Journalists seem to have got a thing about the triple lock today, talking about how they’ve dug it up or found it hard to find. So far be it from me to tell them what to read, but back in November last year I posted up the text on Liberal Democrat Voice. [Insert cliche of choice about bloggers and journalists here 
]
Anyway, here’s the relevant text again:
Conference agrees that:
(i) in the event of any substantial proposal which could affect the Party’s independence of political action, the consent will be required of a majority of members of the Parliamentary Party in the House of Commons and the Federal Executive; and,
(ii) unless there is a three-quarters majority of each group in favour of the proposals, the consent of the majority of those present and voting at a Special Conference convened under clause 6.6 of the Constitution; and,
(iii) unless there is a two-thirds majority of those present and voting at that Conference in favour of the proposals, the consent of a majority of all members of the Party voting in the ballot called pursuant to clause 6.11 or 8.6 of the Constitution.
Keep up with the latest news and analysis
about the Liberal Democrats with my
free monthly email newsletter.
I scour hundreds of blogs and dozens of media outlets for the best news and analysis - so you don't have to. It's completely free and you can leave the list at any time. So why not give it a try today?
You might also be interested in...
- Book review: The Liberal Democrats, edited by Don Maciver
- Since when is something debated in public, in front of journalists called “hidden”?
- Second Adur Conservative councillor switches to Liberal Democrats
- Liberal Democrats back campaign to free our postcodes
- Liberal Democrats launch green jobs manifesto pledge
RT @markpack: New post: The triple lock: Liberal Democrats and deals with other parties http://bit.ly/d5DGcF
So that’s a double lock
3/4 of MPs plus 3/4 of Federal Executive
or a triple lock
1/2 MPs plus 1/2 Fed Exec plus 2/3 Special Conference
or a quadruple lock
1/2 MPs plus 1/2 Fed Exec plus 1/2 Special Conference plus 1/2 members.
I really hope it doesn’t get to the quad option – a deal that can’t get 2/3 of a special conference should be junked
RT @matgb: @Heresy_Corner By "Lib Dems unprepared" you mean "some of the members"? – this looks well prepared to me http://bit.ly/95ZAaz
[...] conference, he needs to ballot the members. You can see why they call it the Triple Lock. This, courtesy of Mark Park: (i) in the event of any substantial proposal which could affect the Party’s independence of [...]
In effect, 3/4 of the parliamentarians and the Fed Exec has to happen or no deal will be done, because there’s no way that the country can hang on for weeks while special conferences and membership votes are organised. In brief, it’s steps 1&2 and a deal with the Tories, or simply a minority Conservative government right now.
I can’t figure out whether Clegg will seek an alternative deal with Labour if he can’t get one with the Tories. If not, then the minority Tory administration is the only game in town.
For those postulating pacts and deals: the triple lock – http://bit.ly/9updVo
[...] means the leadership can’t just jump into bed with any other party, there are rules (the “triple lock”). In summary, 75% of MPs and 75% of the elected [...]
CAN CLEGG PASS THE TRIPLE LOCK TEST? http://tinyurl.com/y8tfjml http://tinyurl.com/2v45dur http://tinyurl.com/2vngfwp #ukelection #ge10
CAN CLEGG PASS THE TRIPLE LOCK TEST? http://tinyurl.com/y8tfjml http://tinyurl.com/2v45dur http://tinyurl.com/2vngfwp #ukelection #ge2010
CAN CLEGG PASS THE TRIPLE LOCK TEST? http://tinyurl.com/y8tfjml http://tinyurl.com/2v45dur http://tinyurl.com/2vngfwp #ge2010 #takeitback
[...] coalition prior to Tony Blair’s landslide victory prompted the party to construct the Gordian triple lock, designed to prevent their leader from unilaterally making any deals that might compromise their [...]