British Election 2010

[Yog]

So apparently, there is an election right now in Britain.

From what I read in newspapers, Gordon Brown offended some old lady (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc8JcyiZzro) (:lol at the captions), and currently the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are about even in the polls. What I found really interesting is, supposedly, the Liberal Democrats are demanding election reform (proportional elections), is this true? Could this be the beginning of an end to the two party system? I'd appreciate some Brits explaining what is going on. :)

[Dasquian Belargic]

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/u0QsSoV0SRo&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/u0QsSoV0SRo&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

Oh, the election. Is there nowhere I can escape you?

...who am I kidding? All this build up to the election is really exciting. For the first time in.. forever, I guess, we have a third party who is actually threatening to cause a real shake up! Not that I expect the Lib Dems to win with a majority, even with their performance in recent polls, but the possibility of a government that is not just Red or Blue by default is.. wow.

A little bit of comedy that might sail over some peoples heads, but hopefully at least Droo will appreciate it:

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EKFTtYx2OHc&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EKFTtYx2OHc&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

[Droo]

I honestly fear for the future of a country whose entire political architecture may be completely restructured thanks to sixty minutes of television. You can almost hear the jaded labour voters saying: "Ooh my! That Nick Clegg looks like a fresh-faced young man of tomorrow! I likes the look of him! Look, he knows how to look directly at the camera and can pontificate on a fairy-tale Britain we'd all like to see! Colour me yellow!"

And this new direction of political intrigue just leaves me more irritable about the whole nature of politics: less gossip more policy please.

[Dasquian Belargic]

All it takes is Gordon Brown calling you a bigot and you don't want to vote Labour no more :lol

As an aside, it largely doesn't matter who I vote. My constituency is a solid Labour stronghold. The same guy has been the MP since the early 80s.

[Yog]

Admittedly, I don't know much about the Liberal Democrats other than what it says on Wikipedia. Here is what it says:


Promoting social liberalism, the Liberal Democrats voice strong support for constitutional reform, electoral reform, civil liberties, and higher taxes for public services. The party president's book of office is John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, which defended individual rights while attacking the tyranny of the majority and the despotism of custom. The party objects to state limitations on individual rights and favours a welfare state that provides for the necessities and amenities of life.[11][12] They support multilateral foreign policy, opposing British participation in the War in Iraq and supporting the withdrawal of troops from the country.[13] The Liberal Democrats are the most pro-European Union of the three main parties in the UK. The party has strong environmentalist values—favouring renewable energy and commitments to deeper cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. Since their foundation, Lib Dems have advocated electoral reform to use proportional representation in electing the House of Commons, also hoping to replace the House of Lords with an elected chamber.
It all sounds like good ideas to me? Especially the part about election reform.

What is their handle on dealing with the stagnant economy though?



A little bit of comedy that might sail over some peoples heads, but hopefully at least Droo will appreciate it
Loved those clips. :D

[Dasquian Belargic]

72 hours to go :ohno

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6BA2Jz7xIXw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6BA2Jz7xIXw&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

[Dashiel Starborn]

Todays the day! VOTE OR DIE people

[Yog]

The votes are still being counted. Conservatives are projected to win 36.2% of the votes, Labour 29.1%, and LD 23.0%. What is already clear, none of the parties will have majority, which should make the parliamentary situation interesting to say the least.

So now that none of the parties have majority, the question is what the Liberal Democrats / Clegg will do.

[Droo]

In his statement earlier suggesting the Conservatives should be allowed to establish a stable government due to the number of votes and seats they won, it seems Clegg is playing fair and I will be surprised if he doesn't end up making a deal with Cameron and the Conservatives, despite the Liberals crying out for electoral reform. To side with a party which after 13 years in power has now been rejected by the public at large would tarnish the Liberals reputation and one wonders what would be the point of sacrificing public trust and popularity for a new electoral system? Especially after Clegg's emphasis on national, not party, interest.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Now begins the countdown to David Cameron axing public sector jobs in the North East and plunging Newcastle into an even more dire state of worklessness.

[Captain Untouchable]

To side with a party which after 13 years in power has now been rejected by the public at large

Bit late to the party with weighing in on this, but I felt I had to make a comment on this.

Have you actually seen the way the votes for each party break down? In this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zS5tyfPztlY) video by a lad on YouTube who goes by Nerimon, he raises a very good point.

