To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
fr @newstatesman – @CarolineLucas happy to consider confidence/supply w/ reform-oriented coalition.
Rupert, my concern is that unless Caroline is part of a formal coalition, the government wont be able to rely on her. To be blunt, I am more concerned about what she can do for the progressive majority, not what drawbacks there are for her entering the government.
http://www.leftfootforward.org/2010/05/greens-on-board-for-a-progressive-government
Every extra vote the #progressivemajority government could rely on, takes it a step further away from losing a confidence vote, or at least from not being able to get its main business through.
My concern is that if the government doesn’t need her vote, why should she be part of any formal agreement? They don’t need her if she isn’t going to pledge to support the Progressive Alliance. She is only of use to them if she pledges to formally join up. Otherwise it gives her too much leeway to just withdraw.
Country before Caroline’s career.
You underestimate your opinion-forming might, Mr Ramsay!
Hello,
I wrote a piece yesterday calling on Caroline to push for a deal – I’m not powerful enough to predjudice any discussions! – see: ‘Well done Caroline. Now time for a progressive majority’.
I think she should do a co-operation agreement to support a government along the lines described in my peice from this morning – ‘The deal Nick should do’. Such an agreement should be along the lines f the deal we did in Scotland – no guaruntees, but a vote for a Labour PM now, an agreement to negotiate in good faith when her votes are needed, and perhaps Labour support to get a better select committee seat than she’d have under the D’hont allocation system.
Thanks,
Adam
Cheers Adam. Now that it looks like the Progressive Coalition is on, what should Caroline’s position be? Your opinion please, none of this “well I wouldn’t want to prejudice any negotiations” all the politicos have been coming out with!
You’re right about her 1 vote. However, this calculator shows that there could be circumstances in which she does hold the balance of power, bizarrely enough:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2010/may/07/parties-coalition-government
That would be the case if the SNP and Plaid withdrew, taking it down to 319 (assuming the SDLP and Alliance whip with Lab and Lib) – Caroline could be crucial in that scenario.
Having said that, if the Nats withdrew, it would bring the govt down anyway. So perhaps you’re right.
Would be nice to see a Green in government though?
Blanco,
1) She is not on the fence. She is saying that she won’t deal with Tories, but would consider a deal with Lab/Lib/Nats depending on what was offered. That’s a clear position.
2) They don’t need her 1 vote in coalition – in practice, they don’t *need* it at all – though it will help. She could vote for a minority Lib/Lab/Nat coalition government – especially if it was only formed for a year (see below).
3) as I understand it, she is consulting the relevant party committees. I am not on any of these, so don’t know exactly what discussions are being had, and though I do get some more info, am only publishing what they choose to put in the public domain. In practice, there is nothing on which to consult yet – the only circumstance in which we’d be in any negotiations are if a Lab/Lib/SNP pact formed. In that circumstance, if she was approached with an offer, I’m sure there would be discussions with the party more broadly. But if her current statement is non specific in that it doesn’t give much detail, it is precisely because the relevant party bodies are currently being consulted.
Thanks,
Adam
She cant criticise Clegg for being dithery if she doesn’t get off the fence herself.
A LibLab pact cannot govern with C&S. It needs the smaller parties to piss or get off the pot. Is she going to join a coalition or is she going to let the progressive coalition down?
And why is her party not being consulted about this? At least the Lib Dems are asking theirs.