Over the last two years, it has become clearer and more evident that our political landscape is a struggle between two coalitions. We have one coalition which is open, temporary, business-like and at times unsteady. And there is another which is very firm, strong and long-lasting, and possibly will out-live all of us.
The first is the current Conservative-Liberal Democrats coalition
(‘Con-LD’). This currently runs the government and was the result of an
indecisive general election. Its’ main purpose is to secure a stable
administration during difficult economic times and put into place a deficit
reduction programme and other measures agreed in a coalition agreement. It is
due to run for five years and come to an end in 2015.
However, it becomes clearer each day that its’ main opponent
is the formidable Conservative-Labour coalition (‘Con-Lab’). This is a far stronger
coalition, in place since 1945, and infinitely more difficult to break down. Its
successful objective has been to work together to secure the two party hegemony. This coalition is, of course, secret and unacknowledged by either
So where is the evidence for this contention – that in any
dispute with a third party, the two big old failed parties will close ranks? This
is as follows.
Firstly, since the 1970s, the ‘others’ have secured at least
a quarter of the votes. The Liberals in 1974 and the Alliance in 1983-87 got
25% alone, and were rewarded with a tiny fraction of seats. To the horrors of the Con-Lab coalition, 35% (over a third) of
voters chose someone else in 2010. We are now clearly a multi-party democracy.
Any sane society would seek to reflect this change of circumstances
by putting into place a fairer electoral system. Instead the Con-Lab coalition
have robustly defended first-past-the-post – a system which grossly
over-inflates their vote, and makes it possible, as we saw in 2005, that one
party can dominate parliament with 35% of the votes – barely a fifth of the electorate.
As the Soviet empire fell, and as democracy spread throughout
eastern Europe, Africa and Asia, it is noteworthy that no new democratic country has adopted
the first-past-the-post system to choose their representatives.
True, we had a referendum on changing the system, into which
the Tories and the media pulled their enormous resources. Despite Ed Miliband’s
support, did we get a full throttle, active campaign from Labour – or instead a
mixed, half-hearted effort more interested in working with the Tories and against
Nick Clegg rather than take this historic opportunity?
Secondly, since 1945, the rules of party funding continue to
bias the two big parties. The Tories have big business and Labour have the
trade unions. The Liberal Democrats and others have quiz nights and car boot
sales. So the Con-Lab coalition can dwarf anyone else in terms of putting resources into
campaigning. (Party funding is currently being reviewed but does anyone think there
will be actual genuine change?)
Thirdly, before the current Con-LD coalition, there was one example
of third party co-operation since 1945 – the Lib-Lab Pact of 1977-78 of which I
wrote earlier. The Liberals' reward was to be proportional representation for
the first European Parliament elections in 1979 – yet when it came to it,
Labour betrayed the Liberals and voted with the Tories to ensure
And finally, we come to the most recent example – House of
Lords reform. This is a once-in-a-century opportunity to finally have a second
elected democratically-accountable chamber. Labour should be enthusiastically
supporting this principle. Instead they plan to ally with the Tory rebels to
ensure the reforms are talked out.
The ghosts of the great socialists
of the past must be disgusted that, after all the struggles it took to get socialism
established in this country, their beloved Labour party are now backing privilege
and patronage over democracy. Keir Hardie and Michael Foot must be rolling in
It is suggested that the Liberal Democrats may block the boundary
changes. Tories need not worry. If there is any
doubt, I think Labour will vote to push them through. The changes may harm Labour and benefit
the Tories – but they will harm the Liberal Democrats most of all – and, in my view, Labour
would be happy to see years of Tory government, and the country suffer as a result,
if it meant the extinction of the Liberal Democrats.
Of course, there are certain people on both sides prepared
to defy the Con-Lab coalition and work with others. To his credit, David Cameron
has proved willing to work with the Lib Dems, has become the first Prime
Minister to sacrifice his right to call an election at will, and is to an
extent promoting Lords reform. For Labour, Ed Miliband and Peter Mandelson have
discussed willingness to work across party lines. Whether each can defeat the
establishment within their own parties is doubtful.
This brings us to the question – how can we break this coalition?
How can we end the Con-Lab coalition which has been in effect since 1945? Well, the answer is – I don’t know. The
Con-LD coalition will end soon but the Con-Lab deal is as strong as concrete. The
only hope is with the other parties – Liberal Democrats, UKIP, the Green, the
Nationalists, the English Democrats etc.
If we can see more and more votes taken away from the big
two, if we eventually see more progressive leadership from either big party, if we see our multi-party democracy continue to grow and develop, then
maybe – just maybe – we will get genuine change in this country. Although how many of us will
be around to see it is another question.