A confidence-and-supply agreement is a political agreement in which a party or group of legislators outside the government undertakes to support the government on specified confidence votes and on supply or financial measures while generally remaining outside the governing Cabinet. It is therefore narrower than a coalition agreement. The supporting party does not necessarily accept collective responsibility for the government's full policy programme and does not normally receive ministerial office simply by signing the agreement.
The government gains a degree of parliamentary stability, while the supporting party can influence selected policy areas without formally joining the administration. The precise obligations differ between agreements and constitutional systems. In the UK, confidence and supply arrangements have been used when an election has produced no overall majority and a governing party needs additional parliamentary support.
The two components of the term have distinct meanings. Confidence concerns votes determining whether the government retains the support necessary to remain in office. Supply concerns parliamentary approval for government taxation and expenditure, including financial legislation and appropriations. A government may have difficulty functioning if it cannot secure supply because executive programmes require lawful authorisation and funding.
A confidence and supply agreement therefore normally commits the supporting party to back the government on a defined set of essential votes while allowing it to oppose the government on other matters. This creates a structured relationship between a minority government and an external parliamentary group. The arrangement can reduce uncertainty compared with negotiating every confidence and financial vote separately, but it does not provide the same political integration as a coalition.
A confidence and supply agreement is different from a coalition because coalition partners normally participate directly in government and share ministerial responsibility. Under a coalition, ministers can come from multiple parties and the parties typically agree on a common programme and collective decision making. Under confidence and supply, the supporting party can remain outside the executive. It can therefore retain a separate identity, criticise government policy and vote against the government on matters not covered by the agreement.
This distinction can be important for electoral accountability because voters may need to distinguish between a party that formally governs and one that provides limited parliamentary support. The precise boundaries depend on the text of the agreement. Some agreements are highly detailed, while others specify only a limited number of commitments.
The agreement can help a minority government survive because it establishes predictable parliamentary support. Without such an arrangement, the government may need to negotiate separately before every important vote, creating uncertainty over whether it can remain in office or pass essential financial measures. The supporting party gains bargaining power because its votes may be necessary to maintain the government's parliamentary position. The governing party gains greater stability but may have to modify policies, provide financial commitments or accept concessions.
Confidence and supply is therefore a mechanism of parliamentary bargaining rather than a formal constitutional category that has exactly the same legal form in every country. Its operation depends heavily on party discipline, the number of seats held by each party and the wording of the agreement.
The UK's 2017 general election provides a prominent modern example. The Conservative Party remained the largest party but did not hold an overall majority in the House of Commons. The Conservative government and Democratic Unionist Party agreed a confidence and supply arrangement. According to the House of Commons Library, the DUP committed to support the government on confidence motions and on specified matters including the King's Speech, the Budget, finance bills, money bills, supply and appropriation legislation and Estimates. The arrangement did not turn the DUP into a coalition partner. The DUP remained outside government while providing support on the defined matters. The agreement later came under pressure when the DUP did not support the Conservative government in certain Budget votes.
A confidence and supply agreement can contain both political and practical advantages, but it also creates dependencies. The government may have more predictable support than an entirely unsupported minority administration, while the supporting party may obtain policy or financial commitments. However, the government remains vulnerable if the supporting party withdraws its support or decides that an issue falls outside the agreement.
The supporting party may also face political criticism from voters who regard its support as making it responsible for government decisions. The governing party can likewise be criticised for depending on another party whose policies it does not fully share. These tensions mean that confidence and supply arrangements require continuing negotiation and political management even after the original agreement has been signed.
The term should not be confused with an informal arrangement in which a party occasionally supports a government. A formal confidence and supply agreement normally specifies the areas in which support will be provided, creating a clearer expectation than ad hoc voting. Conversely, not every agreement between parties is confidence and supply. A coalition, legislative pact or policy agreement may cover many areas without being designed primarily to guarantee confidence and financial votes. The distinction is especially important in parliamentary systems because the government may require support for its survival even when it cannot command a majority on ordinary legislation. A confidence and supply arrangement addresses this institutional problem without necessarily merging the parties involved.
Confidence and supply is therefore one possible response to a legislature in which no party has sufficient seats to govern alone. It can permit a minority administration to function while preserving a formal distinction between the government and the supporting party. Its effectiveness depends on the legislative numbers, agreement terms, party discipline, political incentives and constitutional conventions governing confidence and supply.
The House of Commons Library identifies confidence and supply as one of the possible arrangements following an indecisive election, alongside formal coalition and less formal arrangements. The concept is consequently best understood as a negotiated parliamentary support mechanism rather than as a separate type of government or a permanent constitutional form.
