Well. - Edit 1
Before modification by Rebekah at 14/05/2010 01:48:18 PM
While I find it worrying as well, that is more my view on the political right showing though... it has good ties with members of the Conservative party and is fairly reliable for reflecting that.
It seems to me that the magazine likes to through paddies when people are not doing what it likes. It's difficult to take them seriously.
Also: fiscal conservatism and Euroscepticism are hardly characteristics belonging only to Maggie Thatcher. It's rather infantile to suggest that they are, and that comment you quoted reeks of hyperbole.
That's a little scary, yes. Some former Lib Dem chappy says everyone's over-reacting about that, but I guess he has to say that.
Yeah, I am currently leaning more to it being a screw up where the intent was purely to secure the coalition in place through till the end of the term but no one stopped to consider what the actual implication of what they were doing was.
It does seem to be a unifying issue, from the coverage today pretty much everyone is against it who hasn't bought into the coalition be they on the right or the left.
I've been reading a little more, and I don't think it's as bad as it seemed at first.
The first point against the hysteria is that it isn't about votes of no confidence, which Labour etc are saying it is. The no confidence set up stays at 50% +1.
The 55% is for dissolving the parliament and calling a new election. Seems a tolerable move if you want fixed terms. However, I agree that it certainly seems to be a somewhat desperate grab to retain power should the coalition crumble. Curious, though, that the Lib Dems are so happy to support it when really it would be about keeping power in the Conservatives' hands.
Re fixed terms: 5 years is definitely too long. Maybe 4 or 4.5 would be better.