Suspicious minds: An examination of trust-building in party mergers
| Author | Emma Sanderson-Nash,Alan Wager,Dan Keith |
| DOI | 10.1177/1369148119857595 |
| Published date | 01 November 2019 |
| Date | 01 November 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Original Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148119857595
The British Journal of Politics and
International Relations
2019, Vol. 21(4) 746 –762
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1369148119857595
journals.sagepub.com/home/bpi
Suspicious minds: An
examination of trust-building
in party mergers
Dan Keith1, Emma Sanderson-Nash2
and Alan Wager3
Abstract
Here, we examine the understudied merger of the Social Democratic Party and the Liberal Party.
This systematic study of the process which created the Liberal Democrats in 1988 adds to our
understanding of what was a rare but important event in British politics. We demonstrate that
it deviated from theoretical accounts of such mergers that stress the need for trust at the elite
level. We recognise that inter-party trust can instead develop across the three faces of party
organisation. We contribute a new typology for understanding these processes, and argue that
existing studies are right to highlight that trust between the party in public office is important but
wrong to conclude that its absence precludes mergers from occurring. Instead, we find that a lack
of trust between parties in public office restricts the degree of delegation and increases the level
of monitoring and formalisation, which can have damaging effects on the parties that emerge.
Keywords
Liberal Democrats, Liberal Party, party leader, party merger, Social Democratic Party, trust
Party mergers are common in most European party systems and have played an important
role in contributing to the emergence of new political parties (Bolleyer et al., 2016). Such
marriages between political parties have the potential to alter the dynamics of party com-
petition (Mair, 1997) and to affect government coalition politics (Marland and Flanagan,
2015). Given the significance of mergers, it is understandable that they have attracted the
attention of political scientists. Scholars have, however, noted that the emergent literature
on party mergers has been limited due to the thin theoretical analysis found in a number
of case studies (Coffé and Torenvlied, 2008). In response, path-breaking studies have
advanced our understanding of why political parties merge and the factors which shape
the survival chances of merged parties (Bolleyer et al., 2016; Ibenskas, 2016).
1University of York, York, UK
2University of Sussex, Brighton, UK
3Kings College London, London, UK
Corresponding author:
Dan Keith, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK.
Email: dan.keith@york.ac.uk
857595BPI0010.1177/1369148119857595The British Journal of Politics and International RelationsKeith et al.
research-article2019
Original Article
Keith et al. 747
One important area in which there has been insufficient analysis has been in studying
the definable steps or processes through which parties merge. The processes inherent to
mergers have been neglected since Lees et al. (2010) sought to develop a general frame-
work of mergers they applied to cases in Germany and the Netherlands. In particular,
Lees et al. highlighted the significance of the development of trust between party leaders.
It is problematic that considerable gaps exist in explanations of the opaque processes by
which parties merge when they might impact on the ability of new parties to establish
themselves or their electoral fortunes.
In this article, we make three theoretical and empirical contributions to address these
gaps. First, we use the wider literature on party organisation to revise the general frame-
work for understanding merger processes presented by Lees et al. (2010). Doing so ena-
bles us to provide a more comprehensive account of the ways that trust emerges in party
mergers. Our framework can analyse, while not being restricted to, the role of party lead-
ership. It enables us to explain the role played by other parts of political parties, including
the activist base. Second, as Lees et al. (2010) acknowledged, their ideas were only sub-
ject to testing by two case studies and require application elsewhere. Here, we show how
our revised framework provides a better explanation of the merger of the Liberal Party
and the Social Democratic Party (hereafter SDP) in the United Kingdom, to form the
Social and Liberal Democrats in 1988 (renamed Liberal Democrats in 1989). We examine
how the merger followed processes that deviated from those Lees et al. saw to be inherent
to party mergers – and how trust failed to develop between party leaders.
Third, analysis of an apparently deviant case helps us to contribute to the theoretical
understanding of mergers. We provide a new typology that can be used to understand
merger processes. It points to the potential for variation to exist in the processes by which
parties merge. We present expectations about why different types of merger processes
unfold and consider their effects on merged parties. We argue that while the absence of
trust between parties in public office (and their leaders) does not preclude mergers, in
such cases we can expect greater formalisation of the merger process. Our study provides
a basis for future research on merger processes and is relevant beyond political parties to
other political organisations, including interest groups and international organisations.
We have further reasons for analysing the formation of the Liberal Democrats. It had
a profound impact on UK politics which contributed to weakening the UK’s two-party
system. It also participated in a rare coalition government with the Conservative Party in
2010. Political scientists have analysed the attitudes of Liberal Democrat voters and
activists (Whiteley et al., 2006) and its intra-party tensions (Sanderson-Nash, 2011).
Analysis of the merger that formed the Liberal Democrats though has been restricted to
historical accounts (Crewe and King, 1995; Douglas, 2005) or written by party activists
and politicians (Beith, 1998; Meadowcroft, 1998). The lack of theoretically informed
analysis is problematic given the long-term implications mergers can have for issues of
ideology, institutional culture and allegiance (Lees et al., 2010: 1301), and thus the devel-
opment of the Liberal Democrats.
The article is structured as follows. First, we examine the existing theoretical literature
on merger processes, with specific reference to research by Lees et al. (2010). We draw
on the wider literature on the organisation of political parties to revise their framework to
account for the significance of actors beyond the leadership. Second, we outline the con-
text behind the formation of the Liberal Democrats and use process tracing (following
George and Bennett, 2005) to examine the sequencing of the merger. We show that the
generalisable qualities of mergers qua mergers Lees et al. identified as underpinning
To continue reading
Request your trial