Spearthrower wrote:Beatsong wrote:It isn't a legally or politically meaningful distinction, at the point it's happening, whether you call it a Labour government or a National Unity government. If the majority party fails to command the confidence of the house, the next largest party to attempt to do so (ie, the opposition) will always, by definition, be a minority party, so they will always need the support of MPs from outside of their own party. I'm certainly no legal expert but when those who are describe this stuff, they don't seem to focus on which way the new government gets labelled. It always seems to come down to one thing: simply, whether anyone can "command the confidence of the house".
Right, but I think there's a distinction there between
government and
party. It's the government which has lost the confidence vote, not the party. The government could, in theory, be brought down by their own party, and a new leader could be selected who does command sufficient confidence from the remaining MP's of their own party. Not the case here, obviously with the slim majority and tenuous DUP support, but in principle I don't think it's solely the right of the opposition to form a new government after a no confidence succeeds.
According to wiki you're right and I'm wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motions_o ... l_practiceUnder the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, a passing of a motion of no confidence is one of only two ways in which an early election can occur (the other is a motion to hold an early election passed by at least two-thirds of MPs). Following a successful motion, Parliament must dissolve, unless the motion is overturned within 14 days by the passing of an explicit motion of confidence. This procedure is designed to allow a minority government time to seek the support of other parties (as a formal coalition or with a confidence and supply arrangement) to avoid having to face re-election, or to allow an alternative government to be formed.[72]
In principle, the alternative government could be led by any MP who can draw together enough support for a legislative programme that secures a vote of confidence and, by convention, a request from the Queen to form such a government. In practice, it is likely to be the leader, or a senior member, of a party with a significant number of MPs in the House that can achieve this. In turn they could be expected to bring about an early election using the two-thirds of MPs provision of the Fixed-Term Act to gain a popular mandate for their programme.
So fair enough, I stand corrected. It always baffles me how much of what happens in UK politics has to do with people's interpretations of convention and expectation, rather than explicit written laws.
by 
