Strategic Policy - ConLib Reform - Case Study Example

Introduction The elections of in the United Kingdom (UK) marked a turning point in the evolution of the body polity in that country. The worthy feature of this election was the victory of the first peacetime coalition in more than 70 years. Further, the hung parliament that was the result of the election was the first since the 1970’s. And given the rather long stint by Labour over the last couple of decades, there was some voter fatigue with them and hence some of this dissatisfaction and disenchantment translated into tangible gains for the ConLib coalition. Finally, the reform agenda on which this coalition won appealed to the voters who were widely inclined towards “change” and reform of the constitutional system and governance. The sclerosis of governance that had sent in during the last years of the Labour rule added an impetus for reform and change which was capitalized by the ConLib coalition (Shaw, 2007). This paper looks at the reform agenda of the ConLib government and analyzes the same by putting it into context and examining the drivers of the reform agenda. Specific examples of the areas in which the reforms have been promised as well as implemented are discussed. Finally, the paper also discusses the need for such reforms and the historical perspective in addition to tracking how far the changes have been implemented. The emphasis of this paper is analytical rather than descriptive and to provide an understanding of the context as well as the institutions that are attempted to be reformed. Background to the ConLib Reform Agenda The conservative liberal democrat coalition came to power at a time when the global economic crisis was as its peak and there was uncertainty in many quarters about sovereign debt crises hitting Britain as well. Further, there was all round disenchantment with over a decade of labour rule and hence the ConLib coalition was looked upon as a credible alternative to the authoritarian and prone to excess labour rule. In addition to this, the constitutional reforms that ConLib promised were seen as something that was long overdue given the state of the economy and the body polity in the UK. The election of David Cameron as the Prime Minister and Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrat party as his deputy was widely hailed as “change” coming to the UK in the same way the election of Barack Obama was a turning point in the history of the United States. Though the election promises of the ConLib coalition were not as grand or grandiose as that of the Obama campaign, nonetheless, in the context of the UK’s electoral and political economy, the agenda represented by this coalition was very significant. Further, the coalition had a concrete action plan (which was published) on how they were to go about implementing some of their reforms and hence the reform agenda was indeed substantial and the proposed changes deep (Bale, 2010). Before concluding this section, it would be worthwhile to note that the reform agenda of the ConLib coalition was in response to the need for changes in the way the body polity of the UK was structured as well as a proactive approach towards anticipating some of the trends of the 21st century as they relate to politics, economy and societal issues. The idea of “Big Society” that has caught on like a meme among the British people and politicians alike represents a fundamental break with the past and an attempt to move forward in an inclusive manner. This conception of the Big Society represents the actualization of the vision of the ConLib collation as well as the realization of the welfare society ideals that were proposed by Labour and New Labour as well but were unfortunately never implemented (Hazell, 2010). It remains to be seen how far the ConLib coalition succeeds as it goes about its reform agenda. The following are the four principles that underlie the reform agenda of the conservatives (Conservative Party, 2010): Decentralization and Distribution of Power: The imperative for this is the need to address the growing disenchantment of the people with the policy making apparatus and hence by decentralizing power, the idea is to dispel the sense of powerlessness and helplessness that has set in among the people. Make Government Smaller: The imperative for this reform item would be covered in the next section in the discussion related to “big society”. Accountability: The need for this reform item stems from the first point where people ought to know what their representatives are doing and to take them to task for failures. Transparency: Given the experiences with New Labour and their authoritarian ways, this need for transparency in the decision making apparatus was clearly felt and hence this forms a major reform agenda item. Analysis of the ConLib Reform Agenda If one were to take a longer term perspective of the evolution of the body polity in the UK, it would be along the lines of transforming the role of the state and making it more flexible and accountable. Whereas Labour and New Labour’s ideas were to have a bigger role for the state and increased state funding in the mould of the Keynesians, Conservatives have always dreamt of a state that is small and whose role is diminished and where them market has a more prominent role. Over the last few decades, this has been the driving force in the UK with a tug of war between the forces in favour of market based solutions and those in favour of a greater role for the state. It is in this context and historical perspective that the reform agenda of the ConLib coalition has to be analyzed. As the following extract from a paper published on the political economy and its evolution in the UK shows: The current Conservative-Liberal Coalition, in legitimizing a perceived shift towards a smaller state developed the notion of a ‘big society’ and a ‘smarter’ or ‘post bureaucratic’ state. The emphasis here is on a reduced, but more strategic centre, the decentralization/devolution of power, smarter delivery through developing a range of partnerships and trusts with relevant nonstate actors and smarter funding through a reappraisal of the manner in which public ventures are currently financed (Smith, 2010). The point about the ConLib agenda is that they do not seek to diminish the role of the state completely. On the contrary, what they seek to achieve is a smarter version of the state that is able to deliver