Question
Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what consideration they have given to including in the Cabinet Manual guidelines for government formation in the event of the next election not providing a Commons majority for a single party.
My Lords, as the Prime Minister announced yesterday, the Government have committed to updating the Cabinet Manual to ensure that it remains an authoritative guide to our constitutional arrangements. This update will restate and underline the rules and conventions that underpin our democracy, including those relating to elections and government formation. We will ensure that the second edition accurately articulates arrangements where there is no overall majority in the House of Commons. We will engage with parliamentary committees in both Houses on the draft text.
My Lords, I welcome this announcement and thank the Minister for alerting me to the Statement yesterday. The coalition Government produced the Cabinet Manual as a guide for future Governments to the conventions of our unwritten constitution. It was intended that successive Governments should update it after each election, but the chaos of single-party government and rapid turnover of Prime Ministers means that this is the first one. As it is now highly likely that the outcome of the next election might be one in which no single party has a majority, can the Government pay particular attention to the area of government formation to allow sufficient time to negotiate and establish another stable coalition Government?
The noble Lord knows how fond I am, and I am delighted to have been able to announce that we are updating the Cabinet Manual. While I understand that everybody in this building is very excited about elections—we all campaign for them—it is not yet two years since the previous general election and there are another three to go, and I look forward to ensuring that there is another Labour Government. In terms of ensuring the premises of formation of government, as ever, the convention remains that it is those best able to command the confidence of the other place.
My Lords, does my noble friend reflect that when the noble Lord talks about chaos, we should go back to the coalition Government, when his party signed up to austerity, which caused such damage to our country? It also agreed to the disastrous NHS reform Bill brought in by Andrew Lansley—the noble Lord, Lord Lansley—which cost £4 billion extra and was a total disaster. Will he remember that?
I am delighted to see my noble friend back in his place; we have missed him—I believe everyone has had their Weetabix this afternoon. Fundamentally, what is so important about the Cabinet Manual is making sure that the conventions and precedents are outlined so that, regardless of who is in power and what events are before us, there is a document to guide Ministers and civil servants about how we respond to them.
My Lords, will the Minister accept on behalf of this one member of the Constitution Committee, which has repeatedly asked for the manual to be updated, that it is singularly satisfying to have this Answer on the day when the once and future chair of the Constitution Committee, my noble friend Lord Strathclyde, has just taken his seat on these Benches again? Does she agree that the manual contains very important parts of our conventional constitutional structure and its updating is much to be welcomed?
The noble Lord raises an important point, and I welcome all our colleagues back to their place. With regard to the Cabinet Manual, the reality is that it has not been updated since 2011. It considers us still to be a member of the European Union, and it reflects not just the Fixed-term Parliaments Act but a different set of relationships we had with the devolved assemblies. It needs updating to make sure that government and civil servants have the guidance before them.
My Lords, as the Minister responsible for the production of the Cabinet Manual in 2011, I have to confess that I expected that it would have been updated before now, so I welcomed the Prime Minister’s announcement yesterday. I can confirm that one section that does not need updating is the bit about the formation of Governments. It is quite comprehensive, since it was done after the 2010 election. However, can the Minister confirm that there is a very helpful section at paragraph 2.18, which may be useful in about 15 days’ time, referring to the resignation of a Prime Minister of a majority Government and the fact that the governing party would be responsible for electing his successor?
The Prime Minister remains in place, and he has our full and utter confidence.
Lib Dems!
They have had a go.
The Rycroft review warned that our fragmented statute book—with redundant provisions left unrepealed, measures passed by Parliament never commenced and consolidation deferred again and again over many decades—poses a genuine practical risk to our democracy and our national security, yet the Cabinet Manual section on legislation omits those basic housekeeping tasks of commencement and consolidation. Will the Minister commit to consulting fully on ensuring that those key tasks are included in the next edition of the Cabinet Manual?
My Lords, given that the current manual is being redrafted as we speak, it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the detail. However, to reassure Members of your Lordships’ House, we have asked both the Lords Constitution Committee and PACAC in the other place for their assistance on the consultation with parliamentarians across both Houses. How they choose to do so will be a matter for them.
My Lords, the Cabinet Manual, or possibly more correctly, the Cabinet Office manual, is not a written constitution, nor is it binding on Ministers. The Government intend to update this source of guidance and information. Can the Minister confirm whether this update will be simply to reflect changes in legislation and practice since 2011, or will it be done in a more maximalist way to embody additional conventions and practices? Will it seek to amend any existing conventions where legislation has not changed since 2011? Will she also confirm that, since the manual is owned by the Cabinet, it will not be published without its explicit endorsement?
Let me take those questions in order—if I miss one, I will come back to the noble Baroness. First, yes, I expect the document to be endorsed by the Cabinet. Secondly, no, I do not expect it to cover any additional precedents that are not already there. We are not changing precedent. This is a living, breathing document about how we operate—about having one place with our established precedents and conventions. I forget the third question, so I will write to the noble Baroness.
My Lords, this is a really interesting Question, because none of us knows when the next general election will be—it could be in three years or much sooner—so are the Labour Government thinking about which other political parties they might be prepared to work with? Obviously, now that we are in a five-party or even six-party election, they might be forced to work with all sorts of people, including the Greens.
My Lords, I wonder if that is a bid for power, for engagement or for negotiation, but I have to say that, given some of the candidates, platforms and personal views of the Green Party, that would be a struggle. Having said that, we are many years away from a future general election, and I think it is fair to say that those of us who campaign regularly will continue to campaign month in, month out regardless of when a general election is called. However, there is a great deal of work to get on with before the next general election.
My Lords, someone called William Wallace ought to know that the coalition in Scotland was far more successful than the one down here. Will my noble friend the Minister confirm that the Cabinet Manual includes sections on transparency and openness, and that that will apply also to the First Minister of Scotland?
My Lords, is it this First Minister or previous First Ministers? The Cabinet Manual is a UK-owned document, and it is about the British Government. Obviously, we have ongoing relationships and discussions with the Governments in the devolved assemblies, but that is a matter for them.
My Lords, over the past 27 years, the Parliaments of Scotland and Wales have functioned well after elections in which no party has had a single majority, but in similar circumstances at Westminster, there could be absolute chaos in terms of deciding who is invited to Buckingham Palace and when. Should we not move to the system that they have in Scotland and Wales where their Parliaments elect the First Minister? Doing so for the House of Commons is perhaps the only way for a new Prime Minister to know that they have the confidence of the House.
My Lords, we have, especially in the other place, a series of conventions that determine who commands the confidence of the House, and they include the King’s Speech and Budget votes. There is no need for any additional convention.
Cross Bench!
I give way to the noble Lord, Lord Grocott.
Can my noble friend cheer us all up by reminding us, in the election following five years of coalition government, when the public were asked to give their judgment on it, how many Liberal MPs were left?
I am so pleased to see my noble friend also back in his place; he has been sorely missed. However, I do not think I need to repeat matters of recent history for people who so actively follow current affairs.