BBC BLOGS - Nick Robinson's Newslog
« Previous | Main | Next »

Two possible blocs

Nick Robinson | 08:56 UK time, Friday, 7 May 2010

An intriguing interview just now with Peter Mandelson.

He conceded that the country had voted for change and accepted that replacing Gordon Brown was one of a number of options on the morning after the night before.

He is one of a number of cabinet ministers who have been preparing the ground for a Labour/Lib Dem coalition. To turn their dream into reality, they would have to prove to the country that a coalition of two losing parties would be a more stable government than a Conservative minority government.

The BBC projections show the shape of two possible rival power blocs:

LAB: 261
LD: 55
SDLP: 3
ALLIANCE: 1
Possible total: 320

CON: 306
DUP: 8
IND UN: 1
Possible total: 315

Non-aligned:
SNP + PC: 9
GREEN: 1


Comments

Page 1 of 2

  • Comment number 1.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 2.

    Nick, you seem to completely ignore the possibility of a Conservative-Liberal coalition.

    CON: 306
    LD: 55
    Possible total 361

    i.e. a massive majority, unlike the two scenarios you propose.

    Do you not think this is a possibility?

  • Comment number 3.

    Nick,

    Rather than look at how the constitution functions from the basis since universal suffrage was introduced, how about comparing it with how it functioned in the 19th century?

    After all the traditions of parliament date from even before then.

    How did the great ministries function in a similar circumstance? Was there such a circumstance in the era of Disraeli and Gladstone?

  • Comment number 4.

    So the LibDems, may want electoral reform as a price for support.
    But less than 24% voted for them (and electoral reform).
    So where is the democratic voice here?

  • Comment number 5.

    Interesting day ahead, Nick

    All the talk of the public rejecting Mr Brown is possibly misplaced. This is not a presidential election - our system allows voters to choose from party manifestos - i.e. policies they wish to see implemented.

    If you drew a Venn diagram to show policy overlap between the 3 main parties, there would be substantial overlap between Labour & LD and the Conservative bubble would be quite isolated.

    A progressive centre left set of policies is what the people have clearly voted for.

    Let it be so.

  • Comment number 6.

    Great: so you have an election with a specific leader of Labour: hey ho ... lets get rid of him!

  • Comment number 7.

    I heard a figure of 15% of votes in this election being postal/fraud votes.

    As suggested by other posters on this blog, it would be nice to see the figures broken down to constituency so we could gauge some idea of how many seats have been swung by fraud.

  • Comment number 8.

    Mandleson would throw his own granny overboard to cling on to power!

  • Comment number 9.

    If "IND UN" refers to Sylvia Hermon, your calculations are wrong. Hermon resigned from the UUP specifically because of their proposed alliance with the Tories. So it's safe to assume that she would not enter into any kind of alliance with David Cameron.

  • Comment number 10.

    Amazing that anyone would want to pick up this poison chalice. If we are to solve the economic crisis, the pain will reflect on whichever party or party group does the unpopular but necessary things.

    It must be that the benefits of being at the Parliamentary trough, even for a short time, outweigh the unpopularity it will bring long term.

    It is also astonishing that having a hung Parliament is interpreted by some as an indication that people wanted PR - nobody had PR on their ballot paper - every vote was individually a vote for someone to win. The result of PR will be we have hung Parliaments for ever.

  • Comment number 11.

    If the Lib Dems did join with Labour after Clegg promised that he would side with the party that won the strongest mandate (i.e. most seats and votes) would that be the fastest broken promise in UK electoral history?

  • Comment number 12.

    Clegg could destroy his party if he goes with Brown. He stated flatly that he would align his party with the party which had the biggest mandate - which is assuredly the Tories. He would be hounded by that assurance for ever....

  • Comment number 13.

    Is this a case that many have suspected that the BBC wanted an Anyone But Tories result. Why should it be automatic that the Lib Dems side with Labour?

    If they were really serious about stable government then the Lib Dems should be talking with David Cameron not to a desperate and defeated prime minister who will say anything to cling on to power

  • Comment number 14.

    Gordon Brown would have to stay on as PM at least long enough to win a confidence vote before he could be replaced as Labour/coalition leader.

    If Brown resigned as PM immediately after calling election, and without having won the confidence of the incoming House of Commons, the Queen would have no option but to invite David Cameron to form the next government. And Cameron would then have the right to demand immediate fresh elections, which would probably punish any backroom deals by Labour or the LibDems.

  • Comment number 15.

