quote:
The press were constantly going on about a possible/probable coalition from the start, so each of the parties should have planned well in advance, deciding on possible strategies for each of the significant measure of votes.
Actually, the press was mostly saying it would be a hung parliament. A hung parliament doesn't mean there will be a coalition - the past 3 elections in Canada have been hung parliaments and we've ended up with 3 minority governments. I don't think anyone really expected a coalition - maybe some sort of confidence agreement between 2 parties, but not really a full-out coalition because they're so very rare in Westminster parliamentary systems. However, that said, the Tories were well prepared - Oliver Letwin even dug up old Lib Dem ideas from past conferences to propose to them. Labour admits it had no plan (or interest to be frank) in a coalition, and so had absolutely nothing to offer the Lib Dems when they started talks. The Lib Dems had also done some work. However, even then, it normally takes weeks, if not months, in other countries where coalitions are the norm and everyone knows the election will result in a coalition, for parties to negotiate a workable coalition platform. To hope to achieve the same level of comprehensive coalition programme in five days is quite unrealistic. There was all sorts of (what i think were totally artificial) deadlines being put on the parties - like they had to recall parliament by such and such a date because the Queen's speech had to happen on some other date, etc. Why? If the parties needed 5 weeks to reach a solid agreement, they should have had 5 weeks - reschedule when parliament opens. Shouldn't have been a big deal to do that.