The Liberal International’s recent seminar on government coalition building in Amsterdam uncovered a fact that most British political parties have tried hard to ignore, that is the era of two party, confrontational politics is over. The time for coalition, compromise and cooperation is here.
The Liberal Democrats’ Southport conference tentatively touched upon the topic of cooperation with the Labour government. Out of the eye of the media which usually descends upon the main autumn conference, the party decided that cooperation whilst maintaining political independence was the way forward. A sound, sensible solution and one which their European cousins adopted some time ago. It is true that the First Past the Post electoral system is designed to avoid coalitions, however with proportional representation being introduced for the elections to the Welsh and Scottish parliaments it is time to accept that coalitions will become part of every day British politics.
The examples of coalitions in Europe are encouraging. Guido Westerwelle MP and Secretary General of the FDP party in Germany noted that his party has been in government for all but a period of seven years since 1945. Although the FDP has always been the junior partner in the coalition it has managed to implement certain aspects of its programme, that without being in government would never have been achieved. For example in the present government the FDP was the driving force behind legislation to reduce taxation, liberalise trading hours and make the labour market more flexible. Despite this comfortable position Westerwelle acknowledged that the FDP must portray itself as the driving force in the coalition, with its own political identity and programme if it is to remain a credible political party.
The importance of a party maintaining its own identity was a point also emphasised by Lord Steel of Aikwood who discussed the painful experience the Liberal party had had with the Callaghan government in 1977-8. In this case the party found themselves tarred with the same brush as the government, and at the same time the parliamentary party alienated itself from the party in the country. Lord Steel admitted that the Liberal Democrats were beginning to find themselves in a similar position now that they are involved in constructive opposition to the government. This is an awkward situation which can easily be used against the party by its opponents. In addition it can often conflict with local politicians who are working against disagreeable Labour local authorities. What is the party to do? Lord Steel advised that it face up to these situations now and decide how they will act, because when electoral reform is implemented there will be no time to be schizophrenic about the issue.
Lord Steel’s point leads to the argument that in a developing, sophisticated democracy a multi party system flourishes under a system of proportional representation. Mr Jean Penders of the Dutch Christian Democrats embraced this argument, and asserted that the continuation of a system of politics whereby two blocs fought each other for power was detrimental to democracy. Only under system of proportional representation can democracy develop and flourish.
Far from being a vindication of coalitions the Liberal International seminar also dealt with the negative aspects of sharing power. For example the cases of Israel and Italy were highlighted as examples of proportional representation gone array, where the concept of proportionality seems to have been taken to extremes at the expense of practicality. Annemie Neyts – Uyttebroeck MEP argued that the development in Belgium of a federal state from a centralised system and the coalition agreements which came with that change, caused an alienation between politicians and citizens. It was from this alienation that corruption spread through the judiciary and extremist parties could pander to disillusioned voters. Yet in this case Mrs Neyts-Uyttebroeck’s party, the VLD, underwent a process of modernisation which recognised the citizens’ demands for more attention and the opportunity to make more decisions for themselves. In this case coalition government did have negative side effects, yet the Liberal party in the system was modern and sophisticated enough to accept the challenges of the situation.
Despite such problems none of the participants condemned coalition government, rather they viewed it as a concept to be developed. Frank de Grave of the VVD and deputy minister of social affairs in the Netherlands argued that coalition government is about compromise and compromise is a factor of everyday life, voters understand compromise. The key to success is to be honest with your voters about your compromises. For the VVD this approach does seem to have worked. The party has been a junior coalition partner since 1994 and yet has won two regional elections and has been topping the opinion polls in the run up to the May 1998 general election.
So will the Liberal Democrats succeed in the world of coalition building? President of Liberal International, Frits Bolkestein MP, stated that for a party to succeed it needs to assert its identity, be united and present itself credibly. With an astounding success in the May 1997 general election the party has done the groundwork now it has to make the bold decision to accept the facts of coalition government and be prepared to act when it arrives.