    #2, Con-Lib pact

    I see two problems with this - the first being the Conservatives' open refusal to countenance electoral reform, and the second being the reaction of a large part of the LD core vote to a Con-Lib coalition, including myself.

    Am I alone in thinking that what we as electors have achieved through our system is to produce an outcome where there is no stable coalition possible?

    There is a clear moral mandate here - for a progressive Lab-Lib pact, which would have 52% of the popular vote, and both parties of which are in favour of electoral reform.

  • Comment number 16.

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

  • Comment number 17.

    If Conservative has 36% of the public vote, how can they dare say they have won, when 64% of the country has voted another party?

  • Comment number 18.

    Gordon Brown hinted that last night!

  • Comment number 19.

    If Sinn Fein are not able to vote (if they choose not to be sworn in) does that reduce the amount of seats required to 322 rather than 326? It doesn't change the maths on your blocs above but does make it rather closer.

  • Comment number 20.

    How exactly are the Tories claiming a mandate? The electoral system which they support - I don't - requires them to have a parliamentary majority which they don't have. And they only have three percentage points more than they did at the 2005 election. The only reason they have gained so many seats is because they started from an incredibly low base.

    The Tories need to realise that the reason the British people didn't trust them is because they come across as smug and arrogant with a seeming entitlement to power. No, power and trust has to be earned, and they haven't shown themselves to be worthy of it.

  • Comment number 21.

    What is the next step if it's a hung parliament ? I voted for Labour but I am against the Liberals that's why I didn't vote for them. In fact I blame the current state of the nations fall into disrepute and lawlessness on Liberal values. So why would I have voted for Labour if I had known that if they miss out they would form a 'gang' to beat up the party who has democratically come out on the top of the tree. What next, the silver and bronze in an olympic event combining their scores and electing to share the gold medal ? Man City and Man United combining their points tally to take the Premier League title back to Manchester. It's pathetic. The conservatives have the most seats why isn't it a formality for them to get in power ?

  • Comment number 22.

    "So the LibDems, may want electoral reform as a price for support.
    But less than 24% voted for them (and electoral reform).
    So where is the democratic voice here?"

    Erm, they got 24% of the vote but less than 10% of the seats. Where is the democratic voice there?

  • Comment number 23.

    Well Nicholas... we shall wait and see, I guess.... "To turn their dream into reality, they would have to prove to the country that a coalition of two losing parties would be a more stable government than a Conservative minority government."

    You know, on reflection.... I'm not sure they need to prove anything to the country. Quite the contrary.

    Barring the whole thing imploding in on itself, when these pacts break down, as they all do eventually, all they, as professional politicians, have to do is convince each other. The public have had their say and if they play their cards right, they effectively arent going to get another one for another five years.

    The next five years are going to stink to high heaven anyway, and whoever forms the government will probably get booted out after this parliament, so what do they have to lose? Nothing. All they have to keep on doing is governing by news cycle and talking the talk.

    The public cant do a damn thing about it. Nothings going to happen, there wont be any riots in the streets there wont be any uprising... the electorate will just take it on the chin. They havent got the stomach for it.

    I for one would not be in the least bit surprised at one of two outcomes; Brown stays put as Clegg & Co sell out and DO prop up a rump Labour administration or Brown gets the boot, replaced by either Balls or Johnson or Milliband and we still end up with the IMF being called in, being propped up by the LD's, who will probably get the PR bribe they wanted.

    Eitherway... the markets will probably decide for them in due course. I'm just relieved that the end results arent going to affect me directly for the next couple of years....

    Maybe Athens isnt quite looking so bad this time of year...

  • Comment number 24.

    Our areas are changing in Britain. Those huge areas which voted Labour have a big immigrant / Asian population who historically haven't voted. However, they are all supporters of Brown and they have sent round a missive to their communites to turn out this time and to vote Labour. Conversely, many English people, disgusted at the way our country has become under Labour, have moved abroad in the last few years. Most of them would have voted Conservative apparently. So, we have foreign born people moving here and voting Labout - as predicted but nobody is allowed to say that I suppose.

    The English indigenous population have moved out of those areas to more rural traditionally English places who vote Conservative.

    The silly people who turned up at the last moment are mostly students star struck by Clegg or militant Labour voters (typical students) but there may have been a majority of Conservatives - who knows?

    Personally, it is obvious to me that the country would be behind David Cameron to become our Prime Minister, albeit of a small majority, and for another General Election down the line sometimes when he and I would hope he will be rubberstamped this time as our real Prime Minister.

    Fingers crossed.
    I am sure the business world wants David Cameron - and I wonder what the Queen wants (rhetorical question as I think she would be true blue, don't you?).
    What I don't want is Harriet Harperson in charge - I just cannot contemplate that under any circumstances - dreadful!

