Opinion: Beware Mandelson bearing gifts

The airwaves are full of siren voices: Ben Bradshaw calls for “a progressive coalition”, Peter Hain for “a new voting system, a new second chamber, a fixed term parliament”, the Prime Minister resigns to make a deal possible.

It’s heady stuff for a Liberal Democrat, so why isn’t Clegg beating down the door of number 10?

Years back I was newly elected to a hung council. The 25 Tories had gone into opposition, so we 24 Lib Dems tried to form a coalition with seven independents, themselves split into three small groups.

The Tories confidently predicted we’d fall apart in months, but we were determined to form a workable administration. We gave the three independent groups everything they could have wanted: the mayoralty and chairmanship of two important committees. Excessively generous perhaps, but it worked. We won the following two elections.

Could a similar grand coalition work in parliament today? Take the MPs from Labour, the Lib Dems, SDLP, Alliance, the Greens and the nationalists, add Sylvia Hermon, and you’d have 330, and only 323 would be needed to win a vote. So that’s plenty, right? Wrong.

The key hurdle for the new coalition would be legislation for a referendum on PR. If the DUP abstain and the Tory party oppose it, 307 votes would be needed.

Under PR, up to 70 Labour MPs would probably lose their jobs. That’s why, in 13 years of Labour government, there’s been no PR. If just 24 out of 258 Labour MPs abstained, the legislation would fail and the coalition collapse. And who could blame them? Neither PR, nor AV without a referendum, were in the Labour manifesto.

Let’s assume the impossible, and say the vote passed. To get PR, the coalition would have to survive the run up to a referendum on PR.

The next challenge would be the financial markets. Up to now, the markets have assumed whoever won would quickly produce a coherent plan to reduce the deficit.

Without one, there’d be a run on sterling, and inward investment into the UK would fall. Interest rates would rise, as would long-term interest rates for government borrowing. With more international turbulence, we might be tipped into a double-dip recession.

To avoid this, the coalition would have to plan cuts. To keep the Scottish and Welsh nationalists and Northern Ireland parties loyal, most of the cuts would fall on England. Imagine the resentment, the strikes and demonstrations. It would make the winter of discontent look like the Richard and Judy show.

Into this raging furnace, we’d then throw the petrol of a referendum on PR, promising more of the same, in perpetuity.

Labour are full of clever people. They know a grand coalition is impossible. So why are they suggesting it?

Is it a principled attempt to protect public services? I fear not.

The Lib Dem leadership must know it’s a non-starter, even though they have to be seen to take the Labour overture seriously. But, Peter Mandelson and his friends aren’t trying to convince the leadership. They are aiming this fantasy at the Lib Dem rank and file, to undermine Nick Clegg’s authority, and bring a Lib/Con pact crashing down in acrimony and chaos.

Read more by .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Advert

32 Comments

  • A very insightful piece.

  • Anthony Aloysius St 11th May '10 - 1:42pm

    “The key hurdle for the new coalition would be legislation for a referendum on PR.”

    Eh? Surely the proposal frokm Labour now is just to introduce AV without a referendum. That would be the key hurdle, and it would obviously be a higher hurdle than legislation for a referendum.

    But even leaving electoral reform out of the picture, it looks to me now as though a sizeable section of the Labour party will not support this, simply because they would prefer to go into opposition.

  • Completely agree. And the longer it drags on, the more the people will be annoyed, with all parties.

  • Keith Browning 11th May '10 - 1:43pm

    The words Mandelson, Campbell, truth, honesty, integrity rarely seen in the same sentence.

  • I think you’re right, George. In addition I would say that although the Labour leaders are now more palatable than the Tory ones, if they can’t even get John Reid and David Blunkett on board they are never going to manage it with the fruitcake wing of the party. In the Tory party the fruitcake wing IS the leadership, so they are at least going to be speaking with one voice. Also, the Tories seem desperate for power and this will help them to behave. Numerous Labour MPs seem to have grown tired of government and will be impossible to keep disciplined.

  • Sort it out guys!!!

  • Anthony Aloysius St 11th May '10 - 1:54pm

    “Also don’t forget that all that’s on offer from either Labour or Conservative is AV which would not be likely to result in any kind of electoral break through for the Liberal Democrats.”

    Labour is reportedly offering a subsequent referendum on a proportional system.

  • I can’t believe anyone here is seriously thinking about jumping into bed with the Tories on ANYTHING at all.

    The Labour backbenchers had better realise that if they don’t support PR and sign up to a deal, they will be gerrymandered out of existence anyway by an eventual Conservative government and the union with Scotland will also be split to boot. The Labour backbenchers are just saying what the Tories have managed to silence anyway.

    Better no deal at all than a deal that fails to produce PR.

