Monday, February 18, 2008

Cameron Should Table a No Confidence Vote

Tabling a vote of no confidence in a government is something an Opposition should do very sparingly. But if now is not that time, I don't know what is. As far as I can recall, David Cameron hasn't tabled one in his two years as leader. It wouild give him the chance to explain why this government doesn't deserve to remain in office, and it would get a lot of media coverage - something rare for any parliamentary debate. He would lose the vote, of course - but so what? Holding the government to account is what an Opposition is supposed to do - and there is no better way of doing that at the moment than tabling a vote of no confidence.


Anonymous said...

I disagree Iain. This will just unite Labour and the Tories cannot win. Cameron should try and maximise Labour dissent and tease out Blair supporters who will be none too pleased. Cameron should however go for the kill but not by calling a no confidence vote. It will back fire.

Tony said...

One thing we could be sure of in any such debate is that Brown will not have an ounce of the gravitas shown by Margaret Thatcher in her last Commons performance and she tore Labour apart.

Paddy Briggs said...


In what way would such a futile act help anything - other than, no doubt, to boost further Cameron's inflated ego? Politics is more than a debating game...

Anonymous said...

This might be a good move if the Tories had a credible alternative strategy. But they haven't.

See also Steve Richards (no fan of Labour) in the Indy: "Chancellor has lost control, but it is the Tories who are isolated"

Unsworth said...

The Labour benches are divided anyway, what with Darling first agreeing with his own side that this would be 'disastrous' and now saying that it's better than Hovis. Cameron's best move is to contrast those two positions - and chuck in a few comments abour air-miles whilst he's at it. After all, £6000 per taxpayer equals a fair number of air miles.

I think Darling will be replaced soon, anyway. He's outlived his usefulness to Brown. Next Chancellor, Cooper or Balls? She was less than effusive in her support for Darling, and you can always guarantee that her disgusting consort will be lurking in the background with the stiletto. Lady Macbeth, eh?

David T. said...

A no confidence motion also creates an opportunity to let the public see that there is an alternative government in waiting with sounder people with a sounder approach to the problems that may flow from the government's failure.

Anonymous said...

I disagree Iain, a vote of confidence should only be called when there is evidence of massive discontent within the government's own ranks forcing an embarrassing fa├žade of unity.

Use sparingly yes, but only when there is a good chance of defections.

Anonymous said...

Can you smell the fear and panic in the comments from the nulab? A short glance through the blogs comments proves this. Just look at paddy briggs above. Anon below him has his arse hole twitching like a bunnys nose with panic.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the previous posts - now is not the right time to call for a vote of no confidence which the Opposition have no hope of winning. Far better to act with our head and not our heart and continue to let the Labour Party implode and for the economic realities to sink in with the electorate.

The economy is what will ultimately finish Labour and Brown in the polls not a grandstanding performabce in the Commons which will be totally ignored by the mass of those of the electorate that need to switch allegiance at the next election which they will only as their lifestyle is affected detrimentally

Cameron , Osbourne,Davies, Haig and rest of shadow cabinet just need to keep chipping away at Brown and Labour slowly and surely demolishing their reputation for economic competence at every opportunity. We have another 18 - 24 months to nail Brown into the ground on his abysmal record and make sure that when we put him down he and Labour stay down

Anonymous said...

This could well provide a welcome media storm. Labour must not be allowed to let this slide from the headlines.

hatfield girl said...

Principled, plainly argued opposition to the emergency legislation needed to nationalise the bank (it's hard to believe those words 'nationalise the bank', what century, what country are we in?), might be better than a no confidence vote.

Labour members will rally to their Government's support on a simple loyalty issue; on the collapse of the Executive's economic and fiscal policy and reputation, there will be acknowledgment even on the Labour side, in some parts of the Labour coalition.

Unknown said...

Keep chipping away at them and let them self destruct.
We have another example of the Brown jinx, as poined out on the BBC this morning, Northern Rock first reported problems, with a profits warning, on the day Brown came to power!

Anonymous said...

I think you are right Iain .
Now IS the time to make such a move and make the point . The opposition must place itself at the head of the people and demand change . Emphasise that Labour only ever gained 21.4% of the vote in England and that they have no democratic mandate .
They should be howling blue murder ,shouting for explanations and proclaiming that heads must roll .

The government is likely to win such a vote and yet even if it does it will appear besieged , isolated , out of touch and just clinging on . They must be depicted ( not difficult) as just a bunch of devious incompetents simply hanging on for their own personal advantage and using naked parliamentary numbers to perpetuate their jobs .

Such a debate will crystallise the public using up of any remaining goodwill that this government has . After that they will be running on goodwill-empty. This is is not a time to pussyfoot around .

