Coalition agreement

Here it is:

http://www.libdems.org.uk/latest_news_detail.aspx?
title=Conservative_Liberal_Democrat_coalition_agreements&pPK=2697bcdc-
7483-47a7-a517-7778979458ff

Looks pretty good on the whole, particularly under civil liberties, and
a step towards a proportionally-elected upper house is a bonus.

 

Aha
"We have agreed to establish a commission to consider the 'West Lothian
question'. "

CL does indeed look good. Environment looks rather weak and criminalising
Wood is an outrage.

Quite a lot there to keep Old Tory happy too. Well thought out strategy.

 

Amazing press conference they just had. Almost sounds like the next
election will be Labour versus the Conservative Democrats!

 

Who?

If the Scottish problem is dealt with socialism will become a Scottish
problem. IYSWIM.

Perhaps each party that gains a MSP gets to put a representative MP in
Westminster. In tandem with greater devolution.

 

CamClegg.

 

Using the patented Mavis Beacon "Hunt&Peck" Technique, ogden

**** me.

That's not bad at all!

 

And we can thank Oggie for it all

 

Never thought I'd see the day that I'd be reading a "Tory" list
nodding my head.

 

Quite. The mere possession of (I presume rare and endangered) woods to
be a criminal offence? Fucking absurd, unless provision is made for old
stuff.

 

Oh *that* kind of wood. Ok.

 

Same here.
I read down the list of objectives and they all sounded pretty fair and
reasonable....

 

Well as a LibDem party member I'm content that we've got a damn sight
better programme ahead of us than if the Tories had had an overall
majority, and I've no reason to believe that a better deal, or better
prospective government, could have been agreed. I'll be voting for it.

 

Are you going to try and get a spot at the conference on Sunday then?
The email from Ros suggests there isn't going to be a ballot of the
entire membership.

 

Nah - we have an unavoidable appointment in North Yorkshire. I should
have used the subjunctive.

 

Your chuckling is unwarranted.

There's a special conference at the NEC on Sunday for which registration
will be open to all members with priority to voting conference reps.

What I meant was they're not doing a paper ballot of the entire
membership - anyone who feels that strongly is welcome to go to the NEC
to make their point.

 

I went over this the other day but there's no harm in doing it again...

" Conference notes the absence of specific constitutional provisions
which clearly define the Party?s approach to gaining positive consent to
proposals for an important change in strategy or positioning;

i) in the event of any substantial proposal which could affect the
Party?s independence of political action, the consent will be required
of a majority of members of the Parliamentary Party in the House of
COmmons and the Federal Executive; and

ii) unless there is a three-quarters majority of each group in
favour of the proposals, the consent of the majority of those present
and voting at a Special Conference convened under clause 6.6 of the
Constitution; and

iii) unless there is a two-thirds majority of those present and
voting at that Conference in favour of the proposals, the consent of a
majority of all members of the Party voting in he ballot called pursuant
to clause 6.11 or 8.6 of the Constitution."

The motion was passed yesterdy by more than three quarters of both the
parliamentary party and the fedex, meeting requirement i) and rendering
the special conference unnecessary. But, to quote the party president,
"Liberal Democrats remain a democratic party, and we believe
it right to consult our membership on this momentous occasion in our
party's history" so they're doing the conference anyway. I'll be amazed
if the motion is voted down.

 

"A turd in a coalition is still a turd"

HTH

Paul.

 

Or ... the ConDems as they are becoming known as