The deal negotiated with the Conservatives has been unanimously backed by the Liberal Democrat MPs. It’s also been backed by the party’s Federal Executive with just dissenting voice in the end. Both decisions were significantly helped by not only the successes of the party’s negotiating team but also by very impressive and persuasive appearances by Nick Clegg.
Talking shortly afterwards, Nick Clegg said,
I can your hopes and your aspirations with me … I want to assure you that I wouldn’t have entered into this agreement unless I was genuinely convinced that it offers a unique opportunity to deliver the kind of changes you and I believe in … Fairness [will be] at the heart of everything we do.
There will be a special conference on Sunday (in Birmingham I believe) which will be addressed by the country’s Deputy Prime Minister.
Earlier in the evening I did a tally of Liberal Democrat bloggers who had, so far, expressed a view for or against the deal with the Conservatives. At that time 76% of those who had expressed a view agreed with it. As more details emerge, it’s likely there will be plenty in the deal that Liberal Democrats like, including on tax fairness, education and green matters. On constitutional reform getting a referendum on AV for the Commons will be further sweetened by getting an elected House of Lords.
So far, the complaints about details I’ve heard have just about all been from Conservatives – which is a good sign 🙂
More details through the day…
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The street in Australia named after my great great grandfather
Lib Dems pick Richard Kilpatrick as candidate for the Greater Manchester Mayoral election
David Warren
Roland
David Raw
Peter Chambers
59 Comments
Good! Now lets get on and sort out the mess that Labour have left us and stop bickering between ourselves….naval gazing is so yesterday….well done Nick & team and lets show the country what we can do now we have a real share of power!
For what it’s worth, I still agree with nick. For the LibDems and for Nick, this is a once-in-a-generation chance – please don’t mess it up.
good – I can sleep easy in my bed tonight. For the coalition the real hard work now begins
Curiously the papers seem to be suggesting that David Laws will end up with the most senior Cabinet position – Education Secretary – while Clegg will be Leader of the House, Alexander Scottish Secretary and Cable merely Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
You pimped my vote to the Conservative party for a ministerial car and a few side issues. I have always voted for the party but sadly I can never vote Lib Dem again after you sold out the parties liberal principles.
My best advice to any of our MPs is to cross the house and sit as a independent MP.
Cleggs new kind of politics stinks!
I suggest we ignore the claims of “Abi” and others like him or her. Let us give our team a chance, and see how we think they get on and how the public – as judged by opinion polls and focus groups – think they get on. Of course Labour folk will try to trash us – if it works their beloved left-right tribal politics is dead.
Good luck to all our team, Cabinet Ministers, junior ministers, and backbenchers on the government side of the house.
@Abi
I’ll cut up your membership card for you. I didn’t even vote Lib Dem (Labour, tactically… I am ashamed) but today they’ve proven they’re willing to risk being annihilated at the next election if it means they can force real policy concessions from the Conservatives. That takes big balls, props to them.
Oh, and Chris Huhne as Home Sec? He will be better than the string of illiberal shysters Labour gave us.
Thanks to “progressive” Labour, the outcome of this election from the start was going to be an outright Tory Majority, if not for the brilliance of Nick Clegg. He electrified the campaign, spoke of a New Politics, and one month later it is here.
The gratitude of “progressives” is overwhelming as they consider returning to their “true” home a party that even today scuppered a “progressive coalition” which they had 13 years to enact unilaterally had they cared to do so. For Cameron, what better way to permanently alter the landscape then to enact multi-party electoral reform. The “progressives” would form a minor 30% rump as long as the Tories were willing to behave within the scope of decency.
(40% Tory-20% Liberal 30% “progressive” 10% “other”) How do the “progressives” / Labour hope to govern without some kind of meaningful coalition that would satisfy the 60% non-Tory? Cameron actually gave the Liberal Democrats a fair deal. Labour vilely couldn’t be bothered to up the ante. (a Clegg Premiereship after Brown “stepped aside”, and STV without a referendum comes to mind).
Along with New Labour, “progressives” have just entered exile, which in the final analysis is always self-imposed.
I feel a bit cheated right now.
Abstaining on marriage in the tax system?
Immigration caps?
A tax policy which seems to consist of “tax cuts” and “scrapping the NI tax increase” with no details of how to pay for it?
I know compromises were needed, but I’m not sure those that the Liberal Democrats got couldn’t have been made as part of a Conservative minority administration, leaving the Lib Dems to remain principled in opposition.
I hope that we will now follow what we have done in similar situations elsewhere, and publish whatever deal has been done in full. Apart from reinforcing what LD policies we have ensured will be included in the programme of government it will also assuage the fears about “back room deals”. The more open and transparent that we can be about what we have achieved the better.
When there was a hint of coalition with Labour, progressive all the way. When not, it becomes an insult. Fickle is the mind of a LibDem.
No he didn’t. He lost seats. This was pretty much the result predicted beforehand.
But, it’s here, so I would hope they manage to make a good fist of it.
Let’s face it Labour are only interested in power for Labour politicians – everything else is secondary to them. Their refusal to share power is perfect evidence of their lack of responsibility.
