Over at The Guardian’s Comment is Free website, LDV Co-Editor Mark Pack notes how united the Lib Dem membership has been, at least so far, in nervously watching and waiting to see how the balanced parliament negotiations develop.
There’s general recognition that Nick Clegg and the party face the toughest of choices – but also a determination to see electoral reform brought in. Here’s an extract:
Many have an instinctive preference or aversion to one of the other main parties, but what they all have in common is a commitment to the Liberal Democrats. Those in principle who would never touch party X with a bargepole are greatly outnumbered by those who don’t mind if it’s party X or party Y – as long as there is a good deal for Liberal Democrat policies in the process. In part that is born of seeing the experiences in devolved governments and local councils around the UK. There is no one magic pairing that has always been the best choice, and no one cursed pairing that has always been the worst choice. It all depends on the circumstances and what can be agreed.
You can read Mark’s article in full here.
13 Comments
No Overall Control Party comes out in favour of Liberal/Tory deal. This is a way forward to dissolving Tory power politics from the inside and will only last a year or so.
The people will very shortly have a government representative of the many, not the few
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Vote-for-No-Overall-Control/112289348800253
A positive article showing a united party. That has got to be rare amongst the press of late. He also sounded positive on electoral reform too, perhaps reflecting the mood of the country as suggested by opinion polls from YouGov and ICM. Is the Guardian becoming a Lib friendly paper?
Picked up my mood. I’ve had enough of, well, idiotic people saying we can never work woth Tories or Labour, respectively.
It’s what we bloody well want with voting reform! Get used to compromise, and good government, instead of elected dictatorship!
A referendum on the Alternative Vote was in the Labour party manifesto. So for Labour it is not a concession but an initial offer, that can be improved upon in negotiation.
Now, after days of tough bargaining, all that the Tories have offered is to match Labour’s opening bid! This may be all that Cameron can get past his party but it is a poor deal.
Some sources now say that Labour are offering the Alternative Vote without a referendum, followed by a plebiscite on PR. If true that is a very good offer. Especially given that any form of electoral reform will be difficult to get through a referendum.
I believe from yesterday that Clegg never wanted a Lib-Lab coalition and was playing games to get more from the Tories. At this point Clegg could gain respectability back by ending negotiations and allowing a minority formed government by the Tories, because if he makes any arrangement, the Liberal Democrats will fall into obscurity. If you don’t believe this, listen to the people on the street!!
I have to admit I cannot believe Nick Clegg is doing this to your supporters and England. Nick Clegg is a typical political “whore” and I cannot believe I have to use that term. Just reading the article about Clegg’s ‘list’, it is clear what this is about, Cabinet seats and ego. Clegg could care less about the voters and supporters. Well good luck, because when the Lib Dem Cabinet Ministers go down for the Tory mistakes and the voters remember the Lib Dems stabbing them in the back. You’ll wonder why the Lib-Dems have become irrelevant and a laughing stock!
Lib Dems have become a real joke, have duped many to believe in them, and now everyone that voted Lib Dem should have voted Labour!
For pragmatic read “we’re a lot more flexible than previously claimed from our lofty positions of virtue”. I’m thinking of opposition to Trident going straight away.
Of course Labour was going to loose. Of course when given responsibility, “pragmatic” decisions have to be made. But that’s not how it was presented before.
I wonder what the commenters who, yesterday, were scoffing at those who’d been going into melt-down over a ConLib coalition the weekend are saying now.
My guess – Clegg
The one thing we must now do is a deal.
If we were to declare failure, after testing out both options, then we would be declaring to the nation that three-party politics and coalition building are not viable for our party. If we did that, the nation’s response to us would, of course, be deserved oblivion
“Get used to compromise”,
The question is….in favour of whom and at cost?
We did NOT vote for a Conservative government in any shape or form. I must say I agree entirely with Mr Dobb’s comments above. Congratulations…enjoy your new Tory government (sorry Conservative/Lab coalition).
Im wondering how any Liberal party member with decent liberal values can square an agreement with the Tories in this country with the agreements that the Tories have with some European homophobic parties.
Paul – that’d be the difference between merger and agreeing to work together, in the same way as in councils up and down the country Labour and Tory are in coalition here, Liberals and SNP there, etc.
Though even then, I’m confused as to your alternative plan? Do you mean you’d’ve had the Lib Dems prop up the Labour party that in the not-so-very-long I’ve been politically aware, has voted down an equal age of consent, blocked repeal of section 28 for years, spent oodles of taxpayers money in the courts to preserve the ban on LGB people serving in the armed forces, reduced trans people’s employment rights by adding a swathe of exemptions to equality law…
Paul: in your personal life you may refuse to have anything to do with anyone with less than perfect morals, if you choose (though I’d point out it’s not what the truly saintly do, but never mind that). In politics, it would always have been necessary to sit down with people who have friends we wouldn’t want to shake hands with or indeed meet in a dark alley. That’s the way it is. It doesn’t mean we’ve become the same as them. Just that we’re willing to work with them. I’ll hold my nose and live with it.
This really is delicious. Of course compromise and accommodation is necessary, but this WAS NOT WHAT WAS BEING SAID LAST WEEK. I don’t understand (well, yes I do) the psychological jump necessary for Party loyalists to admit that they have gone from never-tested idealism to actually having to accept responsibility with influence (David Blunkett didn’t bother with paraphrasing Baldwin as to whom wishes the latter without the former).
I do have to wish the ConLib coalition the best, as it’s the country they’re now responsible for. From a personal point of view, I also hope this represents a forming of political maturity in which the Party realizes it cannot be everything to everyone in every corner of the country (even when this involves, say, stridently anti-Traveller lines in the West Country).
Alternatively, Party loyalists could carry on insisting dissenters didn’t read the caveat hidden in the micro-dot on the I.
PS Fixed term Governments? Was this not a Party which mooted the power to recall MPs? Just not the ones now with baubles of power!
Those screaming about the evil Tories – how could any liberal party do a deal with a party which has introduced the most authoritarian, anti-liberal policies introduced in this country since the acts of settlement?
It cuts both ways – neither of the other two parties is a liberal party – that’s why the LibDems exist, not to be a refuge for dissaffected Labour/Tory voters (don’t we have the BNP and UKIP for that anyway?)
The country voted for a hung parliament – for once we got it – its now incumbant upon MPs to form a government. Stop being sore for getting what was voted for.