Hung Parliament U.K.
When I wrote this hub, before the election was held, I wrote:
"In a few short days the UK will be holding an election, which by all accounts may lead to a hung parliament, where no one party would hold a sufficient majority to govern with conviction and a true mandate.
Politics being what they are, the party who managed to have the titular authority by having more politicians than the others, would probably try to form a coalition government, cobbelled together with the third party."
Well the UK did get a hung parliament, and the horse trading begun, ending in the Conservatives forming a coalition government with the Lib Dems, but only after the losing Labour party had attempted to scupper their deal by offering the Lib Dems the family silver and their first-born children as slaves, in a sordid and pathetic attempt to hold onto power and deny the Conservatives their numeric victory.
The Lib Dems unfortunately behaved like 'harlots' (as one commentator stated) and played both ends towards the middle.
Now I can guess you could ignore the rest of this hub, but that would be a shame, for I think it described what has occurred and why it will be ultimately beneficial, especial if you don't have a grasp on UK politics!
In the UK the three main parties are The Labour Party, who have held power since 1997, then The Conservative Party, who have been in opposition for so long that they have few politicos who have ever held office, and finally The Liberal Democrats, who have not been a significant force for the last 90 years.
For my (mainly) American readers....
The Labour Party are supposed socialists, who used to be a radical left wing party (when they could not get elected) but swung to centrist politics when they finally realised that even though they had big support amongst the have nots of society, they had no support from the haves and the wanna haves... so a quick change behind the bike sheds produced 'New Labour' a supposedly new improved version, and in 1997, after many years of Tory (Conservative) rule, a new generation of young first time voters gave them power, which success they repeated in two more elections under the highly stage managed leadership of Mr Charisma, Tony Blair.
When Blair resigned the premiership, (and set off to make 20 million pounds income during the last two years just speaking to folk) he handed the premiership to Gordon Brown, who should (to be able to govern) have called an election, which he would probably have won, but he chickened out and refused to let the electorate endorse his authority.
They could have probably pulled it off if under their management they had not managed to allow the bankers to rip the financial heart out of the country and leave every Brit with a $15,000 debt to be repaid (to the same bankers who lost the money in the first place.... go figure!)
The Conservative Party has always been the right of centre party, who broadly speaking represented the business, professional and ruling classes.
Having spent 12 years in oblivion and elected and removed a whole plethora of new leaders, they finally came up with a leader, who had a Blair lookalike theme to him, much more charismatic than Labours Gordon Brown (who I'm sure is a nice chap, but has the charisma of a wet fish on the slab)
David Cameron is a classical Tory leader, public school educated, wealthy, well married and connected.
Currently he's in a 'call me Dave' mode of ordinariness in an attempt to woo the disaffected Labour voters, and appear 'normal' (which he is not).... he has actually worked in the real world, unlike many politicians, but it was in TV and PR, so not too much reality would have reached him.
I would be more impressed if he had run a chain store or managed an industrial complex, but who wants to do that when Nº 10 beckons? - they are full time occupations that take years to learn how to do, whereas being Prime Minister is a five to ten year stint, during which your hair goes grey, but you then can scoop in millions for just talking to people, plus the pension is stupendous, so no contest.
Besides which, the real work and decisions are made by the civil servants (an oxymoron for sure) who actually run the country and have jobs for life tenure in their positions.
And that is the point when a hung parliament happens.... the politicos can bicker about who rules, but the civil servants just get on with the job, excepting they need to manipulate three political bosses rather than one.
Last but not least we arrive at the door of Mr Nick Clegg, who despite his very ordinary name is like Cameron a wealthy chap from a good family with a decent education.
Clegg has won hands down in the televised 'Leaders Debates' which have happened for the first time this year, mainly because he has managed to tap into the repulsion that most Brits feel about politicos and parliament in general, after they have all been exposed as greedy manipulative professional politicians.
In other words, the sheeple have begun to realise the truth.
25 years ago I was approached to become a politico by a few rich friends of mine who ran a couple of public companies and a bank (BCCI), and they suggested that as they wanted political clout, would I like to join a political party and stand for election.
"Which party" I innocently asked, "Not bothered" they said, "any party you want to represent, we need politicos in all of them to shape opinion."
As I was a money grubbing parasite at that time in my life, I thought seriously about the idea, for coming from a working class background, I would be a cinch for the Labour Party to elect, but having become wealthy from my business activities, it would also play well as a Conservative.... into the valley of indecision!
I spoke to one of my major clients, who was a Labour MP as well as one of the biggest property owners and developers in Central London, and he advised me to consider which party looked most liable to be in power during the time I wanted to be in parliament, and join them. "It's no fun sitting in opposition in the back benches" was his considered opinion, "so join whoever is going to be empowered for the most time."
Thankfully, as I contemplated the idea, I had a rare moment of conscience, brought on by the sheer calculated hypocrisy of all the politicos I knew (and I knew a whole heap of them in all shades) which led me to refuse the option, and leave the UK for Spain.
Otherwise, you may have been seeing me on those leaders debates.....perish the thought!
Anyhow, back to our topic....
The Liberal Democrats have always been the third, mainly non existent party in UK politics, and supported by woolly jumper Eco liberals since the mid sixties, meant that most 'ordinary' folk just dismissed them as a credible political force, with good reason.
Suddenly they may hold the balance of power in the coming election.
So what do these guys stand for, and what separates them?
Well not much actually...
Basically they are constrained by what the civil servants will actually allow them to do, because in effect, the country needs to be run within certain economic guidelines in any case, no matter who is empowered.
Secondly the three main parties are all actually centrist, which is why the populace are having difficulties in deciding who they should empower, they are all the same!