10 Million people voted Conservative. 8 Million people voted Labour. 6 Million people voted Liberal Democrat. Now, our election system is royally fucked which is why everything is so squiffy... but I don't think it's fair to say that Labour has been "rejected by the public at large", when they're actually, in the grand scheme of things, not *that* far behind the Tories. And to argue it the other way, 14 million people *don't* want David Cameron in power.

Don't get me wrong: I'm a fan of neither Labour nor Conservative. I just feel that the media, and the public in general, aren't necessarily seeing an accurate depiction of public opinion: they're getting bogged down with the seats thing.

[Yog]

but I don't think it's fair to say that Labour has been "rejected by the public at large", when they're actually, in the grand scheme of things, not *that* far behind the Tories. And to argue it the other way, 14 million people *don't* want David Cameron in power.
I agree with this. 64% of the voters effectively told Cameron to sod off.

Maybe it's because I am used to proportional elections and parties forming coalitions, but to me, it's both absurd and irrational that Clegg / Liberal Democrats are turning to the Conservatives first. As far as I can see, their political platforms have almost nothing in common. Why should the LD voters be punished with policies they did not want? How is that democratic?

If I were Clegg, I'd put some bone hard demands on election reform, so that when the next election comes around, the Tories become utterly irrelevant. Then we can laugh at them for their Pyrrhic victory. There is a reason they have not been in Government for such a long time.

(yes, even as a non British, I am no fan of the Tories. Thatcher with her privatization and tax policies caused immeasurable damage to British economy, from my point of view. And this is from someone who will probably vote Conservative in the next Norwegian election :))

[Dasquian Belargic]

And now Gordon has resigned. I guess we might end up with Milliband in charge for a brief spell, until Cameron and Clegg hash out some kind of agreement.

:(

[Captain Untouchable]

Brown hasn't resigned. He's said "I will resign before October". He'll continue as PM until he is replaced, one way or another.

Everyone is complaining about all the options, and how no party is going to actually achieve a decent majority. Why not embrace that, and let the Liberal Democrats run a minority government? On any issues where they're left wing, they'll get Labour backing, and can probably get stuff done. On more conservative issues, they'll get Tory backing. For anything "woah, shit: what the hell are you doing?", they'll have both Labour and Conservatives opposing them... but the diametric opposition of those two parties will stop that happening too often.

And as an added bonus, Nick Clegg isn't a tool.

[Xavier Synik]

I can't speak for the players, but minority governments while essentially proving a point (ie nobody has the majority of the support) are a serious pain in the ass.

We've had a minority governments since 2004 first with a Liberal government that didn't last long, and now 2 Conservative governments.

While I am a Liberal and am glad that a minority government tends to keep the Conservatives from pushing through a lot of things that I am not a big fan of. Minorities as a whole are not very conducive for getting things done in a parliament one way or the other.

Now mind you Canada is probably unique compared to the British Parliament because of the fact that we have 3 national parties and 1 federal party that comes solely from Quebec, which means there are a lot more unique agendas.

Yeah not a big fan of minority governments. Just hope you guys don't have the whole proroguing government bullshit that the conservatives have taken to using to avoid contentious issues, but since our government is based off yours, I'd bet you do...

One other note... if you do end up with a minority government get used to 2 words. non-confidence motion...

[Darth Turbogeek]

I agree with this. 64% of the voters effectively told Cameron to sod off.

Maybe it's because I am used to proportional elections and parties forming coalitions, but to me, it's both absurd and irrational that Clegg / Liberal Democrats are turning to the Conservatives first. As far as I can see, their political platforms have almost nothing in common. Why should the LD voters be punished with policies they did not want? How is that democratic?

If I were Clegg, I'd put some bone hard demands on election reform, so that when the next election comes around, the Tories become utterly irrelevant. Then we can laugh at them for their Pyrrhic victory. There is a reason they have not been in Government for such a long time.

(yes, even as a non British, I am no fan of the Tories. Thatcher with her privatization and tax policies caused immeasurable damage to British economy, from my point of view. And this is from someone who will probably vote Conservative in the next Norwegian election :))

It's becoming clear that Clegg has drawn a line in the sand with election reform and that with Brown's supposed resignation that he is playing hardball with both sides.

Now, while under the British system there is no moral or legal obligation for Brown to step aside (in fact until he is defeated in a Queens Speech he's still PM), Labor and the LD's dont have enough to set up minority govt by themselves. Theya re still approx 7 votes short of the probability of surviving a Queens Speech vote (effectivly, a vote of confidence). The onyl truly stable govt that could possibly be assured to survive a Queens Speech vote is a Tory (Ugh) and LD alliance.

