Votes or seats? Why Nick Clegg won’t, can’t and shouldn’t answer that hung Parliament question

by Stephen Tall on April 14, 2010

Ever since Nick Clegg launched his line on a hung Parliament – that he would talk to the party that won the “strongest mandate” and was keeping all options open – the question has been asked (though not by the public): does that mean the party with most votes or the party with most seats?

And ever since Nick has been asked that question, he has studiously refused to answer it. He stonewalled Paxman on Monday, and at the Lib Dem manifesto launch today.

And you know what? He’s absolutely right to refuse to be drawn. Here’s why: the crazy British electoral system throws up so many possible permutations, it is impossible to give a definite answer. Let’s just take one example of a plausible election result to show why Nick Clegg should decline the kind invitation of the media to tie himself in pointless knots of speculation.

    Conservatives 36%, Labour 34%, Lib Dems 22%
    This scenario would see the Tories win most votes, yet emerge with perhaps only 255 MPs to Labour’s 310 – which would mean that even with the Lib Dems’ c.60 seats, any kind of Lib Dem-Tory deal would lack a majority in the House of Commons. Labour certainly wouldn’t have the strongest mandate in that case – but the Tories wouldn’t have enough seats either.

I could go on all night working through the various psephelogical possibilities … and that’s fine because I’m just a blogger on the internet. But the idea that Nick Clegg, as leader of the UK’s third largest political party, should waste time in interviews setting out how he might respond according to each and every result is ludicrous.

I have my disagreements with the Lib Dem leadership on the question of a hung Parliament: I think the party should have ruled out a coalition in advance. But Nick is 100% right not to take the media bait, and bog himself down in unknown unknowables on an issue which means diddly squat to the public.

Enjoy reading this? Please like and share:

5 comments

New post: Votes or seats? Why Nick Clegg won’t, can’t and shouldn’t answer that hung Parliament question http://bit.ly/agTYkp

by Stephen Tall on April 14, 2010 at 9:29 pm. Reply #

RT @stephentall: New post: Votes or seats? Why Nick Clegg won’t, can’t & shouldn’t answer that hung Parliament question http://bit.ly/agTYkp

by Helen Duffett on April 14, 2010 at 9:31 pm. Reply #

RT @stephentall: New post: Votes or seats? Why Nick Clegg won’t, can’t and shouldn’t answer that hung Parliament question http://bit.ly/agTYkp

by Steph Ashley on April 14, 2010 at 9:32 pm. Reply #

There’s also the differential turnout point. If the average safe Labour seat had the same turnout as the average safe Tory seat, then they’d have won the popular vote in England by a country mile last time, instead of just scraping it.

I started doing the maths on that, but sharing a laptop with She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed means not enough time to just prat about with numbers for a few hours.

by MatGB on April 14, 2010 at 9:53 pm. Reply #

RT @stephentall Votes or seats? Why Nick Clegg won’t, can’t and shouldn’t answer that hung Parliament question http://bit.ly/agTYkp #hangem

by Toque on April 14, 2010 at 10:18 pm. Reply #

Leave your comment

Required.

Required. Not published.

If you have one.