Of all the myths that have emanated from pundits, academics, spin doctors and newspapers in these three long days since last Thursday, the silliest one is that the British people produced a hung Parliament result via some form of collective wisdom. Compared to this idea, the expectation of widespread tactical voting is comparatively sane.

There is no evidence for this because the syndrome could not possibly exist. The election result was a confluence of confusion, anger, rejection and local issues. This collided, in a quite random manner, with two other factors: the existence of a part of the Union largely uninterested in the result, and the first ever televised leader-debates.

First, voters are not some sort of radar-connected flock of starlings who can make astonishing diversionary movements as if they were members of a formation dancing team. It amazes me that adults in the media can not only suggest such a thing, but that otherwise intelligent readers and viewers can give it house room in their heads.

Second, collective wisdom (or madness) can only result from major stimuli, to which most of one species react in what seems a sensible (or stupid) way. A good example would the daily activities of market traders. A better example in politics is a landslide that defies expectation, and there was just one of these in the twentieth century – the Labour win in 1945. Given the causes of this were a decade of depression followed by an appalling six years of war, you might observe that the expectation was more a case of Churchillian hubris than defiant voter wisdom.

The Life of Brian may well have suggested that ‘we are all individuals’ and likely to shout that sentiment in unison, but real life is different. So if you hear another self-serving New Labour gargoyle spouting the ‘The People have decided to give none of us power’ drivel, ignore it: it represents only the grasping of a dinosaur at a short straw as it hurtles over the cliff.