Numbers, opinions and our politics

Angus Robinson of the SNP has just added his voice to a Lib-Lab coalition. Whatever it is, it can't have Conservatives running the country.

The man is entitled to his opinion but of course, regardless of his reasons it might not reflect the real position that we find ourselves in after the votes were counted:

Conservatives 306 36% of the votes cast

Labour 258 29% of the votes cast

Lib Dem 57 23% of the votes cast

We all talk about 326 as being the majority and this would lead us to think that this is the magic number (as we have 650 members of the lower house). There are some maths to be done here (thank you gavin) to show what the real number that is needed to be 'stable' government is:

We start at 650 MPs - from this we remove the Speaker of the House (a Conservative) and his three deputies = 646

From the 646 we can remove the five Sinn Fein MPs (who don't ever take their seats) = 641

Having reached the figure of 641, we can see that an effective majority is actually 321.

Having just read Nick Robinson's Blog, I thought I merely add his words here as a reference and food for (prayerful) thought:


Gordon Brown has made an audacious bid, not just to keep Labour in power but to reshape British politics by creating the sort of coalition not seen in Britain since the Second World War.

The Prime Minister was told by Cabinet colleagues and by senior Liberal Democrats that there was little in the way of policy to stop their two parties working together, but that he was a barrier, in part because he was seen as uncollegiate, in part because his continued presence was regarded as electorally toxic.

This solution still raises a number of problems, however, which the Conservatives and critics in the media are sure to raise:

is it legitimate for Gordon Brown and Labour to stay in office, having lost this election?

is it right for a new Prime Minister to be chosen, not by voters, but by Labour party members?

And can such a coalition be strong and stable given that in parliamentary terms it has the equivalent number of MPs to Harold Wilson or John Major's governments, which were hardly strong or stable.

However the real question tonight is for Nick Clegg. Does he now stick to his chosen path and do a deal with the Conservatives to the fury of many in his party or does he switch to Labour, risking the wrath of those who will accuse him of creating a coalition of losers?"

(I've placed this just under today's blog as I think it is helpful)