Labour Party Leader Gordon Brown, Conservative Party chief David Cameron and Liberal Democrat Nick Clegg wait to take part in the second of Britain's leadership election debates in Bristol on April 22, 2010.POOL/Reuters
Are you following the British election? It is well worth doing so, since British politics may provide a look at the new normal over here as well as over there. Multi-party elections, minority Parliaments, and perverse and unpredictable seat results: just like here!
The Guardian provided a roundup of the most recent polls in its daily campaign blog yesterday, along with seat predictions:
Sunday Telegraph/ICM poll:
Conservatives: 35% - 284 seats
Liberal Democrats: 31% - 232 seats
Labour: 26% - 103 seats
Ipsos Mori poll for the News of the World:
Conservatives: 36% - 276 seats
Labour: 30% - 280 seats
Liberal Democrats: 23% - seats not calculated
BPIX poll for the Mail on Sunday:
Conservatives: 34% - 271 seats
Liberal Democrats: 30% - 106 seats
Labour: 26% - 242 seats
YouGov poll for the Sunday Times:
Conservatives: 35% - 285 seats
Liberal Democrats: 28% - 90 seats
Labour: 27% - 243 seats
As wise people in politics say, the numbers don't lie. And what these mid-campaign British polls point to is a devastating defeat in the popular vote for the New Labour government under Prime Minister Gordon Brown; a remarkable leap (possibly into second place) for the Liberal Democrats led by Nick Clegg; and a pretty good chance that the Conservatives under David Cameron will hold onto their core vote and therefore scratch out a first place -- without, however, any significant improvement on the 32.3% of the vote they received in the 2005 British general election.
It's all very Canadian, really.
The Conservatives -- the "nasty party" -- remain a distinctly minority preference, there and here. Two-thirds of the electorate want a different government, there and here. But in the absence of some sort of further evolution in the political system, the Conservative minority seem set to rule -- there and here.
Liberal Democratic leader Clegg was musing this weekend that he might actively help make that happen by supporting the Tories should they come first in the popular vote.
This was a canny piece of maneuvering, designed to inoculate his party against the Tory claim "Vote Clegg, get Brown." It was a reminder that Mr. Clegg comes from the right wing of his party. And it underlined (as do those numbers up above) how poorly a first-past-the-post electoral system reflects the will and votes of citizens in a multi-party democracy. Labour seems set to come in third in the popular vote, but in some scenarios could still have the most seats.
There is, however, no suggestion in Britain that the debate over who-will-work-with-whom is somehow unconstitutional or undemocratic. The British -- even their conservative newspapers and pundits -- understand that electing a minority Parliament obliges the political parties within it to work together in some combination.
Whatever happens, the British Parliament will be taking its place at the centre of British politics after the next election. Setting a fine precedent for the former colonies.
***
Meanwhile, over here, all eyes are on House of Commons Speaker Peter Milliken. He will be ruling imminently on a demand by the majority in Parliament for disclosure of documents related to possible mistreatment of enemy combatants in our power in Afghanistan. Stephen Harper's government insists it will be the judge of what is released, if anything -- not the elected representatives of the people of Canada.
A year and a half ago our Governor-General showed herself to be unequal to her responsibilities -- or, at least, the occupant of a fatally broken office. Now we will see what the Speaker of the House of Commons is made of.