Coalition

The 55% Dissolution

Earlier I suggested that this new rule, requiring that any motion to dissolve parliament must be backed by 55% of MPs was “daft, questionably democratic and should be quietly shelved.” That seems to be the majority view. Which means, naturally, it’s time to reconsider. Tom Harris and Hopi Sen are correct to suppose that if a Labour-Liberal coalition had proposed this the right would be in uproar. However plenty of conservatives are unhappy with this anyway. See Iain Martin for instance. Or Dizzy. Or Pete. But, unless I am hopelessly confused about all this, the provision has nothing to do with confidence votes. The government would still be brought down

Reform? Looks more like gerrymandering

Much ado about this 55 percent proposal – whereby that proportion of the House, rather than just over 50 percent, would be required to vote down a government – and rightly so.  But, as so often, Iain Martin says all that needs to be said.  Here’s a snippet from his must-read post: “It is rather stretching things to try and present this piece of proposed gerrymandering as ‘Political Reform.’ It is actually designed to ensure that even a walk-out of the whole Lib Dem parliamentary group couldn’t actually bring down this government. This would weaken parliament and strengthen the hand of the executive considerably – when it is only weeks

The emergency Budget will be the true measure of this coalition

So who agrees with the economists forecasting that VAT will rise – perhaps to 20 percent – this year? I’m not normally one for making predictions but, as far as I can tell, this one seems pretty likely. Various politicos have been leaning towards this measure over the past year. And the new government will need quick ways to plug the fiscal gap while spending cuts filter slowly through the system. Problem is, it might make Vince Cable’s silly attacks during the election look even sillier in retrospect. Oh well. This opens up the wider question of how the coalition will rebalance our public finances. The Lib Dems have said

Playing for Keeps

So will it work? I’m more optimistic than Fraser and, unlike him, think that this really could, for reasons I’ll get to in a minute, be a “new era”. Of course, Fraser is not alone in questioning the long-term viability of the coalition. The excellent Steve Richards also thinks it cannae last. The sceptics may yet be proved right. Nevertheless, it strikes me that viewing this government as an awkward marriage of convenience between a left-wing party and a right-wing party is a mistaken or less than wholly useful approach. Is opposing ID cards a left-wing or right-wing position? Is the localism agenda owned by the right or by the

James Forsyth

The coalition passes the easy bit with flying colours

The first press conference of this new era was a definite success. The body language between Cameron and Clegg was good. When Clegg called Cameron ‘Dave’ it sounded very natural. Cameron’s argument was that the two parties could have come to a confidence and supply agreement but that would have been ‘uninspiring’ and could have broken down at any time. What the Prime Minister didn’t mention is that the coalition agreement ties the Lib Dems into cuts as well as providing stable government. Clegg was excellent, as in the debates he is helped by being a little bit taller than Cameron. He defused any tension when Andy Bell reminded Cameron

James Forsyth

The coalition agreement at a glance

I have just had a quick read through the coalition agreement and a few things jumped out at me. First, this new government will not abolish Lord Mandelson. The agreement states that while the parties are committed to a wholly or mainly elected Lords ‘likely there will be a grandfathering system for current Peers’.   The Tory manifesto commits a Conservative government to introducing ‘new rules so that legislation referring specifically to England, or to England and Wales, cannot be enacted without the consent of MPs representing constituencies of those countries.’ The coalition agreement has watered this commitment down significantly. The new government will merely ‘establish a commission to consider

Sense reigns, as the Tories redefine their health spending pledge

Here’s another sensible development for the day: the Tories have diluted their pledge to keep on increasing health spending.  As the FT’s Alex Barker reports, the Lib-Con political settlement is going to contain these words: ‘We will increase NHS spending in every year of the parliament.’ So what’s the difference?  Well, the previous pledge was to increase health spending in real terms each year – whereas this new formulation suggests that cash spending will increase, but that there will be cuts once you account for inflation.  Sure, it doesn’t smash the ringfence down completely.  But it’s still progress so far as the fiscal crisis is concerned.  Score one up for

Iain Duncan Smith’s appointment is a triumph for the welfare agenda

Of all the Cabinet positions announced so far, one is more eyecatching, and holds more promise, than all the rest: Iain Duncan Smith has been appointed Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.  Through his work with the Centre for Social Justice, IDS has shown that he not only knows his way intimately around the welfare brief, but cares deeply about it too.  The hope now is that this will energise the Tories’ welfare-to-work policies, and also put the CSJ’s crucial benefit reforms on the government’s agenda.  On a day when unemployment has risen once again, this may prove to be one of the best decisions that Prime Minister Cameron

James Forsyth

The new power broker

Ed Llewellyn, David Cameron’s chief of staff, is going to be one of the most influential people in Downing Street these next few years. He has already played a crucial role in the negotiation between the Tories and the Lib Dems; having worked for Paddy Ashdown in Bosnia and being friends with Nick Clegg’s wife from his Brussels days he has good relations with the Lib Dems.   Llewellyn has extensive links across government and it is telling that Sir Peter Ricketts, who was appointed as the national security advisor this morning, has worked with Llewellyn twice. He was Hong Kong desk officer at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office when

Who is missing?

