Coalition - what it looks like

7.30pm update:

Hague now speaks to the press. Are the Conservatives concerned GB's call to resign is swaying the Lib Dems towards Red? And more importantly are they saying these things to each other - why is this being played out in the press? Here's what Will of the Hague's got to say for himself (we'll not bother to ask where on earth Sir Dave of the Cam is - perhaps he is already too important to talk to 'the people'):

The Liberal Democrats have said to the Conservative party that they are only prepared to enter into a coalition agreement with a party that will change our electoral system to the alternative vote method of voting.

Now, David Cameron and the shadow cabinet and the Conservative MPs have decided that, although our concentration in all of these negotiations has been on the financial situation, on reducing the deficit, on the improvement of education, on the other great issues facing our country, that in the interests of trying to create a stable, secure government, we will go the extra mile. We will offer to the Liberal Democrats in a coalition government the holding of a referendum on the alternative vote system, so that the people of this country can decide what the best electoral system is for the future.

Or they can choose to continue their talks with us, to make a coalition with the Conservative party, which is on offer, in a government that would have a stable and secure parliamentary majority; a majority of 76 in the House of Commons, something highly desirable in our current economic situation; that would have an elected prime minister in David Cameron, the leader who obtained by far the most votes and seats in the general election held last week; and which would say that any reform of our voting system must be subject to a referendum of the people of this country.

We are absolutely convinced that we should not have another unelected prime minister and we should not change our voting system without a referendum. And whatever happens now, and whatever decision the Liberal Democrats make, that is ground on which we will stand.

6:300pm update:

Clegg on Sky news

Gordon Brown has made an important announcement today. It must have been a very difficult thing for him to say personally but I think he has taken it in the national interest and I think his announcement could be be an important element in the smooth transition towards a stable government that people deserve, without of course prejudice and without predicting what the outcome of the talks will be between ourselves and the Labour party.

and the Lib Dem ststement:

Over the past four days we have been working flat-out to deliver an agreement that can provide stable government that can last. The talks with the Conservatives have been very constructive and I am grateful to David Cameron and his team for the effort they have put in. But so far we have been unable to agree a comprehensive partnership agreement for a full parliament.

We need a government that lasts, which is why we believe, in the light of the state of talks with the Conservative party, the only responsible thing to do is to open discussions with the Labour party to secure a stable partnership agreement. We will of course continue our discussions with the Conservative party to see if we can find a way to a full agreement.

Gordon Brown has taken a difficult personal decision in the national interest. And I think without prejudice to the talks that will now happen between Labour and the Liberal Democrats, Gordon Brown's decision is an important element which could help ensure a smooth transition to the stable government that everyone deserves.

5:00pm UPDATE:

Brown speaks outside No 10. Says he has no desire to stay longer than is needed. That he will fasilitate coalition talks with the Lib Dems but will then step down as head of the Labour Party.

He says:

If it becomes clear that the national interest, which is stable and principled government, can be best served by forming a coalition between the Labour party and the Liberal Democrats, then I believe I should discharge that duty to form that government which would in my view command a majority in the House of Commons in the Queen's speech and any other confidence votes.

But I have no desire to stay in my position longer than is needed to ensure the path to economic growth is ensured and the process of political reform we have agreed moves forward quickly. The reason that we have a hung parliament is that no single party and no single leader was able to win the full support of the country. As leader of my party, I must accept that that is a judgment on me. I therefore intend to ask the Labour party to set in train the processes needed for its own leadership election. I would hope that it would be completed in time for the new leader to be in post by the time of the Labour party conference. I will play no part in that contest and I will back no individual candidate.

4:40pm update:

This from the Guardian - made me laugh out loud

My colleague Hélène Mulholland spoke to Simon Hughes at the end of the Lib Dem meeting. Hughes played down the prospect of a deal today: "I am sure there will be a government by the end of this week."

By the end of the WEEK?

4:20pm update:
This from David Laws, on behalf of the Lib Dems:

The parliamentary party has agreed that the central priority must be to form a strong and stable government in the national interest. The parliamentary party agreed that the proposals that have been discussed with the Conservative party and that were aired today reflect very good progress on a number of points. But they have also asked for clarification of details in relation to education funding, in relation to fair taxes, and in relation to issues in regard to voting reform and progress on that issue.

The parliamentary party has agreed that the leader will continue to listen to the representations that are coming from the leader of the Labour party, that clarification will be sought from the Conservative party on the particular points that I've just mentioned and they have also agreed that it is vital that progress should be made on all of these matters as soon as possible in the national interest.

The parliamentary party has also agreed that deficit reduction and a plan to bring down the deficit as soon as possible must be at the heart of any agreement.

THIS MORNING:
I found this graphic of the house of commons on guardian.co.uk most interesting.

Here's what we'll look like under a Cleggeron coalition:

And here's what it'll look like if Clegg and Brown decide they're going to go to bed together:

Meanwhile it's been 3 days since we voted and even though Clegg's begging us to 'bear with them', no clear decision's been made. He said they're:

"working flat out around the clock to try and act on the decision of the British people last Thursday in the election result"

Is it me or is Clegg also telling us this state of uncertainty is all our, the voter's, fault?

The press are betting we'll have a new PM by the end of the day though and I'm prepared to bet my supper that it'll be Sit Dave of the Cam (all hail).

It's hard to tell which is bigger news, though - the fact we don't yet have a parliament, or the fact the EU's about to go bankrupt. Testing times.