Clik here to view.
Liberal Democrat architect of coalition agreement says party needs to spell out disagreements with Conservatives
Danny Alexander, the Liberal Democrat most responsible for the coalition agreement, has said his party needs to get better at spelling out its differences with the Conservatives, and not expect the public to learn of them by osmosis.
But he refused to accept that the party's disastrous electoral showing last Thursday was a verdict on its commitment to cut the deficit so quickly, saying that "the case for backing the deficit programme is now ever stronger".
Speaking in the week of the anniversary of the coalition's formation, the chief secretary to the Treasury also rejected claims by some of his party colleagues that he had turned into the chancellor's bodyguard, throwing himself in front of every bullet heading for George Osborne.
Alexander claimed that doorstep disquiet was not about opposition to the spending cuts, but a fear they would be implemented in the same way that the Tories had imposed them on the regions in the 1980s.
"If anything, our shared commitment to deal with the deficit has to be as strong now, if not stronger. So we need to be even more forceful about why we think that plan is right and why we are confident that will leave the economy in the right place.
"It is very important in my job that I stand foursquare behind the plan we have reached jointly to deal with the deficit. That does not make me a bodyguard for George Osborne. It makes me an advocate for what we do. I think it would be completely wrong to get the sense out of these elections that there is any diminution whatsoever in the Liberal Democrat commitment to the strategy: quite the reverse," he said in an interview with the Guardian.
Alexander said the Treasury accepted it was for the SNP leader, Alex Salmond, to decide the independence referendum date in Scotland, but warned: "There are big risks to the Scottish economy to have the spectre of independence hanging over it for the next five years." He is open to speeding up new borrowing powers for the Scottish government, so they can be used earlier for the Forth rail bridge, and while he gave no commitment on a separate Scottish corporation tax, said that "we would be willing to have that discussion".
Alexander negotiated the first coalition agreement, sits on the four-strong body alongside Osborne, David Cameron and Nick Clegg responsible for day-to-day coalition business, and is starting to draw up a coalition agreement mark 2. A second agreement, he says, will cover the last two years of the parliament. The Lib Dems' priorities will include a greener agenda and better childcare: "It is not about whole new areas of policy."
Admitting that his party had made mistakes in handling the coalition, he said: "We perhaps thought that we argue our corner in government, and then decisions emerge publicly and somehow everyone understands almost by osmosis how these decisions were taken. People outside government want to know more about how the strong Liberal Democrat voice works in government. People need to see where these debates take place and how they are resolved. That is not about disrupting the business of government, or being personal and negative. But we need to be more relaxed about the disagreements."
He also offered a defence against the charge levied by former party leaders such as Lord Steel that the leaderships of the Lib Dems and Tories had given the impression of joined hearts and minds.
"It was right at the start of a new form of government in modern times to show that the coalition worked and could produce strong, sustainable government, but it is now equally important that we demonstrate different strands. There was a phrase 'two parties coming together in the national interest'. Well, we need to have as much emphasis on the two parties as the national interest. We came into government to make a difference, not make friends."
Alexander was the most senior Liberal Democrat to clear the NHS bill before publication, but now his party leader is warning it would be better to have no bill than a bad bill. Alexander said: "There are real cost pressures within the NHS, so I think reform is needed to make sure the NHS can deal with those pressures.
"I don't think the Labour top-down model of the NHS – where a few people in Whitehall try to control what happens in every GP surgery in the country – works. I don't think that model is suitable for the NHS [to] meet the financial challenges. So that is why I don't think we should abandon reform, just make it better by coming up with substantial changes."
But he hinted at a retreat. "We need to be sure that we only allow GP consortia to go ahead with commissioning where they are ready, where they are capable and have got all the right building blocks in place. So you would have a more variable pattern. From the Treasury financial point of view you need to make sure that consortia are only given permission to go forward if and when they are capable of financially and clinically taking them on."
Alexander accepted GP commissioning should be voluntary: "If they don't want to go forward, they are not going to develop the capabilities."
He also revealed he is opposed to a single blueprint for public service reform, suggesting the much-delayed public services white paper will be less radical than once envisaged. "We have to look very carefully on a case by case basis. There will be a public service white paper but it is the subject of debate within government.
"I am someone who is saying in each case we need to think what form of reform is appropriate, so the payment by result model may be suitable for the Work Programme, but we need to avoid a sweeping blueprint across the entire public sector."
But everything returns to the government's economic judgment. He insists his party was clearer at the election than any other in spelling out specific cuts, even if it did not say the structural deficit should be eradicated in a parliament.
Asked if ultimately the Lib Dems could be destroyed by the deficit programme, he rejected the premise of the question. "The interests of our party and of the economy are completely aligned."