Last week was a bad week for the government whips’ office: a big ‘rebellion’; the prime minister shouting at backbenchers; people in tears. These are the Westminster stories which mean very little to most people outside, but they do represent a serious problem for a government’s programme.

When I was chief whip, we had an office outing to see a hilarious play called ‘Whipping it Up’. A key premise of the play was that the whips kept a book of damaging secrets about backbenchers in a safe which they would deploy if a rebellion got desperate. The denouement of the play was the opening of the safe to reveal that it contained no such book.

The reality of whipping is that it can rarely – if ever – succeed on the basis of threats. It is a far more sophisticated, human and political activity. Given the problems for the government, what should the whips do?

First, they need to win the argument for whipping. Successful politics is about collective activity and the organised delivery of ideas for change. Whips organise to ensure that the collective view is delivered. You might think that this argument would be easier to make to Labour backbenchers. In fact, I was constantly amazed at the obsession with the self and individualism shown by Labour MPs who were unwilling to support the Labour government. For some, solidarity and collective action is for speeches, not for their responsibility to their party and their parliamentary colleagues.

But as Professor Philip Cowley of Nottingham University has identified, this group of Tory backbenchers is already more ‘rebellious’ than Labour backbenchers in the first half of our time in government. And it appears to be a mainstream activity. One backbencher claimed over the weekend that he’d gained the support of Margaret Thatcher for his vote against Lords reform.

The government whips will have to be a much better channel of communication than they seem to be at the moment. Tory backbenchers think nothing of using letters to national newspapers to spell out their grievances or concerns about policy. There is clearly a real disconnect between the party leadership and their backbenchers.

David Cameron will need to look like a winner again! During the early years of the Labour government, many backbenchers were persuaded to support the government on the basis of the scale of victory that Tony Blair had achieved. Cameron didn’t win the last election, so backbenchers can legitimately ignore this sort of argument for loyalty.

There is a real problem for ambitious Tories thinking about future careers. The coalition has led to fewer ministerial opportunities – it will be interesting to see what the next reshuffle brings in terms of either recognition for loyalist or buying off ‘troublemakers’. Select committees are no longer under the ‘gift’ of the whips office so they have far fewer ways to reward loyalty.   For some, the boundary review may see them fighting colleagues for a seat – some have made the calculation that Conservative associations will be more impressed by opposition to Europe and Lords reform than by loyalty to a coalition government.

Some Tory backbenchers are doing some interesting thinking about a range of issues – there doesn’t seem to be a way to incorporate this into the Tory planning for the next election. Labour took some years to get to the situation where the party in government felt too separate from the wider party thinking – the Tories seem to have managed it in double-quick time.

Finally, whipping is about organisation and knowing what’s going on. I was very surprised that there seemed to be little idea how big the Europe rebellion was going to be last year – and they came late to the fact they were going to lose on Lords reform last week. I wonder if having Lib Dems and Tories in the same team makes the sharing of intelligence and counting of support more difficult. Whatever the cause, they will need to be sharper on the numbers.

I think the parliamentary Labour party should be pleased with their efforts. They have some strong performers, have put the government under pressure and are beginning to lead on describing new ideas for the next government. Most importantly, they now look like a coherent and united force. If anyone’s tempted to do otherwise, I hope they’ll look across at the government and recognise the real damage caused by disunity and disorganisation.

—————————————————————————————

Jacqui Smith is former home secretary, writes the Monday Politics column for Progress, and tweets @smithjj62

—————————————————————————————

Photo: UK Parliament