news just in...definitely hung parliament...no chance of conservative majority

[Heathcliffscathy]

according to the bbc

It's not fair but stability is traditionally seen as being more important, therefore the sitting PM as an individual has the chance to get his party and any other parties behind him. This is not a 'Labour' win, this is continuity of the PM. If the Tories supported GB (never going to happen but if...) then we would have a Lab/Tory coalition with GB as PM even though Tories got the most votes and would be the bigger party in the coalition.

If GB can retain the confidence of the House of Commons and have enough support to get his legislation passed (327 seats agreeing with him) then he gets to stay.

DC got more votes than him but he doesn't have enough to make sure his legislation is passed. One could argue the 'will of the electorate' was not to have a Tory Govt cos they didn't get a majority, so a Lib/Lab coalition headed by GB as the sitting PM would be more representative.

If you do some sticky electoral maths neither side can do it on their own with their traditional allies. The Lib Dems HAVE to decide it.

GB is PM until he resigns. He will resign if/when he loses the confidence of the Commons. ONLY once that has happened can the Queen invite someone else to form a Government.

Basically the problem here is that GB hasn't resigned because he thinks he has a fighting chance to form an anti-Tory alliance.

Because GB is the sitting PM. If Cameron was the sitting PM, he'd be staying in office while the parties work out what the hell to do.

The Labour party is no longer in government - it's GB on his own holding the fort until some deal is agreed so two or more parties combine with at least 326 votes (actually there's one seat where there hasn't been an election yet as the candidate died, dunno whether it's traditionally a safe seat for any party).

And if we end up with a minority government, or one with a very narrow majority, you'll end up with extraordinary scenes of MPs in hospital being sent over by ambulance to vote when the government is in danger of losing key legislation. Happened in the 70s.

Twoifbysea- thanks for replying to the question- but what were the comments? Do you have a link?

It's just that Labour policy re: benefits for single parents, IMO, as a single parent, are very generous. My DS2 is 6mths, and I am planning on going back to work but in the interim I have been well looked after under labour. Your comments came as a surprise so I wanted more specific info.

Thirsk and Malton traditionally safe Tory but it won't make a huge difference either way.

Cons could do it with 323 I think as Sinn Fein don't sit, which removes 5 seats from the equation, but they don't have that even if they call in the DUP...

Currently there is no govt. Parliament is dissolved. The job of the PM is still there but in many ways that's a red herring because that's held until the person resigns and that person is under no obligation to resign until they totally lose the confidence of the Commons.

A hung parliarment would probably be a good thing, it'll be a good practice in compromise and patience for the gonernment.

Interesting thiong is that ConLib coalition (left and right) should effectively produce something similar in policies and objectives to the Labour party :-) ex-Brown.

How ironic as Labour will start their search for new leader when we are through this!

Labour supporters are deluding themselves. Many more people voted against Labour than voted against the Tories. There is nothing progressive about the Labour party so the whole concept of this progressive alliance is a complete nonsense.

Plus, the only reason Labour got managed to get the number of seats it did is because of the embarrassingly predicatable voting pattern up here in Scotland. If I still lived in England I'd be furious at the mere thought of having policies pushed through on devolved issues wholly due to the election of a raft of Scottish Labour MPs.

gaelicsheep dont wish to be rude but I think that your statement above is entirely missing the point of the "game throery" being played out. Sorry to copy what I wrote in other thread:

Labour might be wise to sit back and renew themselves. Without GB they might look so much more attractive. Also they could drop some of their unpopular policies and adopt a few LibDem like policies (drop ID cards, add PR and maybe trident). They would then clean up much of LD support at next election in a year or two.
Also both Cons and LDs will be associated with period of weak Govt and Labour will then be able to cash in.

DC would do well to consider playing the same game.

No I see the point but I disagree with it. The ethos of the Lib Dem and Labour parties are poles apart. Labour is, these days, all about authoritatianism and state control. The Lib Dems are, predictably, libertarian and quite close in values to the more moderate Tories. I think a Tory/Lib coalition is a fantastic opportunity for a progressive and strong Government.

A new Labour leader would have zero resistance from the membership in ditching ID cards and adopting a few LD policies. You watch; Mandy is a crafty one and will reshape Labour to capture LD supporters.

