James Forsyth reviews the week in politics
When the head of state herself has declared, after a lifetime of study, that ‘the British constitution has always been puzzling and always will be’, one wonders what hope there is for the rest of us if we wake up on 7 May to a hung parliament. We have become used to going to bed in the wee hours of Friday morning knowing who the new Prime Minister is. But this time the only thing that might be certain is the uncertainty. The Cabinet Office guidelines for a hung parliament are thorough and detailed. But they will not help with the media frenzy that is likely to be unleashed from Friday onwards: the news helicopters hovering over Downing Street, the 24-hour rolling commentary.
Many Labour MPs are wondering who, precisely, will prise Gordon Brown out of Downing Street if he loses. One told me that Mr Brown would interpret any indecisive result as a rejection of the Conservatives — and set about trying to establish a ‘progressive coalition’ with the Liberal Democrats. Constitutionally, in the event of a hung parliament the incumbent Prime Minister has the first chance to try to form a government. But Nick Clegg has said he will not support Mr Brown if Labour has neither the most votes nor the most seats. It is not inconceivable that Mr Brown will try to stay put. But then, as one Labour MP warns, ‘there’ll be a Ceausescu moment’.
There is one other way that Labour could stay in power. Mr Brown could be replaced by another member of the Cabinet who will offer the Liberal Democrats what they want: a second election under PR. Such an outcome is being discussed by MPs of all parties — but it has several snags. First, someone must get rid of Mr Brown, something the Labour party has failed to accomplish the last three times it has tried. The Prime Minister is unlikely to imitate John Major’s example and head down to the Oval to watch a bit of cricket. It would go against his character not to at least attempt to form another government. As this is going on, Mr Cameron would be touring the television studios demanding that the Liberal Democrats come out and tell the defeated Prime Minister that the game is up. Finally, the Queen would only ask the new Labour leader to form a government if the Palace had an explicit guarantee from Nick Clegg that his party would support Labour but not the Tories.
Any stitch-up over voting reform in the Commons would be held up for a year in the Lords. Labour peers are even more sceptical of PR than the remaining Labour MPs will be. A boundary review could not be conducted in less than 18 months. So if the Liberal Democrats were to agree a deal with Labour, hoping for a fresh election under their new voting system, they would have to wait at least two and a half years. All this time, the Conservatives would be on the outside, having won the most votes and seats, denouncing the Liberal Democrats for putting power before principle. It would look like the most deplorable political stitch-up — and one Mr Clegg is too clever to be associated with.
This is why the most probable result of next week’s election is David Cameron in a limousine en route to the Palace, after Mr Brown has accepted that he cannot form a government. Cameron’s choice will be about whether to go it alone, or enter a deal with the Liberal Democrats. His colleagues (often the last to know what he is thinking) are desperate for him to choose the former option. They fear what the party might concede in any negotiation. Mr Cameron’s sudden announcement on Saturday that any ‘un-elected’ Prime Minister would have to go to the country within six months was sprung on the Conservative party without warning.
Colleagues worry that if constitutional change can be offered up without consultation during an election campaign, then the same would be the case during any deal-making. Certainly if PR was brought anywhere near the table, the party would have a fit of the vapours.
Backbench Tory MPs are represented by the wonderfully named 1922 Committee. Mr Cameron had a close relationship with Sir Michael Spicer, the current chairman, but he has now left parliament, and his replacement is due to be elected after the Queen’s Speech — too late to protest against any deal that Mr Cameron might have made.
Even before the election was called, the executive committee of the ’22 began to discuss emergency procedures for choosing a new chairman in the event of a hung parliament. There are now influential voices arguing that the new Conservative parliamentary party should be convened as soon as possible after the election to choose a new chairman. The idea would be to put in place someone who could negotiate with Mr Cameron on behalf of his party — and make clear, for instance, that any form of PR would be unacceptable. Others argue that this is unnecessary as Cameron himself would call a meeting of the parliamentary party in these circumstances.
Those who know Cameron well believe that the parliamentary party’s fears about what he might offer up are unfounded. One tells me that Cameron’s instinct will be ‘to go it alone’ and that he is fully aware that the Liberal Democrats are ‘going to want what we are not prepared to give them’.
In fact, the Tory leadership is quite bullish about its ability to dictate terms to the Liberal Democrats — or to ignore them completely. Cameron aides are studying Alex Salmond’s minority government in the Scottish parliament. His budget was defeated by two votes last year. But a fortnight later, and after only minor tweaks, the budget was passed by 123 votes to 2. The moral: voting down a budget creates such a sense of panic that the pressure is then put on the opposition. The Tories calculate that the Liberal Democrats would not dare cause such a crisis over £6 billion of cuts, the principal issue that would divide the two sides in the Tories’ planned emergency budget.
This whole issue might turn out to be academic. In 1992, everyone was expecting a hung parliament even after the exit poll came in. But the eventual result was a narrow Conservative majority. The same might happen this time. Tory candidates in marginal seats are surprisingly confident that they will make it over the line. But if they do not, then we should all be prepared to be puzzled.
Comments