As the prospect of a hung parliament looms larger, it’s crystal clear the Lib Dem leadership is determined to shoot down early Tory claims that the financial markets will react badly to no one party having an overall majority.
Last month, it was deputy leader Vince Cable – regarded by many voters as the best choice of Chancellor – who stressed that “Our own approach to fiscal policy is at least as robust as that of any other party.”
And now today, in a speech to party workers, Nick Clegg will accuse the Tories of ‘a crude form of blackmail’ by encouraging fears of a fall in the stock market.
The Conservatives are so desperate that they have resorted to a crude form of blackmail. David Cameron and George Osborne are stoking up fears in the markets, actively trying to destabilise the pound and reduce the Government’s ability to borrow. It’s like a protection racket: vote for us or our friends in the City will lay waste to your economy, your savings and your job.
“There is nothing positive in the Conservatives’ election strategy. It’s built entirely on the hatred of Gordon Brown, stoking up fears of a broken society and now threatening economic meltdown. It’s a strategy that is completely negative and without hope, and it’s becoming increasingly obvious that people aren’t going to fall for it.”
Strong stuff, fair stuff. But do LDV readers think there’s a possibility the British public will in reality be put off voting Lib Dem out of fear of what might happen in a hung parliament?
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Joy of Six 1528
Endometriosis and acetylation
Reform makes first gain from Conservatives in this by-election cycle
How Chancellor Reeves torpedoed the economy
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
cim
Iain Donaldson
Jennie
Simon
Geoff Reid
7 Comments
Some voters will be put off by the prospect of a hung parliament, rightly or wrongly. Others will buy the Tory line that this election is between Brown and Cameron only, whatever the reality.
It’s up to the Lib Dems to make the case as to why the party having more power after the election will be a positive outcome for the country and counter the Tories. So far, that’s happening and the result is that the Lib Dem vote has been remarkably resistent to squeeze. There’s every opportunity to continue – not least the Spring conference this weekend and the three leaders’ debates in April/May.
Larger loos in parliament eh? Is our Cyril returning?
Hung parliaments are only ever discussed in negative terms in the meeja. So its always going to eb hard when the default psotiion is they’re somethign to be afraid of.
That’s fair enough, but it really needs to be accompanied by a clear statement of the principles that would govern the actions of the Lib Dems in a hung parliament.
Yesterday we had a press story about Clegg privately ruling out a deal with Labour unless Brown was replaced as leader, while publicly saying he was keeping all options open. I can understand the temptation to put out that kind of spin, but it’s really not an honest way to proceed, and I don’t think it will ultimately do the party much good.
Well, it’s nice to see Clegg attacking the Tories for a change. However, I don’t think the charge of blackmail is a particularly good one. The people who drive market sentiment are quite capable of making up their own minds. Cameron could reasonably argue that if the markets are genuinely scared of e.g. a Labour victory, that can only be because it could genuinely have scary consequences.
As to raising the hung parliament issue (which admittedly Clegg has not done explicitly, at least in the excerpt you print), it rather reminds me of Corporal Jones yelling “DON’T PANIC!” Calling attention to a potential threat, in order to try to play it down, does rather tend to be counter-productive.
The man in the street will see that neutral people like Stephanie Flanders think that hung parliaments are scary, and will conclude that hung parliaments probably are scary. Which is why a simple “oh no they’re not!” will not help us. What we need to be doing is explaining exactly what we would actually do in a hung parliament, and why our responsible behaviour would ensure stable government.
I can’t see that the markets listen to Cameron. The markets do not like the size of our debt which is on a par with Greece’s at 12.55 and twice the average in the EU. Both the Lib Dems and Labour want to make less cuts than Cameron and therefore will be seen as a higher risk. If Labour and the Libs Dems think lower cuts will work then try to sell your ideas to the markets and see how far you get. Remember these are money men and not interested in politics only the computed risks to any capital they lend to the UK. With the UK’s huge debt the markets are in charge in reality. The markets want a clearly defined mechansim of implementing cuts. if politicians want to go their own way after the election the markets will react accordingly. You’ve got the problem as you need to borrow from them because you are skint but they do not need to lend to you.
Derek Emery,
What you say is largely fair comment, but there are some false inferences we must be careful not to draw. The fact that lenders would prefer big cuts does not necessarily mean they are right for the country. If a banker lends a carpenter £10 and wants his loan repaid, he will be delighted if the carpenter pawns his saw and pays up at once. He will be less impressed if the carpenter uses the saw to earn his way out of debt more slowly. However, the carpenter will be doing the right thing to work his way out of trouble, provided he can avoid excessive interest penalties by keeping the banker reasonably on side.
What the next government will also do, of course, is rely on big tax rises as well as spending cuts to pay off its debts. We all know that the Tories will do it, we all know that Labour will do it, however much they both try to kid us otherwise. If the parties are allowed to maintain their dishonest stance on tax, the election campaign will be pretty meaningless.
Sadly, leading the way into fantasy politics is Nick Clegg, who sent me a membership renewal letter today stating “We’d make Britain fairer by delivering big tax cuts for middle-income and low-paid people”. Nick, do you really think anybody believes you for one moment?