  • Comment number 25.

    Will the rush of ex mp's selling their second homes effect the housing market

  • Comment number 26.

    LD 23% of vote, 1% seats. This is one-man-one-weighted-vote. LD+CON must push reform through.

    And Nick, your acquiring a politician's spin. Mandy didn't accept Brown to go as an option; he didn't deny it. If you ask him directly and he refuses to answer clearly it's not for you to put words in his mouth, even if they are already on the tip of his tongue. It's bad enough we have to put up with Chinese Whispers from the politicians.

  • Comment number 27.

    Labour may do well to let the Consevatives in whilst they select a new leader and the Conservatives have to make all the nasty decisions and become very unpopular. WIthin 2 years Labour could be back in power for another 10+ years

  • Comment number 28.

    4. At 09:19am on 07 May 2010, Chris H wrote:
    So the LibDems, may want electoral reform as a price for support.
    But less than 24% voted for them (and electoral reform).
    So where is the democratic voice here?

    -- Labour also wants the electoral reform (whether the same type or not). Conservatives do not. If you just go on that issue... it is 36% to non-reform and around 50% for reform (excluding the other parties). So which is which now?

  • Comment number 29.

    This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

  • Comment number 30.

    As Peter Mandelson is appointed and therefore receiving a salary one presumes he is a Civil Servant and employed under those terms and conditions. One, I hope he is taking leave either paid or unpaid for the time he has taken on the party campaign trail away from his job. Two, as a Civil Servant he should not be taking a political stance. If some of his staff did what he is doing they would be sacked. Three for someone who has no mandate from the electorate why continually refer to him?

  • Comment number 31.

    I am sure that Labour will string a deal together with the Lib Dems. However none of the pundits has recalled those words of Mervyn King that whoever governs next could become so unpopular that they might be out of power for a generation. If I was David Cameron I would sit back and let Gordon Brown and his toadies cling to office for a little while longer.

  • Comment number 32.

    Is your Independent Unionist Sylvia Hermon?

    I presume so as your figures add to 645 (i.e. 5 Sinn Fein MPs)

    Wouldn't she be a Labour supporter from her past voting record?

  • Comment number 33.

    I Look forward to the re-match :-)

    Frankly, it looks as though the people have voted for electoral change at the very least, giving the balance of power to the smaller parties, so providing a new government simply introduces the necessary change to the voting system then calls a new election, while holding firm in the fiscal arena, people should be satisfied

  • Comment number 34.

    Mandelson "conceded" no such thing, and I am getting really quite annoyed at the way your interpretation of the conversation is being reported as though it were the substance of the conversation.
    You asked "Is Permutation A possibe?" and received as answer words to the effect of "There are all sorts of permutations, the possibilities of which I am not going to discuss".
    Jumping from that to "Mandy says Gord can go" is bordering on misrepresentation, IMHO.

  • Comment number 35.

    DeepingDavie 5

    'A progressive centre left set of policies is what the people have clearly voted for.'

    In England they've voted decisively for a Conservative government. It isn't tenable for the Scots to hold way over the English electorate when they have their own parliament.

  • Comment number 36.

    A progressive centre left set of policies is what the people have clearly voted for.

    Let it be so.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rather you than me, Davie boy. I'll be a very amused spectator from the sidelines when it all goes pearshaped inside 12 months and, to quote a line from Two And A Half Men, you end up leaving "with your gonads in a guppy bag".

    The people have spoken, indeed. Are you colour blind as well? Have you seen the political colour of the map? Its a shambles and you're just spinning the same old crap.

    Anybody know how many of the seats UNITE bought have been declared? Did Jack Dromey get elected? That other geezer from UNITE in Redbridge?

  • Comment number 37.

    Dear Nick

    As a member of Labour's NEC, I am fascinated to hear with what authority Lord Mandelson is talking about a change of Labour Party leadership as an option for the discussions about to start concerning the government of the country.

    What is of interest is that the Liberal Democrats leader, Nick Clegg, will be meeting his new parliamentary party and the party's federal executive this weekend.

    I'm standing by my phone.

    Peter Kenyon
    http://petergkenyon.typepad.com/peterkenyon/

  • Comment number 38.

    DeepingDavie 5

    'If you drew a Venn diagram to show policy overlap between the 3 main parties, there would be substantial overlap between Labour & LD'

    You'd certainly get a great deal of overlap in the areas of being morally bankrupt and putting party interest before that of the country.

  • Comment number 39.