It's been thought that a lot of LD voters voted Tory because of the very thought of a hung parliment. So it's not entirely the case LD voters and supprters would feel sold out if Clegg chooses to support Troy in a Queens Speech.


so that when the next election comes around, the Tories become utterly irrelevant. Then we can laugh at them for their Pyrrhic victory

No, I suspect that like a lot of parties who win minority govt, they will in fact increase their vote next election, no matter they system. FPTP is riduclous and TPP (Third Party Preference) would help Labor a lot but still I would suspect Cameron will get more votes next time around. Who would lose is Labor who would almost certainly become the third largest party, handing over to the LD's quite a few more seats. The fact that the LD's got a considerable vote share and yet have a small representation is pathetic.

What this is is Clegg's chance to win a system that will really benefit his party. If he plays hardball on this one, he stands to gain the postion to be the real kingmaker next election with a bigger gorup of MP's and maybe powerful enough to gain the ability to win a Queens Speech vote himself under the right alliance

[Dasquian Belargic]

Couldn't Lab/Lib get some of the other independent parties on board to form a coalition? Or are they only allowed to have two parties per coalition?

I would have though that most Lib Dem voters would vote Labour to avoid a hung parliament, when Conservative policies are typically so at odds with what the Lib Dems want. I don't know if that's the feeling all across the country, but certainly in the north east where I am - one of the few parts of the country that is still strong Labour (such as Sunderland: first seats declared and all for Labour) - the thought of voting Tory for any reason is abhorrent. Our industries - coal mining and shipbuilding, notably - collapsed under Thatcher's government. Whether or not that was entirely her governments fault doesn't change the fact that a big mark has been left, one that's only compounded by the fact that David Cameron has announced the north east as one of his key targets for spending cuts in areas that we rely heavily on for employment.

I only hope that Clegg siding with Cameron doesn't cause the Lib Dems growing support to decline, in anticipation of the next election.

[Darth Turbogeek]

Couldn't Lab/Lib get some of the other independent parties on board to form a coalition? Or are they only allowed to have two parties per coalition?

You can have as many as you want, as long as you win the Queens Speech vote.



I would have though that most Lib Dem voters would vote Labour to avoid a hung parliament, when Conservative policies are typically so at odds with what the Lib Dems want. I don't know if that's the feeling all across the country, but certainly in the north east where I am - one of the few parts of the country that is still strong Labour (such as Sunderland: first seats declared and all for Labour) - the thought of voting Tory for any reason is abhorrent. Our industries - coal mining and shipbuilding, notably - collapsed under Thatcher's government. Whether or not that was entirely her governments fault doesn't change the fact that a big mark has been left, one that's only compounded by the fact that David Cameron has announced the north east as one of his key targets for spending cuts in areas that we rely heavily on for employment.


After 13 years of Labor, the faults of Thatcher - and there was a godawful amount of them - cant be used as an excuse for the current state of industries and the economy. The fucked up position the UK finds itself in - and it is seriously fucked - is to be laid squarely at the feet of Labor as they have had more than enough time to fix shit.

The other dirty secret is that British goods were complete shit (ie Lucas and British Leyland) and that's why industry collapsed when the Japs worked out how to do it better and cheaper - so it wasnt just Thatcher's fault big major employers disappeared.

The UK has one of the biggest debt levels in raw dollars and also a very high one as per a % of GDP. Basically, the country is spendign well beyond it's means for too long and needs to have harsh cutbacks or sell more shit to the outside world. It hasnt GOT shit to sell apart from it's finanace markets. I can not for instance buy a single product rom the UK in Australia today - but on the other hand, even tho shit doesnt really get built in Australia, we supply the shit to build things with, which is why out of all the Western Countries, Australia barely felt a fart with the GFC that belted Europe and USA so hard - the economy was at max capacity already with many countries wanting as much of West Australia as possible.

So if the UK doesnt have industries that other countries want and there's a lot of debt to be paid, where's the money coming from?

That would be called "Get the fuck outta there because your country is about to really have a shitload of pain coming as the Govt realises it cant spend any more money cause it aint got any" - and no wishful hope is going to save the pain that is coming.

