Will we have a general election and, if so, who will win?

Much, as ever, would depend on which major party was able to assemble a working majority

Thinking about holding a general election at this time of year inevitably calls the phrase “turkeys voting for Christmas” to mind. For, as the surprise results in 2015 and 2017 demonstrate, a mixture of polling errors, a volatile electorate and Britain's capricious first-past-the post system makes the outcome hazardous to predict.

Jobs, in other words, will be the number one issue in the minds of many MPs – er, their own jobs.

How could it happen? Not the way the 2017 election came to be held three years before it was due. That was by a two-thirds vote of MPs – in effect the Labour and Conservatives together – because Jeremy Corbyn was happy to oblige Theresa May’s wishes. This time, Tory MPs are not going to be so keen.

This time, the government would have to lose a vote of confidence in the Commons. That depends on the DUP, whose 10 MPs have propped up May's government so far. If they decide to bring her down, Corbyn – or alternative possible Tory leaders – would have 14 days to try to form an a government that they would support.

It is possible that Corbyn or an interim Tory leader could offer the DUP a deal that would satisfy their concerns about May's Brexit plan, but if they could not there would have to be a general election. Altogether, though, this would take seven weeks at a time when the Article 50 clock is running down.

Then there is the small matter of the weather. Britain has had winter elections before – two during the constitutional crises of 1910 (January and December), plus the February 1974 election called during a miners’ strike and power cuts. Cold, dark nights are not the ideal conditions to go canvassing, get people to a public meeting or to the polling stations, vital as the issues facing the nation may be.

All things considered, then, an early election would be hazardous affair for almost everybody concerned, and one that might simply land the parties, the country, and Brexit more or less where it started.

There is also the problem that a general election may settle nothing, least of all the European question. Given the state of the polls today – and much can change over the span of a campaign – the Conservatives would suffer a swing against them, compared with the 2017 election, of about 1.4 per cent. Crudely, that would see them lose about 20 seats to Labour including Putney (Justine Greening) and Hastings and Rye (Amber Rudd).

As a result of a smallish swing against them, the Conservatives might win something like 297 seats with Labour on 282 seats, though Labour would, on today’s polling scores, win slightly more of the popular vote nationally.

Who then would have a mandate to govern? How would it change the arithmetic on vital Brexit votes? Would more Leavers and Remainers lose their seats, irrespective of party? If a minority Labour government was formed, would it have any success in “renegotiating” May’s deal in Brussels? The EU Commission has been silent, diplomatically, on this last point.

In other words we could very possibly end up with yet another hung parliament – the third in this decade (following 2010 and 2017), after the third election in as many years. Conservatives must reflect on the reality – perhaps a long term trend – that their party has only won an overall majority twice in the past three decades (1992 and 2015), and then only a small one.

Conversely, unless Labour begins to regain ground in Scotland it is unlikely to command a majority in its own right based on seats won in England and Wales alone. The Lib Dems are still too feeble to stage one of their famous revivals. The disintegration of Ukip might conceivably give some Tories a minor boost – or would a Brexit election rejuvenate them?

Much, as ever, would depend on which major party was able to assemble a working majority. There might be an attempt by the Tories to patch up the deal with the DUP – adding say 10 unionists to their 297 strength – summing to 307, still short of an overall majority: Not strong and stable.

What the Tories previously called Labour’s “coalition of chaos” would compromise its own support plus about 52 assorted nationalists, Liberal Democrats and Greens, summing to say 334 – sufficient to govern if it could be relied upon. What “price" the SNP might extract for a “confidence and supply” agreement remains to be seen.

A minority administration of either party could hardly claim an obvious mandate for its policy on Brexit.