( Also , Briggzy is agin it which is a good indicator that Labour don't want it to happen )

Anonymous said...

What happened to the Iain Martin post? It's dropped off the blog.

Anonymous said...

Far be it for me to point out that Lying Labour have a majority of around 60- plus the Liberal Democrats (and Gorbals Thick): make that around 100. Cameron should only do a VOC if he feels strong enough to kebab Labour- and the Libbies- on the Northern Crock fiasco. Win the debate, but lose the vote- a 'winning' scenario; but if he were to LOSE the debate AND the vote- well, hardly good parliamentary tactics.

Paddy Briggs said...

In Britain it is the constitutional duty of the Opposition to oppose – and I must say that Dave and his boys are pretty good at it – especially he and Osborne! With debating skills honed at Eton and St Pauls and Oxford this privileged twosome and the Rara brigade alongside and behind them can usually get the better of dour old Gordon and dull old Alastair. But then Brown and Darling have quite important day jobs – whilst all that Dave and George have to do is to search for the next jibe or epithet or riposte. So it would no doubt be a ripping wheeze to table a motion of no confidence and occupy a bit of parliamentary time and unnecessarily divert the Prime Minister and his colleagues from the important task of actually running something (the country, as it happens). “Running something” is not something that Dave and the boys know much about – never had a proper job you see! But then there was always a ready stash of cash available (still is of course) so they could concentrate on what matters – words not deeds!

Anonymous said...

Just wait for the next election and you'll get your no confidence vote.

If Brown had confidence in his Gornment then he wouldn't have bottled last Autumn's election.

Anonymous said...

Remember what happened to the little boy who cried wolf?

Pogo said...

Oh dear "Paddy"... Nothing left in the ammunition locker other than good old class war?

More to the point, the legislation passed to nationalise "The Crock" has been studied by a sharp-eyed poster on another blog and found to be generic - ie it would seem that HMG can now take any company that takes its fancy into public ownership... I wonder who's next?

Anonymous said...

Is Paddy taking the p*ss? Brown and his bitc..Darling have 'important day jobs'? Well, judging by their action, or inaction, you couldn't tell! Well, his point about Cambo and Gideon applies to both GB and AD, but does DC and Gidders have the skill to really kick Lying labour in the goolies? I don't think so. Silly sod that DC is missed an opportunity replacing Gidders with Hague at last reshuffle. Hague would splatter Brown OR Darling.

Anonymous said...

Why do I get the impression that Paddy Briggs has a paint-scratching penknife in his pocket?

AdamB said...

It would look and smell and taste like a vote of opportunism.

So Cameron is bound to do it.

hatfield girl said...

Defeat for the Labour government on their Emergency Bill to take powers to nationalise banks and other financial institutions would lead, of course, to a Government-tabled Motion of Confidence.

Should a principled stand by the Opposition against such Emergency nationalisation powers being taken not succeed, it can then be followed by an Opposition-tabled No Confidence Vote in this economic, financial, and cultural shambles of a Labour government.

Anonymous said...

agree with other posts - not convinced, whilst I agree with you in principle I think this would be silly posturing.

Anonymous said...

It would be a very very stupid move as far as I'm concerned. If it doesn't work Cameron will have staked a lot on doing it and I couldn't see him continuing in his job if he lost that vote. To lose it would be for the general public to stand up and say "shut the hell up Cameron, you don't know what we really think".

Does he really want to risk that when there isn't truly "no confidence" in this government?

Alex said...

This is no time for futile gestures. Cameron and Osborne should be heaping personal abuse on Darling, Brown, Blair, Harman, Prescott .......

Anonymous said...

Paddy Briggs,

You claim to be some sort of writer.

Do you understand the concept of "paragraphs?"

It would make your postings more readable.

Though they'll probably still be a load of bollocks.

Newmania said...

Briggs do give it a rest. Labour Party policy has greatly assisted the stratification of society of which I think you are complaining and we are hardly going to get any Grammar school boys anymore are we. Would you like me to remind you of the many Labour MP`s who send their children to Public school? Gordon Brown has done nothing but plot his dark rule since he lost his eyesight reading about soviet five year plans when he was twelve under the covers ( Playing rugby ...yeah right ) .If he is a frightening re-animated cadaver shrieking in the light that is the reason not his lack on oportunity .He is after all part of the Scottish Raj himself and went smoothly though that elite with touching the sides . Darling is nonentity because that’s what Brown wanted. Its all he can bear as Mr. Clarke recently confirmed and Mr. Field has been telling us for years
It is exactly Brown’s weakness that he cannot delegate and takes so long to do anything he has no time for the irksome business of consulting the representatives of the people in Parliament or outside it. He looks lumbering indecisive and foolish because that is what he is.

