Hung Parliament in British elections
posted at 9:30 am on May 7, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
The one result that the UK dreaded has apparently come to pass. The Conservative Party won a plurality of seats in parliamentary elections yesterday, but they cannot claim a majority. Labour suffered an embarrassing defeat and the Liberal Democrats did much worse than expected after a surprise showing by their party leader, Nick Clegg, during the debates. That doesn’t mean the Tories will control the next government, however, and it’s more likely that another election will soon be required.
First, though, it does appear that David Cameron will have an opportunity to form a government first, as Clegg insists that Conservatives won the right to try:
Shortly after the news that the UK had its first hung parliament since 1974, the Liberal Democrat leader said that the Tories should now prove that they are “capable of seeking to govern the national interest”.
Mr Clegg’s comments appear to put to an end the possiblity of a Lib Dem and Labour coalition. …
Mr Clegg said: “I have said that whichever party gets the most votes and the most seats has the first right to seek to govern, either on its own or by reaching out to other parties and I stick to that view,” said the Lib Dem leader.
“I think it is now for the Conservative Party to prove that it is capable of seeking to govern in the national interest.”
It could be days before the final make-up of government is decided. David Cameron has made no formal statement since the poll closed but had previously said he was “happy to talk” with other parties, including the Liberal Democrat leader, according to Michael Gove the shadow education secretary.
Some had wondered whether Clegg himself would win the right to form a government. Clegg, whom some called the “British Obama” for his campaign style and attractiveness to the youth vote, had set expectations high for the LDs, but in the end they wound up on the margins with only 53 votes. That helped Labour avoid a humiliating descent, but Gordon Brown’s party still had its worst election in more than two decades.
The British electorate clearly wanted an end to the Brown government, but perhaps didn’t quite get sold on Cameron. That puts the Tory leader in a tough position. At best, he’ll come up one shy of a majority, and potentially ten seats short of actual control. That will mean that he will have to have the explicit backing of either Labour or LD, or convince a few of their members to vote in support of his government. He has to get that together just to form the next government, which will require a majority vote in Parliament.
Let’s say he manages to succeed. How long can Cameron count on that kind of fragile coalition to hold together? He may surprise, but it seems more likely that the first tough vote on budgets or other policy will end up being a no-confidence vote that will bring another election. The other option would be for the two other parties to form a coalition, one that may be more natural than a partnership between Conservatives and either of them, but that would mean that the two parties explicitly rejected by the majority of voters in the election would then govern their country, a rather untenable position for the long term as well.
I’d guess that we’ll see a fresh election within a year, perhaps sooner.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I’m tellin’ ya – they should’ve voted Silly Party.
Midas on May 7, 2010 at 9:31 AM
Boss Hog?
artist on May 7, 2010 at 9:32 AM
I love that guy in the hat. :-)
Abby Adams on May 7, 2010 at 9:32 AM
Or Cameron will govern from the left to appease Labour and the Lib Dems. Which will damage the Tory brand and improve nothing in Britain.
Doughboy on May 7, 2010 at 9:34 AM
They probably wanted to lose this election, to allow the conservatives to do all the dirty work of cleaning up after the liberal progressives screwed everything up. Liberals do all the fun things like spend and the conservatives clean the mess up.
astonerii on May 7, 2010 at 9:34 AM
Who is this ‘Parliament’ fellow, and how do I keep my wife away from him?
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2010 at 9:34 AM
Clegg is a fascist? I did not know that.
LDs + Conservatives = not a viable government.
rbj on May 7, 2010 at 9:35 AM
Oh well, might as well accept the inevitable and institute Sharia Law run by a council of self-appointed muslim clerics.
Bishop on May 7, 2010 at 9:35 AM
Heh.
Abby Adams on May 7, 2010 at 9:35 AM
Knowing next to nothing about the British system, I can say with confidence I understood none of what you just said.
TheBlueSite on May 7, 2010 at 9:36 AM
Wow Ed.
First pussies, now hung…
Someones having a dirty month ;)
Odie1941 on May 7, 2010 at 9:37 AM
All hope is lost for the British Obama. May our own version suffer the same fate in 2012.
JammieWearingFool on May 7, 2010 at 9:37 AM
It’s their country and they can run it (or ruin it) any way they choose. I’m just glad that my Brit and Irish ancestors said “screw this” and left.
SKYFOX on May 7, 2010 at 9:38 AM
Exactly.
