Cameron must avoid making deals with the Lib Dems

Irene

David Cameron will be PM with a good working majority, labour will be in opposition, the libdems will be in their usual place but close to labour in seats.

LittleEnglander

If a prospective Tory minority government was only a handful shy of being in a majority, he could ask the Ulster Unionists for their support. If the LibDems are a no-no, then surely the UUists would make much better bedfellows.

All the more reason for the Tories to squeeze every last vote out of people this time. I predicted a Tory majority of between 16-25 seats a few months ago. I also predict a late surge of support for the Tories...

Nevertheless, they may well not get my vote!

Alcazar

Fraser, Nick Clegg won't bring down the Government - it will be a compact of Lab and Lib that will so he won't be blamed exclusively.

I think you miss a bigger point: if David cannot pull off a clear majority after everything that has happened in this election campaign and having had a monstrously health poll lead going into it then he should be out on his ear and you should (but of course you are under orders not to) be discussing who will replace him.

Hepworth

I think this article might be irrelevant.
(In my opinion), Watching the body language of Brown and Cleg, The deal has been done. Cleg will be holding Labour to ransom and not the Tories. A nightmare scenario. Brown still prime minister with a miniscule amount of public support.
Time I think for me to vote for a smaller party which actually chimes with the policies I think will save our country.

James Benson

Labour ftw. The thought of a tory government chills me to the core.

Publius

Agreed. No coalition. But that doesn't mean that Carmeron can't promise the SNP independence.

chris as usual

There is no way that Clegg can prop up Labour with or without Brown if Labour get less seats and less percentage votes that the Conservatives. That would be suicide for the LibDems.

I agree with you Frazer that Cameron should go it alone. Given that winning the election is a poisoned chalice, according to the Bank of England Governor, then it is essential that Cameron sticks to his principles to deal with the nightmare that Labour has left us in. The LibDems will have nothing to offer to help.

Collis Gretton

Balanced Govt can't work in the UK? See:
http://trumpeter4europe.co.uk/#/nick-clegg-is-democracy/4540620808

Liberated

Let's face it. The Conservatives wont have a proper mandate for running the country on a minority basis. They are about to fall into the trap so well described by Mervyn King. There is no way that a second election within 12 months would give them a better majority. They'd be better off recognising the public mood and also hedging their bets with a partner through whom they could at least claim that the inevitable swingeing cuts were not those of a minority ruling class party imposed on the majority.

Snowman

Alcazar @ 6.45:

Spot on, my blogging partner.

And another thing: the Tories should avoid forming any coalition with any partner like a plague. At all cost they must avoid being the ones signing to the first batch of cuts and tax rises. Instead, they should focus on finding a new leadership as Alcazar suggests, and a new set of policies that resonate with the great unwashed.

Tiberius

I agree with your analysis, Fraser.

But whatever else Cameron does in the early days, he must ensure the electorate knows whose fault it is for the cuts that have to come. Failure to do that could cost him a second term (although not necessarily the Tory party).

stephen

Spot on Fraser!
Adapting an old Cold War slogan better dead than red, better Dave threatens death rather than go yellow![You probably can put it into better words] but the message is clear Dave must face off Clegg!
Clegg is looking increasing flaky and appears as if he is on a shortening fuse.
I don't think Clegg has the b*lls to look Dave in the eye and force another immediate election, the electorate are utterly fed up and want to action not froth and bubble(Clegg's or otherwise0

AKA Jorge Bueno del Publico

Little Englander,

The Ulster Unionists would certainly align themselves with Conservatives because under Reg Empey they campaigning under one banner.

It remains to be seen whether or not they can take DUP votes in the wake of the Robinson scandal. The protestant vote in Ulster is divided in at least five ways ways - I've lost count - but there's DUP, UUP, TUV, PUP and the Conservatives and Ulster Unionist Party.

English mainland voters should beware that the DUP and Sinn Fein look forward, like Alex Salmond, to a hung parliament to extract major concessions.

see the link

http://www.voteforchangeni.com/news/press-releases/dup-and-sinn-fein-have-same-policy-negotiate-with-the-british.php

So watch out you tactical voters you may not like what you get.

Daniel Dare

I believe that Nick Clegg will bed with the largest party to ensure that a hung parliament is seen by the electorate to work.

This will strengthen the viability that LibDems need time to position themselves more permanently as a credible force in politics to eventually succeed as a party of government in the longer term.

DZ

Why is there so much drama? Does Britain really NEED a government? After all, 85% of legislation comes from Brussels, and, talking about Belgium, did I notice that for several months they had no government at all. Worked out well, it seems. So the Civil Service could probably manage well without the frenzied hyperactivity of this government. At least for a year, anyway.

Silent Hunter

Fraser, in you're first point, you're comparing Apples and Oranges.

All four of the "hung parliaments" you refer to historically were ALL under FPTP - the coalitions in Europe are under PR.

This rather points to the fact that it's OUR system that is flawed and can't work in a democratic way to form consensus, which is what the electorate want.

I actually think that the boot is on the other foot - it's the Lib Dems who should not be making deals with the Tories (or Labour). The electorate don't want 'more of the same' politics - they want something different.

For the Lib Dems to ally themselves with either of the old house flipping parties would tarnish them.

