Bristol East Liberal Democrats

'Lib Dems and Conservatives form historic coalition government' - Cllr Jackie Norman, Brislington West

Cllr Jackie Norman said "As was predicted by pundits, the General Election resulted in the first "Hung" or "Balanced" Parliament in a generation. Opinion polls during the campaign found that are large portion of the electorate was actually wanting this outcome, in order to force politicians to work together to solve the giant economic problems our country currently faces . The public were right to want that, in my opinion.

Before the election Nick Clegg rightly stated "The party with the most votes and seats has the mandate to try to form a government first", and that was the Conservatives this time. Given that the Conservative Party has long argued that coalition government is "weak", most people expected David Cameron to try to form a "minority" government on his own, and to seek a loose deal with the Lib Dems for not immediately voting down his Queen's speech and budget (an arrangement known as "Confidence and Supply"). Therefore it was a considerable surprise that he quickly made a "big, open and comprehensive offer" - a serious appeal to Nick Clegg for a full coalition Government, the first since World War 2. As Lib Dems have always argued that coalition government is a good thing, this appeal had to be taken very seriously.

Many in the Lib Dems were instinctively nervous of working with the Conservatives, and argued for a deal with Labour instead, despite the difficult numbers for that. Once Gordon Brown had announced his resignation, that deal was explored seriously. There have since been accusations in both directions about how serious those negotiations were, and I won't dwell on that (as you know who I believe!) What is clear though is that within hours of the Lib-Lab negotiations starting, Labour heavyweights like David Blunkett and John Ried were attacking the idea. I genuinely believe that Labour's Lords Mandelson and Adonis wanted a Lib-Lab deal, but given that it was obviously going to be fought hard by some in Labour, and it would have needed another 4 parties to get even a majority of one, that deal was doomed within hours.

Even after the Labour deal was dead, some in the Lib Dems argued that a full coalition was a bad idea, and that "Confidence and Supply" would prevent the party from getting as "tarnished" by working with the Conservatives. The reality is that everyone was expecting that a minority government would only last till the autumn at the latest. It was presumed that by then David Cameron would have been voted down so many times he was seek and get another election on the grounds that he clearly couldn't govern with only a minority. Each vote defeat would likely have rattled the markets, and we may have had a run on Sterling or other markets as a result. In that chaotic scenario, many think that Cameron would have won the extra few seats he needed for a Conservative majority, as the public worried about the economy and punished Labour and Lib Dems for what might be perceived as "wrecking tactics" preventing him from dealing with the deficit.

A full coalition on the other hand, while clearly offering much greater stability for the country at this critical time, is obviously a major gamble for the Lib Dems. While of course we would moderate significantly the behaviour of the Conservative Party, we would also be linked to everything that the government does - even the things we wanted to oppose. Everyone knows there have to be huge reductions in public spending as a result of the economic collapse, and we Lib Dems will now be tied to those painful decisions. But in my opinion in a choice between a 6 months of chaos under a minority Conservative government followed by another election and probably a Tory majority; versus a formal 5-year coalition deal between Conservative and Lib Dem, the coalition deal is the much better option for the country. Whether it is best for the Lib Dems is another question that only time will answer, but I have to say that I am proud that the Lib Dems have put the country first at this critical time, even though it has the potential to - or is even quite likely to - do huge damage to the party.

On the 'deal' itself, most people acknowledge that the Lib Dems have done very well indeed in the negotiations. Of course the Conservative Right are claiming that the Tories "utterly sold out" and Labour are claiming that the Lib Dems "utterly sold out", but both are saying those opposite things for effect. The Lib Dems extracted such a good deal because we are experienced at coalition negotiations from being in Government in the Welsh and Scottish Parliaments. Because of that, the coalition manifesto is a genuinely radical and reforming program - even famous left-wing commentator Polly Toynbee said "the bitter truth Labour must swallow is that much here is more radical than their own manifesto." So I do urge you to read it! The Lib Dems argued ferociously for voting reform and proportional representation (PR), but the sad fact is that the Conservatives wouldn't offer it and Labour negotiators admitted they couldn't deliver it as too many Labour MPs would rebel against any PR vote. What we have got is a commitment to a referendum to move to "preference voting", which we believe will be a first step to further reform. We couldn't make PR a "deal-breaker" because to be honest it would be wrong to hold the country to ransom at this critical time over an issue that wont affect the economy.

Before the election, Nick Clegg said that he wanted to see a new kind of politics, and he has certainly delivered on that. Britain has had coalition government 4 times in the last 100 years, all of them times of crisis. The new coalition government must now set about closing the gargantuan budget deficit. I wish them good luck, as it will be needed. The Chinese political curse "May you live in interesting times" has never been more apt."