This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8681624.stm

The article has changed 19 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Adonis condemns dissolution block Backlash over election vote rules
(about 1 hour later)
The coalition government's move to make it harder to dissolve Parliament is a "constitutional outrage", ex-Transport Secretary Lord Adonis has said. The new coalition government is facing a backlash over its plans to change the rules on how an election is called.
The Lib Dem-Tory plan will mean that 55% of MPs must approve such a move to get it through the House of Commons. The Lib Dem-Tory deal agrees to fixed-term parliaments which can only be dissolved with support from 55% of MPs.
Labour's Lord Adonis said it raised doubts over the coalition's legitimacy. Labour figures including Jack Straw and Lord Adonis say it is a "fix" and a "stitch up" - currently 50% of MPs plus one can trigger a no confidence vote.
Foreign Secretary William Hague defended the move, saying it was necessary to give plans for a fixed-term parliaments "credibility". Downing Street says Labour put through fixed-term laws in Scotland requiring 66% of MSPs to dissolve Parliament.
Liberal Democrat MP Andrew Stunell, who helped frame the deal, said it was needed to prevent an "ambush" on the Tories by all the other parties. The row comes as Prime Minister David Cameron puts the finishing touches to his ministerial team and heads to Scotland to meet First Minister Alex Salmond and other party leaders in Scotland.
The coalition agreement between the Lib Dems and Conservatives promises a "strong and stable" government, with elections held on fixed dates every five years. Five year term
'Ganging up' The prime minister has the power to ask the Queen to dissolve parliament at any time within a five-year period - which critics say benefits the ruling party.
The raising of the threshold for a dissolution vote is intended to prevent a move to hold an election earlier than that. The new coalition government has instead proposed to have five-year fixed term parliaments. But in a coalition agreement drawn up between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, it says legislation "will also provide for dissolution if 55% or more of the House votes in favour".
Currently a majority of MPs - 50% plus one - are needed to carry a vote of no confidence. In 1979 James Callaghan's minority Labour government fell after losing a confidence vote.
Four senior Labour figures - and, it is understood, some Conservative backbenchers, have expressed concern about the plans.
Former Transport Secretary Lord Adonis called it a "brazen attempt to gerrymander the constitution which calls into question the legitimacy of the coalition from day one".
He added: "If the legislation ever gets to the House of Lords, it will meet opposition of an intensity and bitterness not seen for many years. This is a constitutional outrage."
'Totally confused'
Mr Straw said the plan was "completely undemocratic and totally unworkable" while Mr Blunkett described it as a "stitch-up".
Labour former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer - a supporter of fixed-term parliaments told BBC Newsnight he feared it would result in a "zombie government" - as it would mean 53% of MPs could vote against a government but it would still continue until the fixed date.
But former Lib Dem MP David Howarth, a legal academic who drew up the original Lib Dem plans for a fixed-term parliament, told the BBC the vote of confidence and dissolution of Parliament were "entirely different things" and said Mr Straw was "totally confused".
NEW CABINET Who's Who: New government At-a-glance: Coalition policies No confidence threshold to rise Cameron in Scotland for SNP talks Send us your comments
In other countries with fixed term parliaments, if a government lost a vote of confidence the parties would have to try to work out a new government within the fixed term, he said.
He said critics had got "entirely the wrong end of the stick" adding: "This dissolution vote, the 55% for a dissolution, is not the same as, for a vote of confidence."
A Downing Street spokeswoman said the old rule would still apply to no confidence votes - but should a government be defeated, it would not automatically trigger an election, a 55% vote would be required to dissolve parliament.
She said the details would all be debated and voted on in parliament and the former Labour government had put through the fixed term legislation in Scotland which requires a 66% vote to dissolve parliament.
'Iffy politics'
There is also some confusion among constitutional experts. Professor Peter Hennessy, of Queen Mary University of London University, told the BBC it looked like "very very iffy politics indeed" and there was a "certain brutal efficiency... about traditional confidence votes that one is enough and confidence votes under our system trump everything else".
