David Laws’ account of the negotiations that led to the Coalition agreement is due out next Monday.
According to the publishers:
The Liberal Democrats’ and Conservatives’ decision to form a Coalition government has changed the face of British politics. This book sets out the inside story of how this momentous event unfolded, and how – together – the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives have started to address the challenge of a massive government budget deficit.
22 Days in May is the first detailed Liberal Democrat insider account of the negotiations which led to the formation of the Lib Dem/Conservative coalition government in May 2010, along with an essential desription of the early days of the government.
David Laws was one of the key Lib Dem MPs who negotiated the coalition deal, and the book includes his in-depth, behind the scenes, account of the talks with the Conservative and Labour teams after the General Election, as well as the debates within his own party about how the Lib Dems should respond to the challenges and threats of a hung parliament.
You can pre-order it now from Amazon with £3.00 off.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The mysterious mole men of New York caught on video
Doing better? The goal must be Sufficeincy
Michael Meadowcroft (1942-2026) - A Liberal to His Core
Labour deputy claims that Farage is a threat to democracy
Jason Connor
Mick Taylor
Chloe
theakes
Kira Collins
17 Comments
I have a lot of admiration for David Laws, in particular his role in the Coalition negotiations and in his role as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, for which he was ideally-suited. I do feel, however, that in publishing this book now he is almost certainly looking at the world from his own perspective, which is also what got him into trouble over his parliamentary expenses/living situation. I do not think the publication will doe the party any good, short-term.
I wonder if David Laws has thought about standing for election as mayor of London – or alternatively appearing on “I’m a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here!”
Another very ill judged decision.
And sadly that kind of judgement is why he isn’t in front line politics anymore.
David must also have given up his prospects for a future front line career as releasing a ‘tell all’ book so quickly hardly seems compatible with rejoining a government full of the people who are now subject to his lucrative book deal musings.
My instinctive reaction was the same as Tony and LDV Bob.
Thinking about it though, we don’t know who he consulted about this, or about their reactions, or even if he was asked to do it by various people.
It could well be that Nick, Dave et al are happy for Laws to publish his take on the negotiations as they will show Labour in a bad light?
From what I’ve read of the published bits in the paper, it is a well written, interesting bit of contemporary history. I will buy it probably and I think it only reminds us how urgently David is required in government again.
Given the fact that most people publish political memoirs after their careers are over, and that the enthusiasm for Mr Laws’s return has predominantly come from other people, I can’t help but wonder whether this is his not-so-subtle hint that he has no intention of returning to front-line politics.
I hope not, though–I’d far rather Liberal Neil was right, and this was all a Cunning Plan.
Private school? Oxbridge? Background in banking? Millionaire? Lack of integrity?
I think it is very likely we will see Laws back on the front bench.
I agree with Tony Parsons. Regardless of its accuracy publishing this account just 6 months after the event will rightly be seen by most people as a self-serving justification of what the Lib Dems have done. At least the Labour lot waited till they were out of office before they jumped on the memoir gravy-train. And no, I don’t think he shoul be returning to the Cabinet a matter of months after caught out fiddling his expenses
There will be outrage if laws returned to front bench politics.
in fact if the parliamentary standards committee does not make a ruling on his expenses pretty damn soon there will be an outrage.
He has to go if we are to truly clean up parliament.
Of course there will be outrage if David Laws returns to front-bench politics: the media and probably the Labour Party will work hard to ensure that there is.
I must confess, compared with many of the people currently occupying those benches and their opposite numbers, I’m having trouble working up much in the way of outrage. Laws has a job that requires him to live in 2 different places, and made use of the expenses system that enables MPs to do so. He went about claiming in the wrong way–perhaps wilfully, perhaps not, which is for the commissioner to decide–but compared with flipping, duckhouses, moats and highly expensive period renovations it’s not even on the same playing field.
Editorial note: please remember our moderation policy regarding abusive comments, and also please bear in mind that comments published here are subject to the laws of libel and so if you state as unequivocal fact allegations of law-breaking or financial misdeeds that have not been proved in a court or by regulator, your comments may also be moderated.
I stand corrected, the amounts where more 😉
according to the Telegraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/7780642/MPs-Expenses-Treasury-chief-David-Laws-his-secret-lover-and-a-40000-claim.html
David Laws, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, claimed up to £950 a month for eight years to rent rooms in two properties owned by his partner. The claims could be against parliamentary rules governing MPs’ second home expenses.
Mr Laws apologised and announced that he would “immediately” pay back tens of thousands of pounds claimed for rent and other housing costs between 2006 and 2009.
He also referred himself to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner.
Mr Laws said: “I regret this situation deeply, accept that I should not have claimed my expenses in this way and apologise fully.”
His controversial claims were not uncovered by an official inquiry into MPs’ expenses last year because Mr Laws did not admit that his landlord was also his long-standing lover.
The disclosure is the first big setback for the Coalition.
The Daily Telegraph’s Expenses Files show that between 2004 and 2007, Mr Laws claimed between £700 and £950 a month to sub-let a room in a flat in Kennington, south London. This flat was owned by the MP’s partner who was also registered as living at the property. The partner sold the flat for a profit of £193,000 in 2007.
In 2007, Mr Laws’s partner then bought another house nearby for £510,000. The MP then began claiming to rent the “second bedroom” in this property. His claims increased to £920 a month
“if you state as unequivocal fact allegations of law-breaking or financial misdeeds that have not been proved in a court or by regulator, your comments may also be moderated.”
Even when the perpetrator has publicly acknowledged wrongdoing? That’s ridiculous.
The problem is no matter how hard David tries he will inevitably end up painting a less than flattering light on those other than himself. It could kick off a whole series of revelations about the negotiations and that period as others fight to put themselves in a better light and have their say. It’s not a good idea to expose every detail of the negotiations so soon when other insiders may be forced to speak out by this. The full story of that time is probably not one Nick or Cameron want in the public domain while they are trying to keep the coalition together.
AAS: the sort of comment your question covers would be fine if that’s as far as the comment went (hence my use of “may”).
Tory MP Rob Wilson has a book out on the same thing. I suspect David Laws’ book may be a bit less to the Guardian’s taste.
Mark
Then probably what you should have written is:
“if you state as unequivocal fact allegations of law-breaking or financial misdeeds that have not been proved in a court or by regulator, or admitted by the perpetrator, your comments may also be moderated.”