Cameron sets out the bounds of Lib Dem assertiveness
Peter Hoskin 11:48am
Our coalition government was forged one year ago tomorrow — and we shall have more
on that then. But the Sun has already marked the occasion by publishing an interview
with David Cameron today. It is a wide-ranging sort of conversation, touching on everything from the Prime Minister's workload ("every day feels like a week") to the shelf life of the
government ("five years"), although much of it is unsurprising. It does, however, contain one or two useful insights into how the coalition's game of give-and-take is going to operate
from now on.
First up, Cameron's insistence — contra Clegg — that the Lib Dems should not be portrayed as a "moderating influence" on his party. "I don't see it like that," he says, "We are an influence on each other, because of our different histories and traditions and policies." This is part of the nascent struggle that James highlighted yesterday: a struggle by the Tories to ensure that the Lib Dems don't take credit for all of the sunnier coalition policies. That the Prime Minister is already involving himself suggests just how crucial this is to the Cameroons, and how much it could escalate.
And then there's Cameron's claim that there will not be a Cabinet reshuffle this year, to which the Sun adds, "Senior No10 aides have told MPs to expect no changes until May 2012 at the earliest." Not that he would broadcast a different message, of course, but it does rather sheathe the Damoclean swords hovering above Lansley and Clarke. It had recently been suggested that the Lib Dems were pushing for a change of Health Secretary, as a bloody symbol of how much change they are imposing on the health reforms. But perhaps that has, in the end, hardened Cameron's resolve to keep Lansley in place and simply muddle on.
All of which is to say that, while the Lib Dems are being more divisive — even Danny Alexander had a slight pop at Thatcher in a speech last night — Cameron is only going to let them go so far. Coalition might entail difference and compromise, but it also involves unity.
Previous
charles hercock
May 10th, 2011 11:56am Report this commentReshuffle
Oh yes there will
LANSLEY will go and LAWS will come back
oldtimer
May 10th, 2011 12:51pm Report this commentForget Conservative vs LibDem. The apparent cross party split, reported today, on future carbon emissions targets also promises to be interesting episode.
The targets themselves, of course, are absurd - being the latest manifestation of the global warming scam. But that does not stop them being an unnecessary burden on every household and business in the land. The best thing would be to get rid of them altogether. But this is a European Directive we are talking about so you can be sure we will be stuffed - again. Cameron is supposed to make a decision next week. It will be worth watching this one. Makes a change from the NHS and it is just as important.
startledcod
May 10th, 2011 2:16pm Report this comment@charles hercock I don't think Laws will be back any time soon, not after he's been found guilty on six counts by the Standards Commissioner.
Publius
May 10th, 2011 2:26pm Report this comment"Cameron is only going to let them go so far."
Is that what he has said, or is that what you have been briefed to interpret his words as meaning? Or is it just your guess?
Woody
May 10th, 2011 2:30pm Report this commentCameron will only let them go so far - well they have gone far enough in my view.
The public will get sick and tired of the 'differences' and both parties will suffer, especially as the MSM ramp everything up into a 'row.'
Norman Dee
May 10th, 2011 3:24pm Report this commentIt's getting more and more clear that the major reshuffle victim should be Cameron himself. He mislead a lot of Tories promising and posturing like a Eurosceptic, his promised reaction to the budget has now been watered down until there only a fag paper between him and Labour, the NHS reforms are going west, we're in another war, and for goodness sake he couldn't even sell a perfectly harmless reform of the forestry commission. He's a good turn at PMQ's but is that enough ?
annassasin
May 10th, 2011 6:03pm Report this commentWe have today seen how the coalition will operate from now on. When willetts admits to a sensible idea, lib dems spin it into a horrific anti-poor people plot. The idea that parents that save for their childrens uni education can take up unfilled places seems common sense. Yes Willetts mucked it up, did the libs have to twist it completely. To say that rich kids woth lower results will hijack places offered to poor students is disgraceful. The lob chairman said this on radio5, the public response was obviously hate filled.
Following Newsnight last night, when a lib spokesman said that Clegg did not read the health bill before signing it (hmm), to Paxmam's disbelief, then said that no libs voted against the bill at second reading because it was against procedure to do so. ( double hmm)
It all goes to show that they are nothing more than opportunists. Who will sell their mothers for a vote.
TGF UKIP
May 10th, 2011 6:20pm Report this commentAll completely synthetic; after all why would Dave have any essential differences with the LibDems when in every fibre and instinct he is one himself.
Chairman of Selectors
May 11th, 2011 1:26am Report this commentOff topic, but the faux one-upmanship in the body lanugae between Dave and Calamity is tiresome. Neither can shake the other's hand without placing the other hand on the other's shoulder/arm in a sign of dominance. Neither can enter a doorway without waiting and/or placing a hand on the back of the other, in a sign of control. It's just so tedious. All the more so as both are a couple of tedious lefties motivated by money and power. God almighty the UK is in such trouble with these monkeys running it. Lib dems? Sandal wearing greenie sociopaths. Huhne? The bloke is certifiable. Christ alive.
Andrew Fletcher
May 11th, 2011 8:53am Report this comment@Chairman - lefties they may be but both are also a disappointment when it comes to basic competence
Say what you like about Blair but in the early days he was extremely effective. A great politician and well respected if not always liked.
Cameron just isn't quite good enough and that's the basic problem even before you get to policy etc
Would Davis have been better?
Back to top