New British PM starts work, vows 'strong' coalition

New British PM starts work, vows 'strong' coalition - Yahoo! News UK

Michael Thurston

The coalition deal was forged after five days of political deadlock

The 43-year-old -- Britain's youngest prime minister for two centuries -- got down to work in Downing Street after striking a deal between his Conservative party and the third-placed Liberal Democrats late Tuesday.

Cameron, who has radically transformed his Conservative party from the Margaret Thatcher years, announced a series of cabinet appointments, including Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg as deputy premier and four other Lib Dem ministers.

New Foreign Secretary William Hague insisted the coalition agreement, forged in five days of political deadlock after an inconclusive election, would stand the test of time.

"I don't think it will be a weak coalition. It will be a strong government," said Hague, adding that the conflict in Afghanistan -- where Britain has around 10,000 troops -- would be his "most urgent priority."

New Finance Minister George Osborne added: "Now's the time to roll up the sleeves, and get Britain working."

London's stock market and the pound recovered after a jittery few days ended with Tuesday's deal to form Britain's first coalition government since World War II, following the first hung parliament since 1974.

"Markets had feared a negative start, but as the dawn of a new political era takes place, there appears to be a collective sigh of relief that we have a clearer way forward," ODL Securities trader Owen Ireland said.

Cameron's appointment by Queen Elizabeth II late Tuesday came after Labour leader Gordon Brown finally admitted defeat.

Cameron acknowledged the huge challenges facing him, not least Britain's fragile recovery from the global economic crisis.

"This is going to be hard and difficult work. A coalition will throw up all sorts of challenges," he said in a speech in Downing Street, flanked by his pregnant wife Samantha.

US President Barack Obama called Cameron within minutes of his appointment, inviting him to visit the United States in July, Downing Street said.

On Wednesday Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao had a 15-minute conversation with him, while Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh invited him to make an "early" visit to Delhi, Downing Street added.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy is to hold talks with Cameron in a visit on June 18. Other leaders including German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd also quickly called Cameron to congratulate him.

European Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso said Cameron's government would face "difficult choices in difficult times", while Russia said it hoped for a "new impulse" in chilly relations.

Clegg was joined by four other Lib Dem ministers in Cameron's coalition government -- including his respected finance chief Vince Cable as business secretary.

"We are going to form a new kind of government," Clegg told his lawmakers, adding he hoped it marked "the start of the new politics I have always believed in."

Key Conservative appointments included 38-year-old Osborne as finance minister, Hague as foreign minister, and Liam Fox as defence secretary.

Britain lived through five days of uncertainty after Thursday's general election.

The Conservatives won 306 seats in the 650-member House of Commons -- 20 short of a clear majority of 326 -- followed by Labour on 258 and the Lib Dems on 57. The Lib Dems held talks with both Cameron and Brown's party.

Clegg is leading a Liberal party into British government for the first time since David Lloyd George left power in 1922.

Critics say the deal between the centre-right Conservatives and centrist Lib Dems is an unlikely alliance, since they have strongly differing views on a number of issues.

But between them, they have enough to secure a majority in the House of Commons which Labour and the Lib Dems, seen as more natural bedfellows, did not.

There were already doubts about the political union Wednesday, however, with the Conservative-supporting Daily Telegraph newspaper warning it would be "unsatisfactory and short-lived."

Brown wished Cameron well as he left office Tuesday, while acknowledging the personal weaknesses -- such as poor presentational skills and impatience -- which hampered his three-year premiership.

A leadership campaign to replace him is expected to conclude by September.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

I dunno. This is a really weird arrangement given that the LibDems were sometimes on the left of Labour...

Europe is an obvious point of contention but, since it's an on-going saga that will be around in 10, 20 or 30 years time, the LibDems can actually drop the subject without permanent damage.

Similarly, objections over defense spending should be overcome easily. After all, it's only a handful of billions...

But stuff like taxes and fairness and shit? That's going to be a big fight. Cameron's "Big Society" is a nice idea but it's bullshit. People don't actually want to go to local school boards and do the work of running a school properly. They just want good schools, delivered for as little tax as possible. So, then, Cameron will have to choose between renewed state intervention or renewed privatisation as a cheap substitute for "Big Society". And, there, I can see plenty of fights around that and around who pays for what - If Clegg is even remotely serious about "fairness". I like the way he uses the word (just like me ) but, as with Obama, the proof will be in the pudding. No point in being right, no point in being smart if you can't deliver the goddam goods...

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Quote:

They just want good schools, delivered for as little tax as possible.

That's not quite what research reported last January found:

[...] The research for the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development also showed that fewer than one in 10 people believe their standard of living has improved in recent months.

The social attitude report’s authors attribute New Labour’s policies for the shift to the right because the party's repositioning under Tony Blair towards the centre has pushed the public to become more conservative.

The wide-ranging report, which is funded by several Government departments is based on figures for 2008, the most recently available, but will still come as a boost for David Cameron, the Tory leader, in the run up to the next General Election.

It underlines the sharp swing in British opinion over the past few years. In 2007, one in four people supported the Conservatives compared with 34 per cent in support of Labour. In the survey, the Tories now have 32 per cent support, compared with 27 per cent for Labour.
But the shift in mood goes beyond voting preferences as attitudes have also hardened towards attempts to cut inequality and spread wealth more fairly.

Only two in five people support increased taxes to fund higher spending on health and education, down from 62 per cent in 1997, while half say taxes and spending should remain the same as they are now, the highest level since 1984.[...]

Forty per cent said that taxes should be increased to fund higher spending on health and education while another 50 per cent said they should stay the same as they were. Of course attitudes may well have changed since 2008, but do we know that they have?

The anecdotal impression that I get as a distant observer is that there is more concern about whether the increased spending has been as effective as it should have been, rather than that too much is being spent.

Of course nobody's yet mentioning the elephant in the room: the increased taxes and/or expenditure cuts necessary to cut back the budget deficit.

I don't see what your post has to do with mine, honestly.

After the Thatcher years, people understood and wanted extra spending on public services and were willing to finance it through higher tax. As you point out, there are now doubts whether the money has been really well spent and delivered the best bang for our buck. So what?

It doesn't contradict the fact that people do not want to get themselves involve in local politics. As Contra once observed "it's boring".

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.