    Right, my comment goes live, is instantly removed - technical problems again, like last week? It's not in breach of your house rules - put it back on.

    Here's the basics again: Nick, you have been utterly wrong on everything throughout this campaign. today you appear to be unable to count. A Lib/Lab pact *cannot* deliver an overal majority. it's not a combination that can give either stability or can reflect the democratic will. Labour lost. Labour lost. How hard is it for you to grasp this? Dave has won a narrow victory and the *only* valid outcome is for him to become PM, today.

    Stop talking up this *coup* being put forward by Mandy and Kinnock.

    and stop censoring debate, BBC.

  • Comment number 40.

    I didn't vote for Labour, to be honest as much as anything my vote was against Gordon Brown.

    However I find it very hard to understand how it could be considered anything other than legitimate for a coallition of partys that combined received over 50% of votes to initiate a Government. Surely more legitimate than one formed by a single party who gained less than 2 of 5 votes and do not hold a majority of seats. (I believe this no matter who the coallition of party's are formed from)

    That being said Lib-Lab-Green has a nice modern ring to it

  • Comment number 41.

    So the LibDems, may want electoral reform as a price for support.
    But less than 24% voted for them (and electoral reform).
    So where is the democratic voice here?

    -------------------------------------------------
    The same applies to those of us who are disenfranchised by living in a 'safe' seat. Surely you want to feel that your vote counts and if there are 24% of the population that want to vote Lib Dem, their views should be taken into consideration? Given the issues the country has to face and assuming that we live in a mature democracy surely its not beyond the realms of fantasy that we can expect politicans to work together for once ... is it?

  • Comment number 42.

    12. At 09:24am on 07 May 2010, bonzodog wrote:

    Clegg could destroy his party if he goes with Brown. He stated flatly that he would align his party with the party which had the biggest mandate - which is assuredly the Tories. He would be hounded by that assurance for ever....
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    Certainly has. He most definately made a rod for his own back. It will be very interesting to see which way he jumps. Damned if he does, damned if he doesnt.

    Deliciously ironic.

  • Comment number 43.

    I could live with Mandelson as PM and Vince Cable as Chancellor as the embryo of a coalitioin Government.

  • Comment number 44.

    Much greater emphasis needs to be put on the fact that the Tories cannot have it both ways. They will apparently not support electoral support favouring keeping first past the post. So saying they have won is simply not right, they have not got to 326 - if they won't support reform then they have failed as much as Labour and Lib Dems. Why do the Tories think they should govern and keep the present voting system when it has NOT given them the required number needed by the rules.

  • Comment number 45.

    Stealing "RockingRobin's" thunder...

    Call an(other) election.

    Taxi for Brown, Clegg and Cameron!

  • Comment number 46.

    Good Morning Nick and thank you for your contributions to this fascinating few days in British Political History.

    Nick, could you please shed some clarity on the winners and losers of electoral reform?
    We heard from Mr Tebbitt only a few days ago saying the Conservatives stood to lose a lot from proportional representation and knowing this will never sign up (?) to Nick Cleggs and the Liberal Democrats No.1 policy for many many years.

    In addition, could you explain the democratic systems coalition governments advocate when they invade a country?
    Do we impose PR or first pass the post?

    Thanks.

  • Comment number 47.

    20#

    "The Tories need to realise that the reason the British people didn't trust them is because they come across as smug and arrogant with a seeming entitlement to power. No, power and trust has to be earned, and they haven't shown themselves to be worthy of it."

    Oh god, they're still out spinning the same old crap... Trust? Labour? You're having a laugh.

    Paaaathetic, utterly pathetic. If I were stood next to you and you came out with that tripe, I'd gladly empty a bucket of icy water over your head.

  • Comment number 48.

    #10. At 09:23am on 07 May 2010, croydo wrote:

    "Amazing that anyone would want to pick up this poison chalice. If we are to solve the economic crisis, the pain will reflect on whichever party or party group does the unpopular but necessary things."

    National government anyone?...

  • Comment number 49.

    N

  • Comment number 50.

    In all of this talk of Lab/Lib coalition surely Nick Clegg has to consider that a large proportion of his voters actually voted Lib Dem because they wanted Labour out. For him to assist in them remaining in power is unsupportable and if there's another election in short order he could find himself with even less seats as his voters won't forgive him.

  • Comment number 51.

    I agree with your comment DeepingDavie, if you view this election against the backdrop of recent economic circumstances, the UK press taking a consistent 'anti-Brown' stance (and Browns clear difficulty in finding a voice within a media savvy world PR world), and the unsurprising but vague calls 'for a change' after thirteen years of Labour government, the election result itself demonstrates a distinct lack of enthusiasm for Cameron.

