What Cameron should do about Clegg

In my column yesterday I wrote that the Labour Party was now pointless and should be abolished.

My argument was this - that the split with the Liberals at the beginning of the twentieth century had doomed the left. The split had been over the unions and socialism. Now Labour no longer believed in either the spilt served no purpose.

So Labour and the Lib Dems both can and should merge. And that would dish the Tories.

This morning a further thought occurred to me.

Nick Clegg presents the Tories with a golden opportunity. It would be a disaster for the right to let it pass.

A major priority for Tories is preventing the return of the Ashdown/Blair informal alliance and tactical voting between the parties, a return that could happen very quickly with the Tories in power.

Clegg presents a brief, possibly never to be repeated, chance to do avoid this.

By proposing spending and tax cuts, and radical school choice Clegg has advanced policies that the Tories can consider. Their temptation will be to dismiss them as ill thought through and left wing.

Instead they should embrace the Liberal change, say nice things about it, invite Liberals to join them on bipartisan commissions to consider the future of public spending, offer Liberals a role in public service reform.

Obviously in a hung Parliament or with a narrow majority the Tories will try and woo the Liberals. But unlike Blair they should do this even if they win big. They must try and detach the image of the Liberals to themselves and to others as part of the left.

Tactically the Conservatives may fear loss by accepting Clegg's claim to move back to the centre. But strategically this is a huge opportunity not to be missed.

Comments

[william thomson]

It seems to me that David Cameron can't do any wrong because he never does anything of any importance since he has hardly been in the news or newspapers this past 6 weeks ...is he still alive.
Or is the reason for labour and Gordon Browns slump in the polls because he and his party have had nothing but bad press for the past few months.
I really don't think there is anything in this world that Brown can do that will be appreciated by the news media and their relentless pursuit for his head will continue. If Cameron had achieved half of what Brown has done then I would take my hat off to him, however deep down I strongly believe that the hierarchy of the Conservative party realise that Cameron is a liability if he opens his mouth in public, hence the gagging order has been put in place.

[p]

Codswallop.

The whole premise of this is a static constitutional arrangement.

Much better for the party and the country simply to implement English Votes for English Matters (or go the whole hog and deliver an English parliament).

That would keep the lefties out of power pretty much forever.

Or Call Me Dave could un-jerrymander the constituency boundaries. That would yield another 30 or 40 Tory seats for the forseeable future.

[Bobby Monroe]

We need a serious man for seriois times. Keep the present leader in charge now some jumped up morons.

[Bob Herz]

One word Fink - Europe!

[Thomas Hemsley]

Clegg has rejected any idea of bipartisan working - he only wishes to see cross-party (ie including Labour) consultations on constitutional reform.

[meltonmark]

I doubt many in this country really care anymore. The mainstream parties are all as bad as each other. Each has lost touch with the people. Each is generally regarded as 'pigs in the trough' but with perhaps a slightly different snout size.
Democracy has failed us. We need a new way forward, not a rehash of the existing farce. Instead promoting more of the same, perhaps Mr Finkelstein should be suggesting new structures altogether.

[JONB]

William Thomson - Don't you get it? Cameron doesn't NEED to say anything, Brown is doing all his PR for him, he can just sit back and watch them fight amongst themselves and implode, something which has normally been the privilege of Labour - watching the Tories over the last 10-15yrs, not any more.
I can't wait for the first PMQ's, Brown and all Labour MP's must be dreading it, what a glorious summer it's been...

[Nick Anstead]

While the main argument is sound, I'm not sure that this is a once in a lifetime chance. In particular the Lib Dems seem to have undergone a major generational shift since ousting of Kennedy, who, it should be remembered, was an SDP man. That kind of symbolises the end of one particular variety of Liberal Democrat politics. I think the future is very open for the party and which direction it goes, especially if Labour is reduced in size significantly at the next elections, and the kind of MPs left are those least amenable to deals with liberalism.

Oh, and on P's comment (19:57), two points. First, your suggested constitutional arrangement is completely unsustainable. It is impossible to imagine a situation where a British executive, with whatever Parliamentary majority it may enjoy nationally, is required to propose "English" legislation and pass it through what is essentially an English legislature in which they might not enjoy a majority. Such a system would totally subvert the Westminster model of government and be completely unstable.

The only way it could ever be done would be model the English legislature on the Scottish system i.e. a separate executive and legislature. That system would also empower voters far more. They could, for example, ticket spilt i.e. vote Labour in a British election, Conservative in an English election or visa versa.

Which leads me to my second point. It is very foolish to believe that a party will rule a political sub-system forever. Doubtless there were people in the Scottish Labour Party who thought this would occur in Scotland after 1997, but they have been proved completely wrong. Once established, such systems develop their own politics and centres of gravity. Almost certainly what would occur (over a number of years) is a distinctly English brand of Labour politics, more appealing to those in that country. Or possibly a different party. But the party system would not be fossilized, that's for sure.