As the cool spring air slices its way through the British capital, the backroom negotiations between the major political parties have begun to heat up following Gordon Brown’s decision to quit the Labor leadership. All eyes are focused on Nick Clegg as the Liberal Democrat leader negotiates the political stage in search of a deal to secure Britain with its next Prime Minister.
In reality, the election for Clegg must have been bittersweet. The Liberal Democrats have the balance of power and the ability to form a coalition government (in majority with the Tories or as part of a rainbow coalition with Labor), yet much of the enthusiasm Clegg managed to instil into the electorate during the leader’s debates failed to materialise come election day. In fact, the Lib Dems ended up losing more seats than they initially started with. Election 2010 would not be the third-party revolution in British politics many Lib Dems hoped it would.
While Clegg may appear to be holding the chips, the circumstances of this election have wedged the disarming and charismatic leader into an uneasy position; one fraught with potential danger for his party. Clegg premised his campaign on the notion of the Lib Dems as a “third force” in British politics, above the fray of the two party system. His argument was that his party presented an alternative from the failed iterations of successive Labor and Tory governments.
Now, in a twist of irony befitting a British election, Clegg finds himself jostling back and forth between the two major parties in search of a deal that suits his and his party’s interests. To do this without appearing as though he’s engaging in typical run-of-the-mill politics which he so much derided during the campaign will be a balancing act requiring extreme political dexterity.
Regardless of who Clegg ultimately decides to throw his support behind, the likely outcome will be another General Election in the not too distant future. This could be potentially toxic for the Lib Dems especially if the electorate, tired of uncertainty, begins to clamour for strong leadership, putting aside its idealistic notions of pluralism and cooperation and dutifully falling in behind the two main parties.
A fragmented and disjointed parliamentary session leading up to the next election could also be poison to the Lib Dem’s dream of implementing proportional representation. If a referendum is agreed to, it is certain that the Tories (and Labor) will seek to paint proportional representation as a system that will place Britain at the mercy of protracted periods of weak coalitions and perpetual uncertainty in the political system. If voters see credence in this argument, the Lib Dem’s dreams of PR will evaporate before their very eyes. If this were to happen, for all that Cleggmania promised, little, if any real change, will result.
Clegg needs to play this cool. Any whiff of politicking will crash the soft support that the Lib Dem’s managed to corral during the election. As a famous Churchill quote goes: “a pessimist sees a problem in every opportunity; an optimist sees an opportunity in every problem.” Clegg needs to go into these negotiations with two goals, and two goals only: (1) secure a firm commitment from whoever he forms government with that a referendum for PR be held on an expedited timeline. And (2) achieve the first goal without becoming ensconced in the muck of typical Tory/Labor politicking. The Lib Dems cannot accede to a weak agreement on PR, only to find it flung onto the backburner amidst discursive legislative gridlock that any new government will likely encounter. But they also must do this without appearing too opportunistic. If they the electorate sense blatant opportunism, the Lib Dems will be unable to authentically sell their unique “third force” position in an ensuing election.
There is a lasting opportunity here for the Lib Dems. They must think with foresight. In the long-term, cabinet positions and specific policy nuances should take a backseat to the overriding goal of proportional representation in the British system. It is uncertain if in the future the Lib Dems will hold this power again. Clegg needs to take this uneasy position of to-ing and fro-ing and capitalise on the opportunity to secure a more hospitable long-term future for his party.
With the resignation of Gordon Brown, a new possibility enters the political scene – a Labour/Liberal coalition under the leadership of a young, charismatic frontrunner David Milibrand. A Milibrand/Clegg coalition would infuse vibrancy into the political landscape, but in order to work, they would need to enlist a rainbow coalition of other minor parties. Any offer from the Labour Party to form a rainbow coalition would be meretricious for the Lib Dems. Labor has less to lose and is more likely to offer Clegg promises they simply can’t keep. Also for a Lib/Lab pact to work, the British people will have to tolerate a few more months of Brown as leader, a disastrously unpopular proposition. Even with a Milibrand/Clegg rainbow coalition in government, it will almost certainly fall victim to fragmentation and disunity. Under these circumstances, the Lib Dems will probably lose both their chance to govern in coalition and their chance to secure a referendum on proportional representation.
At best Brown’s departure provides leverage for Clegg in his dealing with the Tories. Clegg needs to use this interesting turn of events to push the Tories hard on PR. Cameron appears to be listening but has to contend with an entourage of Tory MPs behind him none too thrilled about the prospect of PR. In this respect, the Conservative leader may find himself hamstrung. It is impossible to predict just what the outcome of these negotiations will be, but whatever happens, Clegg must capitalise on the opportunity afforded to his party by bringing about lasting political reform. If he manages to do this you could say it would be positively Churchillian.