Doorgunner on May 7, 2010 at 9:38 AM
I dunno, but I hear he’s Funkadelic …..
Jerome Horwitz on May 7, 2010 at 9:38 AM
Who cares? It isn’t as though the Brits and us have some form of “special relationship” or anything.
We used to, of course, but now our wise, dear leader has declared it null and void.
MJBrutus on May 7, 2010 at 9:39 AM
I agree. I really thought Sinjin Wim Bim Fim Bim Sim Bim F’tang F’tang Ole’ Biscuit Barrel really had a chance. Oh well, next time maybe.
rihar on May 7, 2010 at 9:39 AM
Very Silly…
yubley on May 7, 2010 at 9:39 AM
Is it possible in the British system to have a minority government like Canada does now?
Mark1971 on May 7, 2010 at 9:41 AM
Can Cameron now claim he inherited this mess ?
cmsinaz on May 7, 2010 at 9:41 AM
Nope. Someone’s having a dirty mind.
itsnotaboutme on May 7, 2010 at 9:41 AM
“hung” – the press is obsessed with gay sex.
faraway on May 7, 2010 at 9:42 AM
Got the day off?
BadgerHawk on May 7, 2010 at 9:42 AM
The weirdo in the picture is the candidate from the Monster Raving Loony Party, and the other weirdo is the equivalent of a President Arlen Specter.
KingGold on May 7, 2010 at 9:42 AM
This is a fine mess, meanwhile the flames are eating through the door.
tarpon on May 7, 2010 at 9:42 AM
Well, Clegg wants to cut arms sales and EU trade agreements to Israel.
So, yeah, he’s from the same mold as Obama.
mudskipper on May 7, 2010 at 9:43 AM
Let Brown try to form a coalition, then hold another election in about a year – after a vote of no confidence.
OldEnglish on May 7, 2010 at 9:44 AM
I’m just glad to see Clegg fall on his face. Nothing but a carbon copy of George Galloway.
MadisonConservative on May 7, 2010 at 9:44 AM
Not sure he has enough flair, though…
alexwest on May 7, 2010 at 9:44 AM
Isn’t that sort of what we have here? Our British cousins just want them some of that Hopenchange for themselves.
GISAP on May 7, 2010 at 9:45 AM
If anyone needed an argument against a third party over here, here it is.
Vashta.Nerada on May 7, 2010 at 9:47 AM
That’s actually Flava Flav’s mom.
Patrick S on May 7, 2010 at 9:47 AM
Perhaps they should just give anarchy the old college try?
myrenovations on May 7, 2010 at 9:48 AM
Looks like Cameron is offering a deal with the liberal democrats. Obviously the conservative won the majority of the votes as Clegg said, and rejected labour. Might as well side with the majority. The ball is on Clegg’s court. Ugh.
cubachi on May 7, 2010 at 9:50 AM
Rules for blogging on subjects you don’t know much about:
1. Link to someone who does know something.
2. Repeat enough of what they say to pretend that the post is worth it.
3. Try and relate it to something you do know about.
4. Post a silly picture, in hopes of getting random clicks/comments.
Ed’s got this thing down pat. :-)
Abby Adams on May 7, 2010 at 9:51 AM
I give it 3 months before they have to call for a new election. I’ll be surprised if they make it as far as our election. I’m almost crossing my fingers & toes that Gordon Brown decides that what the British people are really itchin for is more Gordon, they’ll have another vote in 6 weeks.
Now either the Tories need to ditch Cameron, or he needs to have a come to the Baroness moment and remember what being a Conservative means.
lizzie beth on May 7, 2010 at 9:55 AM
“Well hung and snow white tan”
A Brit sang it, honest…..
GnuBreed on May 7, 2010 at 9:55 AM
The correct question is, does he hang left or right?
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on May 7, 2010 at 9:55 AM
All you folks out there who constantly complain about our particular form of a (primarily 2-party) Constitutional Republic, consider the alternative….
Apparently, in the British system, the folks against whom the majority voted could STILL end up in power. SPIFFY.
Animator Girl on May 7, 2010 at 9:56 AM
The answer: Shariah!
Akzed on May 7, 2010 at 9:57 AM
PS. Just replace Cameron with Hannan. DONE.
(Yes, I KNOW that would never happen. Allow me my fantasies!)
