There is much debate about what will happen if we have a hung parliament on Friday morning.
The FT forecasts 281 Conservative and 266 Labour seats this morning. The Guardian has 276 and 269 respectively. Some say there will also be a late Tory surge. Maybe there will. I doubt it will deliver anything close to a majority.
Unless things change we know three things.
The first is that David Cameron will declare victory, however bizarre that might sound.
The second is that the LibDems say they will talk to the Tories and seek to form a government with them. Past evidence suggests that they will and that in combination they might command 310 or so seats.
And come 27 May they will find themselves trying to pass a Queen's Speech.
And only then will we know if we will still have a Conservative lead government.
The Conservative desire to rule is so strong I cannot see them giving up without trying to form a government, because they will (probably genuinely) believe Labour should let them do so.
The crisis will come if Labour lets them rule. It can do almost to change events until the Conservatives have tried. That's what the rules and conventions say.
This one is going to run.
But what worries me is what the social reaction to a Conservative attempt to form a government that cannot command a majority might be. I hope it will be calm. Anything else will only play into their hands.
So my message is a simple one: keep calm. Parliament must have its way.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I anticipated trouble on our streets in 2010 when the Coalition made clear their austerity plan, and it was obvious who would be bearing the brunt of it.
That happened in 2011, the shooting of Mark Duggan being the spark, and I think it would have continued if Osborne hadn’t eased up on austerity (though the government pretended it hadn’t) in 2012/13.
If we end up with another 5 years of a Tory led government intent on implementing those £12bn social welfare cuts, then more unrest is inevitable, I fear.
Well I hope Labour keeps its nerve and holds the line.
There are obviously 2 people’s in this country (not forgetting the Greens and UKIP and others of course) and any truly democratic Government would rule that way although the Tories in particular are likely to smell blood and go all the way.
But honestly – if its that close – then FPTP is finished. We cannot keep going on like this.
If you think FPTP is finished then what are you proposing?
If we can’t go on like this then what would you replace FPTP with? Most other systems seem to produce this sort of result every time.
I’m not proposing anything am I?
I’m merely reflecting on the inadequacies of a system that will by a thin margin allow certain ideas to rule over others even though a sizeable amount of the population disagree with it.
The FPTP enables absolute power. That is wrong. But how to change it – I have no idea yet.
Is that OK?
Parliament doesn’t work.
It is arguable that it ever has, or ever will.
You vote for whoever others allow you to vote for, frequently you are voting, by proxy, for the undemocratic rich.
A democracy that allows the extremely rich to buy their own politicians is a contradiction. Such is our democracy: a contradiction.
I would tend to agree with your assessment Richard, the thought appalls me but I am trying to see the positives. Cameron has made all the preparatory changes for an undisguised neo-lib administration, restriction of open access to legal remedy, statutory reduction of trades union capabilities, constraint of free expression, construction of a peon class etc. In the next phase we can look forward to the sequestration and privatisation of social housing and the continuing decline of the NHS until privatisation offers ‘the only answer’.
And the small nugget of gold I am trying to hold on to? Surely, at some point in the next five years the electorate will come to see the lies and obfuscation of professional politicians for what they are. If they do we might be able to create a more transparent, responsive system that has some greater relevance to the way ordinary people live their lives. First past the post has had its day, the arcane, archaic procedures at Westminster are not fit for purpose. Rigging the system to ensure majority government corrupts true democracy. What follows? I have no idea but it must place the majority first.
And how is this choice by the electorate imposed?
Will we see the rise of a Syriza?
“In the next phase we can look forward to the sequestration and privatisation of social housing and the continuing decline of the NHS until privatisation offers ‘the only answer’.”
This is my fear if the Tories an LibDems do their thing again-the financialisation of everything that hasn’t been financialised thus far. The repulsive sight of a Liberal Minister (Steve Webb) advocating for the bedroom tax has destroyed what respect I may have had for the liberals yet I may have to vote for them ‘strategically’, though my present mood is saying: ‘sod it, vote Green and at least a Green vote is statistically registered’.
I agree with this from what I’ve read. What we should consider is that this will also be a big scenario that the Conservatives are already planning for, so we should ask, how are they going to plan? The obvious option is to use their media to discredit parties of the left if they block a vote of confidence, and if there is unrest, to blame the parties of the left for that. How to counter that?
Good question
I have no obvious answers, yet, largely because they are just wrong in law
What about convention, which usually holds sway? Will the Queen be asked to deliver a Queen’s Speech for a party that cannot carry a majority?
Even if the Queen’s Speech is not voted down, it will be known that the Tory party cannot deliver. Even if the content is vacuous, the inevitable will follow.
To avoid this, it has even been suggested that someone other than the Queen could deliver the speech. Mayhem will follow.
The Leader of the Lords will deliver it, I gather
I doubt the Conservatives will want to run a real risk of losing a vote on the Queen’s Speech, but who knows: they might challenge the others to vote them down. Labour might do the same, if they can, but the Conservatives have the first go.
Parliament reassembles on 18 May, so there is the possibility of a confidence motion before 27 May, if Labour believes it and its friends can win a vote against the Conservatives and their friends, and then win a confidence motion themselves. (Otherwise we will have a second general election in short order, which I doubt many parties want or indeed could afford.)
I doubt Cameron will resign unless it is very clear that there is a left-leaning majority against him, either a coalition or something more informal involving the SNP. (Brown did much the same in 2010.)
He will resign if he knows he can’t command a majority
Minority gov.
Civil unrest.
Gov of national unity.
Suspension of civil rights.
Suspension of fixed term parliament.
Arrest of leaders of opposing organisations.
Unions banned.
How about a Labour- Conservative Coalition?
Not formally perhaps, although thathas happened in other countries.
It would mean the Centre of both parties voting to keep out
the nationalists and lefties.
It would mean the end of choice
And the rule of the neoliberal elite
No thank you