Can we actually confirm the “sunday” bit of that, please?
I’m pleased, excited, worried and terrified all at the same time. A moment of great opportunity for Liberalism, but also one of great threat. I will in any case continue to vote Liberal Democrat as both our hearts and our heads lie in the right place, even if the fates conspire to deal us a strange hand.
Deputy Conservative Prime Minister Nick Clegg, Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us.
I am delighted with this coalition, a predicted outright Tory majority is now a much moderated coalition. Liberal Democrat members who cancel their membership over this never really understood liberalism anyway. We are not a subsidiary party of the Labour party so why are we expected to dance along to them when theres no chance of a stable government there. Full electoral reform will mean plenty of scenarios like this, nobody really believes we will suddenly win a majoirty under PR do they??? No we will just see more and more times, liberals in government, putting liberal arguments forward and liberals influencing the running of the country.
House of Lords reform (hopefully STV), AV, fixed term parliaments, recall, less MPs and i really hope the Wright committee proposals. THis is all an excellent step for the lib dems and much better than opposition. At some point we were going to have to break cover from eternal anti establishment and we have finally done it. This is a great day for liberals, The day a LIberal sits as deputy prime minister. If we can show that this coalition works, then one more argument against electoral reform is got rid of.
Exams get in the way of me getting to that conference… 🙁
How is the scrapping of tuition fees going? Dropped in favour of uncapped fees? LD student voters will be pleased.
From the news reports that I have seen on the “Programme for Government” that the two parties have agreed, I am astonished at one area in particular – namely, Europe. The “leaked memo” that appeared in the Sunday Observer last week gave every impression that William Hague intended to provoke a confrontation with the other EU states by demanding that the UK opt out of the UK’s pre-existing commitments in the EU treaties.
Nothing in the leaked “Programme for Government” reports that I have seen shows that any attempt has been made to restrain Hague or his demands. Instead, the reports indicate that any so-called “transfers of power to Brussels” (i.e. pro-EU Treaty changes) will need a referendum to pass, whereas there is no equivalent requirement that any anti-EU Treaty changes (i.e. massive opt-outs such as Hague wants) would require a referendum. This is a one-side ratchet system biased in favour of the Conservative Euro-sceptics.
My personal opinion is there will be another EU Treaty in the next few years, and this agreement will come back to haunt the (Lib-Dem) party with a vengeance. In the meantime, Labour will be free to paint itself as being the pragmatic party who can approach Europe without starting to foam at the mouth when doing so…
Funny but I thought it was NuLabour who introduced tuition fees. Conveniently forgotten that have you student?
Capped fees, will look like a godsend when unlimited fees are introduced soon enough. Lib Dems sold out the student vote.
As a long time Liberal, although admittedly of the Orange Book sort, I am looking at this coalition with a mixture of surprise, delight, and trepidation.
The surprise? Hand to heart, didn’t think I’d see this come to pass in my lifetime. My mother has voted Liberal since she could and hadn’t seen it come to pass.
The delight? Massive respect to the negotiating team, they seem to have got far more concessions on policy and appointment than seems reasonable considering the disparity between our vote share and number of seats and the conservatives.
The trepidation? How our own “supporters” have reacted to the whole deal. I’m not sure what party you were voting for, but aren’t we the party of proportional representation? These sorts of deals and compromises will be common in the system we supposedly desire! How can we turn our back on them now? Moreover, we have far less common ground with Labour than many seem to think. Do we support 42 day detention, criminalizing free speech, ID cards, DNA databases? And do we have anything in common with ethnocentric nationalists like the SNP, interested only in screwing over their neighbours (Including Plaid in Wales, against whom the Barnett formula is unfairly biased in favour of Scotland) for their own benefit? We certainly aren’t in full accord with the Tories, especially on policy areas like Europe, but it seems like we got a far better deal out of this for our policies- the things we should be voting for, not to keep out Labour or the Tories- than Labour were ever seriously offering. This is our chance to prove that compromise, negotiation, coalition can work, and we must grasp it.
@Student – I’d say Labour sold out the student vote much earlier (leaving aside the sheer hilarity that was the head of the NUS pimping for them during the campaign, admitting that he disagreed with Labour on the key student policy) however
A: We don’t know what the compromise has been on top-up fees, if any.
B: Even if it turns out we have the Tory policy that is exactly no worse than the situation we’d be in if the Tories had a minority government or held another election and got themselves a majority, is it?
I’m afraid you’re playing the game of looking for things to dislike. I’m a student; the LibDems didn’t ‘sell me out’ in Scotland, but I’m also a pragmatist who can tell the difference between the possible and the impossible – between what could have been achieved and what could not and I don’t see it as being fair to hold the party leadership responsible for failures to achieve the unachievable while in the process ignoring what they have achieved.
Agree completely Thomas. I am excited by this coalition on the basis of what we have learned about its composition and policy platform so far.
I agree 100% with Derek Houston that whatever has been agreed as the common programme should be published in full – in the interests of transparency, accountability and fostering trust on both sides. It sounds like this will happen shortly.
