The recent history of the Liberal Democrats has been one of unexpected gains followed by catastrophic – and nearly fatal – losses. In May of 2010, to the relative shock of all involved, the fringe political party entered into five days of negotiations with the then David Cameron-helmed Conservative Party, ultimately resulting in a historically anomalous Coalition Government, with Nick Clegg assuming the previously vacant role of Deputy Prime Minister. This turn of events proved surprising for a number of reasons, not the least of which being that the First Past the Post (FPTP), ‘winner-take-all’ electoral system utilized in Britain almost always produces a single-party majority government, negating the need for any sort of formal concessionary proceedings; in fact, one of the purported advantages of the FPTP system (as opposed to a system of proportional representation) is its typical yielding of a strong majority government, capable of enacting its stated manifesto with little to no support from opposition parties. However, when the 2015 general election in the United Kingdom generated a hung parliament, it became abundantly clear that achieving a government able to command a majority in the House of Commons would require both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats to surrender any aspirations either party might have initially possessed of proceeding with unchecked legislative autonomy. Rather, concessions would need to be officially and publically made from the outset, in the hopes of legitimating the fairly unprecedented Coalition Government, as well as theoretically minimizing future backbench rebellions.
In the aftermath of the Liberal Democrats’ devastating loss at the ballots in 2015, David Laws, a Lib Dem Member of Parliament who lost his seat in that year’s culling, published his account of the previous five years of joint Liberal Democrat and Conservative governance. The resulting book, titled Coalition: The Inside Story of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition Government, benefited from Laws’ role as a senior party negotiator in the coalition agreement that ultimately formed the basis of the Conservative-Liberal Government spanning from 2010 to 2015. According to his printed recollections, as a party, the Liberal Democrats were largely optimistic about what the future might hold as they ventured into this relatively uncharted territory in the late summer of 2010. However, as David Laws himself would painfully discover in just five years’ time, agreeing to enter into a coalition with the Tories – as very much the junior partner – came at a much higher cost than the vast majority of Liberal Democrat MPs could have ever predicted. I was gifted a copy of Coalition as a farewell gift from Christian Moon, Head of Policy at the Liberal Democrat Headquarters, and my direct supervisor for the internship component of my Hansard Society Scholars experience. As I realized soon after beginning my time with the Lib Dem Policy Unit, those tumultuous years of coalition government served to substantially inform the present character of the Liberal Democrats, not just in terms of the party’s (greatly diminished) parliamentary presence, but also in regards to its political stances, targeted voter bloc, and general disposition.
With an academic background in Political Science and Policy Studies, I’ve come to deeply appreciate the intersection of public perception and political feasibility. As a past professor of mine was fond of reminding his students, the framing of an issue often proves more determinative than the issue itself. My tenure as an intern with the Policy Unit of the Liberal Democrats yielded further familiarization with this notion of devising policy for which there is a public demand. The invaluable experience of observing firsthand the process by which consultation papers and party manifestos emerge continuously taught me how ideological principles must often conform to political realities. Unlike most other major UK political parties, the Liberal Democrats determine their party policy by putting all proposals to a vote at their biannual Party Conference, typically held in March and September of each year. During the days of Conference, debates are held over policy motions submitted in advance by MPs, spokespeople, or mere party members. These debates adhere to a preordained structure, detailed on the official website of the Liberal Democrats. As one might intuitively expect, and as conversations with those at Lib Dem HQ will undoubtedly confirm, adopting such a detailed, democratic process does require a willingness to sacrifice some degree of efficiency. Obviously, the more individuals allowed to have a say in the creation of party policy, the greater the likelihood of potentially irresolvable discord. This dilemma is made all the more acute by subtle internal divisions within the party. Members of the Liberal Democrats tend to associate with one of two ideological strands: social liberalism or classical liberalism (i.e., economic liberalism).
While interning with the Lib Dem Policy Unit, I was able to attend a number of working group sessions, in which an assortment of individuals who share some common area of expertise convene at the Party Headquarters to discuss future policy, with the ultimate aim of producing a topical consultation paper to present at either Spring or Autumn Conference. In my experience, regardless of the policy area being tackled by the working group, certain members will be more aligned with the strain of the party that advocates classical liberalism, while others will identify more strongly as social liberals. For instance, should a working group be organized around education policy, there will likely be some dispute as to the appropriate extent of the state’s role in determining a National Curriculum, as well as a conversation about the relative merits of academies vs. schools still run by the Local Authority. However, I believe this receptiveness to a diversity of opinion is what allows the Liberal Democrats to vie for seats occupied by both Labour and Conservative candidates. Just as multi-axis political models like the Nolan Chart and the Pournelle Chart allow for the simultaneous expression of one’s economic and social political ideologies, the Liberal Democrats are united by a commitment that transcends the traditional dichotomy of ‘left-wing’ and ‘right-wing’. The differing leadership approaches of Nick Clegg and Tim Farron evidence the room for variation within the party. While, as coauthor of The Orange Book, Nick is a notable economic liberal, Tim falls definitively within the strand of social liberalism.
Because the open-plan nature of the Liberal Democrat HQ lends itself to collaboration amongst departments, I was able to observe the Press Office advising MPs on memorable sound bites, networking with prominent newspapers to ensure publication of issue-specific articles, maintaining the Leader of the Party’s diary, and responding to allegations made by other parties. As such, I came to deeply appreciate the importance of establishing a precedent of ongoing communication and interconnectivity between the disparate teams that together comprise a functioning political party.
Though the idea of studying abroad always appealed to me in theory, I found myself unexpectedly hesitant when the time came to actually commit to a study abroad program. This uncertainty arose not from a lack of confidence in the merits of the Hansard Society Scholars program or any other; rather, I genuinely did not know whether I’d be able to cope with a semester spent out of the country. I’ve always suffered from social anxiety, and while my time at university has greatly enhanced my ability to feel relatively at ease in unfamiliar situations, studying abroad seemed like too daunting a leap for me to realistically handle. Still, I fully appreciated the incredible opportunities an internship in Parliament could provide, and understood how infeasible such an experience would be once I graduated from college and began my professional career. Having gone too far in the process to gracefully back out, I found myself living in London. Of course, in a wholly unsurprising turn of events, my time there proved nothing short of transformative. The three months I spent with the Liberal Democrats confirmed my career ambition of one day working in politics. The passion for liberal causes shared by everyone I encountered at the Party Headquarters was contagious, in spite of the fact that the most principled positions have not always proven to be the most politically expedient ones. Exceptional internship aside, I repeatedly demonstrated to myself throughout the course of my semester abroad how capable of withstanding challenges I really am, an insight I know will propel me to further test the boundaries of my comfort zone.