Fears of UK hung parliament may be overstated

April 19, 2010

— The author is a Reuters Breakingviews columnist. The opinions expressed are his own —

Fears of a huhugodixon-150x150ng parliament following the UK’s general election may be overstated. With Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats, Britain’s third largest party, performing well in the first prime ministerial debate, sterling has received a mild knock. Investors do not like the uncertainty that goes with a hung parliament. While many European countries are used to coalition government, the UK is traditionally a two-party system – with government swinging between Labour and the Conservatives.

Added to this uncertainty is the fact that none of the three parties has come up with a credible plan for cutting the government’s deficit, which stands at 12 percent of GDP. One fear is that valuable months could be lost in horse-trading over forming the next government. Another is that a minority government could embark on a populist, but expensive, programme to prepare the ground for a second election later this year.

The hung parliament scenario is really two sub-scenarios. In the first, the party with the largest number of seats would govern on its own. This is probably what would happen if the Tories were the largest party. Such a government might well be unstable.

The second sub-scenario is a majority formed through a coalition with the LibDems. This is more likely if Labour emerges as the largest party. That’s because it has offered to change the system for electing MPs – something the LibDems and their predecessor parties have wanted for decades. Indeed, during Thursday’s debate, Labour’s Gordon Brown several times dangled this olive branch.

A formal “Lib-Lab” pact would still need to come up with a credible deficit reduction plan. But arguably this would be easier with a coalition that had been supported by over 50 percent of the electorate. What’s more, if it did not have overall power, Labour would have a ready-made excuse for abandoning pledges made in its manifesto, which would otherwise tie its hands in confronting the deficit.

If there is a hung parliament, it will be better to hang together than hang separately.


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

I await to see if the British public turn against Clegg at the 11th hour – its easier to support the underdog until faced with reality of him running the country.

Posted by Abib | Report as abusive

With reference to Gordon Browns rather shameless olive branch dangling, I’d much rather the parties would not consider the eventuality of a hung parliament and the deals that could be made with each other, until after the election (if it becomes reality).
just seems that there is nothing between the three main parties at the moment and we need one of the parties to truly believe in their message for the public to fully get behind it and choose a clear winner :-(

Posted by Euphoria | Report as abusive

Some of the best governing (laws), in my opinion, that Canada has ever had has been with a minority party government.
We have not had a coalition government in recent times.

Posted by canadapatriot5 | Report as abusive