As more than one observer in the UK dryly put it, following the May 6 election that resulted in a hung parliament, the people had spoken, but it wasn’t too clear what exactly they were saying.
The final results of the election gave David Cameron’s Conservative Party 306 seats, Gordon Brown’s Labour Party 258 and Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrat Party 57, out of the 650 parliamentary seats at stake. Even though the Conservatives gained 96 seats, mainly at the expense of Labour, who lost 91, they did not win enough to command an overall majority in the House of Commons. The Liberal Democrats suffered a net loss of five seats, but they were nevertheless still in a position to be courted by either the Conservatives or Labour.
Thus, with the three main parties left to interpret the wishes of the electorate, the Conservatives claimed the moral right to lead the next government, having recorded the largest swing in votes (5.2%) from one party to another since 1931. On Tuesday, after a mercifully short – for the financial markets in particular – but dramatic period of uncertainty, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats announced that they would form the UK’s first coalition government since the Second World War.
But during the interregnum, even as the Tories and the Lib Dems were negotiating, Labour had also been trying to woo the latter, with Mr Brown announcing on Monday that he would resign the leadership of the Labour Party and step down as prime minister in September, effectively sacrificing himself to clear the way for a deal. Mr Brown’s attempt to cling to power by his fingernails was met with reactions ranging from incredulity to outright fury. Even if there was some confusion as to what the election results really meant, one thing was very clear: Mr Brown had to go.
This he did on Tuesday, with grace and dignity, as he resigned as prime minister and party leader once the Liberal Democrat-Conservative pact had been agreed.
As is traditional in the UK, Mr Cameron was swiftly appointed prime minister by the Queen and he announced a “proper and full” coalition with the Liberal Democrats, with Mr Clegg as deputy prime minister, in the interest of stability and in the face of “deep and pressing problems – a huge deficit, deep social problems, a political system in need of reform.”
Mr Clegg, in seeking to reassure members of his own party about the integrity of the coalition, stated, “We are now going to form a new government. More importantly we are going to get a new kind of government. I hope that this is the start of the new politics I always believed in.”
On Wednesday, Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg, both 43, stood side by side at No. 10 Downing Street to confirm the new partnership and to provide details to an expectant, if somewhat apprehensive nation. To the surprise of many, the two erstwhile political rivals appeared to be completely at ease with each other in what some British newspapers have called a “love-in.”
There will be 18 Conservative ministers and five Liberal Democrats in the new Cabinet, but the prime minister referred to the new government as a “Liberal-Conservative” one, with the precedence given to the “Liberal” tag being regarded as a significant indicator of the nature of the partnership and the new type of government promised, perhaps even a suggestion of a kinder, gentler brand of Conservativism.
Indeed, in the negotiations to form a government, both parties have had to put aside some of their more divergent ideological principles and policies in the interest of consensus and togetherness.
For example, the Tories have agreed that there will be fixed term parliaments with the next election scheduled for May 7, 2015, though if necessary, parliament can be dissolved and an election called, if 55 per cent of MPs agree. In addition, there will be a referendum at some point on scrapping the UK’s first-past-the-post system in favour of the Alternative Vote method. The Lib Dems, in turn, have agreed to back the Tories’ plan to address the UK’s huge budget deficit by cutting public expenditure by £6 billion this year. But the Conservative proposal to raise the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million has been put aside.
Both parties concur that reduced spending rather than increased taxes is the way forward, although the government will have to find £17 billion, possibly through rises in capital gains tax to fund the Lib Dem policy of taking those earning less than £10,000 out of the tax system.
The Lib Dems have also dropped their opposition to renewal of the UK’s Trident nuclear deterrent, although the cost of the project will be subject to review, and they will support a cap on non-EU immigration. They have agreed too that no further powers should be ceded to the EU without a referendum and the UK should not join the euro.
More details will emerge in the next few days and weeks, but it is already clear that the coalition intends to take the UK “in a historic new direction,” to quote the new prime minister. As to whether Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg can maintain the “direction of hope and unity, conviction and common purpose” (Mr Cameron again), remains to be seen.
Certainly, there is already some scepticism that the coalition can last, despite the obvious chemistry between Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg and the goodwill on display. But the two principals themselves are under no illusions regarding the enormity of the task ahead and appear committed to working together.
And yet, amidst all the inherent scepticism of the British, in spite of the general cynicism about and of politicians, with all the fears of government by coalition, there is real hope in the UK, cautious though it may be, that the positive intent of the two political leaders could well lead to a new, better form of governance, to Mr Cameron’s promised land, strongly endorsed by Mr Clegg, of “a new politics where the national interest is more important than party interest. Where co-operation wins out over confrontation, where compromise, give and take, reasonable, civilised, grown-up behaviour is not a sign of weakness but of strength.”
Only time will tell whether this marriage of convenience will be consummated into a full-blown union and whether the fruits thereof will be as promised in the rhetoric of the politicians.