public services in a better manner. The overriding theme of the “Big Society” is that a state that is leaner and fitter and which can respond to the needs of the society in a nimble manner is what is required in the 21st century. And this is the dominant meme behind the ConLib coalition’s reform agenda. As the specific examples of the reform initiatives (as discussed in the succeeding sections shows) the thrust of the ConLib reform agenda is to make the state accountable without superseding it and to make the delivery of public services better without diminishing its importance (Bale, 2010). The emphasis on reducing the influence of the bureaucracy and on providing good governance is a characteristic of the reform agenda of the ConLib coalition. The other aspects of the reform agenda are the devolution of powers to local councils and decentralization of the governance structures and thereby enabling the exercising of discretionary powers that are bottom up in their execution rather than top down. One of the main criticisms against the New Labour regime was its centralization of decision making and its opaqueness with regards to the transmission of the influencing factors behind key decisions (Shaw, 2007). Hence, the ConLib coalition aims to bring in more transparency and accountability that was sadly lacking in the previous government. The role of the UK in the world and in the Euro zone in particular is another feature of the reform agenda. This assumes significance as the involvement of the British forces in the disastrous war in Iraq led to significant erosion of public support and confidence in the government of the UK. Hence, the ConLib coalition believes that there is a need for a reappraisal of the role of the UK in foreign affairs. Electoral Reform and Reform of House of Commons and Lords The expenses scandals and other unethical instances of behaviour by the elected representatives have eroded the public trust in them. In the backdrop of the elections of 2010 where a large number of representatives did not contest the polls because of their involvement with one scandal or the other, it has become necessary for reforming the electoral system and the House of Commons and the House of Lords. Reduction in the number of representatives in the House of Commons has long been an aim of the conservatives and now that they are in power, it would be better for them to implement some of these changes. Similar is the case with reforming the House of Lords though it can be said that New Labour’s agenda was similar. Because of the broad based consensus on this issue, this can be relatively easier to address. The timetable for this reform indicates that this issue is being fast tracked and hence new boundaries of electoral constituencies would be ready by the next general election (Curtice, 2010, 627). Concomitant with this is the widely publicized and internationally reported referendum on Alternate Voting or AV as opposed to the present FPTP (First Past the Post System). This is a poster item for Nick Clegg and though the issue is complex and fraught with uncertainty, this is being pursued by the Liberal Democrats as their future depends on this item. The point here is that the referendum on electoral reforms is something that the Liberal Democrats have long espoused and in fact the raison d’être for their existence (Geddes & Tonge, 2010). However, it remains to be seen as to how far they can succeed in their endeavours. Devolution of Powers The devolution of powers to the local councils and regional administrators is one of the centrepieces of the ConLib reform agenda. The thrust of this specific item is how to balance the need for devolution to the Welsh, Scottish and other regional bodies without threatening the idea of the union. Considering the fact that the UK has many regional constituents and there is an inherent need to not weaken the centre, the task of devolution of powers to the regions like Scotland and Wales is indeed tricky and the issue thorny. This is one aspect that has long been seen by conservatives as necessary but because of the need to balance the right wing of their party that opposes such devolution, they have traditionally been content to let the other parties in power tackle the issue. An educated guess about this issue would be that the time has come for the Conservatives to stop ducking the issue and address it head on. With their liberal democrat partners, it might be easier to push through reforms in this area. Apart from the political and social imperatives, the issue of financial devolution is something that needs to be addressed as well. With the overall thrust of the ConLib agenda being a state centric but one in which the state is decentralized, this piece of the agenda can expect some movement (Liberal Democrats, 2010, 585). Position with Regards to Europe The conservative position with regards to Europe is that any laws concerning the transfer of power to the EU must be necessarily being approved by the UK parliament or by a referendum of the people. Since the constitution of the UK is unwritten, such a provision regarding transfer of powers to the EU needs to have a legal basis either with parliament ratification or a people’s vote. This is the key theme of the Conservative agenda with regards to Europe and as the recent events in the Euro Zone has proved; the ConLib government is prepared to walk the talk where matters concerning British rights in the EU are concerned. However the question as to whether future governments would honour the laws passed by the current government is open to debate since as mentioned above, the UK does not have a written constitution and hence the principle of parliamentary sovereignty can be invoked to repeal such legislation. Further, the enforcement of the laws by courts is open to interpretation as well. Hence, it would be better if the ConLib coalition opts for a referendum to decide this issue. Since in a democracy the people are the final arbiter of public opinion, the result of such a referendum would be morally binding on the elected representatives (Kavanagh & Cowley, 2010, 161). Transparency and Freedom of Information One of the criticisms against the New Labour regime was about its opaque decision making mechanisms where little information about the decision making by the power elite trickled out. Operating under a cloak of secrecy and justifying it in the name of national security cost the body polity