Coalition Government 'shows emotional intelligence'

The Constitution Unit at UCL has been carrying out an intensive interview-based study of the Coalition Government. They report that 'In Whitehall officials report that both parties have developed a lot of emotional intelligence and worked hard to develop effective relationships, in a welcome contrast from the Blair/Brown years.'

In Parliament, the Coalition 'has behaved no differently from any other majority government, taking Parliament for granted ... The coalition may have less flexibility to accommodate Parliament because its legislative proposals are already a carefully constructed coalition compromise which they dare not unpick.'

The Unit finds that 'The Lib Dems have had a lot of influence on coalition policy, but struggle to demonstrate it.' This finding is confirmed by another piece of research which has just been published which I hope to comment on subsequently.

A mid-term review of the coalition agreement is due to start this summer and finish in September 2012. This will be an opportunity for discontented backbenchers in both coalition parties to express their views. Conservative backbenchers have been upset recently by what they see as Lib Dem triumphalism over changes to the NHS reforms.

Many Conservative backbenchers on the right of the party think that cuts in the defence and law and order budgets have gone too far and would be prepared to cut the NHS budget (and/or introduce an element of charging).

The Dave and Nick show

Despite the revival of formal Cabinet Government, it is interesting how much the Coalition Government depends on informal arrangements and in particular the personal relationship between David Cameron and Nick Clegg. This emerged from a presentation to the Magna Carta Institute seminar last week by Professor Robert Hazell of the Constitution Unit at UCL.

Cabinet committees are being taken more seriously and there is a right to refer issues up to the Coalition Commitee, but this ultimate star chamber has met only twice. The Coalition Operation and Strategic Planning Group was intended to meet weekly, but has been replaced by informal processes. Cabinet Committees resolve interdepartmental issues, not coalition issues.

Much depends on the bilaterals between Dave and Nick. They usually chat on the phone on Sunday evening and have a regular meeting each Monday morning. The Quad is made up of the PM and Deputy PM, plus the Chancellor and the Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Sometimes it functions as 'Quad plus' when other ministers are brought in. There are slo bilaterals between Oliver Letwin and Danny Alexander, as well as Letwin's 'policy catch ups'.

A good night for Dave

Dave Cameron has reason to be pleased with the local election results so far. BBC projections put the Conservatives on 35 per cent as against 37 per cent for Labour and 15 per cent for the Lib Dems. This is not a bad outcome for a party implementing unpopular policies. The Conservatives are also likely to be able to celebrate a big majority in the AV referendum.

In Scotland the presidential style campaign run by the canny Alex Salmond has paid off with a clear majority for the SNP. Labour may be able to take sole charge of the Welsh Assembly, but even there the result is on a knife edge. The results hardly show that voters think that they have a convincing alternative narrative or that they see Ed Miliband as a future prime minister.

Once again it is the Lib Dems who are the whipping boys for the Coalition Government. As expected, they have lost heavily in the council elections, especially in the north. There will now be increased party pressure on Nick Clegg to differntiate himself from the Conservatives.

Some of the things said in the AV referendum have left a sour taste in the mouth. It may never be glad, confident morning again, but it is not the end of the coalition. The two parties are inextricably bound together.

No depoliticisation strategy

Yesterday I went to the inaugural lecture of Professor Peter Burnham at Birmingham University. He is one of the main exponents of the depoliticisation thesis: in summary, the argument that governments place difficult decisions at one remove to avoid turning an economic crisis into a political crisis.

Sometimes they do this by adopting an external decision rule that can take the strain and the blame: examples include the Gold Standard, the Bretton Woods system and British membership of the ERM. Another option is a domestic rule of some kind such as the Thatcher Government's Medium Term Financial Strategy or possibly Gordon Brown's fiscal rules.

Pete Burnham's observation about the Coalition Government was that they have neither of these stratgies, domestic or external.

Cable at bay

One of the many unedifying aspects of current British politics is the way in which the media regularly demonstrate their power by entrapping and then driving from office a particular minister. The latest target is Vince Cable after he fell foul of a 'sting' operation conducted by the Daily Telegraph.

Cable now appears to have gone to ground among demands for his resignation, but he may just be having another ballroom dancing lesson. His statement that he declared war on Rupert Murdoch and his organisation has attracted particular attention with a statement of shock being put out by the Murdoch interests.

There are those of us who think that the significant position of the Murdoch organisation in broadcast and print media deserves closer scrutiny, particularly in terms of the political leverage it gives them. That is not to deny that Sky News and Sky Sports News have been innovative in their approach to television.

The Coalition Government finds itself attacked from the left by a nascent alliance of workers and students (shades of 1968) that thinks it can defeat the government on the streets and a grateful electorate would then give Ed Miliband a working majority to fill in his blank sheet of paper.

It is possible that the Conservatives could win an early election. That is why some of those on the right would like to undermine the Government so that they can have red in tooth and claw Conservatism.

I think the country needs some stability: a general election in 2011 would not really be in anyone's interests. Cable may weather the storm or David Laws could be brought into replace him and we could all enjoy Vince's Christmas performance on Strictly Come Dancing (it reminds me of when Dennis Healey as chancellor appeared on the leading comedy show of the day, Morecambe and Wise).

At least it makes a change from reading about 'My Snow Hell'.

Lib Dems shut out at Defra

Defra is just one of three government departments that does not include a Lib Dem minister. Moreover, all the ministers in the department have strong farming links, inclining them towards a productionist agenda.

Lib Dem farm spokesman Andrew George, the MP for West Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, has criticised the Conservative stranglehold on posts. Differences have emerged on the proposed badger cull and the decision to abolish the Agricultural Wages Board.