    One could argue that under the circumstances any Lib/Lab coalition would have at least some validity. Sadly we live in a nation without a formal written constitution and shall have to wade through the muddy electoral waters in order to ensure that we adhere to 'convention' at least

    In terms of media hype, the immediate press hysteria following Nick Clegg's reasonable performance during the first TV debate appears to have translated into absolutely nothing. This represents a clear victory against the sensationalist press and their ongoing desire for 'personality driven politics'.

  • Comment number 52.

    Gordon Brown wants power at any cost, you can tell by the way he is going about things, it`s obvious after 13 years in power under Tony Blair he is desperate for qualified power to do what is in his head. A one man band?
    After 13 years I do not think we are better off, I think we are worse off, and have gone downhill a lot compared to other countries in care. I cannot believe how the country has taken him in, I would have thought it would have swung against him, my constituancy has changed for the better now, although not Conservative we are now Liberal with a decent fellow who lives in my area. Labour has no chance here now, they have been in long enough, and were getting complacent!

  • Comment number 53.

    Lib-Dems may be suffering at around 23% of turned out voters - but the Tories have so far only secured around 36% - dramatically short of a majority of voters! Even worse, in terms of the total electorate, they can only muster around 24% so far.

    Why is it that those that don't turn out are supposed to simply not count? Not turning out is surely an indictment of the system and represents either an active dissent towards it or an apathy that must surely be fueled by an overwhelming concern that voting is a waste of time and energy.

    Either way, the make-up of the seats and Tories holding many in less densely populated areas mean that out of all voters who turned out we are so far looking at about 36% voting conservative, which means 64% of voters stood against Cameron. Where are we supposed to draw our conclusions?

  • Comment number 54.

    Nick, are the Sinn Fein seats being taken into consideration, as their permanent absence means that Cameron could quite easily get a majority with DUP help?

  • Comment number 55.

    axxx, you're right. There are actually only 646 seats, as Sinn Fein members don't sit in the house of commons. Moreover, one of those seats is the speaker's. The speaker doesn't vote except in the case of a tied division, in which case he votes with the government. There are, therefore, effectively 645 seats. The number needed for a majority is 323, not the 326 that everybody keeps talking about.

  • Comment number 56.

    It will be a disgrace if Lib-Dems decide to prop up this discredited Labour Party, which clearly has no mandate to continue.

    It only goes to show, if you want a three horse race, you end up with a three legged horse.

  • Comment number 57.

    Surely there needs to be a change of viewpoint (learning from democracies where coalitions aren't seen as scarey); if a Labour - LD coalition emerged, it would have been elected with well over 50% of the popular vote, compared to around 35% for the Conservatives - is that not a more democratic mandate?

  • Comment number 58.

    If Sinn Fein don't take up their seats does that mean a party only needs 322 seats to have a working majority??

  • Comment number 59.

    Nick, what would this election be like under the old boundaries?? I fear it would have been a decisive win for the Conservatives.

  • Comment number 60.

    On current numbers, the percentage of votes are as follows Con 36%, Lab 29%, LibDem 23%. The percentage of seats are 44%, 38% and 8%. 23% of the vote but only 7% of the seats? That's fair!. Funny how some peoples votes appear to mean less than others.

    My lib dem vote is apparently only valued at a quarter of the worth of a conservative vote. Wow, glad I voted!.

    And funny how no-one is commenting on this disparity, come on BBC pull your finger out.

    This is why we need proportional representation, so the balance of power more properly reflects the votes cast.

  • Comment number 61.

    Yes, just heard a listener phone in to radio prog. She would like to see the winner win, ie David Cameron.

    How on earth can you put two losers together, ie Labour and Lib Dems. and make a winner?

    Your Majesty, please ask David Cameron!

  • Comment number 62.

    Labour can scheme their schemes, the Liberals can dream their dreams, but the Conservative party should be left to get on with the job of sorting out the mess that Gordon Brown has created.

  • Comment number 63.


    Two things happened last night:

    (1) Labour lost its mandate to govern
    (2) The LibDems performed so poorly that they lost any moral right to try to force a change in the electoral system, just because it happens to suit their self-interest.

    By tonight, I expect to see Cameron in Number 10 at the head of a (just) minority government.


    Anything less is unacceptable.

  • Comment number 64.

