Photo: Getty

The pre-election drum-beat is quickening and the big two parties are still putting all their energies into outright victory. But the chances of a hung parliament are now reckoned very high, so every party now needs to plan for post-election negotiations.

Labour needs to be ready to consider a partnership with the Liberal Democrats – either a second coalition or some looser political alliance. And the Liberal Democrats need to be as prepared for negotiations with Labour as they are with the Conservatives after five years of power sharing.

A joint report by the Fabian Society and CentreForum, published today, shows there is significant common ground between Labour and the Liberal Democrats, which offers scope for positive dialogue and potential agreement. If the electoral maths and personal relationships permit it, the overlaps in the parties’ policy programmes suggest a realistic and comprehensive agenda for government could be negotiated.

Labour and the Lib Dems have many matching policies that could create a comprehensive agenda for government.

To start with, there are many examples of matching policy commitments: fiscal rules which permit the government to borrow for investment; decarbonising the power sector by 2030; major devolution within England; extended free childcare for under-5s; building at least 200,000 new homes a year; a higher Minimum Wage; means-testing the Winter Fuel Payment; an elected House of Lords; votes at 16; and the mansion tax.

There is an even longer list where one party has a policy position, but the other does not. Our judgement is that many of the ideas of one party will be acceptable to the other, if presented as part of a positive negotiation, where both sides come in a spirit of give-and-take. For example Labour might be prepared to go further on environmental issues than its current position, while the Liberal Democrats would probably accept Labour’s banking and job guarantee proposals.

Then there is a shorter list of clear disagreements: Trident, airport expansion, the energy price freeze, 50p tax. The success of any negotiation would probably turn on how these issues were handled: if the two parties wanted to work together they could probably find a way around these conflicts.

There is a shorter list of clear disagreements: Trident, airport expansion, the energy price freeze, 50p tax.

Of course, each party’s 2015 policies are the transient product of their longer term political and ideological commitments. So there is also the question of whether their worldviews would be sufficiently close for the parties to sustain a constructive partnership over a whole parliament.

Or would we see a slow-motion ‘divorce’ once early commitments were fulfilled, as has been the case with the present coalition? Only time will tell, but the instincts of Liberal Democrats on economic, social and political reform seem to suggest that a lasting relationship with Labour is at least possible.

Centre Forum is a champion of liberal ideas and the Fabian Society of social democracy. This is a independent analysis without any direct involvement from Labour or the Liberal Democrats. It is a resource for the politicians, not something they have ghost-written. Our aim is to facilitate a clearer understanding of the potential (or otherwise) for partnership, from the point of view of policy.

Many other things might stand in the way of a deal, from electoral strategy to personal chemistry, but when it comes to policy commitments, a comprehensive agreement is there to be had if the politicians want it.

Andrew Harrop is General Secretary of the Fabian Society and Stephen Lee is Chief Executive of CentreForum. “Common Ground?”, the new report from the Fabian Society and CentreForum, can be downloaded here.