Animator Girl on May 7, 2010 at 9:58 AM
“He came on so loaded, man…”
Akzed on May 7, 2010 at 9:58 AM
I watched some of the BBC coverage of the election results last night on C-SPAN. When someone lost his or her seat in a race, that MP (member of Parliament, as I learned) was said to have been “decapitated.”
Here’s hoping and praying that we “decapitate” many Democrats, here, in November.
BuckeyeSam on May 7, 2010 at 9:59 AM
That’s what I’m hoping for, though I do t think the government will last a year. Bot only GB is arrogant enough to get trounced and think he’s precisely whatnwas being called
for, or more precisely, arrogant enough to try to cling to power.
lizzie beth on May 7, 2010 at 10:00 AM
I don’t agree with this at all. First of all, UK elections are first-past-the-post like most US elections are, so individual MPs are often elected by pluralities. In each constituency without a majority, you could argue that a majority of voters rejected all the parties.
To fully demonstrate how weak this notion is, imagine a group of people voting on what to eat for lunch. If 40% vote for KFC, 33% for McDonald’s, and 27% for Burger King, can you honestly say that a Burger Coalition was rejected by a majority of the voters?
I don’t want Leftists marginalizing conservatives and libertarians by counting us separately, and thereby giving themselves the plurality, and using your logic to justify telling us to shut up (which seems to be all they’re capable of doing).
The Monster on May 7, 2010 at 10:02 AM
As in America, “the youth vote” must be code for “the moron vote.”
You should have seen the brouhaha in the headlines area a few days ago when Peter Hitchens made the same point you did, and I agreed with him. I’ll paraphrase for you, “That is idiocy. You know nothing about British history or politics.” If Cameron becomes PM and does as you say, we’ll be able to see if our fears were correct.
DrMagnolias on May 7, 2010 at 10:02 AM
Fogghorn Clegghorn.
search4truth on May 7, 2010 at 10:06 AM
Ziggy Stardust. Great way to begin a Friday! That great song will play in my head all day. Thanks!
redwhiteblue on May 7, 2010 at 10:07 AM
Brilliant, jolly good, smashing, elementary, etc.
anticucho on May 7, 2010 at 10:08 AM
same here…
trailortrash on May 7, 2010 at 10:08 AM
Cameron ought to be replaced. He is a squish and RINO par extraordinaire.
nyx on May 7, 2010 at 10:08 AM
I can’t stand Clegg’s accent and ridiculous pauses in his speaking style. He sounds pompous. Does this make me a racist?
redwhiteblue on May 7, 2010 at 10:12 AM
Yes. This is what Bush’s liberal fiscal policies did here.
blink on May 7, 2010 at 10:12 AM
The “mao” lady has been working on Cameron’s campaign for months.
Weird huh….I guess commies win no matter what……
nondhimmie on May 7, 2010 at 10:12 AM
Cameron could not defeat zombie Brown and Clegg the buffoon decisively. I pray that he gets replaced.
nyx on May 7, 2010 at 10:13 AM
How many Brits awoke this morning and were disappointed to discover that a “hung parliament” had nothing to do with gallows?
txhsdad on May 7, 2010 at 10:13 AM
I hate it when my parliament gets hung.
search4truth on May 7, 2010 at 10:20 AM
The Liberal Democrats won 53 seats, and that’s down from the 63 they had in the previous parliament.
Emperor Norton on May 7, 2010 at 10:20 AM
Wizard show, old bean! :)
OldEnglish on May 7, 2010 at 10:23 AM
Hey Midas:
This is for you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31FFTx6AKmU“>
annoyinglittletwerp on May 7, 2010 at 10:24 AM
Europe has imploded! This is getting reaaaally interesting…
ernesto on May 7, 2010 at 10:24 AM
I agree that a third party is a Bad Thing (unless it splits the Democrat vote), but the situation there is somewhat different. We elect our head of government/state separately from our legislature, while their head of government is the leader of the largest party/coalition in their legislature. If we had the British system, Pelosi would be Prime Minister…
jic on May 7, 2010 at 10:25 AM
Exactly.
austinnelly on May 7, 2010 at 10:29 AM
Not a hung Parliament anymore.
The Liberal Democrats have gone into a coalition with the Conservatives.
Vatican Watcher on May 7, 2010 at 10:36 AM
Clegg’s plan is simple: put the Conservative Party in the position of having all the responsibility but none of the power, and elevate his own status.
