With the country facing a hung Parliament how will a government be formed and then sustained in office? Plotting a roadmap through the constitutional issues, this paper highlights and explains key parliamentary dates and events that will shape the process, and sets it in historical context.
The fundamental principle at the heart of our parliamentary democracy is that the government must command the confidence of the House of Commons. In the event of a hung Parliament - where no party secures an outright majority - the arithmetic presents politicians with a conundrum: who commands their confidence and should therefore govern?
The answer to that question will be determined through a complex nexus of constitutional conventions, laws and precedents, party political calculations and gauging of the public mood. There is guidance and rules to resolve who should govern in the event of a hung Parliament including the Cabinet Manual and the Fixed Term Parliaments Act.
Drawing on these and other sources, this briefing paper addresses how a government will be formed and then sustained in office. It also looks at how a minority government might operate in Parliament, focusing on the impact it may have on parliamentary process and procedure.
Table of contents
Introduction: Minority government in context
- Historical comparisons and precedents
Part 1: Forming a government
- What does ‘command confidence’ mean?
- The incumbent Prime Minister: stay or go?
- When will Parliament meet?
- The State Opening of Parliament: will the Queen attend?
- The Queen’s Speech debate: confidence of the House?
- Will there be a second general election?
- What difference does the Fixed Term Parliaments Act make?
- Seats vs- votes: what counts?
- An alternative party leader / Prime Minister?
- How long can be taken to form a government?
Part 2: Parliamentary procedure: help or hindrance?
- Does it matter if votes are lost?
- Whats about the House of Lords?
- Will minority government mean less legislation?
- Will the Speaker’s casting vote influence decisions?
- Managing time: potential problems ahead
- The establishment and composition of select committees
- The fiscal maze
- Delegated legislation: an increase in deferrals and withdrawals?
- Accountability and transparency
Enjoy reading this? Please consider sharing it
In the run-up to the UK’s exit from the EU on 29 March 2019 we will be tracking the progress made by government and Parliament in preparing the statute book for exit day. Our analysis draws on parliamentary data and our own Statutory Instrument Tracker which we built several years ago to support our research on delegated legislation.
When an executive has negotiated a treaty that it can’t get through its legislature at the first attempt, as is probable in today’s ‘meaningful vote’, something in the process has gone wrong. If Parliament is going to get a bigger role in treaty-making, the experience of the Article 50 process could and should be taken as an opportunity to learn lessons.
In 2018, Jersey saw the launch and then abandonment of what could have been a unique official attempt to define formally the role of the jurisdiction’s parliamentarians.
If the result of the ‘meaningful vote’ - whenever it is held - is that no UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement enters into force, it could be near-unique in 170 years of UK treaty-making. But if the Withdrawal Agreement goes through, its parliamentary process will still be unusual: it could be the UK treaty with the most parliamentary decision-making involvement ever.
For its ‘fake news’ inquiry the House of Commons DCMS Committee has reportedly acquired papers related to a US court case involving Facebook. Andrew Kennon, former Commons Clerk of Committees, says the incident shows how the House’s powers to obtain evidence do work, but that it might also weaken the case for Parliament’s necessary powers in the long term.