Overall it may not be the time for a vote of no confidence as I expect worse to come but it’s a fine judgement call . Just how much of his insane Bridge over the river Kwai is this monomaniac going to be allowed to construct.

Unsworth said...

@ Paddy Briggs

'Constitutional Duty'? So where in the Statutes is this effing 'Constitution'?

You're saying that Brown and Darling have piss-poor 'debating skills'? I'd agree. They are not up to the job at all. Stock response to any question and/or comment is to trot out unintelligible mantras about record tractor production, wheat harvests, etc etc.

Part of these two mutton-heads' jobs is to answer to Parliament, innit? What would you prefer Parliament to debate, then? The latest football scores? Or would you prefer them to pass yet more cretinous and useless legislation to add to the 3,000 - and climbing - new laws introduced by the moronic NuLab control freaks?

You seriously believe Brown and his henchpersons are 'running' things? These people couldn't run a bath. They are serially and disastrously incompetent.

As for 'privileged twosomes' - how about Cooper Balls, eh?

Darling has now outlived his purpose, expect a reshuffle shortly.

Yak40 said...

Holding the government to account is what an Opposition is supposed to do

Exactly, and it's something this Opposition has seemed strangely reluctant to do despite all the material available.

Go for the throat.

Anonymous said...

Cameron should call, for a vote of confidence.

But who can blame him for not doing so?

Not me thats for sure.

If he does, he should only do it if it has no chance of working.

Anyone taking over this country right now would be as stupid as stupid gets. So stupid in fact that I would not trust the mans judgment.

It would be like taking over the massive liabilities of a failing bank, at this moment. When the whole housing market is crashing.

ATLAS shrugged

Oh, I forgot all of us just have whether we wanted to or not.

Anonymous said...

11:54 Paddy Briggs cannot be a writer as he misapprehends simple English words that are derived from well-known Greek roots. He thinks "phobic" means "hating" rather than "fearing".

He wrote a snippy, illiterate post directed at me, loftily informing me that islamophobia "is against the law". Ooooh-errr! And he was lofty and snippy with it.

What is he supposed to write for? A new magazine called "Boring"?

Brown, as we know, has no confidence in himself. He is scared to death to do anything about anything in case it turns out to be wrong. That's why he sulks behind closed doors in a quivering little pile of insecurity. His 10-year charade is now floodlit - all his myriad faults and inadequacies pitifully illuminated, and the dog's breakfast he has secretly made, through incompetence, of the previously robust British economy over the last 10 years now apparent to every 12-year old.

Yak40 said...

Emphasise that Labour only ever gained 21.4% of the vote in England

21.4% only ?
Is this true ? I knew it was low but this is amazing, suggests boundaries are really distorted, isn't there still a Boundaries Commission ?

strapworld said...


This country is now rudderlass with a Captain unable to lead!

We are desperate for a leader. Cameron has called for the resignation of Darling - that will not happen and, frankly, it was an easy shout.

No I agree with you 100% NOW IS the time for a vote of No Confidence. Yes to show there is an alternative government BUT the opportunity for Cameron to show his true (if he has them) fighting colours.

From the disgraceful way our troops are being let down (I notice that you, sadly, ignored the Coroner's missive last week) over equipment and money - to the EU and Nato letting us down with troops - to the economic shambles and the shocking record on Crime and Punishment and Education- There is enough evidence for Cameron to give a barnstorming performance.

NO They will not win But people out here in the real world want to see someone deliver a kicking to Brown.

Anonymous said...

There is no point in calling for a VoNC, because Labour MPs who know they will lose their seats at the next General Election will do all they can to keep this Parliament (and their salaries+expenses) going for as long as possible.

Ditto the LibDems will not vote with the Conservatives.

It would therefore be a superlatively pointless gesture.

ps. I assume Mr Briggs objected to Anthony Lyndon Blair (Fettes, the Scottish Eton, and Oxford) on class grounds?

Anonymous said...

Yak40 said...
Labour in England 2005.
"21.4% only ?
Is this true ? I knew it was low but this is amazing, suggests boundaries are really distorted, isn't there still a Boundaries Commission ?"

Due mainly to very large majorities in safe Conservative constituencies. Majorities in Labour seats generally smaller.

Anonymous said...

No - Labour got 21.4% of the electorate - not the vote. The Tories got even less than that - so what democratic mandate do they have.

Yak40, you're getting confused between the percentage of the electorate and the percentage of the vote.

Anonymous said...

Verity said:

"11:54 Paddy Briggs cannot be a writer as he misapprehends simple English words that are derived from well-known Greek roots."

The closest that Paddy Briggs gets to Greek roots is when he slaps some Grecian 2000 on his head. Or else it's a syrup.

What say you, Paddy?