    #4. At 09:19am on 07 May 2010, Chris H wrote:
    "So the LibDems, may want electoral reform as a price for support.
    But less than 24% voted for them (and electoral reform).
    So where is the democratic voice here?"
    What absolute muddled reasoning!
    I know plenty of people who claim to vote Conservative or Labour, who agree that electoral reform would be fairer. This was a vote for a local MP in parliament and an associated party in government. It was not a countrywide proxy for referendum on whether we should have electoral reform. To argue otherwise is either disingenous or plain ignorant.
    Unfortunately, there are probably more than one or two politicians elected today who will exhibit the same kind of viewpoint.

  • Comment number 65.

    Nick, you have been up all night.

    I hope you haven't broken any EU Working Time Directives.

    Thanks for all the updates. Now get some kip!

  • Comment number 66.

    A Labour/Tory coalition (the mere thought of which has somehow been banned by the BBC - let's see if this comment passes moderation...) would have the numbers for tackling the deficit in a broadly-agreed way and without too much politicking.

    It has happened in Germany, it could happen here.

  • Comment number 67.

    Under the constitutional settlement The Queen must act.

    And because of the uncertainty, if not imminent collapse of the bond markets (see Peter Peston's blog) this needs to be as soon as possible.

    We need a National Government of Labour, Conservatives and Liberals - a grand coalition to save the Nation from financial collapse.

    This is urgent and needs to be done TODAY!

  • Comment number 68.

    "In England they've voted decisively for a Conservative government. It isn't tenable for the Scots to hold way over the English electorate when they have their own parliament."

    Last time I checked, our country was called the UNITED KINGDOM.

  • Comment number 69.

    11. At 09:24am on 07 May 2010, Mark_WE wrote:
    If the Lib Dems did join with Labour after Clegg promised that he would side with the party that won the strongest mandate (i.e. most seats and votes) would that be the fastest broken promise in UK electoral history?
    --------------

    No that would be Tony Blair's Things can only get better promise - tehy got worse

    36. At 09:37am on 07 May 2010, Gerry Mandering wrote:
    A progressive centre left set of policies is what the people have clearly voted for.
    ------------------

    No that is what Scotland, Wales and The North East voted for. The majority of England voted Conservative.


    I for one would not be in the least bit surprised at one of two outcomes; Brown stays put as Clegg & Co sell out and DO prop up a rump Labour administration or Brown gets the boot, replaced by either Balls or Johnson or Milliband and we still end up with the IMF being called in, being propped up by the LD's, who will probably get the PR bribe they wanted.

    ------------------------

    I think this is quite likely - Clegg and the Lib Dems hacve always been Labour Lite and that will not change. Labour have won so many seats as teh Unions and militant activists got more people out to vote whichis what teh Conservatives needed to do more.

    Our main problem is 5 more years of UNITE running the country via Jack Dromey's wife. Can imagine it at night in the post coital bed - Harriet love we're having some problems destroying the economy can you pass a law to make strikes and economic disruption easier. OK Jack Darling...

    Nightmare

    Oh and Nick saw you on TV last night - Specsavers mate please.. those glasses do not do you any favours

  • Comment number 70.

    Nick Clegg can't form a coalition with labour as this would go against his declaration that the person with the most votes has the right to try and form a government. Therefore surely he would have to support the tories.
    Also, if we have a look at the share of the vote, lib dems are only slightly behaind labour, showing that it is not who you vote for but where you cast your vote geographically that counts, which surely shows anyone who believes in democracy that the electoral reform sought by Nick Clegg and the lib dems is the best way forward for this Country.

  • Comment number 71.

    Calm down everyone - at some point today our new Prime Minister, the Rt Hon David Cameron will some out and tell us all what he proposes to do as our leader, in the way of forming a new government and leading the country away from and out of every kind of disaster.

    Clearly, everyone needs to get something out of this election otherwise change will not have been achieved.

    All I want is to see 'good riddance' to you know who!

  • Comment number 72.

    England has clearly voted for a Conservative government. Scotland and Wales have their own devolved parliaments. England should not be run by a coalition whose major interests lie outside her boundaries.

  • Comment number 73.

    It would be very nice if the constituency results included spoilt ballots.

    In my constituency the votes for the 5 candidates added up to exactly the number of votes cast, yet I know there was at least one paper with "None of the Above" written firmly across it!

  • Comment number 74.

    Scotland did not vote for change.

    This enforces the argument that the Torys should not have a mandate over Scotland. I also agree that the majority of England decidedly voted for "change".

    If there was a Tory alliance government, maybe the devolved powers to Scotland, Wales and NI should be enhanced further.

  • Comment number 75.

