The 99% (politics outside the US)

So what happens now in the UK?

I admit parliamentary democracy is not my forte. I know that if no one party has a majority, then a coalition government of multiple parties needs to be set up. I think in Britain the incumbent party (ie the party holding the post of Prime Minister), gets first crack at trying to cobble a government together, but I'm not sure.

From my limited reading thus far, it seems Labor has the better chance of forming a coalition, but they need to wait for the Conservatives to fail forming one first.

I am sure of one thing: David Cameron is still kicking himself for the Brexit referendum.

Quote: Nareed

So what happens now in the UK?

I admit parliamentary democracy is not my forte. I know that if no one party has a majority, then a coalition government of multiple parties needs to be set up. I think in Britain the incumbent party (ie the party holding the post of Prime Minister), gets first crack at trying to cobble a government together, but I'm not sure.

From my limited reading thus far, it seems Labor has the better chance of forming a coalition, but they need to wait for the Conservatives to fail forming one first.

I am sure of one thing: David Cameron is still kicking himself for the Brexit referendum.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/uk-election-2017-result-john-mcdonnell-says-labour-wants-to-form-a-minority-government_uk_593a3bece4b024026877ea37

Quote:

As the incumbents, the Conservative government will remain in office and has the first chance to form a new administration.

After that, I don't know who by protocol gets to go next to the Queen to ask permission to form a government.

Quote: Dalex64

After that, I don't know who by protocol gets to go next to the Queen to ask permission to form a government.

That's always struck me as faintly absurd.

Anyway, even if the Tories wind up forming a government, it seems that the thing for May to do is resign regardless. Much, it seems, as David Cameron did after losing the Brexit vote. So if she doesn't resign, how does her party go about removing her?

ON the one hand, it seems like a really odd way to run a country. On the other, if a disaster in human shape like trump for some reason go the top job, they can be removed from power more easily.

Front bench back bench shadow ministers... its always been a mystery to me. Everything is done in the Queen's name but the Queen does nothing. The power seems to be in the police, the press, the bankers and the Pakistanis, with Scottish oil and fishing being a sideshow. The aspect of the UK that is presently fascinating is this historical sex crimes craze: if you pinch a woman's bottom on the street today you will tried and punished according to todays social mores, but if you did the act forty years ago you still get punished under today's standards and complainants get compensation upon the flimsiest of evidence.

Quote: Nareed

That's always struck me as faintly absurd.

Anyway, even if the Tories wind up forming a government, it seems that the thing for May to do is resign regardless. Much, it seems, as David Cameron did after losing the Brexit vote. So if she doesn't resign, how does her party go about removing her?

ON the one hand, it seems like a really odd way to run a country. On the other, if a disaster in human shape like trump for some reason go the top job, they can be removed from power more easily.

Im not an expert on British politics but they use the same Westminster system as Australia does so I would assume the process would be similar if not the same. In Australia the prime minister is simply the leader of the majority party or in the case where no single party has a majority, the largest cohalition partner. The process for changing the leader (and hence the prime minister) will be based on the rules of the party but essentially if they lose the confidence of their party then someone else will challenge for the leadership and it will be put to a party room vote.

Meantime in France, Macron's party scored a landslide win in parliamentary elections, winning 350 seats in the National Assembly.

Curiously this is the exact opposite to the situation in Britain.

Very interesting note today about Israel calling for "ties" with Saudi Arabia: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/06/israel-calls-saudi-arabia-ties-state-visits-170622082111519.html

More interesting that it was published by Al Jazeera, which is based in Qatar.

If you recall, the news note in a blog or somewhere online that precipitated the current crisis, mentioned the Qatari government sought relations with Israel.

At some point when there's a conflict in that part of the world, the better idea seems to ignore it and read about it afterwards.

Quote: Nareed

Very interesting note today about Israel calling for "ties" with Saudi Arabia: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/06/israel-calls-saudi-arabia-ties-state-visits-170622082111519.html

More interesting that it was published by Al Jazeera, which is based in Qatar.

If you recall, the news note in a blog or somewhere online that precipitated the current crisis, mentioned the Qatari government sought relations with Israel.

At some point when there's a conflict in that part of the world, the better idea seems to ignore it and read about it afterwards.

Its hard to have diplomats when the Arab maps do not show Israel and people with Israili visas in the travel history can't enter an Arab state. Usually 'trial balloons' don't result in such major actions.

All the latest commentary on the Qatari mess indicate the real objective is for Saudi Arabia to take control of Qatar's foreign policy.

As noted before, that part of the world is a mess. Any country with some influence (ie any country that's grown rich from oil revenues), supports some form of radical Islamist movement, including terrorist groups. At the same time they have good relations with America and, at times, other western countries.

So the Saudis won't attack militarily a country that is host to a BIG US Air Force base, and that BTW has weapons of its own. In the meantime we hear Qatar supports the Muslim Brotherhood (true) and shills for them through Al Jazeera (also true), but not what groups the Saudis and Emiratis support or whom their state media shill for.

Quote: Nareed

All the latest commentary on the Qatari mess indicate the real objective is for Saudi Arabia to take control of Qatar's foreign policy.

Saudi Arabia has always financed the wars and bought all those Cadilacs (later Chevies) for the families of those killed in the various wars. Saudi Arabia has always been the 'swing' producer of oil when other Arab states violate the various 'quotas'.

Qatar threatened to formally recognize Israel which might even dampen the market for arms and private armies. Most of the Private Armies in the world are owned by the Bush Family or the House of Saud.