[Captain Untouchable]

I can not for instance buy a single product rom the UK in Australia today

I guess you're not counting the fact that the UK is one of Australia's largest suppliers of pharmaceuticals, then. Or at least, it is according to the UKTI website: Australia's fifth largest source of imports in fact, allegedly. But hey: what do the people running government websites know, eh? ;)

I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that 13 years is long enough for Labour to fix the problem. Sure, they could have made some headway, and have. They're stuck with a couple of big problems however: one of those is the political difficulties with pulling a total 180 on the previous administration's activities, and also the public opinion rammifications of "wasting" money on the exact same thing that the previous administration spent money on. The privatisation of British Rail is a great example: look at all the hastle Labour had trying to clean up the mess that was caused there, all because they weren't able to just reverse everything.

Effectively, Labour spent 13 years trying to build a stable economy on top of shaky foundations. Sure, they should have wound up with something better than they actually did... but you can't entirely blame the bricklayers: they've got to work with what they've got.

I in no way support or endorse Labour... I just think it's worth bearing in mind that the Conservatives had a hand in fucking things up to; which is yet another reason why they shouldn't be in power again.

[Darth Turbogeek]

I can not for instance buy a single product rom the UK in Australia today

I guess you're not counting the fact that the UK is one of Australia's largest suppliers of pharmaceuticals, then. Or at least, it is according to the UKTI website: Australia's fifth largest source of imports in fact, allegedly. But hey: what do the people running government websites know, eh? ;)

Have a look where said drugs are made and by whom. Britsh company but usually somewhere else other than the UK. The drugs we take are usually made right here.

Disclosure - I worked for GlaxoSmtihKline for some time :)



I don't think it's necessarily fair to say that 13 years is long enough for Labour to fix the problem. Sure, they could have made some headway, and have. They're stuck with a couple of big problems however: one of those is the political difficulties with pulling a total 180 on the previous administration's activities, and also the public opinion rammifications of "wasting" money on the exact same thing that the previous administration spent money on. The privatisation of British Rail is a great example: look at all the hastle Labour had trying to clean up the mess that was caused there, all because they weren't able to just reverse everything.

Effectively, Labour spent 13 years trying to build a stable economy on top of shaky foundations. Sure, they should have wound up with something better than they actually did... but you can't entirely blame the bricklayers: they've got to work with what they've got.

I in no way support or endorse Labour... I just think it's worth bearing in mind that the Conservatives had a hand in fucking things up to; which is yet another reason why they shouldn't be in power again.

So why should Labor be given the keys again when they have fucked up too Is this some kind of battered wife syndrome?

No, I'm sorry but 13 years is a VERY long time in politics. Countries like in Aisa have come off the Asian financial crisis and basically in disarray and have become economiclly strong and powerful. Argentina went bust in 2001 and they are bouncing back hard and strong. Russia as a country basically self destructed in the 1990's and yet it's growing stronger than ever. Pointing to "Shakey foundations!!!!' ignores facts like Labor in Australia uprooted the foundations in the late 80's, we suffered a deal of economic pain but the basics were done and grounded properly. But Paul Keating had a huge nutsack and just did it, even if it wasnt popular at the time. Three global economic calamities later (Asian crisis, 2001, GFC), we have had ONE quarter of negative growth, a shrinking public debt (to the point where it was effectively "Well, we dont want the bonds market to drop so we'll just keep some debt on cause well...." and also the undeniable good fortune to sit on a country that is in the main worthless on the surface but has simply huge reserves of shit to dig up and sell to the Chinese.

Brown and Blair are particularly resonsible for the further deregulation of the finance markets which lead directly to the GFC and bank collapses, while places that didnt crash like Australia have regulations that they refused to remove, despite Conservative leaning governments.

The sole biggest failure of the Brown/Blair era was Iraq, which has economically damaged the UK badly as well as politically damaged them in the eyes of rich Arab investors. And basically, any Govt that went balls deep on Iraq deserves to be thrown out and NOT forgiven.

Cameron might be a Tory and by definition a cunt but Brown's had 13 years as Chancellor AND Prime Minister and he has screwed the pooch royally,

[Captain Untouchable]

So why should Labor be given the keys again when they have fucked up too Is this some kind of battered wife syndrome?

Who said that? I certainly didn't. You getting confused between reality and the magical voices again? ;)

All I'm pointing out is that while yeah, you can slag off Blair and Brown until you're red, blue, orange or some other party-appropriate colour in the face, the fact remains that it "isn't that simple". There's more to every issue than who fucked up, and how recently that fuck-up happened.

It's important to factor in why they acted the way they did, and also what else they did - the things that aren't important enough to get international coverage, which is presumably why you're only focussing on the big stories. It isn't about which leader is less of a twat; it isn't about individual specific actions of each party; it's about the personality of the parties, and what they stand for. Compared to 13 years ago, there are lots of aspects of the UK that are healthier than they were, and than they would have been if we'd been governed on those issues by a Tory attitude.

