It’s a favourite quote amongst Conservatives who are opposed to electoral reform wheeled out to suggest that there’s something fundamentally alien to this country about coalition government “England does not love coalitions”.
But what did Disraeli really mean when he said it on 15 December 1852? The words were uttered during a debate on the Conservative budget, which was under attack for proposing a deficit. What’s more, the day before he had tried to get the group of Radical MPs to agree to back him and eventually join the Cabinet.
In other words, it was more a matter of “England does not …
By Stephen Tall
| Wed 10th February 2010 - 6:43 pm
The House of Commons yesterday voted by 365 votes to 187 to hold a UK-wide referendum on changing the voting system next year from first-past-the-post to the alternative vote. The Lib Dems reluctantly voted for the alternative vote, as the most modest of improvements on the current, broken system.
But the party, in the person of Cambridge MP David Howarth, also moved an amendment to leave out ‘an alternative-vote’ and insert ‘a single transferable vote’ – in other words, to ask Parliament to approve an electoral system which would at last reflect the votes cast for parties across the country, …
By Iain Roberts
| Fri 22nd January 2010 - 10:30 am
We have a decent amount of debate about the role of MPs – in particular whether they should be spending less time sorting out their constituents’ problems and more in Westminster holding the Government to account and taking part in the law-making process.
So it may be instructive to see how W.J. Brown MP saw the role back in 1945.
In addition to debating in the chamber, Brown described the role of an MP (and I’m not sure if he intended these to be in order of importance) as:
1. Representing the local interests of his constituency and see that they get …
It’s nine days since Nick Clegg challenged Gordon Brown to volunteer to appear before Sir John Chilcot’s inquiry into the Iraq war this side of the general election “before people decide how to vote on his record in government?” And now it seems that Nick’s pressure has paid off – the BBC reports:
Gordon Brown will give evidence to the Iraq Inquiry before the general election, the BBC understands.
Mr Brown, who has said he is “happy” to face the inquiry whenever called, had been under pressure to do so before the election, which must be held by June.
The inquiry’s chairman is expected to confirm later that the PM will be asked to appear but will not set a date. However, the BBC understands he will appear in late February or early March.
You can re-live the exchange between Nick and Mr Brown, either on video courtesy the BBC or via the Hansard transcript, here on LDV.
Nick has welcomed the Prime Minister’s decision to face the Chilcot Inquiry:
It is well known that the Prime Minister was a key figure in Britain’s decision to invade Iraq. It is only right that Gordon Brown should explain his role in this disastrous foreign policy failure before asking the British people for their vote.”
This is an excellent result for Nick. Good in its own right: the Prime Minister should be asked about his role in the invasion of Iraq. And good for Nick’s growing stature as leader: once again, as over the Gurkhas and Michael Martin, it is Nick who is making the running, and punching above his weight at Prime Minister’s Questions.
This in stark contrast to David Cameron, whose string of lacklustre Commons’ performances are beginning to be noticed even by his friends at The Spectator. Here’s how the magazine’s Coffee House blog compared the performances of Nick and the Tory leader at this week’s PMQs:
The LibDem leader took a pop at Labour with a very smart weapon. He wondered why the government hadn’t acted to stop RBS lending tax-payers’ money to Kraft which is about to sack Cadburys staff. That’s three bogymen in one. … hate him because they can see he’s capable, plucky and politically shrewd. The house has strange ways of honouring talent. …
Cameron risks turning into the Rafa Benitez of Westminster. He’s living on a reputation which is rapidly fading from memory.
US firm Kraft’s proposed takeover of Cadbury’s has made headlines in recent days. First, because it’s a major, historic British brand being snapped-up by a non-UK business (or ‘foreign predator’, as Vince Cable labels them). Secondly, because of the fear that job losses will result. And, thirdly, because of the role of the Royal Bank of Scotland – in which the British government has a majority stake-holding – in lending the money to Kraft which will fund its acquisition of Cadbury’s.