FROM THE TODAY PROGRAMME More from Today programme
But Professor Robert Hazell, director of the Constitution Unit think tank, told the BBC he understood the 55% threshold was intended to prevent the government from calling an early election without the consent of both coalition partners - effectively protecting the Lib Dems.
"It certainly won't prevent the opposition from tabling confidence motions on which the normal threshold of 50% will and should, continue to apply."
However Conservative backbencher Charles Walker has also expressed concerns: "This is perhaps just a little too much for our unwritten constitution to bear."
He added: "We have a quasi-presidential system here, without the checks and balances. This would be the loss of an enormous check."
The Conservatives currently have 306 out of 649 MPs - a 47% share.The Conservatives currently have 306 out of 649 MPs - a 47% share.
One seat, Thirsk and Malton, is empty, pending a by-election on 27 May, while Sinn Fein's five MPs have not taken the oath of allegiance allowing them to sit in Parliament.One seat, Thirsk and Malton, is empty, pending a by-election on 27 May, while Sinn Fein's five MPs have not taken the oath of allegiance allowing them to sit in Parliament.
It would be impossible for opponents, even if fully united, to muster the 55% needed to dissolve Parliament, unless at least 16 Tories rebelled against their party leadership.It would be impossible for opponents, even if fully united, to muster the 55% needed to dissolve Parliament, unless at least 16 Tories rebelled against their party leadership.
Lord Adonis said: "This is a brazen attempt to gerrymander the constitution which calls into question the legitimacy of the coalition from day one.
"If the legislation ever gets to the House of Lords, it will meet opposition of an intensity and bitterness not seen for many years. This is a constitutional outrage."
Labour former cabinet ministers Jack Straw and David Blunkett also condemned the move.
Mr Straw said the plan was "completely undemocratic and totally unworkable" while Mr Blunkett described it as a "stitch-up".
Labour former Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer - a supporter of fixed-term parliaments told BBC Newsnight he feared it would result in a "zombie government".
We have a quasi-presidential system here, without the checks and balances Charles WalkerConservative MP for Broxbourne Send us your comments
He said: "Assume 53% of Parliament vote against the Conservatives - that's what all the other parties equal excluding the Conservatives - they can't be removed.
"So if that were to happen a year before the last date for a general election we would have a... zombie government."
However, Mr Stunell, the Lib Dem MP for Hazel Grove, told BBC Radio 4's PM programme: "What the prime minister has given up with a fixed-term parliament is the right to go to the Queen at any moment and just call a general election. Obviously that's what a fixed-term parliament stops.
"On the other hand, if your threshold for a special case is only 50%, in theory it would be possible for the Tories to be ambushed by other parties, including the Liberal Democrats, ganging up against them...
"Although nobody in the partnership has any intention of doing any such thing, it was a small matter for us to say 'No, we accept your concerns and if we raise that threshold to 55%.'
Who's Who: New government At-a-glance: Coalition policies No confidence threshold to rise Cameron in Scotland for SNP talks
"That gives you the safeguard you want and that's the way we've proceeded."
Foreign Secretary William Hague also defended the move, calling it a considered "constitutional innovation."
But he said "Once you agree that there should be a fixed-term parliament, it is only fixed-term if there is some provision to really give it credibility to make it hard to dissolve parliament, other than exceptional circumstances, part way through its five-year term."
Constitutional expert Peter Hennessy, of Queen Mary, University of London, told the BBC he was concerned it was a question of "iffy politics".
"There's a certain brutal efficiency which everybody understands about traditional confidence votes, that one is enough and confidence votes, under our system, trump everything else.
"And if coalition politics means that you start re-writing the procedures of the House of Commons in this way - I really don't think it's on and I am really not in the least bit surprised that people are very worried indeed about it - it creates a very very poor impression for the new politics."
Charles Walker, Conservative MP for Broxbourne, said: "This is perhaps just a little too much for our unwritten constitution to bear."
He added: "We have a quasi-presidential system here, without the checks and balances. This would be the loss of an enormous check."