We have a parliamentary system, not a presidential system, in this country. As I said on Friday, with no party able to command a parliamentary majority arising from the General Election, my constitutional duty as Prime Minister is to ensure government continues while parties explore options for forming a new administration with majority support in the House of Commons.

The business of government has continued, including concerted action in Europe today to avert the financial crisis in the euro area. Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, spent much of his time yesterday at the European finance ministers' meeting in Brussels.

This morning, I had conversations with the president of the European Council, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund and the president of the European Central Bank. I have said I would do all I could to ensure that a stable, strong and principled government is formed, able to tackle Britain's economic and political challenges effectively.

As we know, the Liberal Democrats felt they should first talk to the Conservative Party. Mr Clegg has just informed me that, while he intends to continue his dialogue that he has begun with the Conservatives, he now wishes also to take forward formal discussions with the Labour Party.

I believe it is sensible and it is in the national interest to respond positively.The Cabinet will meet soon. A formal policy negotiating process is being established under the arrangements made by the Cabinet Secretary, similar to the negotiations between other parties.

The first priority should be an agreed deficit reduction plan to support economic growth and a return to full employment.
I know that both parties recognise the importance of ensuring economic stability in the markets and protecting Britain's standing and both are agreed on the need for a strong and full deficit reduction plan over the coming years.

There is also a progressive majority in Britain and I believe it could be in the interests of the whole country to form a progressive coalition government.

In addition to the economic priorities, in my view, only such a progressive government could meet the demand for political and electoral change which the British people made last Thursday.

Our commitments on a new voting system for the House of Commons and for the election of the House of Lords are clearly part of this.

I would however like to say something also about my own position.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 assured 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. I will back no individual candidate.

I believe that the British people now want us to focus on the economy, the continuing fight against terrorism, the terrorist threat to our country.They want us to continue to pursue the economic recovery, and I will do so with my usual vigour and determination, and I will do all in my power to support the British troops whose service and sacrifice create a debt of gratitude we can never fully repay.

And I believe on Thursday the country was also telling us that they want a new politics, and that the political reforms we seek will help deliver that change. I now intend to facilitate the discussions that the Liberal Democratic party has asked for. Thank you very much. As you will understand I will take no questions this evening. Other discussions can be had later.
Thank you very much.

相关中文报道：
【财新网】伦敦时间5月10日下午，英国首相布朗在唐宁街10号发表讲话，称自己将很快辞去工党领导人职务。

布朗称，目前他将继续代表工党与自由民主党（下称“自民党”）进行结盟谈判，与此同时，工党内部将举行领导人竞选，他本人“无意留任长于所需的时间”。他表示希望新的领导人能够在今年9月的工党年会之前产生并上任。

布朗作此表示的背景是，5月6日的英国大选产生了无一政党赢得半数以上席位的“悬空议会”（hung parliament）：保守党、工党和自民党分获306、258和57席，均不足325的半数水平。为保证新政府能够顺利推进政策主张，需要政党之间结盟组阁。

保守党党魁卡梅伦5月7日下午发表演讲，率先向自民党伸出了联合执政的橄榄枝。他强调保守党与自民党在欧洲问题、移民政策等方面的分歧，但称需要为组成一个“稳定、强有力的政府”，共商结盟的可能性。他表示同意成立一个跨党派委员会来研究选举体制改革，显示了他对自民党这一核心诉求的态度由此前的强硬反对到有所退让。

接下来的两天内，保守党和自民党之间进行了紧张的结盟谈判，但工党未公开表示和自民党开展谈判，虽然媒体称一些工党高层与自民党有所接洽。

而布朗在5月10日的讲话中称，自民党党魁克雷格也在刚才告诉他愿意“继续与工党的正式谈判”。布朗说，他相信只有一个真正“进步派”的政府才能为英国带来必要的政治和经济改革，暗示自民党与“保守派”的保守党的组合无法实现所需变革。

从政治理念看，自民党与工党之间更有“共同语言”。在政治体制改革、削减财政赤字的方式、融入欧洲等关键问题上，中间派的自民党和中左翼的工党的政策多有重合，而中右翼的保守党立场明显不同。不过，在保证国民医疗体系、教育等重点公共服务领域的投入方面，三党并无明显分歧。

布朗辞职的表态被理解为是工党为吸引自民党的青睐而释放的善意信号。大选前自民党克雷格针对可能出现的工党-自民党联盟曾表态：若工党的得票率低至第三位，将不能接受布朗继续担任英国首相。当时自民党民意支持率一度超过工党，位居第二。

根据英国宪法，在无一政党获得多数议席的情况下，原则上组阁权在原政府手上。因此，即便工党的议席落后于保守党，它仍有优先组阁权——工党不管与哪些政党结盟组阁，首相仍将由该党党魁（目前仍为布朗）担任。

克雷格当时的表态体现了自民党对布朗继续留任可能连累新执政联盟支持率的担心。自2005年担任首相以来，布朗在公众认可度方面表现不佳。虽然他在布莱尔政府担任财相的成绩颇受肯定，但作为首相却缺乏民众号召力。今年早些时候他凌辱下属，竞选期间他私下称一位向他抱怨移民问题的妇女是“老顽固” 等负面消息被曝光，更降低了其民意支持率。

大选结束后，自民党首先与保守党而非工党进行结盟谈判，说明自民党或许更倾向于前者。很大部分原因是因为，工党与自民党的席位之和仍未达到半数，若要组成多数派政府势必还需要拉拢其他小党，这会增加谈判和组阁的难度。而且，保守党及其支持者也一再放话称，工党失去近百席正是其失信于民的表现，已经没有资格继续执政。这种说法虽从宪法角度站不住脚，却仍可在一定程度上影响公众心理。

理论上，直到5月25日英国女王发表“女王讲话”之前，现工党政府都可继续留任。

声明：音视频均来自互联网链接，仅供学习使用。本网站自身不存储、控制、修改被链接的内容。"沪江英语"高度重视知识产权保护。当如发现本网站发布的信息包含有侵犯其著作权的链接内容时，请联系我们，我们将依法采取措施移除相关内容或屏蔽相关链接。