tories... But the Tories will not yield up genuine PR that is kind to small Parties (such as AMS, or AV-Plus with a decent top-up or STV with reasonably large constituencies). But a rainbow coalition would.
I.e.: There are strong practical reasons why all of us in the #progressivemajority Parties should favour this idea. (For more, see my earlier post: http://rupertsread.blogspot.com/2010/05/how-green-party-can-help-stop-tories.html )
posted by Rupert at
Monday, May 10, 2010
7 Comments:
I don’t like it, but the fact is the Tories have a higher number of votes and share of the vote than Labour got in 2005 which produced a 66 seat majority. A Lib-Lab- Green pact would be at the mercy of pork-barrel politics of the Nats in parliament and onslaught of the Murdock media empire in the country. Sorry Rupert a ‘Progressive Alliance’ would fall apart and the Tories would be returned to give up “firm government” and we all know what that means. One possibility is to say that the economic crisis we face is so unprecedented; there should be an all-party government for two years with DC as PM, a cross-party cabinet including Caroline Lucas to spearhead the transformation of our economy to a sustainable green one. But sadly it isn’t going to happen.
But the Nats couldn't pursue pure pork-barrel-ism, if the rainbow alliance also included the Green Party, the SDLP, the Alliance, and the independent unionist. Altogether, those would take the numbers to 321 - which is the magic number, once one takes into account that Sinn Fein don't take their seats, and the Speaker and Deputy Speakers don't count.
The Nats are sound on the anti-cuts agenda, which is central. See also http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/05/a-rainbow-coalition-the-role-of-the-nats/
Well talking to one of our MPs, he seems to think it could work. I have my doubts. Good post by a Young Green -http://elliepant.wordpress.com/2010/05/10/scorched-earth-a-plea-to-labour-activists/
Recent Green Party tweet: '@CarolineLucas happy to consider confidence/supply w/ reform-oriented coalition.' :-)
We need a fair voting system. A really fair one not a cobbled together compromise like AV. Until that happens people won't really vote for parties they believe in and the 3 main parties would carry on getting votes from people who don't really understand all they stand for.
The Nats have said that pork is their price i.e. insulating Scotland from the cuts that Labour have planned for everyone.
Labour are even more hostile to STV than the Tories are.
A progressive alliance would be great if either Labour or the Nats (or the Green IMO) were actually progressive.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home