Lessons of Coalition (11): what do we Lib Dems need to learn?

LibDemVoice is running a daily feature, 'Lessons of Coalition', to assess the major do's and don'ts learned from our experience of the first 3 years in government. Reader contributions are welcome, either as comments or posts. The word limit is no more than 450 words, and please focus on just one lesson you think the party needs to learn. Simply email your submission to voice@libdemvoice.org and copy info@eastmidslibdems.org.uk.

Today Bill le Breton shares his thoughts.

The Open Coalition and Its Enemies

The most noticeable characteristic of the present Coalition Government is how similar it is in process to the single party governments that preceded it. Rather than becoming more open, government in this Liberal Democrat-influenced Coalition has become more opaque.

An open society needs an open government. The claustrophobia evident in the main messages coming from the leadership of the Coalition is a symptom of the fear of change that comes with a liberal world view. 'Manipulation' rather than 'participation' are the watchwords. Trust in the People there isn't.

If you doubt this, then, consider what recent issues such as the 'Go Home!' poster vans and the 'Racial Profiling' spot checks tell us, not just about the policies of this Government, but also about the way it is arriving at decisions. Those decisions come from the dark crevices in which a paranoid elite operate, exploit and manipulate.

The very idea of coalition government in 2010 must have set alarm bells ringing throughout Whitehall, as they have rung in the Chief Executives' offices of many a council over the last 40 years. Normally, Liberal Democrats are thrilled to hear these bells. They signal the end of an old discredited order; sunlight issuing into the corridors of power.

Within the Liberal Democrat Leadership in 2010 there was more fear than thrill. Trust in the Party (including elements within the Parliamentary Party) there was not.

Strong leadership comes from the coagulation, monopolization and exploitation of power. Its antithesis is not weak leadership. The opposite of strong leadership is involvement, devolution, trust: the organisation of a movement for people to take and use their power.

This Liberal approach to leadership with its instinctive urge to win hearts and minds, rather than to exclude and oppress can actually be assisted by the necessity of operating a coalition. When evolving policy and later, when negotiating with a coalition partner, the ability to point to democratic support is 'powerful'. It is the ability to appeal to another and greater coalition; the coalition of the people.

This is why campaigning is at the very centre of Liberalism. Campaigning is the process of inspiring others to join that movement for change; be it a change in approach to the environment, or to the way education is accessed, or to the definition of justice.

For these advantages of multi-party government to be taken by Liberals, the mechanics of governance - the way decisions are taken in Government - and the mechanics of Party decision-taking must be opened up: made transparent and involving. They must be susceptible to campaigning.

The lack of campaigning in the Party, or its feeble expression as the endorsement of Coalition policy, is the manifestation of a Closed Coalition, just as an old-fashioned office with corridors and waiting rooms and executive lavatories is evidence of a hierarchical and closed culture.

There are plenty of political options for those whose fear of change and of liberalism drive them to yearn for a closed 'drawbridge up' society. It is a tragedy that our chance to let in the sunlight is being wasted. The PM and the Cabinet Secretary rest easy in their beds: Government remains 'Closed to the Public'.

Previously Published:

Stephen Tall: Stronger policy development and campaigning on issues that matter to the public (AKA where's our liberal equivalent of the benefits cap?)

Mark Valladares: Better party communications responding to the realities of governing

Gareth Epps: Government: What's Occurrin?

Nick Thornsby: Making a success of coalition government as a concept

Caron Lindsay: That old "walk a mile in each others' shoes" thing works

Louise Shaw: One member, one vote for all party elections

Mark Pack: The invisible ministers should up their game, or be sacked

Robin McGhee: We should organise ministers better

Rob Parsons: Understand the mechanics of government

Richard Morris: Make the red lines deeper and wider

Note from the Webmaster

All responses to this series of five articles will be posted on the website and forwarded to Phil.Kowles - Policy Officer for the East Midlands and Lucy Care our representative on Federal Policy Committee