  • This is so dangerous – who are we negotiating with on the Labour side – what can they deliver?

    Will an agreement with Labour at this point be any more than a wafty, wind-blown piece of paper – little more valid than Chamberlain’s? Wishful thinking by old-timers in both parties that forget the blood on the floor (and in the sand) of the past 13 years.

    and minority governments don’t tend to last!

  • John Isherwood 11th May '10 - 2:01pm

    I am apolitical, at least I was until the current farce started. Nick Clegg gained my respect when he declared before the election that he would seek to achieve a stable government in the event of a hung parliament with whichever party gained the most votes and seats. He has lost my respect by the way he has behaved towards not only the conservative party, but also the way he has shown disrespect for the people of this country. I am tired of politicians that want power at any cost. We want politicians that are honourable and work for us, the people of this country, and put our welfare and safety first, and by safety I do not just mean physical security.

  • Absolutely agree

  • Andrea Gill 11th May '10 - 3:17pm

    Ellie, that is the point of a coalition vs a minority government etc. BOTH sides are keen on a coalition because it is more binding than any loose sort of arrangement. If there is one thing I believe about the Tories it is that the financial market and the economy is genuinely a very big concern to them, and they are willing to do whatever they can to stabilise this now.

  • Matthew Huntbach 11th May '10 - 3:17pm

    Ellie

    Very insightful indeed. But, what do we do? Is it really worth propping David Cameron up in No10 when he has no motivation to deliver on his coalition promises?

    What is the alternative? The arithmetic of the new Parliament means that only a very close co-operation between all the other parties will achieve something that is capable of long-term government. There aren’t enough non-Tories to make a looser agreement work.

    If we don’t get that co-operation, and Labour doesn’t look likely to give it, then what? By “prop up” do you mean “don’t vote down in a vote of confidence”? If not what? So, we don’t “prop up” the Tories, meaning almost as soon as the new Parliament meets there’s a vote of no confidence and so another general election. Then both Labour and Conservative will go into this new election saying “the presence of too many LibDem MPs caused this almighty mess, because no one party had a majority, so don’t vote LibDem”. And I think, if this happens, people wouldn’t vote LibDem.

  • We have to walk away. That means voting on a case-by-case basis. We vote against massive and immediate cuts to the public sector, against the expansion of the control agenda, against the repeal of the Human RIghts Act, etc. But we don’t support a Labour vote of no confidence, because that would result in a premature General Election which might produce a result that is the mirror image of the present situation, as almost happened in 1974. If the Tories bounce us into another General Election, we can say that we used our position to curb their excesses. A formal relationship would destroy us as a party. Straw, Reid and Blunkett are problems for the Labour Party, not us, to sort. If Labour want to commit hara kiri in public, then let them.

  • What I find funny is the whole a coalition of “other parties” will not work… to be honest say it often enough and it becomes true.

    Other countries manage quite well with coalitions of small parties involved, but it is not me that is involved, we the public did our duty/part by voting in the election, now it is up to those elected to do the job that they were elected for.

    If Nick and the Liberal Democrat party and whoever he chooses to support does the job wrong and we the voters will not forget, that is not a threat from myself, just a statement of fact.

    I think anyone that says I voted Liberal Democrat to get Labour out needs to really consider what they are saying, any Tory voters have voted Tory, any left of center Liberal Democratic party members are not ever going to be happy sleeping with Conservative right of center politicians.

    I think we can expect any Conservative led government to call an election as soon as it suits them, or to go it alone once in power and dare the Liberal Democratic Party to vote them out…
    This is no matter what deals they have made, they will say the Liberal Democratic party is not fully supporting the government.

  • An interesting piece that proves when you strip the layers back you are a single issue protest party.

    An economy in tatters, no government, record youth unemployment, high unemployment, euro collapsing, falling education standards, erosion of civil liberties…. and on and on and on.

    and all you persistently bang on about is PR……grow up and start taking your responsibilty seriously.

    This is not what the eletorate is concerned with….even though it may be what you dream about at night.

    In your quest to get more MP’s at the expense of the real national interest, can you not see you will actually be losing MP’s if you carry on this single issue quest.

    This may be your holy grail, but the public put you into third place, 77% of people didn’t vote for it, so grow up and get on with sorting out the mess of 13 years of a labour administartion.

    It reminds me of how my daughter would sometime behave in the sweet shop……….

  • Adam:

    You are talking out of your @@se. We are not a ‘single issue party’. We have always said the economy is important, which is why it has been at the centre of negotiations. But fundamental political reform, including our current ridiculous voting system, is part of the deal as well. Or did you happen to switch off the TV for that bit during the debates????

  • Anthony Aloysius St 11th May '10 - 4:14pm

    “but the public put you into third place, 77% of people didn’t vote for it”

    But you’re talking about votes in a general election, not a referendum on the voting system.