The Lib Dems – in the shape of Nick Clegg and Vince – have sharply questioned the role of the Government in the takeover. At Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday, Nick asked Gordon Brown:
… there is a simple principle at stake. Tens of thousands of British companies are crying out for that money to protect jobs, and instead RBS wants to lend it to a multinational with a record of cutting jobs. When British taxpayers bailed out the banks, they would never have believed that their money would be used to put British people out of work. Is that not just plain wrong?
LDV reported on Wednesday that Lib Dem MP for birmingham Yardley John Hemming had been granted an emergency Commons motion to debate what he termed an “intimidating” email received from a firm of solicitors Withers LLP.
A brief update, courtesy of the BBC report:
MPs have rallied round one of their number who said he was being “intimidated” and prevented from exercising his right to freedom of speech in the Commons by a firm of solicitors.
On 14 January 2010, they backed a request from Liberal Democrat John Hemming to refer the matter to Committee on Standards and Privileges, who will
As Helen has covered on The Voice, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority is running a public consultation on MPs’ expenses. Comments on its proposals can be submitted until 11 February 2010.
A couple of people mentioned in comments to that post that the proposals are rather better than the media coverage made them fear, and reading through the IPSA’s proposals I’ve had the same reaction.
Even so, it is well worth responding to the consultation because the IPSA will very likely be receiving significant lobbying from some MPs to water down various proposals. Unless other MPs and the public lobby back, there is a risk of a lopsided impression being changed and important reforms being lost.
So here’s my response, which picks up on a couple of weak areas but otherwise backs the proposals:
Nick Clegg pressed Gordon Brown to volunteer to appear before Sir John Chilcot’s inquiry into the Iraq war this side of the general election “before people decide how to vote on his record in government?” The Prime Minister replied that it wasn’t a matter for him. (Odd how when you become the most powerful person in Britain, you seem to lose the power to volunteer to do something inconvenient).
So Nick asked again, telling the Prime Minister he “should insist on going to the inquiry now”, and asking “What has he got to hide?” Again Mr Brown said, “Sorry, guv, more than my job’s worth” (or words to that effect).
Nick still wasn’t happy, so has now written to the Prime Minister, chalenging him to do the decent thing:
Dear Gordon,
I am writing to urge you to indicate immediately to Sir John Chilcot that it is your strong preference to go before the Iraq Inquiry ahead of the General Election.
Following developments yesterday at Alastair Campbell’s hearing, your personal role in the decisions that led to the war in Iraq has now come under the spotlight. The notion that your hearing should take place after the election in order that the Inquiry remains outside of party politics therefore no longer holds. On the contrary, the sense that you have been granted special treatment because of your position as Prime Minister will only serve to undermine the perceived independence of the Committee.
As I said to you across the floor of the Commons today, people have a right to know the truth about the part you played in this war before they cast their verdict o n your Government’s record. I urge you to confirm publicly that should Sir John Chilcot invite you to give evidence to the Inquiry ahead of the election you will agree to do so.
Nick Clegg
Well, I don’t suppose Mr Brown will change his mind – but Nick has at least exposed the Prime Minister’s relief-cum-satisfaction that he can dodge the Chilcot bullet, dominating the main political headlines as a result. And by the time Mr Brown does eventually appear he will be a genuinely powerless ex-Prime Minister so who’ll care what he has to say any longer?
Meanwhile David Cameron asked some windy, unfocused and instantly forgettable questions of the Prime Minister who gave at least as good as he got. Score-draw for theatrics; no-score draw for content.
Here’s Nick’s questions, courtesy the BBC. The Hansard transcript’s below it.
Commons Speaker John Bercow has granted MPs an emergency debate after one Member claimed he had been “intimidated” by a firm of solicitors.
Liberal Democrat John Hemming, who represents Birmingham Yardley, complained about an e-mail he had received from Withers LLP.