From what I’ve heard so far, the mixture of concessions on our side and on the Tory side in some cases actually enhances the overall programme from my point of view (especially on tax and deficit reduction). Meanwhile Nick and his negotiating team have managed to persuade the Tories to make serious commitments on education funding, civil liberties, political reform.
And in the spirit of the new politics, I also think a lot of credit is due to David Cameron for the political daring and statesmanship he has shown in these negotiations. Quite reasonably, as the leader of the party with the most seats and votes, he set out some ‘red lines’, but he also seems to have taken a positive approach to finding areas where we could make common cause.
Likewise Tory spokesmen like Hague and especially Michael Gove have been extremely constructive in their comments, despite some provocation from our team’s (understandable and successful!) brinkmanship on Monday.
I hope Gove’s proposals on schools reform survive this deal (with either him or David Laws as schools secretary), along with a commitment to fund the pupil premium from an addition to the schools budget.
All in all the signs are very encourgaing. Well done Nick and the negotiating team!
@Thomas – Well said. But you leave the Barnett formula where it is. When the North Sea runs out of oil we’ll talk.
Well I’m a student, and hope tuition fees will be abolished, but I know that there are more important things needed to be done, and if compromise was done on tuition fees in order to get those things and stable government in these tumultuous times, then so be it.
But this is all just inane speculation anyway. No-one knows what the agreement says or doesn’t say about tuition fees yet.
David Cameron cannot be true to himself if he doesnt try to bring the tories an absolute majority. It is indeed his duty and he will bring this coalition down when he senses the moment is right. If Labour fallout badly we’ll have another election before the end of this year.
Congratulations to all those Lib Dem MPs who now get a government car. Enjoy it while it lasts. After the next election, you’ll all be able to share the one taxi again.
Do anyone REALLY expect any progress at all on electoral reform when the tories are so set against it. It is not going to happen, by fair means or fowl, the tories will block any move towards it as it will clearly cost them seats. Their core voters and senior politicians abhor the idea and will have none of it. So what happens when they stab Nick in the back and go back on the deal, another election before we get the referendum..??
Weather you like it or not, a massive number of lib-dem supporters are old labour voters, maybe as much as 50%, that were disallusioned by labours swing to the right and saw lib-dem as a more socially responsible option.
I am one of those old labour voters and the only thing i dislike more than new labour is conservatives, they cannot be trusted. I feel I have been stabbed in the back by the lib-dem party, I did not support lib-dems to help the conservatives get a majority, Nick took that descision for me.
Maybe I’m just too old for this “new kind of Politics”, I dont really know, but what I do know is that I no longer feel welcome here any more……I think its time I left…..close the door after me wont you, and kiss Nick goodbye for me, I think he has some tough times ahead, he will need all your support.
@Jayu – And who will you be voting for instead? The party of John Prescott, he of the palatial mansions? A party currently with three MPs and one Lord on trial for fraud? I recommend re-reading Andrew Rawnsley’s books; they make for hilarious post-Labour entertainment.
The LibDems took a considerable step towards getting the things they’d promised they’d do if elected done. If this in some way offends you, if you voted for the Liberal Democrats in the hopes that they wouldn’t get their policy enacted or in the hopes that, by some miracle, they could force through their own policy above the larger, right-wing party who more people voted for or indeed the smaller right-wing party who more people voted for, both of whom possess a vastly disproportionate number of seats and therefore power compared to the number of people who voted for them, then I think you must be out of your mind or else have a profound misunderstanding of how the political system in this country (or indeed any country) works. Personally I vote for the LibDems in the hopes LibDem policy will be enacted (and also ’cause I’m quite a fan of Ming) and we may actually manage to do that this time for the first time since the party’s founding (with the exception of Holyrood).
“So what happens when they stab Nick in the back and go back on the deal, another election before we get the referendum” – If it happens it happens, I don’t think we should pre-empt it. The fact of the matter is AV is such a minor step they may well have negotiated on it in good faith.
“aren’t we the party of proportional representation? ”
Apparently not any more. Now you’re the party of “political reform” (AV).
Oliver is right. You got shafted.
@Jimmy: We have nothing at all like a mandate to push full on PR on the electorate, and too small a share of the votes and seats to demand that much of a coalition partner. It was never on the cards. We got a lot, lot more than a party with our representation could reasonably expect. And Labour would never have given us anything either; they had 13 years to act on these issues and failed.
@Thomas.
I’m a Labour supporter of PRSTV. We do exist. I accept your criticism. We have an anti-LibDem element that seriously needs to grow up. However…
I’m not suggesting you could have demanded PR but you could have demanded a referendum. And if you couldn’t get it under these circumstances then when?
You seem to have got a watered down version of your tax policy and you got the inheritance tax cut postponed. You get to abstain on the marriage tax break (ensuring it passes anyway) and of course the AV referendum bill. If you got anything else of any substance then I’ve missed it.
I find it delicious that so many of you are sitting here, so very complacent about what is in store for your party. For some reason I enjoy the idea that right now you are all delighted with this, this one moment of triumph, totally oblivious of what is to come.
Equidistance for your party was the rubicon.
You have now crossed that river completely.