As things stand, I think a coalition government that has Labour tempered by the Lib Dems, and has a sizeable Conservative opposition to keep them in check and stop them being too leftie, is the best possible outcome of all this. The Libs add an extra buffer that will hopefully prevent Labour from pushing through anything too stupid; and the fact that the Conservatives will only need a handful of extra seats to form a majority, it'll only take a handful of Lab-Lib MPs to disagree in order to stop a motion. So when it comes down to forming a government that won't make any "bad" decisions, it won't be that bad.

It'll just be awkward if they try to do anything progressive. But at least we won't have massive tax raises and budget slashes so that Cameron can build a wall around the UK to stop any more of this icky Europe and international relations stuff leaking in.

[Dasquian Belargic]

After 13 years of Labor, the faults of Thatcher - and there was a godawful amount of them - cant be used as an excuse for the current state of industries and the economy. The fucked up position the UK finds itself in - and it is seriously fucked - is to be laid squarely at the feet of Labor as they have had more than enough time to fix shit.

As I said, regardless of whether her government is fully to blame.. there is the deep-seated belief that because the coal-mining and shipbuilding went poof under Thatcher, we (the North east) do not want another Tory government. You just have to look at the election results (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/region/4.stm). We are probably one of the strongest working class Labour areas in the country and it will take some miracles on Cameron's behalf to convince people here that his party is bothered about us, especially as - like I said - he wants to cut public sector funding here, in an area where we rely heavily on the public sector for employment. Fair enough if he can magic some private sector industry out of his arse, but until he does, leave our jobs alone? >:

[Darth Turbogeek]

As I said, regardless of whether her government is fully to blame.. there is the deep-seated belief that because the coal-mining and shipbuilding went poof under Thatcher, we (the North east) do not want another Tory government. You just have to look at the election results (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/region/4.stm). We are probably one of the strongest working class Labour areas in the country and it will take some miracles on Cameron's behalf to convince people here that his party is bothered about us, especially as - like I said - he wants to cut public sector funding here, in an area where we rely heavily on the public sector for employment. Fair enough if he can magic some private sector industry out of his arse, but until he does, leave our jobs alone? >:


So the rest of the country boted against what the NE wanted. Well I didnt want Republicans int the USA in 2004 so isnt that our bad luck? That's why it's called NATIONAL elections.

And as I said, your country is going broke. Cut backs have to happen. You want to avoid the coming pain - which ALL politicians are going to have to face up whatever side they are to and the public service is always going to be the first target - you have only a few choices, mainly centered around "move".


But at least we won't have massive tax raises and budget slashes

To the part I havent quoted I'll just simply repeat - Labor had 13 years. There coems a time when you simply do not give them another chance. And you do not know what Cameron will be like until he has the keys to No 10 - for all we know he might tell Murdoch to fuck off. Unlikely but Brown truly fucked up and should not be anywhere near be rewarded with another chance

So how do you expect the present budget problems are going to be fixed? Fairies under the garden (which is the same policy Rethugs have)? The defiects are huge and growing. The fundamental reforms have not happened. There's a lack of income coming in and too much spending.

The same is going to happen in the USA sooner than later.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Don't bite my head off Mark, I'm not an idiot. I'm just explaining context, and whilst I appreciate that cuts have to be made there seems to be no forethought for the reprocussions on what is already one of the most workless regions in the country. The whole reason these public sector jobs were moved here was to decentralise the departments which were previously clustered around London, and now they are going to isolate us once again.

[Captain Untouchable]

Think about what you're saying Mark, versus what Jenny is saying. You're advocating curing the financial defecit by increasing unemployment. Sure, the money spent on benefits will be lower than the amount spent on wages, but it's hardly a "fix", is it? Doing so would be an idiot move on Cameron's part, for all of the reasons that Jenny very clearly stated a couple of times already.

An interesting point that was raised on the BBC News "have your say" thing, that is sort of connected: if you look at Scotland and Wales (I can't be bothered to work out which Northern Ireland party is which), the Conservatives only have 9 seats; versus 67 Labour, 14 Liberal Democrat, 9 Nationalist seats.

Would you argue that "England voted against the interests of Scotland and Wales, boohoo" as you did with the North East, or would you concede that a Conservative government isn't necessarily the desire of the entire United Kingdom: that it was effectively just voted in by England?

