Transitions - preparing for changes of government

May 2010 was one of the most dramatic UK general elections in recent decades. But the main players had all done a lot of thinking beforehand about the implications of a change of government.

For the Civil Service, preparation for a variety of outcomes occupied them for many months. For the political parties, the preparation for the election was even longer.

The quality and focus of these preparations, and how well they handled the result, provide valuable and timely lessons, however long the current coalition last and whatever the outcome of the next general election.

In November 2009 the Institute for Government published Transitions: Preparing for Changes of Government (PDF, 5.6MB). This study looked at past general elections in the UK, and at procedures in comparable democracies abroad, in the devolved administrations, and at local government level.

Our report:

• provided a range of advice on how different actors could and should prepare for elections
• highlighted potential pitfalls
• made recommendations for changes to procedure.

One of the most striking conclusions was that long periods of single-party majority rule had affected the collective memory of both politicians and officials. Now, with the experience still fresh and yet the immediate drama of the election passed, recording and retaining these lessons is crucial.

At the same time, the conclusions and recommendations of the original Transitions report were themselves tested by the outcome, and the unexpected formation of the coalition. Now is the time to re-examine these and consider what further thinking or changes may be required.

Themes and issues

Transitions 2010 will cover many of the same themes from the original report, reflected in the original chapter headings. However, it will clearly need to consider different issues that have been brought to light by the May 2010 election, and what impact these will have.

The 2009 Transitions report looked back at previous elections in the UK and internationally to consider lessons for the preparation and process of a change of government.

Though it covered issues that were of relevance to the May 2010 election and made recommendations of immediate concern, it deliberately avoided commentary on the preparations then underway. It was intended that the election itself should be re-visited post-election (after a suitable hiatus).

The reasoning behind this is twofold:

• to reflect on how well the whole process went measured against the criteria identified in the original report, and therefore aid collective memory for future elections
• to consider whether there were issues or recommendations that were missed in the original report that have now been brought to light (or any that should be changed).

Questions

Some of the questions to be considered will be:

Opposition party preparations for government

• What are the lessons from the Conservative Implementation team?
• How important was the different scale of Conservative and Liberal Democrat preparation?
• What are the lessons for policymaking in opposition from both parties?

Civil service preparations

• How comprehensively did the civil service prepare briefs for the different parties
• How well was preparation coordinated and transmitted down through the Service
• Were the preparations for different election results sufficient?

Pre-Election Contacts

• How valuable were the contacts, in which departments and how were relationships built up and then affected by the coalition ministerial appointments?
• What impact, if any, has there been of different experience of pre-election contact for both coalition parties?
• How important were the contacts to the civil service?
• What will be the impact of fixed-term parliaments?

The purdah period and the role of a caretaker administration

• How well did the civil service preparations go?
• How significant was Cameron's 'measuring the curtain-itis' in terms of Conservative preparation?
• What was the impact of narrowing polls on Lib Dem experience?
• Did either party prepare sufficiently for the possibility of negotiations, whether for minority government or for coalition?

The coalition negotiations and handover

• How well prepared were all concerned for this process?
• What was the impact of media and public understanding of the constitutional conventions?
• What lessons are there about the time required for handover period and the potential for procedural or constitutional changes?

The ‘100 days trap’, or coalition building

• What impact has preparation for government had on either party in terms of their ability to translate these pre-election policies into government policy?
• Is there a link between preparation and momentum in government?
• How successful was the Conservative implementation team?
• How were the Liberal Democrats affected by less use of pre-election contacts, and rather less comprehensive preparations for government, compared to the Conservatives?
• How useful were the civil service briefs for either the parties or for the civil service in terms of translating policies into reality?

Work programme

Transitions 2010 will not attempt to produce the definitive account of the election; it is too early for that.

However, it is important to provide a review of the narrative of events, analysis of the political, procedural and constitutional issues at play and to talk to some of those involved with the process. It will rely on a combination of interviews, observation and analysis.

Contact

If you have any queries or comments please email Catherine Haddon - catherine.haddon@instituteforgovernment.org.uk

Further reading

• Peter Riddell and Catherine Haddon: Transitions: Preparing for Changes of Government (5.6MB)