Mr Bercow said the MP believed it amounted to a “contempt of the House” and ordered a debate for Thursday. It was a matter “to which I should allow precedence”, he told the Commons.
By Stephen Tall
| Wed 16th December 2009 - 6:35 pm
Forgive me if I tread carefully here, for while the Lib Dem deputy leader is protected by the cloak of Parliamentary privilege your humble scribe has no wish to tangle with a billionaire. So I’ll let The Times tell the story of today’s (Deputy) Prime Minister’s Questions:
A senior Liberal Democrat today referred to Lord Ashcroft, the Tory deputy chairman, as a “non-dom” in the Commons. It is the first time the Conservative peer, whose tax status is unknown, has been described in a such a way on the floor of the House.
The report of the Senior Salaries Review Body was being debated in the House of Lords on Monday – and Lord (Tom) McNally was there to put forward the Lib Dem view that, whatever and however peers are paid, the second chamber becomes a place which is open to those of all backgrounds, income and geography.
The Lib Dems in the Lords submitted evidence to the SSRB which recommended replacing the attendance allowances and all office costs with a single taxable daily rate with a specific receipted overnight allowance. The SSRB recommended reforms to expenses which would see the introduction of a £200 daily allowance and £140 overnight receipted expense while the Lords is sitting.
Here’s Lord McNally’s speech to the Lords in full:
Here’s what Lib Dem shadow chancellor Vince Cable had to say in response to Alistair Darling’s Pre-Budget Report statement:
What we needed was a national economic plan but what we got was a weak party manifesto. There has never been a deficit like this and we need a sensible and coherent plan for dealing with it.
“The Chancellor has ducked the hard choices on spending and cuts. Instead of facing up to reality he has chosen to move the goal posts by relying on fanciful growth forecasts. He could have used this Budget to make the tax system fairer. But
The House of Commons has confirmed the appointment of Jackie Ballard, Lib Dem MP for Taunton from 1997-2001 – and who stood to be leader in 1999 – to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, the new independent body which will now run the MPs’ expenses system. Jackie is currently Chief Executive of the RNID.
Her appointment was not without its controversy, though, as the BBC reports:
… some Tory MPs were unhappy at the choice of Jackie Ballard saying she had not been an MP for long enough. … Sir Nicholas Winterton and Christopher Chope … tried to introduce an
There’s no doubt today’s PMQs belonged to Gordon Brown. It’s not necessarily that he answered the questions any better than usual – that seems to be an acknowledged superfluity for the Prime Minister – but his performance was miles more energetic and confident than usual.
Mr Brown was also helped by an over-defensive David Cameron, who seemed to have no quips prepared for the inevitable assaults by the Prime Minister on the Tories’ tax cuts for millionaires, and the tax-avoiding non-dom status of Tory candidate Zac Goldsmith. Especially effective were the Prime Minister’s withering put-downs – “The more he talks, …
Lib Dem shadow home secretary Chris Huhne today tackled Alan Johnson on his decision not to block the extradition of computer hacker Gary McKinnon, who has Asperger’s, to the USA. (LDV has previously covered the story here). Their exchange in the Commons today is recorded below, and you can read the whole Hansard debate here:
Chris Huhne (Eastleigh) (LD): The Home Secretary is, in my view, a very brave man to hold out his judgment of the medical condition—and of the worsening of the medical condition—of Gary McKinnon against such overwhelming evidence as we have heard from the hon.
There’s been a small reshuffle of the Liberal Democrat team in the House of Lords. The most notable change is Chris Rennard joining the front bench teams for Constitutional Affairs and for Communities & Local Government.
Other changes included Sue Miller stepping down from Home Affairs, to be replaced by Sally Hamwee. Graham Tope takes over at Communities & Local Government.
