Reply #48: It's a possibility, but I suspect it would be unstable

[muriel_volestrangler]

as you say, the Labour back-benchers are stroppy enough that they might often vote against a Labour government that had many of the present cabinet in it.

1929 is so long ago I'm not sure if we can make a useful comparison to it now. In 1974, Labour had loyal back-benchers; even so, they had to make the "Lib-Lab pact", which, for a few years, meant they kept the Liberal party (smaller than its successor the Liberal Democrats) happy enough that it supported Labour in vital votes. However, eventually the parties fell out, and the Labour government fell, a few months early, on a no confidence vote.

The Tory government that ended in 1997 was technically a minority government in its last year or 2 - though they had a small majority at the 1992 election, they lost so many by-elections as MPs died that they became a minority. They had a few backbenchers who would rebel on things like Europe, but I can't remember if they ever managed to defeat the government - the Ulster Unionists, who are allied with the Tories, tended to vote with the Tories anyway.

The Lib Dems current position is that they wouldn't form a formal coalition with either Labour or Tories, but just vote on issues as they want. So I think a minority Labour government would form in that case, but it would have to tread very carefully to keep both the Lib Dems and all of its backbenchers voting for it. If the Tories were the largest party, they presumably would be a minority government - with good backbench discipline, but, I'd think, more chance of all the opposition voting (except Ulster unionists, perhaps) against it on several issues - I think, once in opposition, the Labour leadership would move leftward in its voting patterns.