Cameron's coalition healthcheck

David Cameron tries to shrug off Lords reform within three paragraphs of his op-ed. ‘What’s far more significant is that we are working together on so much else – and after last week, it’s vital that everyone reminds themselves of that fact,’ he argues.

As part of his health-check piece, the Prime Minister details signs that the coalition is functioning well. When he mentions the reforms the two parties are working together, the piece is very carefully worded. He starts with investment in infrastructure. Then he mentions the education reforms, starting with the reform the party finds most acceptable, the pupil premium. He does refer to free schools – but not by name. The paragraph on Treasury reforms focuses on the tax system: ‘We’ve taken 2 million of the lowest-paid people out of income tax…’

Ed Davey was rather more keen to claim this last reform for the Lib Dems, arguing on Murnaghan that Conservatives were concerned more with tax cuts for the better-off.

Cameron also continues to feed that beast on the right of his party that the Liberal Democrats (and pro-European Tories) are so wary of, reiterating the need for a ‘fresh settlement – and a fresh mandate’ on Europe, his unease with the European Convention on Human Rights, and the need for further benefit cuts.

The problem is, the Liberal Democrats doing the media rounds this morning haven’t been quite so keen to accept that ‘of course the two parties have their differences’ and move on. This is what they’ve been saying about the coalition:

Sir Menzies Campbell on Marr:

‘It’s a marriage of inconvenience, if the truth be told.

‘Let me put it this way: if you’re a Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament whose seat has been pretty substantially carved up as a result of the proposals for a review of the boundaries, then the idea that you would simply march into the lobbies in support of the Conservative government’s particular anxiety to obtain this piece of legislation is one which may be very hard to swallow. I don’t believe that it can be accepted that we will simply form up in the way that some people think.

‘I think there will be a lot of hard talking going on. I don’t regard it as a threat – I think these are two prongs of the same agreement, the coalition agreement, and I expect the first to be honoured, and I expect the second to be honoured as well.’

Ed Davey on Murnaghan: 

‘The coalition agreement isn’t a pick and mix agreement, you’ve got to deliver on all of them. We’re expecting the coalition to deliver on the coalition agreement.’

Lynne Featherstone on her blog:

‘There will be consequences for those Conservatives who voted against the Bill but that is a matter for David Cameron. Our (Liberal Democrat) response will be taken in the light of what happens further down the line.’

Despite the tough talking on Lords reform, Lib Dems are starting to panic that the ill health of this coalition could put voters off the idea of coalition politics altogether. James blogged yesterday about a hardening against the concept from those who might once have been sympathetic, and Liberal Democrat voice is running a lengthy post today on why it is essential the party shows coalition can work well. The problem is that any truly tough threat on the boundary review would include Lib Dem ministers voting down the government’s proposals, which would hardly look like a symptom of a healthy partnership, would it?