Perhaps you can convince yourselves that the concessions that you gained were worth it, that your future is bright, that this is a new beginning, a break-through.
It is none of those things, your party will be annihilated by Labour and the Tories in the next election, if it doesn’t disintegrate before then.
I for one will be glad.
I’ll add this, I will be glad when it happens not because I am a Labour tribalist, but because I agree with Simon.
The Conservatives cannot be trusted and you will now sit through weekly clips of PMQ’s of the Liberal Democrat front-bench jeering and howling at the Labour Party.
That is when the damage will begin to hit home.
I feel bad for my harshness, so here are some things to reflect upon for any activists amongst you who door knock.
You will be challenged in constituencies where you are facing the Tories by the fact that what is the point in voting Liberal Democrat when they can just as well vote Tory and be done with it, considering the intimacy you will create with this coalition if it lasts 5 years.
You will also be challenged in constituencies where you face Labour, again by your close association with the Conservative Party, for everyone who wouldn’t vote Tory, they won’t vote Liberal Democrat.
In marginals you will be squeezed by the votes Labour will take from you and the votes the Tories will both consolidate and gain from their position as the major element in the coalition.
If you have solutions to these scenarios then I take my hat of to you.
The Lib Dem had no choice but to go with the Conservatives with the hand they were dealt. I think they got the best deal they could under the circumstances. Any minority of government would have undermined Nick Clegg’s argument that in a ‘balanced parliament politicians would work together. Also how could the Lib Dems support a party that is likely to go through a polarising leadership contest, which would have decimated any agreement by September? Any other choice would have also led to a further LIb Dem/Tory squeeze.
I still have a heavy heart though that they didn’t get a referendum on electoral reform which had the Single Transferable Vote or another proportional system as an option. After all if the Tories are going to campaign for First Past the Post why should they care what the referendum question was. This is the only way that Britain would have really undergone real reform. Instead the Party will be lucky to gain 20 extra seats if the AV referendum succeeds. Neither will it stop governments having a majority of seats with less than 50% of the vote.
@George Smith
“If you have solutions to these scenarios then I take my hat of to you.”
Prepare to raise your hat. We’ve been combating left-right myopia such as yours for years.
Elected Lords – but is it by PR?
Firstly, I want to say congratulations…
Nick and Liberal Democrats have taken that step in to political adulthood, grown up and understanding and accepting responsibility, have no doubt you will be held accountable and responsible if things do go wrong, I hope we have plain sailing…
I hope there are timescales involved to getting the articles agreed through parliament, if in two years we are still waiting for the referendum or even the legislation to have the referendum, then I think there will be very big problems, I hope the two parties are going to release the full agreement so we can see fully.
The one other point, I hope that you understand you will have to defend your party, when unemployment rises and tax increases take place (there was actually a hint by a Sky city presenter this morning, he wondered how much would income tax be raised?) Any guesses 4 pence, 6 pence, higher, this will of course offset any joy at the £10,000 tax threshold if it comes into place… Vat 20 pence? Or higher…
I suppose I should wait and not speculate, but I just thought you should see a little of what is to come, and please saying “whatever party is in power would have to do the same” will not make any difference to the perception and truth that it was done on your watch…
Good luck and God bless
I’ve been a lib dem voter since ’97. I am anti-tory, anti-Cameron and I can’t imagine ever voting lib dem again. I just can’t vote for a party which is friendly with the tories.
@ Paul Griffiths
“Prepare to raise your hat. We’ve been combating left-right myopia such as yours for years.”
I find it incredulous that you make statements like this, weather you like it or not British polotics STILL runs a left/right wing devide and precicely because of this lib-dems find themselves in this position. I reiterate my point, I and many other lib-dem voters are ‘left wingers’ that are disallusioned by new labour and thought they had found a better way with lib-dems. Exactly how many lib-dem supporters feel the same way I do may come as a surprise for Nick Clegg and his fellows and even some of you guys by the look of it. BUT WE DO EXIST and make up the majority of core lib-dem voters.
This is the death of the lib-dem party and a lot of you seem to be burying your head. I get the impression that a lot of people posting here [apart from the angry labour supporters] are young hopeful voters with little experience of political life. Let me tell you a thing that seems to have been forgotten or overlooked, voters have very long memories. They remember Thatcher and the callous polocies that brough us so much division and anger, and the tories will NEVER be forgiven for it.
They will also remember the dark days when the lib-dem party became a little brother to the tories and they will remember that at every election for the next 30 years. Things like this do not go away and will not go away, lib-dems are now associated with the tory party and it WILL cost them any chance of ever breaking the 2 party system we all hate.
Nick Clegg has put his own personal ambition ahead of our views and it will cost, not only his job, but also 50% of the vote that he used to be able to count on, and any other protest vote the party may have got.
RIP LIB-DEMS.
@Simon
So you’d rather that the Tories had a majority government (which they would have got in about six months time), when they could execute every policy they wanted, so you could sit on the sidelines and say “look how evil they are”
Rather than actually trying to make it better?
At the end of the day, 36% of people voted conservative. It seems a pretty dodgy “new politics” where you scream for PR and votes counting and then try to disenfranchise all of those who vote in a way you don’t approve of.
