Jump to content

Coalitions meant politicians were more likely to break their promises.


Recommended Posts

12 months and finally the penny as dropped.

 

 

Mr Cameron sparked fury earlier this week when he said coalitions meant politicians were more likely to break their promises.

 

Deputy PM Mr Clegg hit back by all but accusing Mr Cameron of double standards. He said: “There are people on the left and the right who preach new politics and pluralism and yet are now so damning of its inevitable consequence, which is compromise

 

“I believed the Coalition was working well but the damage that has been inflicted during this wretched AV campaign has done tremendous damage to personal relations.”

 

There may be trouble ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True a coalition is an excuse to go against everything they told us they would stand for in the run-up to the elections

 

How many times have you heard them say 'oh we had to make changes and go back on our word because we are a coalition'

 

TECHNICALLY NOBODY ELECTED THIS GOVERNMENT :rant:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is why people think that getting a third, or a quarter, or even a tenth of the manifesto they supported through government, is a worse outcome than not forming a coalition and getting none of it.

 

Because it means you have to give up a 2 thirds, 3 quarters or 9 tenths of your manifesto. :roll:

 

Loose the battle and live to fight another day or capitulate ……. Tough choice. :hihi:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is why people think that getting a third, or a quarter, or even a tenth of the manifesto they supported through government, is a worse outcome than not forming a coalition and getting none of it.

 

What makes you think that if they didn't form a coalition nothing would have been formed or organised by the British public?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think that if they didn't form a coalition nothing would have been formed or organised by the British public?

 

I was referring specifically to the Lib-Dems, who had essentially two choices; form a coalition and get some percentage of their manifesto into government, or stay in opposition and get none of it while the Tories operated as a minority government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is why people think that getting a third, or a quarter, or even a tenth of the manifesto they supported through government, is a worse outcome than not forming a coalition and getting none of it.

 

Partly because they aren't adult enough to understand the concepts of compromise and cooperation but mainly because they are Labour supporters outraged that the Lib Dems had the temerity to go into a coalition with the Conservatives rather than getting shafted again in another Lib-Lab pact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.