Talk:National Government (United Kingdom)

Incoherence
There's an incoherence in the paragraph about the Caretaker Government, where it is said that the government comprised Conservatives, Liberal Nationals and non-partisan figures, something rejected a little after where it is said that no Liberal Nationals take part to the government, What's the truth? I hope that somebody who knows better than me British political history would correct this problem... Checco 16:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I wonder if someone who uderstands English can take a look at the article. What is an heavy minority?


 * Would it be a minority that is disbalanced, perhaps?

Weatherlawyer (talk) 04:01, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I think someone's confusing the Cabinet with the Government as a whole. None of the prominent Liberal Nationals such as Ernest Brown and Lord Simon were included in the Cabinet but had posts outside. However it appears Lord Rosebery (Secretary of State for Scotland) was a Liberal National so there was possibly one in the Cabinet. Timrollpickering 19:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I would be glad if you explain me what's the difference between Cabinet and Government in the United Kingdom, indeed in Italy they're exactly the same thing. Another thing: from 1945 to 1968 (year of the final dissolution of the Liberal Nationals in the Conservative Party, right?), were there any Liberal National (aka National Liberals) members in the Governments led by Churchill (1951-55), Eden (1955-57), MacMillan (1957-63) and Douglas-Home (1963-64)? If yes, who were them? Checco 07:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The Government is the administration as a whole, encorporating all ministers, both senior and junior. The Cabinet is the supreme Government committee, comprised of the most senior ministers and taking decisions (you wouldn't try to run government by calling together over 100 ministers to discuss and decide detailed issues).
 * As for membership of later Conservative governments, it's not easily clear. Gwilym Lloyd George contested elections as a "Liberal and Conservative" but didn't really have roots in the Liberal Nationals. Looking at the lists I can't spot many others but this isn't so surprising - Churchill was both an unorthodox party figure and also had disliked the National Government heavily (not least because it became a means to exclude figures like him) and opted to draw in a mixture of equally non-loyal Conservatives (e.g. Woolton who had only joined after the 1945 defeat or Cherwell, a Churchill crony) and non-party men such as Ismay and Alexander. By the time Eden became Prime Minister a new generation of Conservatives was coming through the ranks whilst the National Liberals were increasingly just a label used by a handful of politicians with careers stretching back to the Liberal Party rather than as an alternative party for those entering politics. Timrollpickering 09:20, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Checco 12:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * In Britain, we don't vote for political parties. You are supposed to familiarise yourself with the person you choose. At the polling station you are presented with a list of candidates. And X marks your spot. More than one X vote is a spoiled ballot.
 * As there are only some 300+ successful candidates in a National Election, anyone who can wield the majority as one party can form a government. This is usually the person chosen by their political party as the Prime Minister, however the political party is run.
 * When a compromise is struck combining a majority of successful candidates from whatever original parties, this is called a coalition. There is no limit to how badly compromised it can be.

Weatherlawyer (talk) 04:01, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * People who argue we elect individuals not parties lost that argument a long time ago, probably when Peel issued the Tamworth Manifesto. De facto most candidates are allied to a party with a pre-existing leadership. MPs are not all indepedents who only decide upon the government once they pitch up at Westminster. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:02, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Dominions
"Britain declared war, supported by all of the Dominions bar Ireland (Éire)"

This may not be correct as in so far as I know Ireland was by that time no longer a Crown Dominion.

--Gramscis cousinTalkStalk 15:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Ireland had a tendency to talk the talk without walking the walk on a number of imperial matters. It stopped participating in a lot of Commonwealth activities in the 1930s but didn't actually take the steps to formally leave until 1949. As far as the UK in 1939 was concerned Ireland was a Dominion - most obviously it was the Dominions Secretary who handled relations with Ireland. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I have to agree, Ireland effectively ceased to be a dominion in 1937 with the passage of Constitution of Ireland. The article should simply read "Britain declared war, supported by all of the Dominions bar Ireland. Ejointhehouse (talk) 10:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)


 * That would be a rewriting of history. Ireland was still a Dominion at the time even if it acted like it wasn't one. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

National vs Coalition Government
I have cited John Buchan's fictionalized account in "The Gap in the Curtain" as it (1) is contemporary (1932) with the events described (2) Buchan was an MP close to the period (1927-?) (3) the events in the book, although using fictional names, are an accurate representation of the political climate of the times.D A Patriarche, BSc (talk) (talk) 20:19, 20 December 2014 (UTC)