Coalition politics means compromise, it means trying to moderate the extremes while governing, and your view is that people who disagree with you are beneath contempt? That’s not a very democratic point of view.
If people are ever going to agree to PR then parties need to learn to work together. If all you wanted was a left coalition then why bother voting for a third party? Join the Labour party and add to the pluralism of voices already present. The aim has to be that all parties can work together, and if the people of this country move to the right that it is moderated, rather than the sudden sweeping changes when we flip-flop between left and right every ten years or so.
Everybody else in Europe seems to be able to manage it, but it strikes me that you only want PR so that you can have influence on the Labour party. Why not join the Labour party and try to make a difference? Alternatively, think about how instead of having a hugely destructive Tory government, there will be tax cuts for the poorest, a decent improvement of civil liberties that Labour have busily shredded, and a baby step towards reform which is the best you could hope for given the political will.
The first line of the coalition agreement is “fixed term parliaments for five years, starting with this one”.
That means the Tories can’t pull the rug from under us by calling a snap election before delivering what they’ve promised.
The AV referendum is the best we could have got in the circumstances. A referendum with more than one option would have resulted in a split vote between STV and AV, leaving FPTP as the first past the post!
We should win the referendum, because AV is undeniably more legitimate than FPTP. The only argument for keeping the current system is to protect the seats of currently elected MPs. I don’t think the public will have much sympathy for that.
As for those predicting oblivion at the next election, the new system will allow you to do what you’ve always wanted by voting Labour 1, Lib Dem 2, Conservative 3, UKIP 4 and leaving the BNP box empty.
But for millions of true Liberals in other parts of the country, they will be able to use their 1st choice for us without fear that it will split the vote and let someone else in by the back door.
I believe that the Lib Dems will pick up more second-choice votes from the Tories and Labour than either of them will pick up from each other. Result: more Lib Dem MPs, fewer Labour MPs and far fewer Tories.
Nick Clegg’s team negotiated the best possible deal with 57 seats. If we get 100 next time, we’ll be in a position to form a viable coalition with either of the other main parties, and I’m sure that once again we’ll push for a deal which delivers the maximum number of Lib Dem policies and blocks the worst excesses of our coalition partners.
Welcome to the future…
To George Smith, who has predicted all sorts of disaster for us:
We know only too well that some people won’t like this, and that this will include some Lib Dem voters and activists. Those who are prepared to go along with it will be cautious and well aware of the drawbacks. However, we also have seen that predictions of disaster when this happened with Labour in Scotland in 1999 were short-lived. We came behind a football team in a by-election, and everyone ridiculed us. But in 2001 our vote across Scotland went up by 3%. We also took seats from Labour – our coalition partners – in 2003 and 2007. The public and the press could see that the foretold collapse simply wasn’t happening. This is likely to be repeated so long as two things happen: we continually make the case convincingly that the Lib Dem contribution to this government improves it, and makes life better for real people in specific ways; and that the reality of coalition government is more mature, grown-up and responsible than the horrific yah-boo atmosphere which Westminster is used to. The Tory press will have to realise that if it tries to force a wedge between the coalition partners, then all it will do is deliver a weak minority Tory government.
Simon is right. Your core vote are left-wingers, that is not speculation, that is the results of polling done by YouGov during the general election. The Fabian Society already has a report on how Labour will target these voters, this is going to happen, I honestly cannot believe what your party is doing.
I can understand why some of you are defending this, that is always my first reaction when people attack Labour but if the PLP and NEC were doing something as clearly suicidal as this, if it was completely obvious where it would lead to, it would cause uproar and there is no way we would let it happen and we would fight for the life of our party, not just accept it and try to package it up in ways that are completely out of touch with reality.
It’s sad because I admired your party for your integrity and principles but it just seems like you are all shell-shocked by the results after all the hope and you have now decided that this is the last chance for your party so it’s become an all or nothing event.
That’s fine if you think of only today, but you seem to forget that their is always a tommorrow and their are always new situations and possibilities. If you know what is going to happen, if you accept what your all signing up for, if that’s okay with you, then fair enough.
If there are members who can see what is happening, if you understand were this ends and it’s something your against then your running out of time to limit the damage before it becomes terminal.
No Derek, all they will deliver is a new election not a minority Tory government.
You have no idea how this all works.
Cameron tells his Leader of the House to call a vote of confidence in his government and instructs his MP’s to vote against the confidence motion, claiming the government cannot function within the current parliament and he needs a majority.
The PLP can’t do anything but vote against the confidence motion since it is the Tories and to do otherwise is to say we have confidence in them. They then get the enough yes votes to meet this ‘enhanced majority’ amount.
Boom, new election.
Cameron gets back in with a majority?
First thing he does is repeal the fixed term parliament act, claiming that it is incompatible with parliamentary democracy since it can’t deliver a stable government.
Then were does that leave your party in all of this after you have been in a coalition with them and you have alienated your core vote?
