United Kingdom election results thread

I

Icarus27k

Council Member
Apr 4, 2010
1,508
7
38
Really? No one? I understand it's Britain and all, but it's still kind of important.
 
SirJosephPorter

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
It looks like a minority Tory government, just as the polls predicted. No surprises there. But if hey really fall 21 seats short of the majority (as projected) it may be difficult for the Tories. Having lived in Britain for eight years, I am familiar with British politics. The smaller parties tend not to vote with Tories. The no. 4 party in the Parliament is the Scottish National Party (SNP), it is a party of the left.

The only fringe party which votes consistently with Tories is the Ulster Unionists, and I am not sure if they will have enough votes to give Tories the majority.

If not, they will have to form coalition with Liberal Democrats, and that could prove to be problematical. Britain may be heading for an early election.
 
FiveParadox

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
Of course, as the current prime minister, constitutional convention dictates that The Right Honourable Gordon Brown P.C., M.P. (Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath), the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, has the right to meet the newly-formed House of Commons and attempt to have The Queen’s Speech adopted (therefore obtaining a mandate from the Commons to continue to govern). It could accomplish this with the support of the Liberal Democratic Party of the United Kingdom.
 
SirJosephPorter

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
FiveParadox said:
Of course, as the current prime minister, constitutional convention dictates that The Right Honourable Gordon Brown P.C., M.P. (Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath), the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, has the right to meet the newly-formed House of Commons and attempt to have The Queen’s Speech adopted (therefore obtaining a mandate from the Commons to continue to govern). It could accomplish this with the support of the Liberal Democratic Party of the United Kingdom.
Click to expand...

He could. The question is whether Lib Dems will support Labour. If Tories do not get sufficient number of seats to form a coalition with Ulster Unionists, Lib Dems will get what they have wanted for decades, the role of the king maker. But it is not at all clear which party they will support in a coalition.

If Cameron had been a Thatcher clone, no way Lib Dems would have supported him. But I understand he is a moderate, centre right politician, nothing like Harper (who belongs to the hard right) or the Republicans in USA. Lib Dems may well decide to go with him.
 
FiveParadox

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
It seems — based on the coverage being provided by the British Broadcasting Corporation — that the prime minister intends to make some attempt to govern, or at the very least to be involved in a major way in the governing of the United Kingdom. One thing I find odd is that everyone in the United Kingdom seems to be under the impression that a coalition must be formed to create a Government; we’ve never had a coalition in Canada under normal circumstances, and our minority Parliaments have worked just fine.
 
SirJosephPorter

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
FiveParadox said:
It seems — based on the coverage being provided by the British Broadcasting Corporation — that the prime minister intends to make some attempt to govern, or at the very least to be involved in a major way in the governing of the United Kingdom. One thing I find odd is that everyone in the United Kingdom seems to be under the impression that a coalition must be formed to create a Government; we’ve never had a coalition in Canada under normal circumstances, and our minority Parliaments have worked just fine.
Click to expand...

Canada is an oddball in this respect; FP. Coalition is the order of the day over most of Europe.

If no party gets more than 50% of the seats (as is quite common in Europe), the wheeling and dealing begins to form a coalition. The side which can cobble together more than 50% of the seats forms the government (and it may not always include the biggest party).

The first act of the new government is to introduce a motion of confidence in the Parliament and get it passed. Once the Parliament expresses confidence in the government, the business of governing can begin.

But Canadian system is very rare (where the biggest party automatically forms the government).

So it wouldn't at all be unusual for the PM to see if he can form a governing coalition. And if Labour, Lib Dems and SNP together have a majority of seats, that is a real possibility (if Lib Dems are willing).
 
FiveParadox

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
SirJosephPorter said:
Canada is an oddball in this respect; FP. Coalition is the order of the day over most of Europe.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t seem to be the “order of the day” in the United Kingdom, where they haven’t experienced a minority government in more than three decades. Coalition governments are extremely rare in both Canada, and the United Kingdom, because of the normalcy of majorities; when a minority suddenly appears, the constitutional waters suddenly become a little bit less calm.

SirJosephPorter said:
If no party gets more than 50% of the seats (as is quite common in Europe), the wheeling and dealing begins to form a coalition. The side which can cobble together more than 50% of the seats forms the government (and it may not always include the biggest party).
Click to expand...
This isn’t exactly how it works in the United Kingdom. Whether or not he can form a coalition, the first chance at government is the inherent right of the incumbent prime minister. Gordon Brown will have the first chance to govern, regardless of whatever deals are struck by the opposition parties, unless he decides to resign or the Queen’s speech is rejected by the newly-formed House of Commons.

SirJosephPorter said:
The first act of the new government is to introduce a motion of confidence in the Parliament and get it passed. Once the Parliament expresses confidence in the government, the business of governing can begin.
Click to expand...
This is the same in Canada; the Government introduces the throne speech, and it is debated for six sitting days before a motion for an address in reply to the speech is adopted (or rejected). The United Kingdom Government introduces the Queen’s speech, and it is debated for a predetermined period of time; routine Government business continues to take place during this period, and it can take up to two weeks for the House of Commons to come to a decision on whether or not to adopt the address in reply to the Queen.

SirJosephPorter said:
But Canadian system is very rare (where the biggest party automatically forms the government).
Click to expand...
That isn’t our constitutional system.

If our prime minister holds less seats than the Liberals after the next election, but no party holds an overall majority, it’s irrelevant who the largest party in the House of Commons would be; Stephen Harper would in any case have the right to meet the newly-formed House of Commons and attempt to pass a throne speech. He could have seven seats and the Liberals would have one hundred fifty, but if the prime minister could secure the House’s support, he would still have a democratic mandate to govern.
 
SirJosephPorter

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
FiveParadox said:
This isn’t exactly how it works in the United Kingdom. Whether or not he can form a coalition, the first chance at government is the inherent right of the incumbent prime minister. Gordon Brown will have the first chance to govern, regardless of whatever deals are struck by the opposition parties, unless he decides to resign or the Queen’s speech is rejected by the newly-formed House of Commons.
Click to expand...

As it happens, I was in Britain when they had a minority government, that of James Callahan of Labour. Callahan governed by coalition, first there was the lib – lab pact (between Liberals and Labour), then with smaller parties (like Ulster Unionists and Welsh nationalists).

Labour governed by coalition for three years form 76 to 79. When Labour could not find any coalition partners, it lost a vote of no confidence. But that was unlike what we have in Canada currently, where Conservatives govern without any coalition.

This is the same in Canada; the Government introduces the throne speech, and it is debated for six sitting days before a motion for an address in reply to the speech is adopted (or rejected). The United Kingdom Government introduces the Queen’s speech, and it is debated for a predetermined period of time; routine Government business continues to take place during this period, and it can take up to two weeks for the House of Commons to come to a decision on whether or not to adopt the address in reply to the Queen.
Click to expand...


Throne speech is not the same as confidence/no confidence motion. Throne speech indirectly expresses confidence in the government at the end of six days, by voting on the throne speech.

No confidence motion is a one sentence motion, ‘this house has no confidence in the government’ (or something similar). There is debate on it and then it is voted upon. No confidence motions are quite common in Britain, there is at least one in each session of the Parliament. Opposition parties will introduce a no confidence motion even if government has a majority and it has no chance of passing, just to have a debate. James Callahan lost a no confidence motion (he had survived one just a couple of weeks earlier) and that triggered an election. They seem to be rare in Canada. Maybe it is more difficult there to introduce a no confidence motion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom