Nick sets out Lib Dem election principles: “Four steps to a fairer Britain”

Nick Clegg has been outlining the principles behind the Lib Dems’ general election manifesto this morning. Below is Nick’s speech, and below that are this morning’s BBC Radio 4 Today Programme interview, and a video excerpt from the launch …

Last week’s phoney election campaign was a depressing experience.
The other parties managed to produce a greatest hits compilation of almost everything that has turned people off politics.
Airbrushed posters, meaningless slogans.
All set against the spectacle of the Government turning in on itself when the country is crying out for leadership.
But most depressing of all was that we learned that the Labour and Conservative parties have decided to run their election campaigns as if the world hadn’t changed:
Bombarding people with gimmicks and promises the country can no longer afford.
Treating people like children, as if winning elections is simply about who can provide the best shopping list of policies to buy off voter groups one by one.
Nobody believes a word of it.
Certainly not the voters and probably not even the politicians.
Playground politics.
Make-believe economics.
It really can’t go on like this.
I start this election year with a different assumption: voters know the game’s up for the old politics.
Shopping lists of pledges don’t wash any more. The politics of plenty are over.
After the expenses scandals most people will have no time for implausible promises and no interest in attempts to buy their favour with cheap trinkets.
But neither are they interested in relentless prophecies of doom and despair.
Faced with these new circumstances, I start from three simple beliefs:
First, treat voters like grown ups. People know that the country faces one of the greatest crises in our public finances in generations. They know that difficult decisions must be taken. So they want politicians to spell out their priorities, spell out the choices, rather than live in denial about the dilemmas we face.
Vince Cable and I have gone further than any other politicians in spelling out some of the steps which must now be taken to address the deficit and redirect money to our priorities: a 10% levy on banks profits as long as they are underwritten by the taxpayer; no to the like-for-like replacement of Trident; an end to tax credits to above average income families; cancelling the Government’s Baby Bond scheme; a £400 cap on all public sector pay increases.
These cuts and revenue raising measures are, in our view, unavoidable if we are to persuade people that we are serious – and we are deadly serious – about tackling Gordon Brown’s astronomical deficit, yet alone generate the resources we need for our social and political priorities.
Second, the importance of conviction. I have heard the claim that at a time of crisis in the Government’s finances, values and conviction must take a backseat to the immediate task of balancing the books.
I strongly disagree.
I do not believe it is possible to balance the books, yet alone transform British society, unless you are guided by strong values which guide you through the difficult choices which now must be made.
People will not support a Government which merely presents itself as a team of bean counting accountants – just as it will dismiss a Government living in denial about the enormity of the task ahead.
People want leadership that is realistic about the difficult decisions ahead, but optimistic about the way forward and guided by clear values.
The party which will win the argument in this year’s election campaign is the party which finds a way of marrying credibility and hope, restraint and generosity, discipline and compassion. That is what the Liberal Democrats will provide.
And, third, stick to the big ideas. The coming election will be no ordinary election. For once, the hype about the future of Britain being at stake is true.
Elections should be an opportunity for us all to ask: where next?
And for voters to choose.
As a country, we face acute social, environmental, economic and political problems.
The next Government will not only need to deal with the immediate crisis in the public finances.
It must reinvent our rotten political system, heal the social divisions which still thwart the hopes of millions, and put our economy on a new, more balanced, more sustainable footing.

None of this can be achieved if we merely tinker at the edges – the Labour and Conservative approach.
Talk of change is cheap.
Delivering big, permanent change is the real challenge.
We are putting our cards on the table now.
The heart of our manifesto will be short, direct and to the point.
We have stripped away everything that is not essential because the country cannot afford it.
We have isolated only two areas where we will make immediate, significant additional spending pledges: in education and in infrastructure investment.
And both will be funded from specific cuts in other areas of current Government spending.
No other party in British politics today has taken such a deliberate step to be open and credible with the British people about what we can and cannot afford.
And, yes, that means that some multi billion pound spending commitments we have promoted in the past – like new free childcare entitlements, a new citizen’s pension or free personal care – will no longer be firm commitments in our manifesto, but will be put on hold until they become affordable again. And some of our other pledges such as the scrapping of tuition fees will have to be phased in over a longer period of time.
Our manifesto is based on a single insight: that the dreadful crises we have faced gives us the chance to reshape our country. And it is built on one simple and very British value: fairness.
Making this country fair will not be easy. There are huge vested interests standing in the way.
We will offer the British people the chance to vote for the four steps that are essential for a fairer Britain.
Only four. But they are four big changes – more significant than anything Labour or the Conservatives will offer at this election – that together will reshape the country we live in.
Fair taxes.
A new, fair start for all children at school.
A rebalanced, green economy.
And clean, open politics.
Four steps to a fairer Britain.
Why have we chosen these four priorities?
What do they say about the kind of society we are seeking to build?
As I set out in a pamphlet this Autumn, The Liberal Moment, I believe power, opportunity, good fortune is unfairly distributed in Britain.
I want fairness to be hardwired into every aspect of British life.
It’s just plain wrong that a child born in the poorest neighbourhood of Sheffield today will on average die fourteen years before a child born in the wealthiest neighbourhood down the road.
It’s just plain wrong that the City of London has been cossetted for years while first rate manufacturing companies have been ignored.
It’s just plain wrong that young people leaving school, College and University find it so difficult to get a foot on the property ladder, a steady job, and are saddled with crippling debt before their adult lives have even started.
It’s just plain wrong that our political system is the plaything of two old parties who do not represent the vast majority of people in Britain today.
It’s just plain wrong that a wealthy banker pays a lower rate of tax on his capital gains than his cleaner does on her monthly wages.
As a Liberal, I passionately believe in the potential of everyone to do well for themselves, their families, their communities – if only they are allowed and supported to do so.
That is why I have never shared the pessimism of the Labour party, a party still fixated with the idea that people’s lives can only be improved if someone in Whitehall tells them what to do.
That is why I have always rejected the lack of compassion and imagination of the Conservative Party, a party still fixated with giving tax breaks to the wealthy few rather than opportunity to the aspirant many.
My liberalism, then, is all about giving people the power to get ahead.
Fairness means opportunity is for everyone.
And that means that power must be dispersed, and never allowed to accumulate among elites – be they political, social or corporate – who inevitably exercise that power in their own interests.
It is the failure to disperse power that has made Britain unfair.
It was the failure to disperse the excess power accumulating in the City of London and the global financial markets that brought about the economic collapse.
And it was the failure to disperse political power that made politicians so isolated from reality that they created the expenses scandal.
The four priorities we will set out in our manifesto will put power back into people’s hands.
They will upend the status quo and dismantle, once and for all, the vested interests that have dominated our political and social life for too long.
They will make Britain the fair country I believe people want it to be.
Our tax plan would be the biggest tax reform in a generation.
It is needed because, in our society, money gives people power.
When money is unevenly distributed, so is power.
Of course, no tax system should try to create total equality of income.
But it can and should help redistribute some wealth – and power – to alleviate the worst excesses of inequality.
Under Labour’s unfair taxes, however, power is taken away from the poorest and given to the richest because the poorest 20% pay the highest proportion of their income in tax….
While the richest people and the biggest corporations can effectively pick and choose what taxes to pay.
That is why tax reform is top of our list.
Only when everyone pays their fair share, and no-one is crippled by their tax bill, will we have a fair society.
We will close loopholes for the richest and introduce a tax on mansions to fund tax cuts of £700 for everyone else.
No-one will pay income tax on the first £10,000 they earn, meaning tax freedom for millions of low earners and pensioners, while millions more get hundreds of pounds back in their pockets.
The biggest tax reform in generations.
A level of change you will never see proposed by the other parties.
Only the Liberal Democrats will make taxes permanently fair.
