94 Report Stockley Coalition Could Lib Dems Have Handled Better

Home Office, and the party would have also been helped by having ‘a gopher’ Reports minister at the Cabinet Office, ‘minding what was going on’. Similarly, the culture and structure Coalition: Could Liberal Democrats have handled of Whitehall was always going to pre- sent the Liberal Democrats with major it better? challenges. Akash Paun believed that Autumn conference meeting, 18 September 2016, with David Laws, Whitehall, having grown accustomed, over many decades, to having one head Chris Huhne and Akash Paun; chair: Jo Swinson of government, had no desire to allow a Report by Neil Stockley second centre of power, in the shape of Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. He etween 2010 and 2015, the Lib- had made its burdens even heavier, and also charged that the Liberal Democrat eral Democrats participated in its electoral punishment worse than it negotiators did not think through what Bthe UK’s first peacetime coali- should might been, largely as a result of kind of support Nick Clegg would need tion government for some seventy years. inexperience in government and a cer- in order to discharge his cross-depart- They were momentous times for liber- tain political naiveté, combined with a mental roles as deputy prime minister. als, not least because the coalition came failure, which was at times quite aston- Moreover, they had failed to ensure, in to an abrupt end with the 2015 general ishing, to address basic questions of the early days of the government at least, election, which was catastrophic for the strategy. that there were sufficient special advisers party. The Liberal Democrats’ achieve- The meeting heard how the dam- to support Liberal Democrat ministers ments in office, what they did well, how age that the Liberal Democrats inflicted dealing with Conservative ministers and they might have handled coalition better on themselves had three elements: the their often radical policy proposals. As and lessons for the future will be debated structure of the government; the ways in a result, the party failed too often to get for many years to come, not least by lib- which the coalition was presented; and to grips with some of the Conservatives’ erals who hope to share power again. At the substance of specific policy decisions. important, politically charged policies, autumn conference, these questions were All of these drove the party’s core prob- such as the NHS reforms. addressed by Akash Paun of the Institute lem during the coalition: the loss of its Both David Laws and Akash Paun for Government, David Laws, the former distinctive political identity, which led were sure that the optics of the coalition schools minister who was a key player directly to the electoral wipeout of 2015. had undermined the party’s ability to in the coalition government, and Chris Akash Paun acknowledged that, be perceived as a separate, independent Huhne, the energy and climate change immediately after the May 2010 general party that was making a real difference secretary from 2010 to 2012. As with the election, the Liberal Democrats were to government policies, rather than as a Liberal Democrat History Group meet- well prepared for coalition talks and did mere adjunct to the Conservatives. Laws ing about the 2015 general election, held well at playing Labour and the Con- pointed out that Nick Clegg had impor- in July last year, there was a general servatives off against each other. The tant roles in the government, as chair reluctance to address whether the party’s party’s negotiating team had, however, of the Cabinet Home Affairs Commit- achievements were worth the electoral given rather less thought to which min- tee and first secretary of state. Whereas damage. The drivers of the electorate’s isterial positions the party should try to David Cameron was regularly filmed harsh verdict on the Liberal Democrats, secure. He suggested that they should speaking for the government outside and they might have been prevented, have driven a harder bargain, and laid Number 10 Downing Street, Nick Clegg again provided the dominant theme. claim to important public service depart- had no similar premises or media forum All three speakers accepted that, from ments that were of most interest to vot- available to him. Two of his colleagues, the day the coalition took office, the ers, such as Health and Education. David Laws himself (briefly) and Danny Alex- party was doomed to lose a large amount Laws was in complete agreement on this ander successively held the role of chief of voter support. Akash Paun reminded point, and also explained, quite fairly, secretary to the Treasury, yet the Con- us of the simple, brutal rule of coalitions that members of the team felt the need servative chancellor, George Osborne, in continental countries: the smaller to keep their roles as negotiators separate always presented the