What a shame they're linked to the dems, because the pro-market part of the Lib-Dem philosophy is supportable. I won't be experiencing it directly, but we have, in Tasmania, a Labor government which has clung on to power by doing a deal with the Greens, which the Labor side had sworn they would never do. (one of those 'eternal' political promises.) What would a hung parliament be like? I fear it would mean that Labor, and Brown, stay in, so more of the same.

From the linked article, a perfect example of "Comment is Superfluous:"

"Mr Brown said people should be deeply suspicious about Conservative plans to cut "six thousand million pounds" from public spending next year. "That must have an impact on prospects, jobs, on the economy," he warned. Mr Cameron has pointed out £6 billion is only one per cent of total public spending."

But back to Hung Parliaments. (Will comments about the desireability of well-hung parliaments activate the dreaded SmiteBot? - Let's see!)

Interesting that Cameron/Brown have no problems with the reality of a hung electorate -- with polls indicating a very approximate 3-way split, and no party having any shot at a majority of the votes. That suggests an "unhung" parliament would simply be a consequence of the gerrymandered electoral map, and that the party controlling such a Parliament would not have a genuine mandate from the people. Not that politicians give the proverbial for a genuine democratic mandate.

Alice asked:

(Will comments about the desireability of well-hung parliaments activate the dreaded SmiteBot? - Let's see!)

I'd prefer a hanged parliament, thank you very much

It would be nice to think that we will see the "benefits of gridlock" thesis in action, as demonstrated in the 1990s in the US when the sex maniac was in the WH and Newt and his chums were running Congress. However, I suspect that a "gridlocked" Parliament will mean that some of the necessarily deep cuts in spending will not occur; there will be more tax rises, our country's external debt credit rating will fall, interest rates will spike.

And again, people wonder why I wrote a few weeks ago about the idea of leaving the UK. And when I did that, a now banned commenter had the gall to prattle about my "duty" to my country.

Jonathan, another point to ponder is that laws now are effectively made outside Parliament as well as inside it, if the UK is anything like many other Western countries.

And again, people wonder why I wrote a few weeks ago about the idea of leaving the UK. And when I did that, a now banned commenter had the gall to prattle about my "duty" to my country.

I might suggest that if us Brits do have a duty to our country, it is probably to leave, and thus stop feeding the bastards who are ruining it...

Kev: absolute bullseye!

However, I suspect that a "gridlocked" Parliament will mean that some of the necessarily deep cuts in spending will not occur; there will be more tax rises, our country's external debt credit rating will fall, interest rates will spike.

Indeed... hence my 80/20 against assessment that even a hung parliament would do any good. As Ted says, in truth the only real chance of a favourable outcome requires a hanged parliament.

Cheer up chaps, a hung parliament might be bad for the economy but watching all those pols squirm on 7th May will be fun.

There could be no more convincing evidence of the degeneration of Britain than that its economic health depends on the state of Parliament.

And indeed, water will run uphil if it is in descent from a higher point - as is the case of the U K economy and social condition.

Canada has a minority government, fortunately a Tory one. Our opposition, the Liberals and NDP, are scared to vote the government out because the Tories would sweep back in with a majority.

Quite so Perry.

Whatever the result of the election is Britain is buggered - as all the major party leaderships are useless.