Next: we will give every child the fair start they deserve by reducing class sizes and increasing one to one tuition in our schools.
Nothing is more important in dispersing power and delivering opportunities to people of every background than education, especially education when children are very young.
As a report I commissioned on social mobility from Martin Narey in 2008 concluded, bright but poor children are still being left behind in our school system.
Social disadvantage is reflected in class results from an early age.
Countless young boys and girls are falling behind at school not because of a lack of potential, but because of the circumstances of their birth.
This is not only unfair on them – it blights the education of the whole class when some pupils start falling behind the rest and the class is unable to move forward as one.
Any teacher, any parent of young children, knows that a successful school with happy, fulfilled children depends on children studying happily together rather than pulling apart.
That is why, following on directly from Martin’s conclusions, we are devoting significant new resources to our schools, freed up by taking above average income families out of the tax credit system.
The money will be targeted directly at the most deprived children.
We know for a fact this is the only way to make society fair.
The only way to ensure, over the long term, that every child has opportunities, no matter their background, their home town or their parent’s bank balance.
We’ll be putting more money, £2.5 billion, into schools to pay for more teachers, better discipline and catch-up classes.
Cutting class sizes so children get the individual attention they need to thrive.
Schools receiving an average of £2,500 extra per pupil for each of the million most deprived children in the country they teach.
Of course, an education is little use if there’s nothing for you to do once you leave school or college.
So the third building block of a fair society is economic opportunity.
There are nearly 100,000 square miles in Britain.
For the last thirty years, politicians have been obsessed with just one of them: the City of London.
We will never have a fair society while this is allowed to continue.
The big, permanent change we offer is a shift away from the traditional over-reliance on the City of London and on financial services.
We will usher in a new era where growth is enabled in every part of Britain.
And we place a new emphasis on infrastructure, on people, and on green technology.
Growth that lasts.
Our vision is that, 10 years from now, our economy will be very different from the one we have today. Instead of bias towards the city, there will be balance. Instead of short-term fixes, we will seek growth that lasts.
Thriving local and regional banks, tied into their communities, with real knowledge of their customers, instead of the faceless global leviathans of the international markets.
Diverse, thriving town centres each with their own identity instead of identikit high streets dominated by global retailers.
Reliable transport infrastructure so people can get to work without it costing a fortune or costing the planet.
Wealthy people encouraged to channel their money into supporting local entrepreneurs instead of ferreting it away in offshore accounts.
Each community, home, and office generating its own power and heat locally, instead of reliant on the centralised, polluting energy grid.
None of that will happen under any party other than the Liberal Democrats.
Labour and the Conservatives want to prop up the City, because finance is the only kind of prosperity they understand.
If that is allowed to happen, the only thing that is certain is that we will find ourselves facing the same problems all over again in years to come.
We are the only party that doesn’t just want to rebuild the economy – we want to change it permanently so that we have growth that lasts.
The final change is the one that makes the others possible.
Political reform.
The fair society we seek to build will not be possible without it.
Our corrupt politics is not capable of driving through change.
It exists to block it, to protect the status quo and maintain the vested interests of an old elite.
Only a party which will really disperse power, breaking open the sorry, stale system of governance, rebuilding local government, and embracing fair votes for every level of election can reinvigorate our democracy.
From the smallest parish council to the corridors of Westminster, we have to create a politics that opens its doors to every citizen.
A politics that is open, transparent, and local, so that the power to push through change is in the hands of everyone.
That is why we will get big money and corrupt donors out of politics altogether.
Reduce the number of MPs by 150.
Devolve power over the police and NHS to local communities.
Change the voting system to abolish safe seats and make every vote count.
And give constituents the right to sack corrupt MPs.
Fair taxes.
A new, fair start for all children at school.
A rebalanced, green economy.
And clean, open politics.
Four steps to real change.
Four steps to a fairer Britain.
The coming months are a crucial time for politics.
We will be using those months to focus on these four priorities.
Unveiling, step by step, more details.
How the changes will work in practice.
How they will affect people.
And why they are needed for a fairer Britain.
So I’m putting our cards on the table.
David Cameron and Gordon Brown are playing the politics of the airbrush and the focus group.
One doesn’t know what he believes. The other doesn’t know what to do with the power he clings to so desperately.
I know what I believe.
I am clear about the real changes a new Government must bring about.
I believe the country wants something different.
The Liberal Democrats are different.
We offer credibility where it’s needed.
And hope for our common future.