Colin, You mention leaving the BNP box empty, i will make it quite clear now i will also be leaving the Conservative box and the Lib Dem box empty because despite voting Lib Dem in the last two elections i want nothing to do with this party anymore. And speaking to people at work this morning i don’t think im alone on that.
Well said Colin, spot on!
Here’s the agreement:
http://libdems.org.uk/latest_news_detail.aspx?title=Conservative_Liberal_Democrat_coalition_agreements&pPK=2697bcdc-7483-47a7-a517-7778979458ff
I’ve just watched this video comment on the Times website from Daniel Finkelstein. The title will be upsetting for many of the people commenting on this blog, but it’s interesting analysis and worth watching…
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/daniel_finkelstein/article7123344.ece
It’s clear that the LibDem party, like any other, has members with a wide range of often conflicting views. Many people disillusioned by the controlling nature of New Labour and its move towards the centre ground seem to have found an alternative in the LibDems. For them, the LibDems are a left of centre party.
Some clarification of the party’s identity was always going to be necessary as soon as the LibDems found themselves with a real prospect of being involved in government. By doing this deal, the LibDem leadership has demonstrated that they see the party as a centre centre party.
This statement has clearly alienated a lot of LibDem members who will migrate (or more likely return) to the Labour party. But, if (and it’s a big if) Clegg and his colleagues can make this coalition work, there will probably also be a lot of people for whom the LibDems will become a lot more attractive.
Cameron has also made a very strong statement to his party by entering into this coalition. He has surprised, and angered a lot of Tory voters, but he has come across as professional, pragmatic and reasonable and this will have done a lot of good for the image of the Tory party among the electorate at large.
But despite Cameron’s rebranding, the Tory party’s centre of gravity will continue to be to the right of the LibDems. Now, thanks to what Clegg has done, the Labour party’s centre of gravity will clearly be perceived as being to the left of the LibDems.
All this has positioned the LibDems firmly in the centre of British politics, between Labour and Conservative and without the ideological baggage that these two traditional parties have.
I think that this could be seen a master stroke by the LibDem leadership. I believe that the views of most of the people in Britain are really of the centre, certainly the under 50s. I also believe that most people do not think much about the old ideologies of the 20th century. Remember how Tony Blair had to more Labour to the centre in order to make his party electable again. And look what Cameron has had to do now. In general, I’d say that what the electorate want from a government nowadays is: competence, honesty, fairness and openness, probably in that order.
This is exactly what I see the current LibDem leadership representing and it is how they have presented the party both during the election campaigning, and in entering into this coalition government.
The one thing the LibDems still have to do is to demonstrate that they can govern competently. This is now the opportunity. If they can make this coalition a success they will have made the LibDem party hugely electable for a lot of the British public in the future.
Really, for both the Consevative and the Labour party it is vitally important that this coalition fails and the country can fall comfortably back into the FPTP, two party mentality, squeezing out the upstart LibDems.
Interestingly, the current situation desperately requires a strong, stable and successful government to deal with the economy and I believe that Cameron has a genuine sense of duty to the national interest. Will he do everything he can to make the coalition work for the country, or will loyalty to his party make him ultimately look for ways to sabotage it?
I think it is Cameron who really has to make the choice between country and party.
Mark , if thats what the public wanted and thats how Clegg positioned the party , why did they then lose seats in the general election ?.
All this has definately caused a few stirs in the party, as expected, and luckily it seems that the discussions here, in the most part, are still civil, which is a credit to the party.
Maybe there is a way forward with lib-dems as a centre party, but I openly admit that I am more left wing than center, as are a lot more lib-dem voters, and as such are not just dissapointed but frankly quite angry that the party have done very well from our votes, indeed I believe the party is where it is because of being seen as centre left, and yet now decided to turn their backs on us, for whatever the reason.
Yes I do understand that this may be the only way to get any real influance in government, but for myself and many other lib-dem voters, it is a step too far.
Please dont fool yourselves into thinking that in 5 years time [probably much less] our vote will be cast again for lib-dem, it simply wont, and that is a lot of votes to lose, even if by some miracle the tories actually allow a referrendum or even the British public vote for it, which they may well not.
I feel the main reason that lib-dems are the third party [or were until this week] is because they do not have the backing that a lot of us seem to think they do. This was more than proven by the result of this election, where we lost seats and votes despite Nick doing a fantastic job and things looking so hopeful before the results came in.
One last point to Colin,
“As for those predicting oblivion at the next election, the new system will allow you to do what you’ve always wanted by voting Labour 1, Lib Dem 2, Conservative 3, UKIP 4 and leaving the BNP box empty.
But for millions of true Liberals in other parts of the country, they will be able to use their 1st choice for us without fear that it will split the vote and let someone else in by the back door.”
I would like to point out that I joined the lib-dem party because of labours move to the centre-right, and their position is unlikely to change. To suggest we will go back to voting labour like we want to is frankly insulting and to declare that you are a true lib-dem, implies that I am not. I take it from this comment that you joined the party around the time of the merge between liberals and SDP, and as I didnt I am not a reallib-dem. Well neither did almost every other party supporter.