Labour members never like the authoritarian labour party and that will go with NuNULabour to be formed. Mark my words!

Mandy must be licking his lips....

Just a minor correction to some comments. It is not true that Labour are no longer in government and that Gordon Brown is holding the fort on his own with the civil service. Labour very much remain in government. Alistair Darling is still Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Milliband is still Foreign Secretary and so on. Even those ministers who lost their seats at the election are still ministers until such time as new ministers are appointed, either by Gordon Brown or a new PM. However, the current ministers can't do anything other than respond to emergencies and deal with routine matters or there would be a huge outcry.

Being old enough to remember the last time we had a hung parliament, I don't agree with sbrickett that it will be a good thing. However, I suspect that the most likely outcome is that we'll have another general election later this year.

Isn't a hung parliament essentially what will happen at every election from now if we do introduce PR with no one party under overall control so coalitions will be common. We worry about the stability of the government and financial markets now but if this is what the populus want then we'd better get us to this uncertainty.

Unfortunately due to our relative lack of a strong manufacturing industry our biggest source of revenue is from the financial sector so the government does have to be stable in order to maintain their confidence other wise we'll all know about it.

I blame the crap teaching of history & politics in schools if people actually understood the ins and outs of PR they would realise what they had just voted for, lots of people seem to have this idea that once we have PR all the political parties will be friends and happily work with each other.
The majority of coalition governments such as Germany and Japan never survive their full term of office.

FWIW I can't see any coalition lasting more than 6 months max!the idea that they'll beable to put aside their differences for long enough to sort out this financial mess is laughable. Personally I don't care about the egos of individual politicians or the political parties and how many seats each of them have/want. Electoral reform is not this country's biggest priority at present , I want them to concentrate on the big issue which is the economy otherwise we'll be going the same way as Greece whose problems arise from the fact that they have been living well beyond their means for some time, just like us.

See that doesn't make sense to me. IF (and big if here) we were to have a Lab/Tory coalition shouldn't it be the leader of the party with the most seats that should be PM?

mumzy - I think you are arguing a similar point as me from an opposite direction. I'm not sure people thought the politicians would all happily work together in a hung parliament. I think the country has spoken and it is very clear what it said - we want you to grow up and work together. If they don't they will risk the economy further, yes but they have only themselves to blame. PR would mean Politicians have to grow up and learn to share which is what people, I think, want. The argument that 'politicians can't share so we shouldn't ask them to' is like 'bankers can't run the city well without large amounts of financial reward so we can't take bonuses away'

I thought that lib lab hook up wouldn't give them a majority anyhow.

Suppose it will con lib. Has gb resigned yet?

Good thing about PR is that smaller parties have more of a chance - but then look at some of the minority parties - BNP might win a seat under that system?

Nice for Libs as they'll have a bit of experience to take the next election but then we'll have to get used to lots more coalitions.

Its just the worst time to have a coalition or PR, the adversary nature of our parliament means they have'nt learnt to get along at all. Of course if the economy all goes to pot due to the lack of strong government we can lay the blame on them but then we would be the ones to suffer!

Just posted this on a thread less relevant than this one...

The labour party can't go on with a new head / PM (miliband or whoever) - another unelected PM....

Speaking as a gutted Tory i think Cameron should stick to his guns. The Liberals are going to infight over PR but no one really cares that much about it.

We are billions in debt and most folk just want to know what will be in their wage packets at the end of the month and things like NHS and schools. PR comes way down the left to all but a few shouty liberals.

Also - surely the Liberals will want this to work. If these talks break down they will be showing that PR doesn't work as no one can agree when we get hung parliaments.

I totally agree that PR or any other system is more likely to produce coalitions and if the LDs can't form a coalition they may as well admit that electoral reform is pointless.

PR by its nature means you are highly unlikely to get a majority and even then it tends to be parties like the UMP in France who are actually just umbrella parties. Many things need to change for PR to work - the biggest being that politicians NEED TO WORK TOGETHER. Quickly followed by a redesign of the commons

HellenaHandcart (love them name) is quite right - the Labour party haven't been elected, it is GB the person as PM who has the right to try to form a Govt. If he goes they all go, there's no 'Brown out, Milliband in, Labour stay in power...' option.