(Hat-tip: PolitcsHome.com).

Read more by .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

22 Comments

  • Anthony Aloysius St 11th Jan '10 - 12:15pm

    The Guardian reports:

    The Lib Dem leader dodged questions about the possibility of a hung parliament, saying he was a politician “not a soothsayer”.

    Something tells me those questions aren’t going to go away, no matter how often Clegg “dodges” them.

  • A lady at work told me re the policies that are on “on hold”, that she didn’t know the Lib Dems had those policies in the first place, now she knows what we wont do, but not what we will do.

    Time will tell if the media reports focus more on what we don’t stand for than what we do, what the effect on election results will be.

  • Andrew Suffield 11th Jan '10 - 1:05pm

    “What will you do in the event of a hung parliament?”
    “I consider it to be up to whoever wins the most seats to decide what to do in this situation. If approached, here’s how I will make the decision…”
    “But who’s it going to be, Cameron or Brown?”
    “What do you think I am, the Pythia?”

    I agree that all the evidence suggests these questions are not going to go away, and will continue to be repeated endlessly. Stupidity knows no bounds.

  • Anthony Aloysius St 11th Jan '10 - 1:17pm

    “I agree that all the evidence suggests these questions are not going to go away, and will continue to be repeated endlessly.”

    Well then, the party needs to think of a really good answer.

    Specifically, one that will make it as hard as possible for the Tories in Lib Dem marginals to say: “The Lib Dems will keep Gordon Brown in Number 10”.

  • The BBC take on it.

    Nick Clegg has confirmed the recession means the Lib Dems will have to shelve some of their best-known policies in a speech on his election “priorities”.

    Extending free childcare, free personal care for the elderly and a “citizen’s pension” would have to be “put on hold” and tuition fees ended over six years.
    But he said he could not “predict the future” and could only outline the core values his party would retain “in any situation”.

    Those were “a complete change in the tax system” – the Lib Dems have pledged to raise the starting rate at which people pay tax to £10,000 and more one-to-one tuition and small class sizes at primary school.

    He also said he wanted a “revamped economy weaned off the fascination with the City of London” – with more emphasis on infrastructure and green technology and a “new politics” – reducing the number of MPs by 150, getting “big money” out of politics and changing the voting system.

    He said the days of “shopping lists” of spending pledges were over so his party could focus on priorities like schools.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8450863.stm

  • Well played, Mr Clegg. Presumably if one party got 2m more votes but one seat less then votes would decide who got the ‘clear mandate’, whereas if a party got 20 more seats but only 1 more vote then seats would be the key factor. I’m not sure what else Mr Clegg can do short of spending the next 6 months producing detailed tables trading-off vote leads against seat leads.

  • Bill le Breton 11th Jan '10 - 2:30pm

    Geoffrey, he has never hidden the fact that he wants our Party to be a ‘tax cutting party’. That would have been obvious had David included in his clip from the BBC interview this revealing sentence:
    “Sources told the BBC the decision to downgrade key commitments to long term aspirations involved “difficult” conversations with senior Lib Dems and a “Herculean struggle” on Mr Clegg’s part. ” Hey what a hero!
    “Sources said/told” is the spin and this spin is the old spin of the Leader getting tough with his wayward troups – in this case those wayward ‘tax and spending’ troops, whose policies caused us to do so ‘badly’ in 2005.
    Would someone from the Policy Committee say whether they knew these policies were to be dropped?
    How many of our MPs are already on the record putting their names to these now former party policy pledges?
    You don’t win/defend our marginals by being further to the right than the Tories.
    What people want is a message of hope – of change they can believe in. But then you’d have to be a master campaigner to spread that message.

  • James Robertson 11th Jan '10 - 3:04pm

    “I agree that all the evidence suggests these questions are not going to go away, and will continue to be repeated endlessly.”

    Well then, the party needs to think of a really good answer.

    Specifically, one that will make it as hard as possible for the Tories in Lib Dem marginals to say: “The Lib Dems will keep Gordon Brown in Number 10″.

    Here’s a good answer. Don’t pretend that a hung parliament isn’t a probability. It’s far more likely than a Lib Dem victory. Avoiding the question everyone is asking isn’t “treating people like grown-ups”!

    Demonstrate that we’re willing to be co-operative with whoever wins, but that we’re not going to do any deals ahead of the election and that we’re not going to prop up a failing government. Say, as David Steel did in 1987, that the new PM will be the leader of the party with the most seats and that our party will only be supportive of that party in the event of a hung parliament if (a) we hold the balance of power and (b) certain concessions are made on policy direction.

    This is why Clegg needs to hold onto his best cards and his most unique policies – as bargaining tools. That does not mean that we should be unrealistic in how we hope to achieve them, but it’s going to be pretty hard to sit down with prospective coalition partners arguing for our way on certain issues if those issues are sidelined or omitted from our manifesto.

    Clegg has to be aware of how his comments are likely to be perceived by the public (i.e. prospective voters). As Geoffrey Payne points out, he clearly wants to turn the party into a tax-cutting party, which is not my idea of how the Lib Dems should be lpresenting itself to the public. We’re not soft Tories, we’re Liberals and Democrats.

    I think Nick Clegg should sit down with Jim Wallace whose experience of leading a credible Lib Dem group into effective partnership in Scotland has shown what can be achieved.