badly in terms of having information about the government and its actions. Given the fact that the ConLib agenda encompasses a post bureaucratic state, it is certainly the case that the coalition intends to introduce greater transparency and accountability within the government. The specific action points are to make available information regarding spending decisions over 25K Pounds and where there is a clear need to publish such details. Further, accountability of the elected representatives is something that the ConLib government favours as a means of giving the people their rights to information and access to the decision makers (Bale & Webb, 2010, 40). Reform Agenda in Home Affairs The ConLib reform agenda in Home Affairs is mainly concerned with making the policing more approachable and governance with a “human face”. The alarming increase in the incidents of crime and widespread use of force under the New Labour regime which many observers saw as being authoritarian have prompted the ConLib coalition to make Home Affairs a priority in their reform agenda (Home Office, 2010). The suppression of civil liberties that was a characteristic of the New Labour regime which they justified on the basis of the terror threat was a bone of contention between civil rights activists and the New Labour regime and became a sticking point thwarting progress in this front. Hence, the intentions of the ConLib coalition were noble with regards to reform in this area. The specific reforms introduced were to do with making policing more effective and accountable as well as reform the judicial system with an eye on reducing the prison population. Hence the twin pronged approach of local governance with a human face and changes in the way the Home department was run at the centre was the cornerstone of the ConLib reform agenda in Home Affairs. However, the recent riots in London and other cities in the UK is a grim reminder of the fact that mere intentions are not enough and it takes more than speeches and changes to laws to succeed. What is needed is a comprehensive approach towards crime and criminal justice (Home Office, 2010). In the aftermath of the London riots, judges were unusually harsh in their punishment of the allegedly guilty shows that the reforms have to include planning for contingencies that cannot be anticipated all the time. This is one area where the ConLib reform agenda can do more as is evident from the reactions to the riots and their handling by the government. Tracking the Progress of the Reform Agenda Since it is more than a year since the ConLib coalition was elected, we can take stock of how successful they have been and how far has their reform agenda been implemented in the UK. From an overall perspective, it can be said that the first steps or the foundations have been laid for instituting far reaching constitutional and administrative changes though there have been several hiccups as well. The notable successes are in the realms of Foreign Policy and constitutional provisions as they relate to the monarchy and the devolution of powers to the local bodies. The failures or the missteps have been in the realm of the way in which the policing and the civil liberties are yet to be reformed. Considering the fact that the ConLib coalition came to power at a time of great economic chaos and strife, it can be said that they have so far managed to pull together the divisive forces at work in British society. However, the prevalence of social unrest (first with the students agitating over increases tuition fees and then recently in the case of the London riots) has led many to question whether the ConLib coalition is fit to govern. It is my opinion that these incidents of unrest were the result of stresses (economic and social) built up over a number of years and hence more time is needed for the ConLib government’s reform agenda to succeed. Conclusion The imperatives of the 21st century are such that there needs to be a government that is adept at dealing with the converging crises of this century like climate change, demographic shift, resource depletion and a failing economic paradigm. It is to the credit of the ConLib coalition that they have recognized some of these imperatives and have fashioned their reform agenda appropriately. However, as the experiences of the British polity over the last one year shows, change is resisted by vested interests and status quoists and hence, the reform agenda has to be implemented in a thorough and flawless manner. It is hoped that the ambitious reform agenda of the Conservative Liberal Democrat government is implemented and as the Bob Dylan song goes, “The Times They are a Changing” resonates within Westminster and in the other corridors of power. In conclusion, while it is a bit early to judge the success or otherwise of the ConLib agenda, a start has been made similar to that in the United States though the impetus is more in the UK due to the greater awareness of the electorate and the relatively deep political structures. References 1. Conservative Party. (2010). Big Ideas to give Britain Real Change. London: Conservative Party Publications. 2. Curtice, J., (2010). So What Went Wrong with the Electoral System? The 2010 Election Result and the Debate about Electoral Reform, Parliamentary Affairs, vol. 63, no. 4, pp. 623_38. 3. Geddes, A. & Tonge, J., (2010). How Britain Got Hung, Parliamentary Affairs, vol. 63, no. 4 4. Hazell, R., (2010). The Conservative Agenda for Constitutional Reform. London: The Constitution Unit. 5. Home Office (2010) Policing in the 21st Century: Reconnecting Police and the People. Norwich: The Stationery Office. 6. Home Office (2010).Draft Structural Reform Plan, London: Home Office. 7. Kavanagh, P. and Cowley, K., (2010). The British General Election of 2010. London: Palgrave. p. 161. 8. Liberal Democrats (2010). Liberal Democrat Manifesto 2010, London: Liberal Democrats. London: Routledge. pp. 583_87. 9. Shaw, E. (2007) Losing Labour’s Soul: New Labour and the Blair Government 1997-2007. 10. T. Bale and P. Webb., (2010). ‘The Conservative Party’, in N. Allen and J. Bartle (Eds), Britain at the Polls. London: Sage, pp. 37-62. 11. T. Bale, (2010). The Conservatives: From Thatcher to Cameron. London: Polity. 12. Smith, M.J. (2010) ‘From Big Government to Big society: Changing the State-Society Balance’ in A. Geddes and J. Tonge [Eds] Britain Votes 2010 Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More