This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
I query the use of this terminology in the article. To me a coalition requires the participants to be in government together. What happened in 1892 was that the Irish Nationalists preferred the pro-Home Rule Liberals to be in government rather than the anti-Home Rule Unionists. However there was never any suggestion of the Nationalists taking up office as part of a coalition with the Liberals. This is more like the confidence and supply agreements which have become common in New Zealand since proportional representation was introduced into a Westminster type parliamentary system (although as far as I know there was not a formal agreement in 1892 just a general appreciation of the political realities of the Parliament). --Gary J 13:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
As no one has objected to my view I have substituted minority government for minority coalition, in the article. --Gary J 14:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=small}