  • Anthony Aloysius St 11th Jan '10 - 3:55pm

    Nick Clegg, the leader of the hot air balloon Liberal Democrats, is having to jettison policies fast. Are we uncovering a new definition of ‘lightweight’?

    http://www.politics.co.uk/feature/legal-and-constitutional/comment-clegg-appears-baffled-by-2010-s-challenges-$1352560.htm

  • Bill le Breton 11th Jan '10 - 5:12pm

    Anthony Aloysius St John Hancock, That is a very thoughtful piece by Alex Stevenson which I hope the leadership ponders.

    What I think is tragic for our country is that, in this dreadful time when the chances of a stalled recovery, the chances of a period of deflation, the chances of a lost decade similar to that experienced by Japan still remains the most likely outcome, there is no leader emerging who can build hope, stand for change and inspire us all to believe that together we can turn this country round.

    The Saturday night programme on Obama’s campaign showed that when the American public wanted change, they wanted to be able to identify with their leader. They wanted that leader to have experienced what they were experiencing, to define his own journey as that of the journey of the country itself and the citizens of the country themselves.

    Compare this quote from Obama to the American public with Nick today, “I am asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring real change to Washington … I am asking you to believe in yours.” Phew! That is change with the people and not for the people.

  • David Allen 11th Jan '10 - 5:46pm

    “I agree that all the evidence suggests these questions are not going to go away, and will continue to be repeated endlessly.”

    Well then, the party needs to think of a really good answer.

    Specifically, one that will make it as hard as possible for the Tories in Lib Dem marginals to say: “The Lib Dems will keep Gordon Brown in Number 10″.

    How about the following answer:

    “If the conditions were right, we could work with David Cameron. If the conditions were right, we could work with Labour. We could not possibly work with Labour under Gordon Brown’s leadership.”

  • James Robertson 11th Jan '10 - 7:37pm

    “If the conditions were right, we could work with David Cameron. If the conditions were right, we could work with Labour. We could not possibly work with Labour under Gordon Brown’s leadership.”

    Yes, but that might be a bit difficult if, say, Labour under Brown wins more seats than the Conservatives in the GE. We should be prepared to at least consider working with whichever party wins the election but, if negotiations fail to bring the changes we would like, reserve the right not to be drawn into a co-operative relationship that isn’t in our interests.

    Nick Clegg should be realistic about the possibilities of the Lib Dems holding the balance of power but committed only to considering the possibility of coalition/co-operation with whichever party secures most seats. Saying that we will/will not work with particular individuals in advance of the General Election would be a foolish tactic and would hardly be suggestive of a party of co-operation.

  • Tony Greaves 11th Jan '10 - 8:27pm

    Very depressing stuff. We live in very depressing times. Whether we should try to match our party stance with the times is a matter for debate.

    Tony Greaves

  • Anthony Aloysius St 11th Jan '10 - 8:29pm

    “Whether we should try to match our party stance with the times is a matter for debate.”

    Or, rather, it isn’t.

  • Andrew Suffield 12th Jan '10 - 2:03am

    Avoiding the question everyone is asking isn’t “treating people like grown-ups”!

    Good grief. Nobody is avoiding the question. You’ve been told the answer three or four times in this comment thread alone. This is getting ridiculous. My prediction appears to have been correct.

One Trackback

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarJeanette Sunderland 16th Oct - 12:40am
    How disappointing that you referred to the colour of Joe's dress before you commented on what she said.... So disappointing.
  • User AvatarRoland 15th Oct - 11:01pm
    @Ross - Its probably more to do with peoples understanding of UK English grammar and thus the correct usage of Licence and License.
  • User AvatarTonyH 15th Oct - 10:17pm
    David Evans - "Ryan didn’t have any experience of UK politics." I was actually thinking about one E. Pamplin, but maybe that's ancient history now....
  • User AvatarPaul Barker 15th Oct - 8:14pm
    While I understand some of the concerns expressed in this thread I disagree about the threats facing us. Right now, it seems to be that...
  • User AvatarPeter Martin 15th Oct - 8:09pm
    @ Katharine, I did think twice about including Guy Verhofstadt. I haven't done an extensive background check on his views, but I did turn up...
  • User Avatarfrankie 15th Oct - 8:05pm
    It also increases Iran's influence. Right next door to Israel sits an ally of theirs. Syria has a battlehardend population and army, with no fear...