JohnJ on May 7, 2010 at 10:45 AM
Cameron=McCain
Squishy indeed! And he was very McCain by reaching out to Clegg. I guess he was trying to do so in order to block Brown from getting the Liberal Dems behind Labour in mass, but I had thought there were some smaller independent groups, such as a few in Ireland, that Cameron could have roped in and then he would have the 346 plus a few more to boot.
As Vatican Watcher said they are not hung anymore, and this bodes for some very bad news for Great Britain. They desperately needed strong leadership and major ass reform. The people are rejecting 13 years of socialism provided by Labour and this is all the Conservatives could offer up? God save the Queen!
freeus on May 7, 2010 at 10:50 AM
Despite Cleggmania the LibDems got whacked. Clegg’s got to do a deal with Cameron to save his own job.
Gordon Brown’s epoxied his ass to the toilet seat in No10. They’re going to need a jackhammer to get that clown out.
JEM on May 7, 2010 at 10:53 AM
This is what happens when the “Conservatives” end up with a Frum approved leader who got help from former Obama advisors.
The most unpopular PM incumbant (Gordon Brown) in ages, an economic collapse, and yet the Tories can’t even win a simple majority in the House of Commons?? Pathetic.
A Lib Dem/Tory alliance would be the worst possible outcome. The economy will continue to tank, and it leaves the possibility for a Labour comeback under a new leader within a year.
Norwegian on May 7, 2010 at 10:59 AM
There’s a good chance the Tory party will form a coalition with the Unionists from Northern Ireland- their natural allies of years past.
One can only hope the Lib Dems don’t get into any govt here- not only are they far more radical than they portray themselves (a platform of drug cafes and legalised brothels wouldn’t have gone over with a majority of British voters but these are policies of the LDs- and that doesn’t even touch on the fact that NATO isn’t even mentioned in their manifesto). So I guess you really can say Clegg is the UK Obama. Furthermore the LDs want to change the UK’s generations old voting system (1st past the post) to proportional representation- a move that will harm the conservatives but boost his own party. Finally he is a staunch Europhile who wants to bring Britain closer to the EU and away from the US.
Closer ties with Europe is also a platform most Britons don’t want.
The election was sprung quite quickly with little time for facts to percolate through the media- a single TV appearance was enough to push the Lib Dems into the spotlight. As tiresome as it can sometimes be, there’s something to be said for the long campaigns of the USA.
Jay Mac on May 7, 2010 at 11:04 AM
Following the British elections makes me appreciate America’s system even more. Third parties, hung parliament, coalitions, no-confidence votes, separate elections, etc. etc. My head hurts from trying to figure it all out.
Side note: One of my good friends, who is really in to UK politics, and supports Labour (mainly because all her favorite British entertainers do) tweeted this lovely sentiment this morning: “I wake up to a conservative government…I want to go back to sleep” I think I should inform her that she lives in America.
laurakbarr on May 7, 2010 at 11:10 AM
Cameron’s Tories = Labour Lite.
Tzetzes on May 7, 2010 at 11:21 AM
Agree. However, it almost doesn’t matter. If you look at the positions of the parties (Tories, Labor & Lib Dem) they are all just shades of liberal on the issues. Cameron is a big disappointment to me. It seems he started out fairly conservative but shifted more and more to the left as the campagin progressed. I wonder if it had anything to do with the fact that he hired some of Obama’s campaign gurus to help him?
KickandSwimMom on May 7, 2010 at 11:25 AM
This is similar to Canada’s situation, where the Conservatives have held a minority government over two elections – it helps that the Liberals are ineffective twats (thank goodness) with Michael Ignatieff as leader.
Karthanon on May 7, 2010 at 11:27 AM
This is what happens when you have a government that doesn’t have a cleaner separation of powers.
ButterflyDragon on May 7, 2010 at 11:30 AM
I like what Daniel Hannan says, maybe he should run for a seat in the UK Parliament instead of the European Parliament.
zmdavid on May 7, 2010 at 11:36 AM
get RID of Cameron and run a better candidate in his place in a new election.
Daemonocracy on May 7, 2010 at 11:45 AM
Uhhh…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/election_2010/england/8663681.stm
:-o
Abby Adams on May 7, 2010 at 11:56 AM
Did anyone vote for Harold Saxon?
