UK general elections are now fixed at five-year intervals, as Fixed-term Parliaments Act becomes law
16 replies, posted
• Parliament has passed the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, meaning UK general elections will now be held every five years, with the next one set at 7 May 2015.
• Since 1911, the system had been that Parliament was limited to five years, but could be dissolved by the Prime Minister at any time and usually lasted around four.
• Parliaments can still be dissolved early by a two-thirds vote in the Commons, or if a motion of no confidence passes and no government is formed after 15 days. The PM may also alter the date by up to two months.
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14924982[/url]
This article is from 11 days ago, but it received very little coverage for what is a relatively major constitutional change.
[quote=BBC News][b]Ministers have narrowly won their parliamentary battle over plans to hold general elections every five years.[/b]
The Fixed-Term Parliaments Bill finally cleared the House of Lords when peers, who had twice blocked the plan, accepted a compromise proposal.
They wanted the law to be renewed after each election but ministers said that meant allowing fixed terms to be switched on "like a light switch".
Peers voted by 188 to 173 to accept a plan for a review in 2020.
Parliaments are currently limited to a maximum of five years, but the prime minister is free to call a general election at any time.
The government has argued that fixed terms would eliminate the power of the executive to call elections when it was politically convenient - but their choice of a five-year, rather than a four-year term has attracted some criticism.
And some peers had argued that the coalition did not have a mandate to "bind" future parliaments.
They put forward plans that would in effect have required each new parliament to decide whether it wanted a fixed term.
Peers had twice backed a "sunset" provision that would have given both the Commons and the Lords the chance to choose whether to renew the legislation after each general election.
Crossbench peer Lord Butler urged peers to stand firm and said the government's offer, to set up a review in 2020, was an "insult". And fellow crossbencher Lord Pannick said: "The proposal is not so much kicking the issue into the long grass as burying it in a time capsule."
But peers voted, by a majority of just 15, to back the government.
Advocate General Lord Wallace said any future government could choose to repeal the fixed-term legislation - but that would be the "subject of full parliamentary scrutiny as this Bill has been".
"By contrast the sunset amendments would switch fixed terms on and off like a light switch. Parliaments would default to non-fixed terms if a simple resolution fails to be tabled or if the two houses cannot agree on the matter."
The bill will now be sent for Royal Assent.
Under the bill an election could still be triggered before the end of a five-year term if a motion of no confidence was passed in the government and no alternative administration could be formed, or if at least two-thirds of MPs approved calls for an early election.[/quote]
So... What does this mean for you guys? Sorry, ignorant American here.
[QUOTE=Frogz;32471902]So... What does this mean for you guys? Sorry, ignorant American here.[/QUOTE]
Elected officials are prone to stay longer than before.
Means we're stuck with clueless people in power for longer than normal.
How the fuck does this pass?
Can the Queen still dissolve parliament?
If she can then maybe you can get rid of those morons more quickly
But it also means the PM can't just call an election when their party is doing particularly well
It means that were stuck with the bloody Tories longer than we should be.
This almost makes no difference.
It means that a government can now stay in power for 5 years without re-election. However, if 2/3rds of MPs vote for an early election it will go ahead, and they can still pass a motion of no confidence.
Most previous governments never lasted the full 4 years anyway because the PM could call an early election (when it favoured them), this bill stops PM's from doing this, but a party could still introduce popular policies in the run up to the election.
Interesting to see another small majority.
This was part of the coalition agreement so it was pretty much guaranteed to happened, Labour supports fixed-term parliaments but wanted four years instead of five
[QUOTE=ksenior;32471990]How the fuck does this pass?
Can the Queen still dissolve parliament?
If she can then maybe you can get rid of those morons more quickly[/QUOTE]
If it's not changed yet, in theory, the queen can pretty much veto anything that parliment passes that she doesn't like.
In practise, the ability to veto would be removed the second that she did it. She's a figurehead and that's the way it should be. (the only reason to keep them is for the tourism revenue)
Well, it's still an ace-up-the-sleeve, even if it's a single-use MacGuffin. Thing is I don't think Liz Two's really that political; she's just a figurehead. Maybe when her time comes, and a new King ascends the throne, hopefully Charles'll be a bit more willing to see off the Tories. Then again he might be apathetic as well, in which case we wait for Harry or William to get crowned; by which time i'd probably be having a mid-life crisis.
[QUOTE=ironman17;32472240]Well, it's still an ace-up-the-sleeve, even if it's a single-use MacGuffin. Thing is I don't think Liz Two's really that political; she's just a figurehead. Maybe when her time comes, and a new King ascends the throne, hopefully Charles'll be a bit more willing to see off the Tories. Then again he might be apathetic as well, in which case we wait for Harry or William to get crowned; by which time i'd probably be having a mid-life crisis.[/QUOTE]
Just to be clear, you're advocating an unelected figurehead striking down bills voted through by the Houses of Parliament just because you're politically opposed to one party?
Are you [i]that fucking retarded?[/i]
[QUOTE=Capitulazyguy;32472600]Just to be clear, you're advocating an unelected figurehead striking down bills voted through by the Houses of Parliament just because you're politically opposed to one party?
Are you [i]that fucking retarded?[/i][/QUOTE]
Sounds pretty much like politics to me.
If it wasn't retarded, something would be wrong.
5 years is to much though.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
