UK leaders compelled to walk tough political line

ANALYSIS:David Cameron and Nick Clegg's embryonic alliance needs success but it will be hard to find given the extent of the problems facing Britain

EVERY DIFFICULT journey begins in hope, but none more so than the one begun in No 10 Downing Street this week by the United Kingdom’s new leaders.

The challenges are immense: the doubters in both ranks are silent, or, at least, not damagingly vocal – yet. But it will not last; the UK’s debt figures are horrendous, while its public want action taken; but just not action that will hurt them.

Both men have taken major gambles. Conservative prime minister David Cameron’s decision to describe the prospect of a minority Tory government as “uninspiring” has infuriated many of his backbenchers, and there are those who will feed off such feelings in time.

Conservative grassroots, so far, are going along with Cameron’s optimism. Last week, nine in 10 were against coalition. Now, two-thirds of them believe the Cameron/Clegg pact is right for the UK.

However, they are more divided about whether it is good for the Conservatives. Just 49 per cent believe so, while 34 per cent disagreed. Most believe Cameron gave too much. Meanwhile, just 47 per cent believe it will last for more than two years.

The coalition negotiations were finished in haste, with significant issues left unresolved.

Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg has wisely stayed away from taking one of the great offices of state and, instead, opted for the role of deputy prime minister and control of the constitutional reform agenda.

A full-time ministry would have seen him consumed by ministerial red boxes that keep office-holders up into the early hours, rather than keeping an overarching eye on what is happening in the rest of government.

His decision to opt for the job of deputy prime minister has, however, left him open to ridicule, with charges that he has become “the tea lady”. Michael Heseltine occupied it under Conservative prime minister John Major and it meant something, because he acted with Major’s authority. John Prescott had it under Tony Blair, and it did not. Clegg must become Heseltine and more.

The focus of public attention will, no doubt, centre on the weekly cabinet meetings, with ministers offering cheery waves on good days to the cameras as they enter Downing Street, and blank stares on the bad ones.

However, the real business will be carried out at a committee led by Cameron and Clegg, which is meant to sort out battles between ministers and between parties before they become corrosive.

Everything will depend on information and on trust. Clegg, though he has Liberal Democrat ministers across the system, will need to see the files. Cameron will need to spot looming confrontations and head them off.

However, plans only cover the expected. The issues that will really threaten the administration are not the ones forecast, or feared, but scandal, offence, or blunder not yet committed, or, at least, not yet unearthed.

The relationships between ministers in different departments will require tender interpersonal skills. Some Tories are number two or number three in places where they had expected to be head, while others have been given jobs in departments of which they know little.

Some have not got jobs at all and will nurse resentment quietly for a while, though they know that if Cameron sticks to his plans for less-frequent reshuffles their prospects may be delayed indefinitely.

The relationship will depend on people keeping their mouths shut. And this is something that the British political party system has proven utterly incapable of doing in the modern era, if not long before.

John Major’s government was brought down by such disunity, by the cancer of the heavily-spun Sunday paper headlines, while Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were more damaged by their own than they were by outside forces.

Already, the signs of danger lie ahead. Tory-leaning newspapers have offered a weak fair wind, but their fury that one of “Thatcher’s children” has abandoned the one true faith of majority rule will come back to haunt Cameron.

Indeed, the modus operandi is already being worked on. Tory MPs, and some higher up, have tempted Tory-leaning journalists with the prospect of stories to come, as long as they are tagged as “Liberal” sources.

But governments are not just about ministers. High-ranking party staff – some more influential than ministers – have their own ambitions and, already, they have clashed about who represents the government to the press.

On Wednesday, Liberal Democrats spokespeople let it be known – as it is delicately put in London – that Clegg would have hiring and firing rights over his party’s ministers and ministers of state.

Such a development would be a constitutional change of magnitude. Following a furious row, Conservatives clarified the position, saying that the prime minister’s appointment rights remained inviolate.

On the biggest issue – the deficit – the Liberal Democrats gave way. Spending cuts will happen this year, and on the scale proposed by the Conservatives. However, the detailed actions when they come will provoke difficulties.

The cruel winds of reality may get the coalition over that problem, since the government debt crisis that has already skewered Greece will spread and spread in coming months, forcing acceptance of pain where there was previously none.

Inside the Conservative Party, Cameron’s enemies will have ground in which to move. Firstly, over the decision to require the support of 55 per cent of MPs to vote for a dissolution of parliament and, secondly, over the Alternative Vote (AV).

The dissolution agreement, which needs legislation shortly, will provide the immediate focus for dissenters but will enable them to cloak their actions in constitutional propriety.

Under existing rules, a government falls if it loses a vote of no confidence by a single vote. Under the proposal, it could lose such a vote, but yet manage to avoid an election if sufficient numbers could not be gathered for the dissolution vote.

Such enhanced majorities in coalitions, created to offer comfort to the smaller party, are nothing new; even if they do not exist in Ireland, but are in place in Scotland, Wales and elsewhere.

The agreement is central to the alliance. The Liberal Democrats have to be certain that Cameron – who has 47 per cent of the MPs – will not cut and run should he have the chance of single-party rule.

David Davis, the man Cameron beat for the leadership, is showing signs he may become the focus for dissent, aided by others.

Meanwhile, the AV referendum has to be piloted past the Commons and the House of Lords and many in the latter are unhappy about reforms the government has in mind.

Tory MPs hate the idea because they believe they will not get second preferences. Labour MPs are also opposed. For Lib Dems AV is the last staging post on the way to proportional representation.

If it gets past Westminster, it will have to be put and won in a referendum in the teeth of a hostile campaign from the Tory press. Should it be lost, then the coalition pact is holed fatally. And all of this is even before one considers the minefields posed by the European Union.

Cameron and Clegg have much to ponder.

Mark Hennessy is London Editor