Discussion Thread: Introduce fixed term parliaments

This is an archived discussion thread for the "Introduce fixed term parliaments" voting page. Voting, and this discussion thread, have now closed.  

B. Hulme 1 month ago

davidmoffat and 3 more liked this.
Too many terms in office have always in my 72 years experience lead to the arrogant thinking.. "we know best" and politicians stop "listening" to the electorate (until they need to get back the power they lost) as with William Hague at the laast change in parties.

pabarwell 1 month ago

11 people liked this.
Make all high ranking Politicians,Civil Servants,Lords Members and Consultants, disclose ALL charges and payments such that they may be treated as Normal Tax Payers. They could also be made to purchase their own Pension Scheme.

John Wood 1 month ago

awilliams66 and 11 more liked this.
The problem with this is that we might actually want or need a general election before the fixed term is up. Surely there should be additional provision for a general election if there was - say- a vote of no confidence in the government or perhaps a petition of a certain size from the public. 

Otherwise there's a danger that between elections MPs and governments would be even more complacent and unaccountable than they are now

Alan Hall 1 month ago in reply to John Wood 

johncombe and 5 more liked this.
In Norway the parliamentary term is very strictly fixed. Successful no-confidence motions cause the resignation of the government, but not a new election. The people have not lost confidence in parliament; parliament has lost confidence in ther government.
I understand that in Sweden an early parliamentary dissolution is possible, but then the parliament so elected ONLY LASTS FOR THE UNEXPIRED TERM OF THE OLD ONE, so the four-year cycle is preserved.

davidmoffat 1 week ago in reply to John Wood

1 person liked this.
When I made this proposal a long time ago I did make just such a provision. Either a 2/3 majority of the whole parliament (both houses) or a public referendum which could be called for by petition,etc. This is complicated and a lot has been edited out

John McCann 1 month ago

davidmoffat and 5 more liked this.
I would suggest a 5 yr fixed term to enable Governments to think and act longer term

Guest 1 month ago in reply to John McCann
 
4 people liked this.
I agree, 5 years would be better, and give the government more time to effect their policies and bring about change.

John Hamilton 1 month ago
A four year term as standard is long enough and would perhaps encourage a more dynamic form of government: also. the Prime Minister should only be able to stand for two terms. The ruling party would not then have the advantage (or disadvantage!) of an incumbent Prime Minister.

G Ellis 1 month ago

davidmoffat and 3 more liked this.
I have voted for all 5 as each one is important as another! Actually I like/agree with most of all the other issues on Power 2010!
I'm a Scot living in England.... and I LIKE England and it infuriates me that MPs are not addressing the 'Midlothian Question'. 
Good on You Power 2010! My thanks and gratitude to so many good changes in the offing!

John Duckett 1 month ago

3 people liked this.
The one problem I can see with this is that electioneering would begin in the third year and bore every one rigid. A three week campaign as now is more than long enough.

Paul Collett 1 month ago

davidmoffat and 4 more liked this.
To really stop the present farcical system we should elect parliament in stages, say 20% every year for a 5 year parliament , 25% every year for a 4 year parliament etc. This would stop the Prime Minister playing to the crowd.

Geof B 1 month ago in reply to Paul Collett

awilliams66 and 2 more liked this.
The problem with this, as has been all too evident in those local councils with 'election by thirds' (i.e. 1/3 of council elected every year, then a year without elections) is that difficult / unpopular decsions tend to be ducked, as there's always an election looming. Good government demands a degree of stability. I believe a drwaback of the US system is that the House is in an almost continuous period of electioneering, with deals being done to try to secure re-election.

Alan F Stevenson 1 month ago
It should be fixed at a year. However, MPs, ministers and PMs should be recallable within that time by petition+referendum.

Norman Christie 1 month ago 

davidmoffat liked this.
I agree. Contrary to common belief and parlance the UK is not not a democracy but a benign oligarchy reflect on Thatcherism and the miners' dispute in the 1980s. Authority remains with the unelected Head of State. The prime minister then exercises 'Royal Perogrative' and acts on the king or queen's behalf until he/she loses the majority in the UK Parliament. On losing the majority or a general election the incumbent returns their seal of office to the ruler who then appoints another to rule on their behalf. 
It almost sounds like a fairy tale written in Ruritania, but it is true.

peterleech 1 month ago

awilliams66 and 1 more liked this.
Stop all this nonsense we are seeing at the moment os " are we or are we not having an election" in a) March b) april c) May we all get political numbness and loose interest

Kathleen Steane 1 month ago

awilliams66 and 3 more liked this.
Where is the vote for a referendum on the Euro superstate, straight question, stay in or get out?

johncombe 1 month ago
This would take away the excessive power that a prime minister now has, at the moment we have what is virtually a temporary dictatorship. A fixed term parliament would give the government stability to work out its programme of say four years. A fixed term parliament would work best under PR, when the second most popular party would form a coalition to complete the fixed term of say 4years

Rachel 1 month ago

awilliams66 liked this.
I live in an area where the Leader of the Council has the dubious accolade of being the longest serving council leader in history (about 40 years now). As other posters have mentioned, the terms of all senior serving politicians should be limited. 8 years should be plenty enough for them to get things done. 12 at the very most.