    If you really wanted to know what people think about PR, there is plenty of polling evidence. But from the tone of your post, I don’t suppose you do.

  • Even if a deal with Labour is not realistic it needs to be present as a threat, otherwise there will be no meaningful concessions form the Tories. Nick Clegg is playing the hand he has been given very well.

  • Simon Lilley 11th May '10 - 5:05pm

    There must be no deal with Labour.

    1. The electorate would never forgive us

    2. Their grasp of civil liberties is weak

    3.Whilst no one won the election Labour clearly lost the election

    4. A coalition with us with Brown as PM until a new leader is elected is a ruse to ensure Brown does not have the humiliation as he would see it of having to be Leader of the Opposition. What we have seen is the dark side of brooding Brown.

    Simon

  • I feel quite sad for the Lib Dems. I am not a party member, I’m a former labour voter and I voted for the Liberal Democrats, this time. I was very impressed by Clegg and initially his behaviour after the election.

    I was also, to my surprise, impressed by Cameron’s response to the hung parliament… I am naturally left wing, and yet the Lib-Con agreement seemed like a good option.

    And then this, the underhand, sneaking, manipulative horse-trading with Alistair Campbell and Peter Mandelson trying to stitch up a deal. The nature of all this has absolutely disgusted me, to be honest.

    Clegg has forfeited his public image in a utterly futile flirtation with the Labour party, foisted on him, to be fair, by dinosaurs like Paddy Ashdown and Ming Campbell. The LibDem triple lock really needs to loosen. It’s a crazy system.

  • I don’t know why ‘Lib Dem’ supporters would moan that we wrong to talk to Labour. How were we wrong? We wrangled out of the Tories a referendum on AV. Not perfect but better than nothing and we ensured that the Tories couldn’t simply use us as a stepping stone to power. The truth is Nick Clegg would never have been able to hold a coalition together unless he could get a deal out of the Tories on some kind of electoral reform. We may have a few weeks of bad opinion polls as a result but if we do a good job in Government we will get rewarded.

    And if we win a referendum on AV, then we can open the door on PR. And who’s to say we won’t win a lot more seats under AV. Yes I know there is a lot of evidence to suggest we won’t but if most voters make the Lib Dems their first choice safe in the knowledge that they can keep the Tories/ Labour out with their second vote, then we may be onto a winner. Who knows how the electorate will take to AV? No one really…..

  • Whigs & Tories: change you can believe in

  • @John Isherwood – er, what is behaving well towards the Tories then? Rolling over and supporting everything in their manifesto “for the good of the country” and making no demands of our own? If that’s your view, then I wonder what you think the Liberal Democrats are for?

  • George Kendall 11th May '10 - 8:35pm

    Just listening to Peter Mandelson right now, spinning away that our leadership weren’t serious about negotiating with them. It just confirms what I said above – beware gifts from Mandelson.

    But let’s offer sincere thanks to all those Labour figures who publicly rubbished the chance of a LibLab deal. They were honest, and they’ve wrecked the devious plans of Mandelson to undermine Nick Clegg’s standing in his own party.

    And thanks too to our negotiating team. From everything I’ve been reading, they have done an incredible job. We don;t know the details, but just from what we know: changing tax policy towards fair taxes and getting a referendum on AV are major achievements.

    Federal executive, parliamentary party et al, permitting, now the hard part for all of us begins.

  • George Kendall 12th May '10 - 9:54am

    >> I’ll oppose your government of course, but I respect and admire what you’re doing.
    Thanks Carl,
    Of course Labour will and should oppose it. A good opposition is essential to good government.
    Hopefully your wing of the Labour party will prevail, and that opposition won’t be with the poisonous cynicism that has become too dominant across the political spectrum.
    One of the things that excites me, is this coalition may undermine the party tribalism that makes us see our opponents as the devil incarnate, rather than fellow human beings with different opinions.

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.

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

  • Andy Daer
    @Mark Frankel, yes, it would be nice and neat if it were true that "the Arabs" reject the two state solution. In fact, it is the leadership of the Israeli state...
  • Mark Frankel
    If you break into your neighbour's territory, murder 1200 of its people, kidnap hundreds more and use them to further weaken your neighbour's peace and security...
  • Luisa Porritt
    Roderick, this is what campaigning is all about. Nothing can ever take away the trauma your school friends live with as a result of the horrific abuse they suff...
  • Mark Frankel
    Israel did not emerge from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire. It emerged from the ruins of the British Mandate in Palestine. The British tried to implement the ...
  • Andy Daer
    Tom is normally a reliable commentator, but his pessimism here is unjustified. Trump habitually rocks the boat with crazy ideas, and drops them if they turn out...