Progressive Geographies

The Conservative-Liberal Democrat deal is here. Lots of things to comment on. But just one part for now…

The parties agree to the establishment of five year fixed-term parliaments. A Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government will put a binding motion before the House of Commons in the first days following this agreement stating that the next general election will be held on the first Thursday of May 2015. Following this motion, legislation will be brought forward to make provision for fixed term parliaments of five years. This legislation will also provide for dissolution if 55% or more of the House votes in favour.

Fixed term parliaments are surely a good thing. Instead of it being the choice of the incumbent, giving him or her the power to decide when to go to the country, everyone knows when to plan for. It probably should have been four not five years – PMs confident of winning go after four (Thatcher, Blair); those fearing defeat drag it on as long as possible (Major; Brown). But the deeply alarming part is the idea that 55% is needed for dissolution. Up until now, 50% + 1 was enough for a government to fall on a vote of no confidence. A PM continued – and was appointed in the first place – because they could command a majority of the House of Commons. So now they can command less – 45% only?

Even if the Liberal Democrats leave this government after this bill passes, then Cameron remains PM. He has 306 MPs to date (likely 307 after the Thirsk by-election) and needs only 293 to prevent dissolution. How can this be right? What happens if he is unable to command a majority, cannot pass legislation, can’t be voted down by a dissolution motion, but equally can’t admit defeat and call an election because the power has been taken away from the PM?

Sounds like this needs a bit more thinking through – but more fundamentally a rethink. I can see why they are doing this, otherwise Cameron fears the Lib Dems could threaten to derail him at every moment, but it can’t be a good thing, either now and certainly not to enshrine in law.

Graham Harman has an interesting post about the age of Cameron and Clegg here. His point is that he and they are near contemporaries and could have been at school together – Harman was born in 1968, Cameron 1966 and Clegg 1967. I’m a little younger than the three of them, being born in 1971, but George Osborne was born the same year (May, compared to my December). The Miliband brothers were born in 1965 and 1969; Ed Balls in 1967; the new Foreign Secretary William Hague – once derided for his youthful enthusiasm and inexperience – in 1961.

Blair was born in 1953, but was only 44 when he took office, not much older than Cameron is now. As Cameron said, in one of his best taunts at Blair, “you were the future once”.

Rather than simply sit and watch this on TV, I decided to go for a walk round Westminster.

I timed it pretty well – saw Gordon Brown leave Downing Street, saw the Tory delegation leave the Cabinet Office (William Hague, George Osborne and Oliver Letwin) and then round to the Labour HQ on Victoria Street where Alastair Campbell and Peter Mandelson were just heading inside.

Some photos below – very hard to get these, due to the media scrum…