We now have a shiny new government in the UK. To me, at least, the coalition does feel new and exciting allowing for the best from the two parties while tempering each of their excesses – natural Tory selfishness and rabid Liberal Democrat Europhillia. If they can hold it together (and it is a big if), and deliver on their promises, I think it will be well worth-while.
Now the Government has started to publish its programme, there is one issue in particular which seems to be causing a stir – especially on Twitter and in the blogosphere; the new 55% rule.
This has been reported as a change to the rule on votes of no-confidence in the House of Commons – in some places reported as a change in the threshold from a simple majority to 55% being needed before a government falls. As I see it – this is a fundamental misunderstanding.
Currently there are two ways in which a dissolution of parliament is triggered:
- The Prime Minister requests a dissolution from The Queen
- The Government loses a vote of no-confidence in parliament
(addendum – this does not trigger an automatic dissolution. The Government would fall, however, and if another could form with the confidence of the Commons then that would be the case)
Usually these would be triggered in different circumstances number 1 when the PM and government wishes it and number 2 when the government is weak enough for this no-confidence motion to be won by the opposition.
The proposal from the new coalition government is to change the constitutional convention on point 1 and just point 1. So, instead of the PM having the power to dissolve parliament on whim, he must get a motion passed by the Commons in favour of that dissolution. This is a transfer of power from the PM to Parliament – very much a good and democratic thing.
This is very different from a vote of no-confidence which would (usually) be instigated by the opposition and, to my understanding, is not due to change.
I’m all in favour of fixed-term parliaments, as long as they do not result in lame-duck governments which have no choice but to limp on to the end of their term (as fixed-term US administrations seem to). So keeping the current no-confidence rules and supplementing with the transfer of power to Parliament for the requesting of a dissolution seems a very sensible safeguard.
Popped along to the British Library on Saturday to see their rather marvelous Magnificent Maps exhibition. The display was very well presented, showing not just a history of maps and map-making but explaining some of the different reasons maps area created. There is always an agenda in creating a map, and understanding this can give all sorts of clues to the views and politics of the time in and place in which it was made.