The full Lords team is:
Leader
Lord McNally
Deputy Leader
Lord Dholakia
Lord Wallace of Saltaire
Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
Lord Razzall
Lord Vallance of Tummel
Lord Sharman
Lord Cotter (Small Business)
Baroness Sharp of Guildford (Science and Technology)
Gordon Brown has confirmed he will send 500 more troops to Afghanistan, taking the total UK deployment to over 10,000. He told MPs all conditions had now been met to send the extra personnel and that eight other countries had also offered additional troops. The UK force level will reach 9,500 but special forces takes this to 10,000.
Here in full is Nick Clegg’s Commons response to Gordon Brown’s announcement:
I join the Prime Minister in recognising and commending the enormously impressive work of our Armed Forces in Afghanistan.
Finally it has become mainstream to talk about the need for a big shift in strategy in Afghanistan.
When I first questioned the effectiveness of our action there six months ago and called for this kind of step-change, I was told it was unpatriotic.
The Prime Minister’s change of tone since then has been dramatic – and welcome.
The Liberal Democrat approach to Afghanistan has always been simple: we should do this properly or not at all.
By Stephen Tall
| Wed 25th November 2009 - 9:05 pm
Ah, the joy of PMQs – Nick asks Gordon a question, Gordon fails to answer a totally different question to the one Nick asks. It’s a regular pattern, but today it was clear to everyone that the Lib Dem leader had floored the Prime Minister over the issue of Sir John Chilcot’s inquiry into the events leading up to the invasion of Iraq.
Nick laid the trap neatly, asking the simple and straightforward question:
It is vital that the Iraq inquiry, which started its work this week, is able to reveal the full truth about the decisions leading up to the
There’s an intriguing detail in today’s widely welcomed proposals for reforming how the House of Commons works. In a bid to weaken the power of the whips and to strengthen that of backbenchers of all parties, the House of Commons Reform Committee has recommended that MPs vote in secret for a new body that will control some of the business in the House.
Secret voting would reduce the influence of the whips certainly, but it would also reduce accountability to the public. It’s not hard to imagine a controversial decision by this new body – or a controversial election to …
Somewhat unexpectedly, one of the most immediate changes brought about by televising the House of Commons was to male MPs’ hairstyles.
Until then, it had been the habit amongst some of the, er…, thinning on top MPs to brush their hair forward so that when you looked at them face to face it appeared that they had a bountiful mop of hair above their forehead. Unfortunately, if you looked down on their head from a slightly elevated position, this impressive wave of hair instead looked like a toupe that had slipped forward leaving a bald patch further back.
Clegg, who had called for the speech to be cancelled and the remaining Parliamentary time before an election to be used to clean-up politics, said there was nothing in the proposed legislation to help create jobs, boost bank lending and fix the UK’s “rotten” political system.
And here in full is what Nick said today in response to the government measures announced by HM The Queen:
All the pageantry in the world cannot cover up the fact that this is a fantasy Queen’s Speech from a government that has run out of road in a Parliament that has lost the people’s trust.
This Queen’s Speech won’t give people the help and jobs they need in this recession and it won’t fix our rotten politics.
After 12 long years, in which this government has passed nearly 500 different laws, along with countless thousands of statutory instruments, it is right to stop and ask the question: what is this Queen’s Speech really for?
By Alex Foster
| Wed 11th November 2009 - 10:42 am
On Monday, Helen brought you news from the Guardian of the dispute between Liberal Democrat MP Dr Evan Harris and Home Secretary Alan Johnson.
Over the last two days, Dr Harris’s blog has been unmissable as he has been posting details of the correspondence on his blog, along with the consequences.
I was amazed to hear what the Home Secretary said, under privilege, in parliament about a distinguished scientist and sent Alan Johnson the letter below demanding a retraction and apology.
The headline recommendations from Sir Christopher Kelley’s review of MPs’ expenses have been widely covered. Despite this coverage, there is a series of detailed proposals which have been largely overlooked – including one which may yet put the leaders of political parties on the spot over cases involving their own MPs which they thought they had dealt with.
