http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18547842

'Nick Clegg told BBC News neither he nor the prime minister knew of the proposal until they read it in the Daily Mail.'

To be fair, a lot of politicians don't seem to have known what their stance was until they read it in the Mail.

I have to say I support the changes. Mainly the change to having one exam board set the exams nationally. Existing exam boards have made the tests easier and easier to get "business" from schools who want a higher pass rate to look better in the league tables.
also support going back to final exams as the main assessment. While I understand the argument about not being able to guarantee the source of course work (ie children getting someone else to help), my main point is about the short term nature of knowledge retention under the current system.
For example (back in the day) my school had a terrible pass rate for French. They moved (satarting with my year) to a 100% course work exam board. You learnt the french one week, did the course work the next, then never had to remember that bit again. The pass rate tripled in a year! I got a B. Only my laziness stopped me getting an A, and I could barely speak a word of the language.
Exams are better because:
A) They test your long term knowledge.
B) You don't have to be up to standard at the end of the first term (ie GSCE and A-level courses are two years long, but you have to be up to standard in just a few weeks with course work or modular exams)
C)It's much harder to cheat in an exam.