Catherine Mulvie 2 weeks ago
I entirely support this idea for the reasons you have outlined. Political reform is a high priotity.Expenses is a rdherring in my view

RON C 2 weeks ago

davidmoffat and 3 more liked this.
All MPs should live in a block of Rent Free Standard Furnished Flats, supplied by the State whilst carrying out their duties in London. Any alterations or improvements should be at their own expence, NO SECOND HOMES TO BE ALLOWED. All expenses should be submited with detailed information, based on an newly formulated agreed list.

caritas reipublicae 2 weeks ago

davidmoffat and 2 more liked this.
"Fixed terms" should mean "the Prime Minister / Government can't decide when to call an election". 

A mechanism like that in Scotland, which provides for fixed terms but with the option to call an early general election on the advice of the Presiding Officer if a Government cannot be formed, would be preferable. 

Also, the Latvian system, which allows a referendum on an early dissolution to be held when triggered by the Head of State, would be worth considering

SackTheParties 1 week ago

davidmoffat and 3 more liked this.
While I agree that the timing of elections should not be subject to the whim of the Prime Minister, there is a problem with general elections per se. Even if the date of the general election is fixed, the government of the day will have a very different attitude to public opinion at the beginning, middle and end of a term. Towards the end of the term, government actions are overly swayed by the prospect of a upcoming election.

A better solution would be fixed-terms for MP's but with rolling by-elections. With a proportion of seats up for re-election every month, or quarter, there would always be a prospect of a change of government, and policy would be less affected by short-term electoral bribery.

A still better solution would be to separate the executive from the legislature. So, we would have fixed-term governments, but a continuosly changing parliament, preferably with the latter appointed by sortition rather than election to make it truly representative of the people rather than of political parties.

davidmoffat 1 week ago in reply to SackTheParties
This too in my original proposal

David Owen 1 week ago
There should be a fixed term of Parliament this would stop PM trying to go to the country when he thinks his party might win to keep him/her in power.

stan69 3 days ago
Apologies for the cut and paste...

This is (also) a noble suggestion, but unfortunately, like many of the proposals on here, it is a secondary concern to the much more pressing issue of reforming our currently totally undemocratic system of (electing) government. Apart from anything else, it won't happen UNTIL that system is reformed.

The same is true of the PR proposal. Gordon Brown is only talking about AV because he knows the game is up and that he needs to appear as a reformist to stand any chance of being re-elected. In reality, neither Labour or the Tories will ever voluntarily dismantle FPTP, it is how they stay on top.

The only way that any of the proposals currently in the top 5 would ever stand a chance of becoming a reality, would be after the introduction of a None Of The Above box on the ballot paper. There is an awful lot of ignorance flying around on this site about what NOTA is and how it would work. The truth is, it is THE starting point for dismantling our undemocratic system and taking the power back. The 'how's' and 'why's' are covered in depth on the NOTA-UK website: http://www.nota-uk.org

If the None Of The Above proposal doesn't make the top 5, it will be a tragedy for the fight for true democracy. Without NOTA in place, all the rest is largely unachievable.

So please vote for NOTA proposal, otherwise this noble POWER2010 mission is in danger of being all for nought: http://www.power2010.org.uk/votes/entry/a-none-...

Thanks for reading.

Ross 21 hours ago
This is an excellent idea. We should know when elections will be, and one side should not be able to time them for its own political advantage.

There will obviously have to be a rule to allow an extra election if there is a no confidence vote. This should however be for emergencies only; the original election date should remain fixed in order to avoid a Government proposing a no confidence motion in itself to get around the fixed term.freedomscaresme

1 week ago

From Twitter via BackType

@torybear Is Gordon going to call the election in two weeks? Bloody hope not:http://is.gd/8hUb3 < Not too late to vote http://bit.ly/bvoay4
Hide

freedomscaresme 1 week ago

From Twitter via BackType

@garygibbonblog @AndrewSparrow @OldHoborn ...makes Fixed Term Parliaments all the more appealing: http://bit.ly/bvoay4 #power2010