Fyi, IF we get AV, my vote will NOT go Labour1, Lib-dem2, any other 3 etc. It wont be an issue at all, I am so disallusioned by polotics at the moment I wont bother to vote at all, which will be the first time since I was old enough, because I feel that NO party now represents my views any more. I have seen the Conservatives move to the centre, then labour and now lib-dem move from the left to the right overnight and I unwittingly helped them do it.
I will just have to sit at the back of the room muttering to myself about the good old days where people voted for who they actually wanted to be in power and stating how confused I am by this new fangled politics that I nether want or understand, where poloticians and voters live in the eutopia of constant hung parliments, as they do in europe.
I am in the minority tho, the largest percentage of voters at any election has always been the over 50’s, not wide eyed students, seduced by the exitement of politics and full of spirit as I once was, and many of you seem to be. Politics has a way of leaving you disillusioned even angry, not just once, but time and again, and eventually you will run out of fight and just accept that you are obviously a relic and there is no longer a place for you in politics.
@George Smith – “You have no idea how all of this works”. Of course, you couldn’t know that I taught constitutional law and was a member of the Lib Dem coalition negotiating team in 2003 – but it is unwise to assume that an opinion in itself implies a lack of expertise.
It’s quite far fetched – but not impossible, I’ll grant you – to imagine that Tory MPs could circumvent a fixed term parliament Act by voting against their own Government. But there are political consequences to this. At the election debates and programmes everyone would demand to know why they had publicly condemned their own Government, and asked why anyone else should take a different view by voting for a Tory candidate. And they would be asked why they had claimed to support stable, long-term government, only to circumvent their own legislation. Failure to provide convincing answers would make it hard for them to get beyond their own core vote.
For Labour MPs to back such a no-confidence vote would be to accept another election – which they are far too financially stretched to afford for at least a few years. So they might have to abstain.
And even if the election did come, the Lib Dems would have another shot at the election debates, but this time with the credibility of having been in Government and delivered some key aspects of its manifesto. No-one could make the convincing case again that a Lib Dem vote was a wasted vote – it has just delivered a whole stack of the Lib Dem agenda in Government.
Lib Dem activists who support this are not stupid, as you seem to imply – they just take a different view. There are at least as many reasons to think that this will be helpful to the Party as those to think it would be damaging. Labour of course will target some Lib Dem voters – let them try. A party which prefers the ideological purity and powerlessness of opposition to actually helping people in Government is going to have a hard time selling themselves.
Derek Young
Point taken, my second sentance was condescending for that you have my apology.
Derek Young,
All they would say is that since we are in unprecendented financial times they require a majority in the Commons and the coalition is stopping them from doing x,y,z.
The media would fall in behind that, look at how much of an easy time they gave the Tories considering they consistently called for the wrong policies during the crisis and the following recession, if Labour had that record we would have been crucified, but because it is the Conservatives, the new darlings of the press, its all just “Labours job tax, Labours job tax, Labours job tax”.
Also i’ve said it before and it has been proved, that Labour will pick up many centre-left Lib Dem voters, Labour will want this election now. We have already anticipated a second election and Labour HQ have planned accordingly and we can augment our funds from the trade unions who will be desperate to prevent the Tories from gaining a majority.
And I doubt their will be another election debate, Labour would perhaps do it but the Conservatives definately wouldn’t, their lead was cut down due to it, would they want that to happen again? Of course not. All it takes is for them to agree to it but just allow the negotiations to become bogged down claiming the old rules didn’t suit them.
Oh and it will not take long before the Tory right starts making noises over Europe as a flashpoint over where their party is right now.
I voted for the Lib Dems a couple of time during the Blair era. They seemed like they actually had principles. But it turns out they were just the old Liberal Party desperate to get some hold on power at any cost. Someone on this site mentioned Prescott, labours token nod at the old school working-man vote, Clegg is in the same Job, as a token to a desperate coalition forced by an indecisive electorate. The two Party system actually rallied in the final days. It will rally in marginal seats where the Lib Dems swing vote either normally vote labour or conservative. Why would anyone who doesn’t want a Tory candidate vote for a lib Dem and why would someone who does want one vote tactically? You were the Liberal Party before the Thatcher years and you will be the Liberal Party after about 18 months of lost local elections, angry protests by public sector workers and wipe out in Scotland and Wales. You’re Cherry has been popped and you won’t be able to play the innocent in the future. Politics in Britain is tribal. Neither the conservatives or labour will need you. because your vote won’t hold up. The only austerity Government that ever gained seats was Margret Thatchers and she owed most of her success to The Falklands war and Micheal Foot. Honestly you turkeys have just formed a coalition that brings Christmas forwards,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8677088.stm
As an analysis of which party implemented most of their manifesto pledges and made concessions i find is useful in this debate.
@Mark
“I also believe that most people do not think much about the old ideologies of the 20th century”
The old ideologies still greatly inform the debate both here and across the world normally centreing on how socially redistributive you want capitalism to be. However, I agree that the perception across most people minds in this country is that politics has suddenly become like managing a business, people want ‘what works’.
“I’d say that what the electorate want from a government nowadays is: competence, honesty, fairness and openness, probably in that order.”
