How do you feel about a hung parliament?

[T_i_B]

I thought I'd ask the question as I've had e-mails from both Avaaz and 38 Degrees asking this question. Both websites are mulling campaigning for that outcome but how would you vote to deliberately get that outcome?

Here's some of the text of the Avaaz e-mail asking me to vote in a poll on the matter

Chances of a “hung parliament” are rising by the day, with no one party getting an outright majority. According to the polls, more people would prefer a balanced outcome to any one party to ruling alone. But powerful opinion-formers in the tabloid media and the City are portraying this as bad for Britain.

Should we run a non-partisan “Who’s Afraid of Democracy” campaign to oppose scaremongering about a hung parliament, and to support the idea of two or more parties coming together in a Reform Parliament to confront the challenges we face with progressive solutions -- from building a green economy and the public services to reforming and cleaning up politics?

[Anarcho-Socialist]

1. the scaremongering seems to be unevenly distributed on the political spectrum

The City and the right-wing media know that the prospect of a Cameron government being propped up by Lib Dem votes is unlikely, and correctly assume that a formal or informal Lib-Lab pact is more realistic.

If the Tories do well next month and are a few tantalising seats short of a majority, they could possibly seek an unholy alliance with the DUP. But such a move would have potentially catastrophic consequences for Northern Ireland. Also even then the Tories would be vulnerable to losing their majority through by-elections, defections, and splits (especially if Europe as an issue comes into play).

Labour and the Lib Dems have the potential of entrenching a permanent centre-left majority in government. I imagine that prospect strikes fear into the likes of Rupert Murdoch and the City.

[TheBigotBasher]

3. A Lib / Lab pact is not a certainty either.

Liberal Democrat rules require a conference to decide on any pact. In the mean time Gordon Brown can simply choose not to resign as Prime Minister and tough it out a Leader of a minority Government.

The Queen does not call for another Prime Minister unless the existing one resigns.

If the Liberal Democrats decide on a Con / Lib pact the PM can request another General Election, or be defeated a confidence vote in the House, which would also create a General Election. If the Lib Dem conference decides to go with Labour, then a pact can be formed, however that may not give much room for negotiation as Brown will have filled his cabinet and the Conference will have mandated a Lab / Lib pact.

[T_i_B]

10. Well we now have a Hung Parliament

And the Daily Fail is scaremongering about it just as much as ever.

They might be better off asking why their masters in the Tory party failed to secure an overall majority. Although that might involve asking questions about the effectiveness of hysterical scaremongering, smear campaigns and the importance of Samantha Cameron.

[LeftishBrit]

2. I feel fine about a hung parliament...

better than the Tories getting in with a huge majority of the seats and a minority of the votes! (Or even Labour doing so, as shown by the actions of Blair.)

I would prefer a Labour/Lib Dem coalition, or a minority Labour government bolstered by LibDem support. But even a Tory minority government would be preferable to one that can run amok with no checks.

'Hung parliament' situations can go to extremes; in some countries with extreme forms of proportional representation, small and sometimes very right-wing parties can hold a minority government hostage, and have power way out of proportion to their actual share of the votes. But our system is far too much the other way. Both extremes distort and thwart democracy.

[dipsydoodle]

4. Why ? Are they thinking about recreating

Tyburn Hill gallows ? Might be good time.

[T_i_B]

5. That reminds me...

I need to do a "Who's Your MP?" thread as well.

[dipsydoodle]

6. Claire Ward

for a few weeks anyway. :rofl:

Main home Barnet /north London but had a second home in London because of "late night sittings" A taxi would've sufficed. Cow.

[non sociopath skin]

7. Seems the best of the realistic options at the moment

The Skin

[mwooldri]

8. The opinion formers and the City want it "easy".

A coalition government will mean that they won't be able to curry favour so much with any one particular political party. They'd either have to play by the rules, or get to know a lot more people.

A hung government, with the Lib Dems mandating proportional representation for future Westminster elections will mean the end of two party politics for quite some time. It could mean that one party might get much more populist in an attempt to win 50% of the vote. But it is silly that a political party can gain 23% of the nationwide vote and only get a handful of seats in Westminster.

[fedsron2us]

9. Coalition government is the norm in many parts of Europe.

Even in the US it is quite common for the President to be from one party while Congress or the Senate is controlled by the other.

Only in the UK do people think it is a 'good thing' for one party to be able to force through legislation virtually unchallenged for 5 years purely by dint that they were able to wangle a majority of Pariamentary seats from a minority of votes by due to our absurd first past the post electoral system. Nor is there any evidence that past minority governments were weak in their management of the economy. In fact Denis Healey's budgets got tougher as the size of his Labour government's majority in the Commons declined.