    @ post 41 "So the LibDems, may want electoral reform as a price for support.
    But less than 24% voted for them (and electoral reform).
    So where is the democratic voice here?"

    I totally agree with you.

    The mere fact that such a minority party could use the present situation to try to force a change in a centuries-old voting system, just for their own benefit, is the strongest recommendation we could have had to abandon further talk of PR.

    Cameron has the largest number of seats and now must be allowed to form a minority government.

  • Comment number 76.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 77.

    Why does one party need a majority? Can't these people discuss things and compromise like adults?

  • Comment number 78.

    Chris H wrote
    So the LibDems, may want electoral reform as a price for support.
    But less than 24% voted for them (and electoral reform).
    So where is the democratic voice here?

    The point is that the number of votes they have polled is not reflected in the number of seats. If you were to divide up the seats based on voting percentage it would read:

    Conservative = 230
    Labour = 185
    LibDem = 147

    This seems a little more democratic to me

  • Comment number 79.

    Nick, I saw your 'interview' with Mandleson. What he actually said was that he wasn't ruling anything in, or anything out. It was clear that what he was actually trying to get across was "I'm not answering that question at this stage".

    I do wish you would all stick to reporting what's really happening, rather than trying to give 'your public' something interesting to mull over. Personally, I find the election of our next government interesting enough without making stuff up.

  • Comment number 80.

    43. At 09:40am on 07 May 2010, alan mark bush wrote:

    I could live with Mandelson as PM and Vince Cable as Chancellor as the embryo of a coalitioin Government.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------

    You must be abroad then... :-)


    Incidentally... I dont think Mandy can be PM, as he wasnt elected as an MP, he's a member of the HoL. PM has to be from the Commons, IIRC...

  • Comment number 81.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 82.

    #43. At 09:40am on 07 May 2010, alan mark bush wrote:

    "I could live with Mandelson as PM and Vince Cable as Chancellor as the embryo of a coalitioin Government."

    But could the markets, and how long would it last before the left-wing of the Labour party started to demand what Vince Cable knows he couldn't deliver either budget wise or party politically wise, how long before the right-wing of the Lib-dems start demanding what Mandelson knows he simple can't deliver party politically wise. Such instability will not be good for the UK...

    Call an(other) election.

    Taxi for Brown, Clegg and Cameron!

  • Comment number 83.

    I think the next few days will be known as "that long but single weekend"

    (With apologies to the great Roman historian Tacitus)

  • Comment number 84.

    if the tories are allowed power it would be against the mandate the uk IS 4 NATIONS and 2 have outright selected Labour and only england has chosen conservatives and not outright. and so the government will be decided and will ignore half of the UK WALSE AND SCOTLAND WILL be forced to have a government that has been selected by a miority conservative party from england this is not democratic at all in fact it is a farse if a liberal tort pact is formed it is still a very minor % from SCOTLAND with one tory and with well how many liberals are in scotland. this is shocking
    all the commentators are saying that england wont stand for a minor labour government but what about scotland and walse that have or is our voice silent and not worth as much as the english voice ????

  • Comment number 85.

    11. At 09:24am on 07 May 2010, Mark_WE wrote:
    If the Lib Dems did join with Labour after Clegg promised that he would side with the party that won the strongest mandate (i.e. most seats and votes) would that be the fastest broken promise in UK electoral history?

    ================================
    They are politicians, you should have listened more carefully: What Clegg said was that the party with the strongest mandate would have the right to seek to form a government.
    i.e. Cameron would have the right to try to offer Clegg enough to either support or form a coalition. Not an automatic right to support.

    Devil is always in the detail.

  • Comment number 86.

    I posted this on possibly the wrong blog but in terms of explanation of voters wishes...
    Divide total votes for each party by number of seats gained and Conservative seat takes approx 35,000 votes Labour seat approx 33,000 votes and LibDem approx 126000 votes something wrong with voting system here!
    Why do these figures never get used - total votes cast rather than the percentages?

  • Comment number 87.

    8. At 09:23am on 07 May 2010, Chris Burniston wrote:
    Mandleson would throw his own granny overboard to cling on to power!

    -----------------------------------------------------

    No Chris, Mandleson would through your Granny overboard and then charge you for it.

    His own Granny knows better than to answer the door to him.

  • Comment number 88.

    hmmm... in a pure proportional system (no threshold) the BNP with half a million votes would be likely to scoop more than 10 MPs... and they are now the fifth largest party in the country... scary.

  • Comment number 89.

    Greensleeves, it is hilarious to watch you twisting yourself ever further into fantastical knots of denial in an attempt to fit reality to your conviction that immigrants/young people/the BBC are responsible for every ill that befalls us.

