The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

A progressive alliance: the numbers

Alliance could hope to count on the support of 330 MPs.

By George Eaton Published 10 May 2010 21:04

Following Gordon Brown's extraordinary, game-changing statement, here is a guide to how a progressive alliance could be constructed. Bear in mind that as Sinn Féin's five MPs refuse to take their Commons seats, a government needs 321 seats for a de facto majority in the House.

Progressive alliance

Labour: 258 seats

Liberal Democrats: 57 seats

Social Democratic Labour Party: 3 seats (Labour's Northern Irish sister party)

The Alliance Party: 1 seat (Lib Dems' Northern Irish sister party)

Plaid Cymru: 3 seats (currently in coalition with Labour in Wales)

Scottish National Party: 6 seats (the SNP negotiating team arrived in London last night and called for a "progressive" alternative to a Tory-Lib Dem pact)

Green Party: 1 seat (Caroline Lucas has ruled out joining a formal coalition, but maintains that she is "interested in talking about ways we might co-operate")

Independent: 1 seat (Sylvia Hermon regularly voted with Labour while an Ulster Unionist MP, and could be expected to back the government on key votes)

Total: 330 seats

Conservative alliance

Conservative Party: 307 seats (I add one seat, as the Tories are almost certain to win the delayed election in Thirsk and Malton)

Democratic Unionist Party: 8 seats (the DUP generally votes with the Tories and there has been talk of a deal for some time)

Total: 315 seats

Perhaps the clearest indicator we've had that a progressive alliance is increasingly likely is the statement issued by Nick Clegg this evening. He made it clear he was dissatisfied with the Tories' current offer:

[S]o far we have been unable to agree a comprehensive partnership agreement for a full parliament.

We need a government that lasts, which is why we believe, in the light of the state of talks with the Conservative Party, the only responsible thing to do is to open discussions with the Labour Party to secure a stable partnership agreement.

The possibility that Britain's progressive majority may finally receive adequate representation in government is more real than ever tonight.

Special offer: get 12 issues of the New Statesman for just £5.99 plus a free copy of "Liberty in the Age of Terror" by A C Grayling.

Tags: Liberal Democrats Hung Parliament Gordon Brown

More from George Eaton

21 comments

Mon, 2010-05-10 21:12 — MatGB (not verified)

But it would only work on a very limited Govt platform, no English-only bills as SNP/Plaid would abstain.

Too unstable, think it's unworkable.

Mon, 2010-05-10 21:16 — Jono (not verified)

Have you included the speaker in your total of Tory MPs?

Mon, 2010-05-10 21:16 — JohnRuddy

Why do all the calculations include teh Speaker in the tory numbers? He will only vote int he event of a tie, and then in favour of the Government - not his old party. He didnt even stand as a tory!

Mon, 2010-05-10 21:24 — Cornwall (not verified)

I'd love to see a progressive alliance and it would be a great step forward in the politics of the UK. However i can not see this solution being able to form and maintain a strong government. Firstly the parties are disparate in their policies, trident is but one example. Secondly an unelected PM. Thirdly how disciplined are these parties? it seems to be assumed that they would all follow the party line, it wouldn't take many back benchers to upset the whole apple cart.

For my money the progressives should stay in opposition and force the tories to form a minority government. Which would be unable to force through controversial policies. Then wait for the next election to form a decisive progressive government.

Mon, 2010-05-10 21:36 — Red Rag

The new kid on the progressive block out maneuvered by the exiting old hand...check mate!

http://redrag1.blogspot.com/2010/05/red-rag-brown-makes-ultimate-sacrifi...

Mon, 2010-05-10 21:56 — yoctobarryc

"The possibility that Britain's progressive majority may finally receive adequate representation in government is more real than ever tonight."

Eh George? Are you off your trolley?

You think that a rag-tag bundle of 6+ parties is better for the 'progressive majority' than the last 13 years of Labour government?

I wonder what you guys smoke at New Statesman.