Mr George has been trying to work with the Secretary of State, Caroline Spelman, to have some say about how budget cuts are made. However, he has admitted that he was 'not yet in the inner circle of Defra ministers'.

Most disagreements are likely to be over matters of domestic policy such as the two that arisen already, rather than attitudes towards the CAP where both parties share a relatively liberal, market oriented stance. However, the Lib Dems are particularly attuned to the concerns of smaller farmers from whom they receive electoral support.

There was speculation that Defra would be abolished or at least re-named, but this seems to be off the agenda for now.

The Biden-Clegg relationship

Washington DC: One of the interesting by-products of the Coalition Government is the relationship that has developed between Deputy PM Nick Clegg and US Vice-President Joe Biden.

Within minutes of Clegg's appointment, Biden was on the phone to deliver his congratulations. They have been video conferencing and when Nick Clegg comes to the UN later in the month he will spend two hours in Washington with his opposite number.

The vice-presidency in the US has come a long way since it was described by one incumbent as worth a 'pitcher of warm spit'. Vice-President Mondale described the role as 'You die, I fly' in reference to his role as an attendee at state funerals.

The role of deputy prime minister has no constitutional foundation and does not always exist but it has had some distinguished incumbents such as Rab Butler and Michael Heseltine.

The First 100 Days

This week Britain's Coalition Government marked 100 days in office. Why are we so preoccupied with a time span of 100 days when President Kennedy said that 1000 days was too little to achieve anything? The original Hundred Days was the period between the arrival of Napoleon in Paris after his escape from Elba to his removal after the Battle of Waterloo. The term gained political currency when President Roosevelt got the New Deal off to a good start in his first hundred days in office. As prime minister in the 1960s Harold Wilson promised 100 days of dynamic action, but the reality was more disappointing.

One test of success for the Coalition Government is that it has survived for 100 days without any major rifts appearing. Indeed, there have been fewer tensions between ministers than in many single party governments. There has been grumbling about their lack of influence from MPs the right of the Conservative Party and from Liberal Democrat backbenchers, but it has had little real effect.

The real tests for the Coalition Government are still to come. One will be when the Comprehensive Spending Review is published in October. Some cuts in public spending have already been announced, but then their full extent will hit home. Another will be getting the referendum of the alternative vote through Parliament and then, as far as the Liberal Democrats are concerned, winning it. 100 days is not a real test of five years.

Forming the Coalition Government

There were two key revelations in last night's BBC2 programme. First that the Conservatives had clearly thought through before the election what they would do in the event of a hung Parliament and had an eleven point offer to put on the table to the Liberal Democrats. Labour had no game plan. This confirms my view that the Conservatives have a greater appetite for power.

Second David Cameron and Nick Clegg had a 45 minute conversation at the opening of the Supreme Court in October 2009. This led them to believe that they were on the same wavelength and had been motivated to enter politics for similar reasons.

Telegraph targets Alexander

The Daily Telegraph has now targeted the new Chief Secretary to the Treasury David Alexander over allegations that he used a tax loophole to avoid paying capital gains tax on his second home in London: Danny

They claim it is part of their campaign on behalf of 'ordinary' second home owners and small investors. I am not sure what an 'ordinary' second home owner is. Some people, including politicians, need a second home for work related reasons. Others choose to have one for lifestyle reasons, but it's hardly something one can afford to do on a median income. As for small investors, I am one, but I wouldn't buy shares outside of an ISA or a SIPP as a tax efficient vehicle and I would expect to pay capital gains tax if I sold a substantial number.

The fact of the matter is that an anomaly has developed between the top rate of income tax and the top rate of capital gains tax. This opens the way for tax avoidance which is not acceptable in a period of fiscal consolidation. How one closes this gap is another matter: one does have to do it in one go or immediately and one could look at the exemption on relatively small gains.

The Telegraph should be careful what they wish for. Presumably they would prefer a Conservative majority government, but that is not a possibility. The alternative is a minority Conservative government which would be much weaker. The objective of the coalition was to establish 'strong and stable' government at a time of economic and financial crisis. Although phrases like the 'national interest' are used too readily, this is a period when we need to try and rise about cheap political point scoring to undermine one part of the Coalition Government.

A steep learning curve

I have to admit that I am on a steep learning curve with the Coalition Government. I have a sense of the policy ground shifting beneath my feet even in areas I am very familiar with. The final outcome is very uncertain in many cases.

Part of the problem is a lack of familiarity with the policies of the Liberal Democrats. Mea culpa, but many of us never anticipated they would be in government. I am reminded of an incident in the 2001 Parliament when I was attending a meeting at the House of Commons on higher education. A Liberal Democrat MP came and sat next to me. I knew he was and which constituency he represented. What I didn't know was that he was their spokesman on higher education which sent him into 'Do you know who I am?' mode.

In one policy area with which I am familiar, admittedly not a very high profile one, I have learnt that the Liberal Democrats have a policy which is diametrically opposite that of the Conservatives. It will be interesting to see what is said at a meeting on the subject I have to attend tomorrow.

I am not saying that it will not be possible to arrive at negotiated compromises or agreements to differ on these matters. But it is relatively uncharted territory politically and to some extent the rules of the game have to be learnt as we go along.

One area which is quite important is the role of the Treasury. I think it is no great secret that senior Treasury officials were indicating in the months before the election that they thought their department should continue to be an economics as well as a finance ministry.

George Osborne and his ultra dry Liberal Democrat Chief Secretary are clearly focused on its role as a finance ministry for understandable reasons. Quite a lot of the economic territory is being carved out by St. Vince of Cable. However, we have been here before. Challenges by the business department (in its many incarnations) have always ended up with the Treasury eventually establishing dominant control of the policy space.