In agreement with David Davis, Big Brother Watch sees the mooted 55% dissolution rule as antidemocratic and undesirable.
The pseudo-defence given - that a vote of no confidence would continue to exist - is no real defence, as a government suffering a vote of no confidence defeat by a margin of 54.9% or less would be likely to say, "we'll take this on board, it's bad news - but there's no need to have an election because a dissolution can't be forced."
The rule change seems designed specifically to suit this Parliament, an unwise way to legislate. One cannot, for example, imagine Gordon Brown giving way to demands for an election, if this provision had been in place, and he had lost such a vote in the way described above.
What do you think? If a representative of a think tank or group, where does your organisation stand?
