It’s been quite a week in British politics. Last Wednesday, we were all wondering if the Labour Party would have enough popular votes to finish second and whether the Tories would scrape by to secure a majority in the House of Commons. Yesterday, the politicians there settled the matter while the TV showed a close-up of the teal colored door of 70 Whitehall, the Cabinet Office. The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have formed the first peace-time coalition government since the 1920s, Gordon Brown has taken his leave of Number 10 Downing Street, and Tory leader David Cameron has become the youngest Prime Minister since Lord Liverpool in 1812. At the core is the Liberal Democrats’ deal with Mr. Cameron’s people. That falls into two sections: who got what job, and what policies will they collectively pursue?
For their efforts, the Liberal Democrats got five seats in the Cabinet. Under Mr. Brown, there were 22 members of the cabinet, but recently it has fluctuated between 21 and 24. The point is that Mr. Clegg’s LibDems got a fairer shake from Mr. Cameron based on their popular vote than they did from the first-past-the-post-electoral system.
Mr. Clegg is the Deputy Prime Minister, a largely honorific title. Unlike the US vice president, Mr. Clegg doesn’t become PM if Mr. Cameron were unable to do the job. However, he is also being given a brief to oversee political reform so it’s not entirely a non-job. More about that later.
Vince Cable will be the Business Secretary, although it was thought he would serve under Tory George Osborne at the Treasury. Dr. Cable was the highest profile LibDem politician under Mr. Clegg’s debate performances and a couple of decades older than Mr. Clegg.
David Laws, who was LibDem spokesman for Education, will be Chief Secretary to the Treasury, the number two job there (but still a Cabinet level position). Mr. Osborne will head the Treasury, but Mr. Laws will be responsible for telling government ministries that they can’t have all the money they want at budget time.
Chris Huhne, a former rival of Mr. Cleggs’ for the party’s top job, will head up Energy and Climate Change. He had been environment spokesman for the party before taking on the home affairs brief. The job is very important to the LibDems, and Mr. Huhne is a heavy-hitter. Very hopeful situation.
Finally, David Alexander will be Scottish Secretary, a politically brilliant appointment by Mr. Cameron. Mr. Alexander was born in Edinburgh and represents a constituency in the Scottish Highlands. He was not only Mr. Clegg’s Chief of Staff, but also drafted the latest party manifesto. Since the Tories have only 1 of Scotland’s 59 seats, giving the post to the LibDems always made sense, and Mr. Alexander makes even more sense.
In addition, there will be several "sleepers" scattered throughout the various ministries. There are jobs within the highest echelons of the British executive that are not of Cabinet rank (think Assistant Secretary of State in the US). Most of these will go to Tories, but some will be LibDem sleepers. I expect there will be at least one sleeper in every department. Their purpose is to make sure their party knows what's going on throughout the executive -- and to take some of the blame when things go wrong.
Interesting side note from the BBC: "Baroness Warsi is to become Conservative Party chairman. She will be part of the cabinet - the first Muslim woman ever to hold such a senior political position." The Brits are starting to get the hang of meritocracy.
So now, on to the policies. If you want to read the whole document, it’s here. In a nutshell, there are 11 main headings, and several bullet points underneath.
First, and most telling by virtue of that position, is the heading "Deficit Reduction." In the election, the Tories made a big fuss about cutting it now, while the LibDems and Labour wanted to make sure that the recovery was underway. The balance in the policy is pretty reasonable, and the fact that both wanted to stop Labour’s increase in the National Insurance Contribution (like the American payroll taxes) helped. As an example,
The parties agree that modest cuts of £6 billion to non-front line services can be made within the financial year 2010-11, subject to advice from the Treasury and the Bank of England on their feasibility and advisability. Some proportion of these savings can be used to support jobs, for example through the cancelling of some backdated demands for business rates. Other policies upon which we are agreed will further support job creation and green investment, such as work programmes for the unemployed and a green deal for energy efficiency investment.
The £6 billion was a Tory debating point during the election, and the "green deal" speaks to the LibDem core.
Second came the National Health Service, Schools and a "Fairer Society." The parties pledged an increase in NHS spending in real terms (yes, conservatives in Britain want to spend more on their single payer healthcare system!), the LibDem pupil premium paid for as the Tories insist by cuts outside the schools budget. Defense came under this heading, too.
The parties commit to holding a full Strategic Security and Defence Review alongside the Spending Review with strong involvement of the Treasury.
The Government will be committed to the maintenance of Britain’s nuclear deterrent, and have agreed that the renewal of Trident should be scrutinised to ensure value for money. Liberal Democrats will continue to make the case for alternatives. We will immediately play a strong role in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference, and press for continued progress on multilateral disarmament.
Here is the art of the compromise by agreeing to disagree on the Trident nuclear weapons system.
And finally in this section, "We will restore the earnings link for the basic state pension from April 2011 with a "triple guarantee" that pensions are raised by the higher of earnings, prices or 2.5%, as proposed by the Liberal Democrats." The Tories yield again.
Third was taxation. Here, the LibDems got a few important bits. The government will increase the personal allowance to £10,000 from £6,000 as the LibDems wanted and it is agreed that "this should take priority over other tax cuts, including cuts to Inheritance Tax." The inheritance tax is always important to the Conservatives.
"We further agree to seek a detailed agreement on taxing non-business capital gains at rates similar or close to those applied to income [LibDem], with generous exemptions for entrepreneurial business activities [Tory]."