Travel: “MPs should expect to be treated in the same way as their constituents in this regard, unless there are compelling reasons to the contrary. That …
Here’s how the BBC describes its new Democracy Live website, which covers the Westminster Parliament, the European Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly:
It brings together for the first time in the BBC, live and on demand video coverage of proceedings in our national political institutions and the European Parliament. Democracy Live builds on previously available content in the form of video streams, guides and biographies.
But the real magic lies in the site’s search function, which is unlike anything the BBC has done before.
The Telegraph reports today that two Lib Dem MPs – Malcolm Bruce and Matthew Taylor – are among the 17 MPs who have protested to Sir Christopher Kelly at the proposed ban on employing relatives:
Malcolm Bruce
Liberal Democrat MP for Gordon
Employs wife, Rosemary Bruce, as Office Manager and Diary Secretary
“Having my wife as office manager, diary secretary and constituency PA operating from an office in our home is invaluable not only to me but, I strongly believe, to constituents and other organisations I deal with as part of my parliamentary and constituency duties.”
By Stephen Tall
| Wed 28th October 2009 - 12:10 am
Two weeks ago, Nick Clegg wrote to Sir Thomas Legg – in the wake of Sir Thomas’s decision to recommend MPs repay public money if they had been found to have overclaimed expenses for cleaning and gardening – asking that he examine the most serious allegations levelled against MPs:
… when your inquiry was first announced, I think most people expected the worst offences such as flipping to come under the toughest scrutiny. The letters sent this week, however, appear not to focus on these offences. If your review is to be seen as credible it must expose every single one of those MPs who claimed for a non-existent mortgage or ‘flipped’ their second homes purely for personal gain, some of whom then went on to avoid Capital Gains Tax. Some of these MPs appear to have made tens or even hundreds of thousands of pounds in profits with the help of taxpayer subsidies. They must be exposed and these illegitimate profits returned.
Today Nick got his answer, but not the one he – or the public – would have hoped for. Sir Thomas passed Nick’s letter to the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, to reply. Here’s what he said (with a big hat-tip to The Times’s Sam Coates):
You’d have thought he’d be famous enough by now, but apparently not … The Independent reports:
Liberal Democrat MP Lembit Opik will complain to the Commons authorities today after his name was missed off a key internet search tool. The online of version of Hansard, which records everything said in Parliament, has a “search by Member” page – but Mr Opik’s name is not on the alphabetical list. It means his Montgomeryshire constituents cannot simply click through to find his written and spoken contributions.
When told of the error Mr Opik said: “I’m both appalled and amazed by this and will
For many eighteenth- and nineteenth-century abolitionists, slavery was easily defined as the ownership of one human being by another. But any technical definition of enslavement is problematic, given the messy realities of coercion in practice. Forced labour exists on a spectrum from slavery to freedom, with debt labour often very similar to slavery.
Steve Nash I agree with KP that the International Aid and diplomatic Budget should increased, to challenge both Immigration and the need for Defence. It may not be the ch...
Tom Arms @ John Kelly: I certainly didn't mean to imply that Gaza is peaceful. Sadly, civilians continue to die, humanitarian conditions remain appalling and Israel cont...
Peter Wrigley @Jana: The definition I like is taken from an article by Timothy Garton Ash in the Guardian way back in the 2000s: "Liberalism properly understood (is) a quest...
Roland Another limitation is the ability to take a hire car on a ferry; I initially thought it was this restriction Alistair was going to comment upon, given the wide ...
Ian Sanderson (RM3) Hire car companies do have some bizarre restrictions, often related to individual companies and airports. Among them is various age restrictions for seniors. I ...
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Labour and the Liberals in 1924 and today
Brexit: The Uncivil War - the TV drama with Benedict Cumberbatch
A power vacuum?
I am liberal, woke and proud of it. We should all accept such descriptions with pride
Steve Nash 
Tom Arms 
Peter Wrigley 
Roland 
Ian Sanderson (RM3) 