This is John Bachelor speaking with my colleague Joseph Sternberg of the Wall Street Journal editorial page.

He's in London, he writes political economics.

We come to the polling showing on Easter Sunday in all of Britain, Guardian, Times, Telegraph, that the polling

shows the next general election, conservatives who have been in power for 13 years will have less

than 100 seats after the voting, 100 seats.

And I asked you what that means. What does it mean for their authority after having spent all these years in the vast majority?

What does it mean for Kirst-Armer leading labor to have something like a 350 majority in Parliament. What does it mean

for the policies? Joe answers very carefully here about first of all the 100 seat model.

There's much more.

I think they would be very much marginalized in that scenario.

I mean certainly they would have a lot of political influence

and ability to sway the debate because they would still be the primary opposition party in Parliament and would be the people that, you know, the media and voters in general would look to for a reality check or any kind of

accountability on a labor party government. I mean you're absolutely correct that the British

parliamentary system does not include mechanisms that we have in the

U.S. such as filibusters or the prospect of a has performed fairly well so that it's a relatively narrow margin in Parliament.

That can have an impact on the governing party because they will understand that they have to tread carefully,

but that is not the scenario that we're going to be looking at here most likely.

I hope you enjoy it. Thank you.