Mon, 2010-05-10 23:06 — Ian Graham (not verified)

Am I missing something in the respective arithmetics ? A 'progressive alliance' needs, for most purposes, to outvote only the Tory + DUP bloc (= 315). Which Labour plus LibDems+SDLP+Alliance would do. So going this route actually lowers the bar. All the remaining 'others' would be likely to be 'progressive' on most issues without being actually tied in, although the temptation to try and extort here and there would undoubtedly be a factor.

Mon, 2010-05-10 23:34 — Sam (not verified)

George, do you seriously think the British people would stand for this?

If the SNP, NI parties, and Plaid form a coalition then the English population would pay for it.

I think it's a coup.

I think this could lead to civil unrest.

Mon, 2010-05-10 23:34 — 9xzulug

yoctobarryc.how many years did we have to endure thatcher era?this is why the CONNEDSRVADIVS can't seal a deal.2 out of 3 voters did not vote Tory.coming close is not WINNING.they may as well come last.IT'S THE R/WING OF THE TORY PARTY THATS THEIR ACHILLES HEEL.this was always going to come to a head even if they gained a majority.GREAT BRITAIN does not welcome r/wing rhetoric we had a taste of thatcher era and thats a fact,we as a nation are even more intergrated than they realise

Mon, 2010-05-10 23:34 — Allan sayers (not verified)

Progressive alliance would be by far the best for the vast majority of British people. Under Tories the rich get richer and the poor poorer. Every time they govern!

Mon, 2010-05-10 23:54 — UrbanOspreys

Wow. I live in a world where SYLVIA HERMON is seen as 'progressive'. The centre really has moved to the right. Here's her voting record:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/lady_hermon/north_down

Mon, 2010-05-10 23:59 — Disappointed (not verified)

Oh dear, how progressive would an alliance be that can't carry a legislative programme, squanders millions on silly quangos, bails out the banks but not local businesses, supports illiberal intrusive programmes like ID cards and ContactPoint and would impose a weak form of PR on the British People without any say. Where did our principles go? How very disappointing.

Tue, 2010-05-11 00:04 — Mary Smithe (not verified)

I hate to say it but it looks like a coup.

Absolutely incredible we are seeing this in Britain today. Very sad day for anyone that believes in democracy.

Tue, 2010-05-11 00:08 — Sarah (not verified)

This is a disaster for the Libs and for Labour. Will people forgive us for trying to do this?

Tue, 2010-05-11 00:48 — Naz (not verified)

Whatever team you support, this is really f'd up. Can I declare myself PM too?

I am unelected too.

Tue, 2010-05-11 02:48 — George (not verified)

Re:Mary Smithe

I always find it wonderfully entertaining how ludicrously hysterical people such as yourself find any possible alternative to the Conservatives being in power.

More people voted for Labour and the Liberal Democrats than they did your beloved David 'Call me Dave' Cameron.

So contine, pull your hair out whilst running around your house in hysterics, pausing to come on here and denounce democracy that does not produce the result that you want, whilst the rest of the sane electorate of the UK will welcome this possibility.

Tue, 2010-05-11 02:53 — George (not verified)

Re:Sarah

Tory sycophants and their press will never forgive us, but what would that matter? They will always be against us anyway.

More people are with us than are with the Tories, we have the right to do this and an obligation.

Tue, 2010-05-11 08:02 — Peter Martin

What's the difference between the Tory party and a Jumbo Jet?

A jumbo jet has more than 326 seats.

Tue, 2010-05-11 09:01 — bernard2

if it wasent for mr blair labour and our lib dem friends would already have a coalition from along time ago , 1997 to be exact . i wellcome the lib dems and am more than happy to goive policy consessions such as PR voteing , i have always preferd PR syestems over first pased the post anyway . from the new zealand exprience it does not mean you wont get torie govenments as well as labour led coalitions if we go to PR. its just a much more democratic and representitive voteing syestem .AND WE WANT MILLIBAND TWO HE WILL CAIM CAMRON IN THE COMMONS .dont blame lanour its not labours fault the tories were so inept they couldent cobble together more than 35% of the vote and for a 4th time in a row couldent win a majority . OH AN MURDOCH U FORGOT WE BRITISH ARNT AS EASY BRAINEASHED AS THE AMERICANS ARE BYE YOUR NEWS PAPPERS.