But alas, I suppose pragmatism outweighs the heart.

djw2009

Some of these blog posts are really off the wall, Fraser. You look at it from the party machine point of view. But look at it politically instead: Cameron and Clegg agree on nearly everything. They are both slap bang in the middle ground of politics. Their precise policy formulations may differ as they belong to different party machines but politically they are the same thing. So even if Cameron does not make a deal with the LibDems, we still get Lib Dem politics. Cameron's address to Black Britain (as if there could be such a thing) shows he swallows the traitors' line on multiculturalism hook line and sinker. His attitude on sex education in schools ("faith schools much teach children about "gay" equality") and his passion for the EU all point in the same direction. Cameron IS Clegg. If you don't want Clegg's politics, don't vote Cameron. Vote Blue, Go Pink?

Edward Sutherland

Fraser: a very good analysis. But can you address the position of the Tories if they have the greatest number of seats,the largest share of the popular vote, but still in "hung parliament" territory. My understanding is that Brown, as incumbent PM,then gets first chance to form a government, and will then sell his wife, grandmother and children, plus whatever little is left of the gold reserves to bring the Libdems into a coalition. How should DC react then?

Tim W

"Euro-style coalitions don't work in Britain." Well, history may suggest they didn't but that argument is slightly weak in my view.

I reckon that by Thursday people will decide they want the 'real deal' (Cameron) and not some 'alternative choice' (Clegg). Brown is faltering badly.

I fully agree though that Cameron should carry on in a minority government.

If a Lib-Lab coalition happened it would be a mess and some Lib Dems in Tory marginals may even defect. That hasn't been mentioned yet but its possible.

Woody

I fully agree David Cameron should go it alone. They have the right policies and they work by being dilluted.

Forget about Gordon Brown - he won't be in a position to do any deals with anyone. You've only got the look at the faces of those travelling with him, they are going to pay a very heavy price for their cowardice. It will be Mandelson pulling the strings.

Tim

A very serious flaw in your analysis and I suggest you study the LSE website. If and when the Conservative Government fell and the Liberals and Labour then but only then entered into a formal coalition the Queen is actually more likely NOT to dissolve Parliament.The LSE comment that constitutionally the Queen in fact has to then allow the Liberals and Labour to form a Government.

I look forward to your rebuttal o this proposition which I do not believe you will be able to provide.

JohnAnt

If it were simply that Cameron had not over time managed to convince the vast rump of voters (created by Brown) who can see their state jobs and benefits being cut by a Tory government, I'd say it was a sign of just how state-dependent the majority of the electorate has become.
But Dave must have convinced at least some of them: the Tories had a big lead, and lost it. We all have our pet theories why, whether it's Dave's EU Referendum turnabout, MPs' expenses causing a disaffection with politics, Tory wavering on immigration or the economy, Osborne, Clarke, Goldsmith, whatever.
But has any poll work been done to establish just why Cameron lost his lead, against the most disastrous PM of recent times?

Alcazar

@ Tim
May 1st, 2010 8:53pm

Exactly right. The Old Bird has to find a reasonable way to keep (any) government in place and if she is advised that a PM can be found to lead a coalition 9or another minority) government then she has to go that route.

It's not for DC or Fraser Nelson to manage the Queen's role or interjection in all this. That's for Parliament to do.

Events dear boy, events.

stephen

Peter Oborne's piece in the Mail today has another point to add to Fraser's piece. If Brown crashes and burns it is very likely that Labour will be distracted at least until the next Labour Party Conference when their constitution requires according to Oborne would have to approve a new leader.

Mark

"My understanding is that Brown, as incumbent PM,then gets first chance to form a government, and will then sell his wife, grandmother and children, plus whatever little is left of the gold reserves to bring the Libdems into a coalition."

Ah well, but maybe he - or at least other Labour people have also read Mervyn King whose point has especial political resonance in the context of a hung Parliament, because then you don't have the control over when to call an election. If your partner (i.e. the Lib Dems) find it convenient to abandon you in a vote of no confidence or vote of supply - not only is your Government dead but you are forced into an election when you might least want one.

Alcazar

@ stephen
May 1st, 2010 9:49pm

Sadly your point is not substantive. It pays not to rely on Peter Oborne too much: he has his head up his backside when talking about Labour Party Leader election rules. It took me a few mins to google and read the rules, he should learn to use the internet.

TGF UKIP

Alcazar, Snowman and djw2009 are spot on and Tiberius "he must ensure the electorate knows whose fault it is for the cuts that have to come." Quite so, but given his and his best mate's failure to do that over the last few years and during the course of this campaign, what possible prospect there is of him being able to that in government?

Have you heard him, or any of the Clique, even mention THE DEBT OF £1.4 trillion or £56,000 per household?

Given the disaster he would be in government, even with a majority, far better to let the Left take the rap when it all goes belly-up and for the Tories to wake up, dump him, provide a proper and successful opposition under a new leader and look forward to taking power at the next election in 2011/12.

stephen

Alcazar

Oborne may have got it wrong on this but I still find him a jolly good read and he has a way of seeing where things are going IMHO. It's exactly a year today he wrote a piece suggesting Brown was given a bottle of whiskey and a loaded revolver and left to do the decent thing! As another article on Coffee House says what if? Lucky Dave it did not happen!

stephen

This is not meant to be offensive but why if hung parliaments don't work has the exemplar of these Belgium managed to be the first to get a Burka ban through[as I believe they have but subject to confirmation] Have a fun Sunday all Coffee Housers! I have a feeling we will have a real media feeding frenzy next Sunday.

Tiberius

To the usual suspects who even now wish to argue yetserday's themes, I say:

A leader other than Cameron would be looking at lower polling; and,

The Tories, having tried out the honesty and openness approach about the economy desired by some, found that the electorate didn't want to hear it, with the consequence that their polling fell from the 40% plus heights. The Tories have been more upfront than any previous Opposition (freezing public sector pay and raising the retirement age), but the rest of the story has demonstrably to wait until after the election.