government’s major parties almost always suffer at the bal- from calculations as to which office they economic statements, some of which lot box. The senior partner claims credit might themselves hold. included key Liberal Democrat policies, for popular policies and achievements, Chris Huhne believed that in accept- to the Commons and the public. and leaves the junior partner to take ing the offers of the Department of Busi- The Liberal Democrats may have the blame for unpopular features of the ness, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and been complicit in making themselves government’s performance. According the Department of Energy and Climate secondary characters in the story. As to both David Laws and Chris Huhne, Change (DECC), ‘we walked into a Tory soon as the coalition took office, Nick about half of the Liberal Democrats’ vot- trap’. For these departments required Clegg had appeared with David Cam- ers from 2010 could have been expected the Liberal Democrats to make their eron in what Mr Paun called their to desert the party. Sure enough, the ‘messiest compromises’, on tuition fees famous ‘love in’ press conference in the party’s poll ratings began their nose- at BIS and nuclear power at DECC. In Downing Street Rose Garden. In the dive within months of the government’s hindsight, Huhne reflected, Nick Clegg same vein, David Laws cited Nick’s deci- formation. But the speakers analysed at should have taken on a major department sion to sit immediately next to David some length the ways in which the party of state, such as the Foreign Office or the Cameron in the Commons, listening and Journal of Liberal History 94 Spring 2017 17 Report: Coalition – could Liberal Democrats have handled it better? looking up to him at Prime Minister’s he called ‘a terrible mess … that came of recent (and subsequent) single-party Questions, the part of parliamentary nowhere’, for which the leaderships of administrations. proceedings that features most fre- both coalition parties were ultimately Laws was correct to remind the meet- quently in TV news bulletins. responsible. ing of how much the Liberal Demo- On policy, the main topic of discus- For David Laws, and Akash Paun, the crats had delivered. However, in so sion was, understandably, tuition fees tuition fees debacle was the starkest exam- doing, he may have exposed some of – ‘the area we made the biggest hash of,’ ple of a bigger, more fundamental prob- the weaknesses of the party’s position according to David Laws. He suggested lem for the Liberal Democrats: the loss of in the coalition. On 7 May 2015, all of that the party had made two basic mis- the party’s distinctive identity after they the achievements he listed, impressive takes. The first was to go into the 2010 went into coalition. Laws conceded that as they were, were not in themselves, an general election still promising to oppose ‘we thought too little’ about the damage electoral asset for the party and did not any increase in tuition fees, which Laws that was done to the party’s brand, and help to any significant degree in address- saw as a hugely expensive commit- what could be done to address it. ing its lack of an identity with voters. ment that would do nothing to promote What, then, of the Liberal Demo- The meeting addressed some of the rea- social mobility. (Akash Paun opined that crats’ many achievements during the sons, including the fact that the Con- the presentation of the pledge showed coalition? Surely they proved that the servatives took the credit for some key that the Liberal Democrats did not seri- party had made a positive difference, policies, most notably the increased per- ously expect to be part of the govern- with an underlying framework of clear sonal tax allowance. I would add that ment after the 2010 general election; in liberal values? Laws began his contribu- almost none of the policies were per- other words, they did not really expect tion with a list of policies delivered by ceived as being ‘pre-owned’ and then to have to deliver their promises on tui- the party, which ranged from the pupil ‘delivered’ by the Liberal Democrats tion fees.) Laws also believed that the premium, expanded early years’ edu- in office. Moreover, lists of policies sel- Liberal Democrats underestimated the cation for disadvantaged children, free dom resonate with voters. Chris Huhne high political price they would pay for school meals, the increasing personal summed up the Liberal Democrats’ pre- not following through with the com- tax allowances and halving the deficit dicament when he charged that they had mitment once in government. He sug- to pension reform, the creation of the failed to communicate their achieve- gested, with the benefit of hindsight, Green Investment Bank, shared paren- ments or encapsulate them in a simple that the party should have vetoed the rise tal leave, the 5p tax on plastic bags, and slogan or message.

Load more