Two heads are better than one? Assessing the implications of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition for UK politics (original) (raw)
Related papers
British Politics, 2010
The Liberal Democrats performance in the 2010 general election is something of an enigma. In historical terms the party fared well but the promise that the party displayed during the campaign was unfulfilled. In the hung parliament, the Liberal Democrats played a pivotal role in the post-election negotiations with both main parties. The outcome of these negotiations, a Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition and a Liberal Democrat leader, Deputy Prime Minister was surprising. This article assesses the role of the Liberal Democrats in the campaign and the coalition, as well as the party's future prospects as they face the challenge of benefitting, electorally, from the coalition deal.
The Primary focus of the article is how the coalition government of Prime Minister David Cameron of the Conservative Party and his Deputy Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrat Party has necessitated a rethink of the current British Constitution. In essence the application of the Westminster model has changed, in that, minority government is able to form a government with another which the voters did not have in mind while voting. Therefore, to what extend can the coalition stretch the constitution without snapping it. An exploration of questions of legitimacy, manifestos, coalition agreement, collective responsibility and capacity to deal with real world changes is made.
How unusual is the UK Coalition (and what are the chances of it happening again)
2010
This article draws upon insights from theoretical and empirical studies of coalition behaviour in multi-party politics to examine the formation of the UK coalition following the General Election of 6 th May 2010. It argues that (1) the formation of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition is not unusual in historical terms or in the context of contemporary European politics; and (2) that although it is a break from the more recent pattern of postwar British politics it nevertheless does conform to our expectations in the light of the coalition literature. The article also provides a comparative analysis of the impact of Britain's 'First-Past-The-Post' (FPTP) electoral system on party competition and an examination of the performance of the Alternative Vote (AV) system and argues that (1) if the UK retains FPTP then a return to single-party government in 2015 is highly likely; and (2) it is not inevitable that the introduction of AV would significantly advantage the Liberal Democrats.
The Coalition and the Decline of Majoritarianism in the UK
The Political Quarterly, 2015
The United Kingdom has traditionally featured many aspects of the majoritarian model of democracy: its first-past-the-post electoral system tends towards producing single-party majorities, while its legislative decision rules concentrate policy-making power in the hands of the resulting single-party governments. However, in an unprecedented break with the UK's postwar conventions, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats formed a coalition following the general election of 2010. In this article, we examine some of the Coalition's impacts on governing and constitutional conventions, placing them in a comparative European context. We conclude that the Coalition reflects a shift towards the less majoritarian forms of politics prevalent in continental Europe, and that some of these changes are likely to persist even after the end of the current government.
The Return of Cabinet Government? Coalition Politics and the Exercise of Political Power
2017
It is often said that political power in the UK is increasingly concentrated in the hands of the Prime Minister and a cadre of unelected advisers, prompting many commentators to announce the demise of Cabinet government. This paper will seek to determine whether or not the advent of coalition government is likely to prompt a return to collective decision-making processes. It will examine the peculiarities of coalition politics, continuities and ruptures with previous government practice and, finally, ask whether or not the return of Cabinet government is realistic or even desirable.
The Coalition: Voters, Parties and Institutions
2012
Please note that in order to view this pdf as intended and to take full advantage of the interactive functions, we strongly recommend you open this document in Adobe Acrobat. Adobe Acrobat Reader is free to download and you can do so from the Adobe website (click to open webpage). Navigation • Each page includes a navigation bar with buttons to view the previous and next pages, along with a button to return to the contents page at any time • You can click on any of the titles on the contents page to take you directly to each article of the broadcast over the written media, Cowling tracks public opinion from the run-up to the elections to the coalition's first anniversary, while Anstead considers media attitudes towards the coalition as a departure from the norm of single-party government.
Electoral Studies, 2016
The Liberal Democrats' performance in the 2015 general election provides an opportunity to examine the only case in the postwar period of a national junior coalition partner in British politics. Comparative research highlights competence, trust and leadership as three key challenges facing junior coalition parties. This article uses British Election Study data to show that the Liberal Democrats failed to convince the electorate on all three counts. The article also uses constituency-level data to examine the continued benefits of incumbency to the party and the impact of constituency campaigning. It finds that while the incumbency advantage remained for the Liberal Democrats, it was ultimately unable to mitigate the much larger national collapse. Highlights • The article tests expectations of junior coalition parties in the British context. • In doing so, it explains the Liberal Democrats' 2015 general election collapse. • The party suffered from a lack of perceived competence and influence. • Voters losing trust in the party also cost them badly. • Leader Nick Clegg not the effective force he was in 2010. • Incumbency and campaigning still benefitted the party, but it was not enough.