Cameron: government's U-turns a sign of 'resolve, strength and grit'

[SwissTony]

David Cameron has insisted his government has "resolve, strength and grit" as he defended a string of forced U-turns on tax measures.

Speaking on BBC1's Andrew Marr Show, the prime minister said it took courage for an administration to admit it was "ploughing into the brick wall" and change course on high-profile policies.

Cameron also defended his refusal to launch an investigation into his beleaguered culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt. Instead, he said the minister had acted "wisely and fairly" and had given "a good account of himself".

He acknowledged "difficulties" thrown up by the budget, but sought to make a virtue of the government's willingness to accept its mistakes.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Orwell, eat your heart out.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jun/03/cameron-uturns-sign-government-resolve

[LeftishBrit]

1. Well, then let them show LOTS of resolve, strength and grit...

and U-turn on just about ALL of their revolting policies!

[non sociopath skin]

2. Two minutes hate, anyone?

The Skin

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. On 'Broadcasting House' this morning, they said fixed term parliaments had been a U turn

(Radio 4 prog, if people don't know it). They didn't explain more. Can anyone suggest how that was a U turn? It went through: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-11/fixedtermparliaments.html

Originally, a 55% level for an agreed dissolving of parliament was proposed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/13/fixed-term-parliaments-explained

Labour said it should be 51% - but it was pointed out this wasn't about a vote of no confidence, but for when the majority of MPs can agree that a new election is needed - including the government. It was to stop an early election being called for tactical reasons. They eventually went with 66% - not really a U turn, I'd say (and exactly what the Scottish Parliament has - ie what Labour set up for it).

So what was the U turn?

[LeftishBrit]

4. I haven't been following the history, though I was against the original proposal, but...

I think that the original idea was to NOT allow for governments to be brought down by a vote of confidence, but only if 55% vote to dissolve parliament early.

In the present form, it seems that the possibility of bringing down the government by a vote of confidence has been reinstated, but that it has been made more difficult (requiring a two-thirds vote) to dissolve parliament without a vote of confidence.

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. Well, this was from 14th May 2010:

The ex-Lib Dem MP David Howarth, who developed party policy on fixed-term parliaments, says there are no plans to change rules on no-confidence.

The coalition could still be defeated on a simple 51% majority. In that situation the PM – Cameron in this instance – would have to try to form a new coalition, perhaps with other opposition parties, and if so he could carry on, even as a minority government. But if he fails to do that there has to be an "escape clause" of an early election.

A fixed-term parliament removes the power to call an election from the prime minister. The plan is for the Commons, not the PM, to have that power – and the threshold should be 55% of MPs

That's only a few days after the coalition was formed.

[LeftishBrit]

6. Thanks

As I remember, it was not at all clear and different people were interpreting it differently. But I admit that I was feeling pretty devastated just after the election, so it may be that I wasn't seeing this clearly.