A YEAR AGO, TORY flacks dismissed any suggestion that David Cameron’s dismal poll showing and his subsequent rush to find shelter in a coalition with Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems was anything less than a victory. It was not, of course. It was a loss – or more precisely a failure to win. Inevitably, Cameron will have to face the voters again. It remains to be seen whether the results will put the Conservatives out of contention for another decade, or make clear once and for all that Labour is the party of history. One thing seems certain: the Liberal Democrats – the party of radical irrelevancy – are already political relics.
By BENEDICT BROGAM [Daily Telegraph] – By reaching a swift understanding with Mr Clegg, himself all too well aware that he was the election’s big loser, Mr Cameron ushered in the age of compromise and tactical retreat that has marked the last 11 months. Any assessment of the Coalition’s performance to date, and the difficulties it now finds itself in, has to take account of the oddity at its heart. We are led, if not by a loser, then by a politician who has no trophy to show, no winner’s badge to wear, no mandate of the kind that gave Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair and even John Major an immediate bond with the electorate.
It is to his credit that he has approached the job with an acute sensitivity to his political limitations. The institutionalising of government by consensus, centred around the deepening personal relationship between Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg, must be recognised as his signal achievement. It has set the tone and style for the rest of the Coalition, its benefits felt from the motor of the Treasury to the outer cogs of remoter departments. It is that remarkable collaborative approach between Tory and Lib Dem ministers that has delivered significant victories in the vital areas of deficit reduction, welfare reform and improving schools.
But incidences of chaos are multiplying. Yesterday, for example, a staged media event had to be organised to rescue the Government’s health reforms from evisceration. It passed off well enough, with Mr Cameron demonstrating once again his effectiveness as a communicator. But the underlying impression was of an administration in retreat, forced to trim on the policy because it got the politics wrong. Or take defence, where the Government is struggling to live with the consequences of the choices it made in last year’s strategic defence review. Or higher education, where cash-starved universities are running rings around Vince Cable and the new funding system. Or how the Treasury’s raid on energy companies has left steaming resentment in the City.
Continued at the Daily Telegraph |
The bells of St Dymphna.
By BAGEHOT [David Rennie – The Economist] – Alarm bells are clanging in Mr Cameron’s inner circle. On April 6th the prime minister, his Lib Dem deputy Nick Clegg and Mr Lansley announced a two-month “listening exercise” to review their NHS policy. That carries its own risks: the legislation is already trundling through Parliament; hints of concessions have generated headlines about Mr Cameron’s alleged habit of retreating at the first sign of trouble.
Allies of Mr Cameron have a different explanation: the “pause”, they say, is inspired by his conviction that big changes are needed in the NHS, but are possible only with the support of a majority of the NHS’s million-strong workforce. Mr Cameron needs to connect with NHS staff and persuade them of his personal commitment to the service and its founding ideals, and that he is a “very different” sort of Tory prime minister.
That explanation is intended to reassure. But in truth it sends a troubling message about Mr Cameron’s strategy in government. Mr Cameron stands by the need for radicalism: sources say he will not give ground on core principles such as culling NHS managers, more diversity of provision, devolution of power outward from the centre and more patient choice. Yet remaining popular is also a core strategy. That is a tall order.
Continued at The Economist | More Chronicle & Notices.
