Monday, November 30, 2009

Timetable for the Election


This is from a House of Commons Research Paper and shows the timetable for a general election assuming the five most likely dates in 2010. Conventional wisdom says that the election will coincide with the local elections on 6th May. That's what most commentators believe. There is another reason to suppose it will be held then too - Labour can't afford two lots of elections within weeks of each other.

I still maintain the view that any sensible Prime Minister would not hold an election the week after people receive much lighter than usual paypackets. April sees the introduction of all the new tax rises imposed in the 2009 budget. People seem to have forgotten about those.

Perhaps the way round this is for local elections to be postponed until 3 June, to coincide with a general election.

But then again, more and more people seem to be talking about March.

Frankly only one person knows, and he ain't tellin'. But then again, perhaps he doesn't know yet, either.

Hattip: Mark Pack

15 comments:

Opinicus said...

Its got to be March or February to avoid a budget setting out Labour's spending cuts, which would finish them as a Party and which would remove any line of defence against the Tories at the GE.
It must be before the budget. Simples.

ILLIBERAL DEMOCRATS said...

Gordon Brown will probably make himself Lord Protoctor before he calls an election.

I hate Gordon Brown and I hate Labour!

I would love to execute them after a fair trial - i.e. they plead guilty to treason!

Think I have been playing too many computer games in my past - Remember the one where you kill some one and the character goes " OH - Yes". I once did that after "mating" with a girlfriend and she slapt me! I had been drinking! So it does not count!

Lord Lavendon said...

Why Brown cannot put the country and himself out of misery, by simply calling an election now is beyond me.

pete-s said...

I don't want these ba****ds in one day longer than possible. If the 2005 GE was on may the 5th, how can they dissolve on the 10th May.

Old Holborn said...

Vote on the Swiss

http://surveys.polldaddy.com/s/F36E97217A59950E/

HERE

Dangerouslysubversivedad said...

It's going to be May. Printers are having pre-orders placed by Labour Constituency groups to coincide with that date.

Liam said...

All this would, of course, be meaningless if the United Kingdom took even one step into modern, civilised society by having fixed term elections of Westminster.

I prefer annual elections for local government, while feeling the need in the 21st century for fixed term Parliaments is more relevant than ever. How we can continue accepting a system where the Prime Minister of the day has the starting gun in his hand is beyond me.

You are right to suggest, Iain, that the one man who would know the date actually does not know. Gordon Brown makes decisions late, and often calls them wrong. I would not start booking weeks off work in March quite yet....

Scary Biscuits said...

Brown 'doesn't know' or is still having an almighty dither?

Liam, fixed term parliaments are just another panacea. Germany has them and yet strangley still managed to cut short their term at the election before last.

The true solution is to repeal some of the Acts where Parliament has given itself more power. This includes the 1715 Septennial Acts, which not only lengthened Parliament from four to seven years (since reduced to five) it also abolished the need for candidates to set out their manifesto before seeking election. (This last point is why Labour got away with breaking its promise of a referendum on Europe; previous corrupt MPs had abolished the need to make their promises binding.)

Atually, I can't think of a successful Parliament that has gone for more than four years. Reducing Parliament to a MAXIMUM of four years (rather than fixing the term) would in achieve the same effect in practice and if they could return the right for us to know what they're going to do once elected, that would be nice too.

Unsworth said...

Just bring it on.

Erskine May said...

pete-s: The length of a Parliament is not determined by the date of a General Election but by when Parliament sits.

DiscoveredJoys said...

A fixed term for MPs, e.g. 4 years with a quarter of the seats standing for election every year, would probably be good for democracy. Not so good for the various parties though, so I expect it will never happen.

As for the date of the next General Election, if Brown knows when it will be today, he'll change his mind tomorrow. I reckon he will keep flapping until he has to choose the last possible date by default.

What a way to run a country.

Oliver Drew said...

@Opinicus - You're assuming that Labour will tell the truth in a pre-election budget? That is one heck of a stretch!

As Labour have not told the truth for years in budgets when there were no elections planned I cannot forsee them telling the truth in any pre-budget election.

I HOPE for March but I think Brown will hang on and hang on until the last possible minute.

As the polls go, 10% might just be as good as it gets for Labour, and if it were me, I'd dissolve Parliament now for an election in the second week of January (if that was possible).

Osama the Nazarene said...

He's dithering, as usual.

Lord Mole said...

The Election could only be on June 3rd if the Prime Minister just didn't call an election and allowed the Parliament to expire. This would look outragously weak. The Election will be in May.

quietzapple said...

Brown will be governing rather than agonising over the reducing Tory lead . . .

. . . sensible PMs govern, they don't chatter as much as bloggers, Iain.