The Cabinet is taking shape, admittedly with one or two surprises and not all of them good ones. There is still a way to go, even though action has already been taken on the NI increase. I understand that Michael Gove will be education secretary, which obviously leaves the hugely impressive David Laws to find another brief. Work and Pensions is a possibility, a job that has also been earmarked for the equally impressive Philip Hammond. There is a very obvious lack of women – Sarah Teather is highly regarded on the Lib Dem side, probably more so than her counterparts on the Tory side. I’ve heard rumours that she’s

The Cabinet takes shape

New Cabinet Ministers are arriving at their offices. I’ll update this as the day unfolds and we expect 5 Lib Dems to sit in Cabinet, but here’s the order of battle as it stands: Prime Minister: David Cameron Deputy PM: Nick Clegg Chancellor: George Osborne Foreign Secretary: William Hague Home Secretary (And Minister for Women and Equality): Theresa May Justice Secretary: Ken Clarke Business and Banking: Vince Cable Health Secretary: Andrew Lansley Education: Michael Gove Scottish Secretary: Danny Alexander Work and Pensions: Iain Duncan Smith Defence Secretary: Liam Fox Energy and Climate Change Secretary: Chris Huhne Chief Secretary to the Treasury: David Laws Attorney General: Dominic Grieve Transport: Philip Hammond

A Text for Dave and Nick

Hold hands, gentlemen, and say together: Where there is discord, may we bring harmony. Where there is error, may we bring truth. Where there is doubt, may we bring faith. And where there is despair, may we bring hope. And this, as I suggested a long 36 hours ago, is what it’s all about and why this agreement needs to be for a full parliament: [T]he stakes in this game are much higher than the question of who wins what and who gives what up in the next few days, weeks and months. There is – no, there may be – an opportunity for Cameron to redraw the map in

The waiting game | 11 May 2010

Westminster is working itself into a frenzy as we wait for the official announcements, statements and rituals of state which will surely come in the next few hours.   The very latest is that Cabinet ministers are saying Brown will go either tonight or tomorrow morning; Vince Cable has suggested a Lib-Con deal is “very close”; and all the noises are about a full coalition, perhaps with Nick Clegg as deputy Prime Minister. But enough of that: we shall soon have something more concrete to grasp than all the rumours and helicopter imagery.  And it will be nothing less than the end of 13 years of Labour government.

Alex Massie

Clegg Gets Labour to Drive His Party to the Tories

There’s one thing that may be said of Nick Clegg’s willingness to talk to Labour: it allowed Labour to show Liberal Democrat MPs that a deal with the Tories is the only show in town worth buying a ticket for. Once Labour MPs vowed to derail any plan to force through voting reform without a referendum and once John Reid, David Blunkett and Andy Burnham pointed out the absurdity of a “Loser’s Alliance” that, however constitutionally permissable, would mock the actual, you know, result of the election then even the most sawdust-brained Liberal Democrat MP could appreciate that this bird wouldn’t fly. That leaves a proper deal with the Tories

James Forsyth

Lib-Con deal in the bag

The Lib Dems are holding a meeting of both their MPs and the Federal Executive at 7.30pm. It is now widely expected that this meeting will approve a coalition deal with the Conservatives. Those who have taken the temperature of the Lib Dem Federal Executive say that approval is in the bag.

Whatever happens, Clegg has sullied his credibility with the Tories

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves: some sort of deal between the Lib Dems and the Tories is still a distinct possibility, even if negotiations have been rocked by the events of yesterday. But whether it goes through or not, Clegg has seriously dented his credibility in Tory circles. Backbenchers who were warming to the idea of a formal Lib-Con coalition a few days ago – if only to scupper Labour’s hopes – are now dead set against it. The very notion of Clegg as Home Secretary is becoming a collective anathema. The question now is whether – failing a Lib-Lab coalition – the Tory leadership is more inclined towards

The Tory right strikes back

Sam Coates reports that the Tory right want Cameron to renege on the commitment to a referendum on AV. You can see why they want to do this but it’s ill-advised. The Lib Dems have destroyed their credibility by indulging blatant self-interest and the Tories should avoid making a similar mistake. The need for unity is absolute. It’s time to put-up and shut-up in the national interest. Right now, that means reaching an accommodation, either in coalition or in a minority government with Lib Dem backing or abstention. If that requires a referendum on voting reform then so be it. Besides, facilitating a referendum is not to endorse reform. The

The developing picture

The emnity between Labour and the SNP is legendary. Scenting opportunity, Angus Robertson has tried to appeal to Labour’s progressive instincts and substantial Scottish support to secure protection from cuts. John Reid and David Blunkett have talked sense about the damage a dalliance with nationalists would do to Labour’s English position. Now Douglas Alexander has said that he can’t envisage an deal with the SNP. This adds to the growing sense that the grand coalition will never form – a minority Lib-Lab coalition remains a possibility but an increasingly unlikely one. Boris has it right. This is the lurid politics of proportional representational laid bare. Michael Portillo and Malcolm Rifkind