[Dasquian Belargic]

Cameron is the new PM. I cannot believe it.

[CMJ]

No party stays in or out of power forever. In just the past decade in the USA both the Republicans and the Democrats have had their obits written by newspapers and bloggers. After awhile people just get fed up with the party in power and things flip.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well parties can collapse, although one hasn't fallen apart in over a hundred years in American Politics.

[Xavier Synik]

Cameron is the new PM. I cannot believe it.

We all said the same thing about Harper here when he was first elected... that was 6 years ago.

[CMJ]

Well parties can collapse, although one hasn't fallen apart in over a hundred years in American Politics.

Try over 150.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Well, at least they have said they will call a General Election in 2015.

[Yog]

It's still unclear how the Conservatives intend to cut the deficit. I read they plan to raise the retirement age to 68 years among other things.

That may not be enough:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/feb/25/national-debt-raising-retirement-age

[Dasquian Belargic]

68 is already the retirement age for people my age.

[Yog]

Is it just me, or are the cabinet positions filled almost entirely by men? How old fashioned.

Her Majesty’s Government

The Queen has been pleased to approve the following Ministerial appointments:
Cabinet

Prime Minister, First Lord of the Treasury and Minister for the Civil Service

The Rt Hon David Cameron MP

Deputy Prime Minister, Lord President of the Council (with special responsibility for political and constitutional reform)

The Rt Hon Nick Clegg MP

First Secretary of State, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

The Rt Hon William Hague MP

Chancellor of the Exchequer

George Osborne MP

Lord Chancellor, Secretary of State for Justice

The Rt Hon Kenneth Clarke QC MP

Secretary of State for the Home Department; and Minister for Women and Equalities

The Rt Hon Theresa May MP

Secretary of State for Defence

Dr Liam Fox MP

Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills

Dr Vincent Cable MP

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

The Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP

Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change

Chris Huhne MP

Secretary of State for Health

Andrew Lansley CBE MP

Secretary of State for Education

Michael Gove MP

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Eric Pickles MP

Secretary of State for Transport

Philip Hammond MP

Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Caroline Spelman MP

Secretary of State for International Development

Andrew Mitchell MP

Secretary of State for Northern Ireland

Owen Paterson MP

Secretary of State for Scotland (and providing ministerial support to the Deputy Prime Minister in the Cabinet Office)

Danny Alexander MP

Secretary of State for Wales

Cheryl Gillan MP

Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport

Jeremy Hunt MP

Chief Secretary to the Treasury

David Laws MP

Leader of the House of Lords, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster

The Rt Hon Lord Strathclyde

Minister without Portfolio (Minister of State) *

Baroness Warsi

* Unpaid
Also attending Cabinet meetings:

Minister for the Cabinet Office, Paymaster General

The Rt Hon Francis Maude MP

Minister of State – Cabinet Office (providing policy advice to the Prime Minister in the Cabinet Office)

The Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP

Minister of State (Universities and Science) – Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

David Willetts MP

Leader of the House of Commons, Lord Privy Seal

The Rt Hon Sir George Young Bt MP

Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury and Chief Whip

The Rt Hon Patrick McLoughlin MP
Also invited to attend Cabinet meetings when required:

Attorney-General

Dominic Grieve QC MP
Privy Council

The Queen has also been pleased to approve that the following be sworn of Her Majesty’s most honourable Privy Council:

George Osborne MP

Dr Liam Fox MP

Dr Vince Cable MP

Eric Pickles MP

Jeremy Hunt MP

Chris Huhne MP

Michael Gove MP

Caroline Spelman MP

Andrew Lansley CBE MP

Andrew Mitchell MP

Danny Alexander MP

David Laws MP

Philip Hammond MP

Dominic Grieve QC MP

Owen Paterson MP

Cheryl Gillan MP

Baroness Warsi

[Dasquian Belargic]

Men and former, failed leaders of the Conservative party :rolleyes

[Captain Untouchable]

It's a coalition government, with representatives from other parties. We have an MP for the Green Party. And yet, no one thought to make her Minister for the Environment, or of Energy and Climate Change? Way to miss the opportunity to earn yourself some credibility / respect points there, Dave. >_<

In other news, we're gonna need to come up with one of those hip and trendy relationship titles for Clegg and Cameron, like Brangelina, or whatever. For some reason though, the only one I can come up with is "Dick". I wonder why... :mischief

[Dasquian Belargic]

Cleggeron, Clameron..

I'm loving Theresa May as the Equality Minister :rolleyes