Next was banking reform. The deal includes a banking levy, action on "unacceptable bonuses," "proposals to foster diversity, promote mutuals and create a more competitive banking industry," and "proposals to give the Bank of England control of macro-prudential regulation and oversight of micro-prudential regulation." A big-ish concession from the Liberal Democrats was the agreement not to join the euro – eventually, the LibDems want to jettison the pound, but given the Greek situation, that isn’t in the cards for ages. Hence, a big concession on policy, and a minor one in the end since it isn’t feasible.
Immigration was largely a Tory issue in the campaign, and the LibDems went along with "We have agreed that there should be an annual limit on the number of non-EU economic migrants admitted into the UK to live and work. We will consider jointly the mechanism for implementing the limit. We will end the detention of children for immigration purposes."
Political reform is the sixth heading, and it looks like the LibDems got everything the Tories could give without losing their right wing. They got a 5-year fixed-term parliament, with a 55% threshold for dissolution prior to that. They got a referendum on the alternative vote; "Both parties will whip their Parliamentary Parties in both Houses to support a simple majority referendum on the Alternative Vote, without prejudice to the positions parties will take during such a referendum." This means both parties will enforce a pro-referendum party line vote in Commons to establish the referendum, while the Tories have reserved the right to campaign against it. MPs who misbehave be recalled by their constituents (both parties favored this), and the House of Lords should be an elective body "on the basis of proportional representation[!]" Greater devolution for Scotland and Wales [and England?] are on the list.
Under Pensions and Welfare, there is a Tory-tinge to the section. "We agree that receipt of benefits for those able to work should be conditional on the willingness to work," is a prime example. Education was another section despite "schools" appearing in section 2. Here, the parties largely agree on goals, but aren’t entirely aligned on method. For example, "If the response of the Government to Lord Browne’s report [an ongoing study of higher education funding] is one that Liberal Democrats cannot accept, then arrangements will be made to enable Liberal Democrat MPs to abstain in any vote."
On Europe, the LibDems abandoned most of their policies. For example, "We agree that there should be no further transfer of sovereignty or powers over the course of the next Parliament." Also, "We agree that we will amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that any proposed future Treaty that transferred areas of power, or competences, would be subject to a referendum on that Treaty – a ‘referendum lock’." Furthermore, "We will examine the case for a United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill to make it clear that ultimate authority remains with Parliament. We agree that Britain will not join or prepare to join the Euro in this Parliament. We agree that we will strongly defend the UK’s national interests in the forthcoming EU budget negotiations and that the EU budget should only focus on those areas where the EU can add value." All told, pretty Tory, and in truth, this is where most of Britons’ hearts lie anyway.
On civil liberties, an area where New Labour carried a faint scent of Old Fascism, the Tories and the LibDems found a lot in common:
The scrapping of ID card scheme, the National Identity register, the next generation of biometric passports and the Contact Point Database. Outlawing the finger-printing of children at school without parental permission. The extension of the scope of the Freedom of Information Act to provide greater transparency. Adopting the protections of the Scottish model for the DNA database. The protection of historic freedoms through the defence of trial by jury. - The restoration of rights t non-violent protest. The review of libel laws to protect freedom of speech [British libel laws totally SUCK!]. Safeguards against the misuse of anti-terrorism legislation. Further regulation of CCTV. Ending of storage of internet and email records without good reason. A new mechanism to prevent the proliferation of unnecessary new criminal offences."
Lastly, there is the environment. This amounts to a huge Liberal and Green wish list. Moreover, it is one of the areas where Mr. Cameron has actually changed Tory policy (they realized that rural Britain, where it gets a lot of votes, doesn’t like to be polluted). And where they vehemently disagree, the LibDems have their safety valve.
We have agreed a process that will allow Liberal Democrats to maintain their opposition to nuclear power while permitting the government to bring forward the national planning statement for ratification by Parliament so that new nuclear construction becomes possible.
This process will involve: the government completing the drafting of a national planning statement and putting it before Parliament; specific agreement that a Liberal Democrat spokesman will speak against the planning statement, but that Liberal Democrat MPs will abstain; and clarity that this will not be regarded as an issue of confidence.
The deal looks like it will hold for a couple of years at least. There will be grumbling on the Tory right and the Liberal Democrats’ left. Labour claims they’ve had over 8,000 inquiries about membership since the Teal Deal went down. Some of those people are probably Liberal Democratic activists. That is how it goes.
Everyone who has followed my diaries on this campaign knows my bias. I am a long-time supporter of the Liberal Party, and Liberal Democrats after the merger with the SDP. Could they have got more? Not out of the Tories (who frankly were more generous, or perhaps more desperate, than I thought they’d be). And Labour, as I discussed yesterday, couldn’t deliver even if they wanted to.
More than being a fan of the Liberal Democrats, I’ve been a friend of Britain and her people (and they have repaid my friendship many times over) for decades and owe a graduate degree to its generous and open university system, part of my health to medical care I received for free (well, I did pay the Value Added Tax to support the NHS) and I got my professional start working for a British company. Looking at the current UK political landscape, I really believe that the LibDems got a good deal not just for themselves but for the country as a whole [OK, Clegg, don’t make me look bad now].
There’ll be a short finale to this series of diaries in a day or several to see if there is anything American Democrats can learn from all of this.