Clegg's main point of difference relates to what he would do about the UK's national nuclear deterrent, which is supposedly to be 'Trident' which will cost 100 million pounds to renew.
Now personally I kinda agree that we have moved away from 'Cold War' deterrents, and instinctively dislike the concept of nuclear oblivion, but obviously the mandarines in Whitehall view it differently.
I would reappraise the situation, realise that we live in the age of the nuclear suitcase bomb, and take a lead from the Israelis (who of course do not have nuclear weapons) who buried their deterrent deep in the ground where they would render the oil fields of the Arab states useless for 25,000 years.... now THAT'S a deterrent!
The UK could simply build a big nuclear device into the basement of each of their embassies.
Now you can see why you should be relieved that I am not in contention for the leadership of the UK!
The main possible change if the UK have a hung parliament, would be changes in the UK electoral voting system, because Clegg, who may hold the balance of power, is demanding that the system be reviewed and changed from 'first past the post' where the party who wind the most 'seats' in parliament wins, to a system of 'proportional representation', where votes are counted and where when you politico loses, your second vote counts towards another selection, and which basically ensures that nobody will end up having a 'clear majority'
Supporters point to Germany, who manage a 'balanced parliament' the pet title used by supporters rather than 'hung'
Detractors point to Italy, where nothing is ever easy to resolve, or Israel, where the minorities in government rule the roost.
Instinctively I swing away from proportional representation, and towards a clear majority as the best way of getting things done.
So in MY political system, I would add one additional candidate.
None of the above!
None of the above, because in my political empire I would make it a law that EVERYONE MUST VOTE, but for those who truly did not support any of the candidates, there MUST be the option to cast their vote for no one, and if Mr No One won the most votes, or if no party gained a clear majority, then my regime would demand that the whole vote ran again, ad infinitum, until SOMEONE was elected by a majority of voters.
The simple fact is that folk are completely fed up with lying politicos, which is why Nick Clegg has garnered support, as he seems to tell the truth, though of course he just may be better at disguising his lies.
Looking at the 'Leadership debates' gave me a sinking feeling, mainly because I know that they are all just looking to gain power and that they believe that to do that they need to flannel the populace with promises designed to attract voters rather than solve problems.
None of the above would be prepared to make the changes needed to solve the current problems and satisfy the electorate that THEIR interests were being served.
They all pussyfoot around keeping politically correct and staying centerist enough in order to appeal to the most people.
The fact is a politician should be prepared to tell the truth and stand for what they believe, to be able to answer WHY they believe it, and to be unafraid of losing the election because they do so.
But in my opinion, they would not, for the swing towards Nick Clegg (and who knows much else about the Liberal Democrats), is due to him being the least unattractive proposition, so to speak.
The UK needs a strong leader who can force through reforms and changes in parliament as well as in society, and to date I do not see one.
What I see are puppets who dance to the machinations of the puppet masters, who have sold their soul for the chance of power.
The puppet masters control all three parties, they don't care who wins, because they stay in control in any circumstance.
What we need is to change this fact, then the rest will follow.
The sheeple know it, the politicos know it and those who have half a brain understand it, but none of them will create the waves needed to wash clean the governance of the country.
In any case, if a real leader appeared, strong and honest, an individual thinker with courage....the puppet masters would kill him or her before they had time to order new curtains for Nº10.
But never mind, Christ will return soon, and all these accounts will be squared.
So what will happen to the UK election?
Well it looks like one wrong word will end Browns chances of another four years to experiment with ruining the country, after he told a good and noble Labour supporter one thing to camera, smarmy as he moved into good camera angles, then called her a bigot when he thought he was out of sound reception in his campaign limousine, for having the temerity to question him about immigration.
Such hypocrisy should lose him the hard core real socialist, working class vote in droves, for he truly was two faced in this instance, so I expect them to come in last in the count, especially as most traditional working class Labour voters are just as concerned about immigrants taking their jobs as she was, so I guess they are all bigoted in Labours eyes?
So what will happen?
Frankly, who knows?
The UK electoral system could allow that Labour won the election even if they polled the least votes, and the Conservatives could therefore win even if they poll the most votes.
That needs to be changed.
The Liberal Democrats would like to hold the balance of power in a hung parliament, and recent opinion poll performance has encouraged Clegg to even think that he should be Prime Minister in that hung government, they would certainly demand proportional representation if allowed half a chance, but then after 65 years in obscurity, they have nothing to lose in creating a situation where they would never win an outright majority, but always have some seats in parliament with which to pursue their ideas.
In a world where Greece is rapidly sinking into total meltdown however much money the Germans lend them, and where Spain, Portugal and Italy could follow suite as Standard & Poors downgrades their credibility any further, anything is possible, even the disintegration of the Euro zone currency.
So my most likely scenario would be that a hung parliament would actually be good for the country, it may wake up the politicos to their inability to gain confidence from the people.
It would certainly not last long, and it would bring rapid reduction in both financial aspirations and ability to borrow, thereby forcing whoever was empowered to actually tell the truth and make the expenditure cuts that are required.
People have become so soporific under the 12 years of 'Nanny State' Labour's regime, that they expect that services which they cannot afford will remain available to them, and like all folk who see gain with no pain, care not who pays for them to continue living in the style they have acclimatised to.
People need to think of themselves as being like England was in the 1950's bankrupted and indebted to the US after fighting Hitler, fed up of their 'masters' and ready to bite the bullet and work their way out of the depths they were in.
Instead, they look to borrow even more hypothetical funds from the bankers who own their existing debts.
It is time for a change, but I doubt it's a change the public will want to accept.