This is indeed about what people currently think about politics. That it is more about the character, or appearance of politics rather than any true ideals or values that are implemented via policy.
I am not saying that competence, honesty, fairness and openess are not important to politics. In fact I believe they are central to politics but are not ends or values in themselves.
To highlight this point let us analyse the previous Labour government. In terms of competence, competent at what exactly? managing the economy? In terms of the economcy, are you free market or believe in regulated capitalism? Are you socially redistributive or not. Labour also pursued an authoritarian regime curtailling civil liberties and passing an unprecedented amount of legislation with the creation of 6000 new criminal offences. Are you libertarian or authoritarian? Labour was competent at leading us into an unjust war in iraq with its PM lying to the public and subsequently walking away. Are you pro or anti war? In short there is a core value or ideal underpinning everyone’s view on all these matters. Also in short, if competence was an ideal in itself under Labour, I would prefer incompetence on their part to have achieved any of that.
honesty – I don’t that any critical thinker who has lived in the UK, read the endless lies, manipulation and spin emanating from the government and the media could possibly argue that there is any honesty about politics right now. Even the liberal democrats, who i voted for on the basis that i believe they had the highest values and moral integrity have fallen at the very 1st hurdle. Namely, their core manifesto promise of campaigning for a fairer electoral system based on proportional representation, the very 1st opportunity they have when they can wield any power… they completely abandon it just for a turn at the levers of power.
Fairness – what is fair? should everyone pay exactly the same tax rate in the whole country? inrespective of level of income? surely that is fair isnt it? Or is it fair that those who have the most can contribute more and you seek to smooth some of the gross inequalities inherent in capitalism?
Fairness is not an ideal or value per se, rather a desire for the appearance of fairness in politics, where you fall depends on your ideological – socialist or right wing point of view. Or from a civil liberties point of view, whether you are liberal or authoritarian.
Openess – again greatly important in politics but again it is wanting character of politics to be open rather than any substantial policy based on some core ideal or value. To illustrate my point, at the Iraq War Inquiry, several times the feed was cut off for the ‘national interest’. Ultimately are you an ultra libertarian with no trust in the government or state and believe that all information should be public knowledge or are you more authoritarian and trusting in the apparatus of the state to do what is best. Again in this case, openess is ultimately underpinned by an ideological point of view.
In short this is at the very heart of the problem with politics in the UK. We are living in world of political consensus. The political spectrum is extremely narrow centreing on the centre/centre right.
The only differences that i can disern between the parties are: vote labour and get a centralising, authoritarian, anti-civil liberties government that seeks to futhur the power of the state and increase the fear, paranoia and mistrust central to the UK psyche. Vote Conservative and get a xenophobic, anti-immigration, anti-european, pro rich party which if you peel away the veneer of respectability of cameron and co, has some very nasty roots. Vote Liberal Democrat, a disingenuous party superficially proclaiming itself to be a progressive, reforming voice in the country, yet in reality dropping its biggest campaign and manifesto pledge at the 1st opportunity. See them for the shameless, valueless power grabbers that they really are.
In short the electorate were broken by Margaret Thatcher’s ‘reforms’ and have since spread out into a dismayed, disillusioned fearful bunch.
They have been controlled by both fear and wonder. The fear spun out be the labour government of: criminals, terrorists and sex offenders to then justify the rapid expansion of the state and the curtailment of civil liberties, The ‘wonder’ has been the promise of increased wealth for all in the utopia, which has failed to materialise.
The whole while politics has moved from its roots of discussing and implementing core values, ideals and ideas to a new discourse of pseudo managment and political speak mascarading as values.
@ George
“Politics has a way of leaving you disillusioned even angry, not just once, but time and again, and eventually you will run out of fight and just accept that you are obviously a relic and there is no longer a place for you in politics.”
That is exactly the problem with the current mainstream politics in the UK. However, true power is not external, it can only come from within. In believing that you are right, that you will not sacrifice your humanity, compassion and empathy just because the current political system makes it hard to impossible. Once you accept defeat and that you are powerless, you are. You have also sacrificed the most important thing in life, your humanity, Don’t give up but it is true that nothing in life worth having is easy.
@Derek Young
“A party which prefers the ideological purity and powerlessness of opposition to actually helping people in Government is going to have a hard time selling themselves.”
Politics should be about ideals and values and defending them on the major issues yet compromising where compromise is possible. However, you cannot compromise with everyone and not all views and opinions are valid. For example, the current electoral system is evidently unfair yet it has perpetuated itself for a ridiculous amount of time.
Who are you helping by obtaining power for the sake of power? Only yourselves surely?
The fact is that I believe that politics should have ideals and values at its core which you express, clearly, honestly and openly to the electorate rather than treating them as fools and spinning and lieing just to not displease as many people as possible to gain power.
Ideological purity and honesty about it are what I do think politics should be about. If you don’t value the ideological purity of politics and place the attainment of power over it, you wind up in a very dark place agreeing with whatever the current consensus is: whether it is slavery, a dictatorship etc.
The fact that you are arguing otherwise and have held such a prominent position in politics and the Liberal Democrats I use as furthur evidence of what is currently wrong in the current system.