  • Comment number 90.

    68. At 09:56am on 07 May 2010, Le Gooner wrote:

    "Last time I checked, our country was called the UNITED KINGDOM."

    Until the unfairness caused by devolution and the West Lothian question is sorted out, the demands for English affairs to be determined by English MPs will grow massively.

    Fine to have UK affairs determined by UK MPs but not as we have it.

  • Comment number 91.

    le gooner so many contradictions

    It isn't tenable for the Scots to hold way over the English electorate

    althogh the fact that the tories have only been voted for in england and not decisivly at all labour still have a large presance

    and so this suggests that it is ok for the english electorate to hold walse and scotland that is half of the UK that has voted outright labour to be forced under a tory government when clearly it is not what is wanted ???? labour are more that entitled to form a government 2 of the 4 UK nations has chose them outright no questions

  • Comment number 92.

    I am a labour voter and would hate to see a Tory government but it seems to me that the decent thing is for Cameron to accept a timetable to a new election under PR in 3 years time, via a LD coalition.

    Lib Lab arguably not got the mandate, nether has Conservative minority administration, if the Tories want a stable responsible government then they have to do whatever it takes to gain LD support, even if it mean that they lose power in the long run.

    Do the decent thing Gordon and Cameron.

    J

  • Comment number 93.

    'stable and secure government' is what we need in these times. I hope that Gordon Brown picks up the phone soon to Nick Clegg and gives him the promise of a referendum on electoral reform and also an assurance that he will resign from the leadership of labour woithin the next six months. This then will allow the Lib dems to go into governemnt on a shared platform ... something they cannot do with the Tories!

  • Comment number 94.

    If it is to the advantages and the will of the people with the real hidden power and influences over both parties, there may be a loose Labour-Tory alliance.

  • Comment number 95.

    There is already plenty of anger in England about having Scottish MP's voting on issues that only affect English constituents.

    This anger will be magnified if 40+ Scottish Labour and Liberal MPs are propping up a minority government who are imposing laws on England that does not affect their own constituency/country. At least Cameron does have a mandate within England to make laws for England.

  • Comment number 96.

    In accord with the present 'first past the post' system, my newly-elected MP actually got but 45% of the votes cast in this constituency.

    Why does the same not hold good for parliament as a whole? There should be no question of any party other than that with the MOST seats forming the government, even if they face stormy times should the others all gang up on them!

  • Comment number 97.

    73. At 09:58am on 07 May 2010, Tom Jones wrote:
    It would be very nice if the constituency results included spoilt ballots.

    In my constituency the votes for the 5 candidates added up to exactly the number of votes cast, yet I know there was at least one paper with "None of the Above" written firmly across it!

    -------------------

    They are listed as rejected ballot papers and are not counted as votes which is why the votes cast total adds up to the 5 candidates as any spoiled papers don't count towarsd that total

  • Comment number 98.

    sconned, you voted for your local MP not a national government. If you think that is unfair you should have actually voted lib dem this time even if they're diametrically opposed to what you believe, as they are the only party who want to reform the way that these votes are held.

    Germany has had a PR type system since the war and constant "hung parliaments" and it hasn't stopped them becoming the largest economy in Europe.

  • Comment number 99.

    After the fiasco of ppl not being able to vote,or running out of ballot papers.Robert Mugabe has offered some election observers,it says on his blog,they talk about me lol

  • Comment number 100.

    24. At 09:32am on 07 May 2010, Greensleeves wrote:

    Those huge areas which voted Labour have a big immigrant / Asian population who historically haven't voted. However, they are all supporters of Brown and they have sent round a missive to their communities to turn out this time and to vote Labour.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Actually I think you’ll find the Lib Dems are the ones who very often put Asian candidates in to mixed areas such as mine in the hope of dividing communities on race/religion lines. I’m very pleased to say it didn’t work in my area.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    24.The English indigenous population have moved out of those areas to more rural traditionally English places who (sic) vote Conservative. Personally, it is obvious to me that the country would be behind David Cameron to become our Prime Minister
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    You’ll be amazed to know there are still some white British people living in cities – you should come and visit sometime! People in rural areas have always voted Tory, this is nothing new.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    24. I am sure the business world wants David Cameron
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Would that be the business world which includes the bankers who got us into this mess in the first place?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    24. I wonder what the Queen wants (rhetorical question as I think she would be true blue, don't you?).
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I really don’t give a t*** what the Queen wants – there shouldn’t be an unelected wastrel at the head of our proud country.

 

Page 1 of 2

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.