In the febrile, post-Glasgow East atmosphere, it seems unlikely the Labour party will be giving much thought to their relationship with the Liberal Democrats. For their part, the Lib Dems have spent recent months attempting to put as much distance as possible between themselves and the government as they seek to take advantage of Labour’s current political weakness. Before heading off on holiday, Nick Clegg fired a parting shot – that the party would target 50 Labour seats at the next election, a complete reversal of the ill-fated Tory ‘decapitation’ strategy of 2005.
At one level then, the two parties appear more distant than at any point in recent history – and that gap could become even wider as the election approaches. On the other hand, those very same factors currently driving them apart – Clegg’s redirection of the Lib Dems and the resurgence of the Tories – may in fact end up moving them much closer together in the longer term.
It is nearly a year since I wrote an article on the same theme for Progress. Then, there seemed a strong practical driving force for increased cooperation between the two parties: the possibility of a hung parliament would oblige them to work together. Now, this outcome seems unlikely, and one that Labour, as much as the Lib Dems, would welcome as a measure of success.
Similarly, Menzies Campbell’s cautious leadership of the Lib Dems, and his good personal rapport with Gordon Brown, appear a distant memory. Clegg shares neither the close links with the Labour party nor the social democrat-tinged politics of his predecessor. While it has taken Clegg some time to find his stride, his direction of travel is now becoming clear. He is aiming to ensure the Lib Dems occupy an equidistant position between Labour and the Conservatives. And he is seeking to root Lib Dem policy much more firmly in the party’s liberal tradition.
Clegg’s boldest statement of intent to date has been his recent announcement that he would fight the next election on a net tax cut platform. This commitment is not yet formal party policy (and will prompt a serious row at the party’s autumn conference). But it appears highly unlikely it will be defeated. For a party that went into the last three elections proposing a net tax rise, it appears a shift of totemic significance.
Clegg, and key allies such as shadow education minister David Laws, have also sought to modernise the party’s approach to public services, ending the tendency, most notable under Charles Kennedy, simply to defend the status quo. Laws, for example, is trying to reverse the party’s long-standing opposition to academies – indeed he is proposing a further liberalisation of the system to allow schools greater autonomy and to make it easier for new schools to open. The party leadership is also keen to remove the costly, and regressive, pledge to abolish student tuition fees – although this is one issue where it still fears defeat at conference and its alternative approach is yet to be finalised.
Simplistically, these moves can be seen as a shift to the right – the triumph of the ‘Orange Book’ wing of the party. Clegg has based his political narrative on a critique of the statism of the current government – a plea for devolved politics in a post-bureaucratic age. The language he employs is not dissimilar to that of David Cameron. In practical terms, too, Clegg’s Lib Dems appear more willing to work with the Tories than in past – most notably agreeing not to oppose David Davis’ one-man civil liberties crusade.
But the rightwards drift should not be exaggerated. The Lib Dems are still a progressive party – deeply committed to tackling poverty, reducing inequality and expanding the life chances of the disadvantaged. Clegg’s tax cut is aimed at low earners and will be chiefly funded by other changes to the tax system that hurt higher earners, notably the ending of higher-rate pensions tax relief and capital gains taper relief. This is in stark contrast to Conservative policy which to date has only offered a reduction in inheritance tax and stamp duty. On law and order, defence, foreign policy and Europe, the Lib Dems remain far removed from the Tories and much closer to Labour. At the same time, the Conservative conversion on other key issues for the Lib Dems, such as civil liberties and the environment, looks lukewarm at best.
There are four good reasons to believe that, despite Clegg’s repositioning, Labour and the Lib Dems may find it easier to work together again, albeit probably not until after the next election.
The first is that many of the issues that have most divided the parties in recent years are no longer as salient. In particular, Iraq is fading as an emotive political issue. Labour also looks unlikely to persist with its big centralising projects, such as ID cards, that so enrage Lib Dems.
The second is that, paradoxically, Clegg’s reforms should make it easier for the two parties to cooperate. Clegg has accelerated an internal reform process begun under Campbell to ensure much greater policy coherence. As such, he has gone a long way to answering the repeated criticism that the Lib Dem platform is too opportunistic to make the party a reliable partner. For Labour modernisers, at least, the Lib Dems now look a far more attractive proposition under Clegg’s leadership.
Third, the current debate over the future direction of the Labour party suggests it may move closer to the Lib Dems on a number of key issues. Many of the more talented younger generation of Labour politicians have reached a very similar conclusion to Clegg about the failings of the Blair/Brown government’s centralism. Most notably, David Miliband’s proto-leadership manifesto in the Guardian called for: ‘The imagination to distribute more power and control to citizens over the education, healthcare and social services that they receive.’ In the same article, he cited the importance of pursuing the green agenda and has previously talked about the need to revive liberal internationalism post-Iraq. He also frequently alludes to the importance of the liberal radical tradition in the Labour movement – perhaps hinting at a less tribal approach in future. There is much in Miliband’s analysis that Lib Dems would support.
But above all, it is the renewed ascendancy of the Conservative party that may oblige the two parties to work more closely together. It is, of course, almost impossible to predict with any certainty the electoral map after the next election. But assuming the Conservatives win, MPs from the two parties will find themselves more often than not passing through the same voting lobby. If the Conservatives secure a landslide, Labour may find its attitude to wide-ranging constitutional reform – and above all voting reform – shifting. In these circumstances, it would be vital for the two centre-left parties to rediscover the spirit of cooperation of the mid-1990s or face an extended spell of Tory hegemony.