BobOfTexas on May 7, 2010 at 12:03 PM
Maybe Brits just want to stop government all together. Think of it as similar to American style gridlock. Most Americans prefer that to an active government from either side of the aisle.
Sultry Beauty on May 7, 2010 at 12:07 PM
This is why you NEVER, EVER want a third party!!! It got us Clinton. Look at the mess it leaves England. Do not like the British/Canadian system.
Voter from WA State on May 7, 2010 at 12:09 PM
Second look at Monarchy?
Blacklake on May 7, 2010 at 1:03 PM
No, it didn’t. The folks who voted for Ross Perot split into three camps: The ones who would have stayed home if he hadn’t run, those who would have voted for Clinton if Perot hadn’t run, and those who would have voted for Bush 41 if Perot hadn’t run.
38% of them would have voted for Clinton, 38% of them for Bush. Thus, Perot’s run made no difference in the actual outcome.
This ridiculous urban legend that Clinton got elected because of Perot needs to be stamped out. It’s flat-out false.
VekTor on May 7, 2010 at 1:11 PM
You want the OTHER guys to have a third party. If the UK didn’t have the hard left split between Labour and the LibDems, the Tories would never get power.
On the other hand, the Tories are a left-of-center party under Cameron, so do I really care? OH, and if it weren’t for UKIP, Cameron would have won a clear majority.
In other words, I remain convinced the party would be far better off juking right. But the party is convinced it’s losing because it hasn’t moved far enough left.
Ugh. I hate the politics here.
S. Weasel on May 7, 2010 at 1:12 PM
In my dreams: The Tories can’t manage to cut a deal with the LibDems, who then end up in coalition with Labour. They then have to set about taking the axe to their beloved public sector, raising taxes and cutting spending or the pound and ftse go into freefall and people riot like the Greeks — likely anyway. They can take the crap for the results of their own left-wing policies.
After a year they fall apart and go to the country again — this time the Tories, who have sacked the squishy Cameron, get in under a proper conservative leader.
Fortunata on May 7, 2010 at 1:30 PM
This, and the Negron thread in headlines, and you know it must be Friday. ROFLMAO!
John the Libertarian on May 7, 2010 at 2:04 PM
Nah, the Adder Party!
CurtZHP on May 7, 2010 at 2:33 PM
Why is Boss Hog shaking that guy’s hand in the picture?
Torch on May 7, 2010 at 2:37 PM
Overlooked in all the election coverage from the BBC, which is talking about the one Green party MP, the Scottish & Northern Irish parties, etc. etc., is this ranking of the popular vote:
1. Conservative – 10,706,647 votes (36.1%) +3.8% – 306 seats
2. Labour – 8,604,358 votes (29.0%) -6.2% – 258 seats
3. Liberal Democrat – 6,827,938 votes (23.0%) +1.0% – 57 seats
4. UK Independence Party (UKIP) – 917,832 votes (3.1%) +0.9% – 0 seats
5. British National Party (BNP) – 563,743 votes (1.9%) +1.2% – 0 seats
6. Scottish National Party – 491,386 votes (1.7%) +0.1% – 6 seats
7. Green – 285,616 votes (1.0%) -0.1% – 1 seat
…
Noteworthy is that the “evil right-wing” parties together grabbed an additional 2% of the vote over last election, a total of 5% of the vote, and the “ultra-evil” BNP vote was over 100% higher than last time, and twice as high as the Greens (who gained one seat in Parliament).
RD on May 7, 2010 at 3:10 PM
Boss Hog?
artist on May 7, 2010 at 9:32 AM
ROFLMAO !!!! I thought that too !!
cableguy615 on May 7, 2010 at 5:01 PM
This is similar to Canada’s situation, where the Conservatives have held a minority government over two elections – it helps that the Liberals are ineffective twats (thank goodness) with Michael Ignatieff as leader.
Karthanon on May 7, 2010 at 11:27 AM
Ditto that ! I hope the Lieberal party keeps trottin’ out those twats too, hopefully Harper will get a majority next time around.
As for my disgruntled friends to the south, I feel your frustration! We had our own “untouchable Messiah” whom the far-left and/or Canadian Media felt could do no wrong, his name was Jean Chretien (Teflon Jean or Jean Cretin I called him on occasion!)
cableguy615 on May 7, 2010 at 5:08 PM
Not surprising, since the differences between the three major parties was minimal.
irishspy on May 7, 2010 at 9:00 PM