Imagine the situation.
You are a Liberal Democrat peer.
You have voted for several measures you did not like because they were in the Coalition Agreement.
You have now seen the Conservative Party walk away from a major part of the agreement.
You now know your place in Parliament is secure for a good few more years without the party’s whips being able to hold over you anything about your fate when reforms kick in, even if they should wish.
How do you think you are going to vote on future issue after issue that is in the Coalition Agreement but not the LibDem manifesto?
The troubles for the Tories with the Lords, where they do not have a majority, are not resolved by today’s news. They have only just begun.
* Mark Pack is Party President and is the editor of Liberal Democrat Newswire.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Chase Park fair photos
Green and Lib Dem Southwark brings government closer to voters
A swamp of lies and disinformation
Doing better? The goal must be Sufficeincy
Michael Meadowcroft (1942-2026) - A Liberal to His Core
Kira Collins
Tom Reeve
theakes
17 Comments
The fact that Cameron wouldn’t even accept a referendum option shows just how weak he has become – it’s a Tory ‘non’ to any meaningful reform. A better economic recovery might have strengthened his hand against the Tory right but he looks very weak today – he made the “big open and comprehensive offer” and now he’s undermined an essential pillar of the Coalition agreement.
Of course we will retaliate, although really, binning the boundary changes is really revenge for vilifying Nick Clegg to undermine the AV vote.
For the Lib Dems however, it’s time to smile a little – time to roll out that other boundary review http://tinyurl.com/3axpg8z
Hopefully this means the Lib Dem’s in parliament fully understand their situation: The conservatives have no intention of letting us have anything that they disagree with.
It is now up to us to force them into understanding what a coalition is in the only way they seem to understand – by giving them a bloody nose. Rejection of the boundary changes in response to the failure of Lords reform should be only the first step, by my count we owe them for the NHS and AV too.
Some people might think this is immature and that we shouldn’t reduce ourselves to this, I’d like to respond by saying that if we DON’T do this we are presenting ourselves as having no backbone whatsoever. A direct result of that will be an even larger reduction of seats in 2015 (after all, why entrust your vote to someone who won’t stand up for you?) and, to be frank, coalition partners who will steamroller us even more than usual.
I thought you did very well on the BBC News, Mark, well done! The link between Lords reform and the number of Commons MPs and the power of the PM was clever too, though perhaps a bit tenuous!
Mark, if the Lords reform issue is problematic for the Tories, it’s absolutely disastrous for the Lib-Dems – let’s sort of use your analogy in another way, imagine you are a Lib-Dem voter and in the last two years you have watched the party you entrusted with your vote, make a mess of the economy, increase tuition fees, part privatise the NHS, brutally cut welfare spending and bring about Free Schools – all without any dissent, and, now , on the issue of Lords Reform (which though important, does not directly effect the lives of ordinary people in the same way the schools, hospitals and a job does), it throws its teddies out of its cot – I fear that you would think very carefully before voting in the same way again.
I analyse the breach of the agreement in the following piece: http://www.allthatsleft.co.uk/2012/08/the-lib-dems-biggest-shambles-yet/
Mark – cheery as ever! I have to say I rather agree with Ray North. There have been numerous decisions which go way beyond the coalition agreement to which our response has been to roll over to have our collective tummies tickled. It is deeply disturbing that as a party we only get our collective knickers in a twist on issues like this, rather than the dreadful legislation that is getting pushed through and that flies in the face of our alleged commitment to ensure that “no one is enslaved by poverty”. Pernicious, vindictive and ultimately counter productive. Targeting the poor, the disabled, those fleeing domestic violence and some of our most vulnerable children through cuts to benefit, changes in employment law and legal aid. And let’s not start to consider what is happening to our NHS and schools! You can shout all you like about the pupil premium (though it is worrying how little of that seems to be being used for what it was originally intended) or the tax cuts, which yes will help mitigate a little against the VAT rises for those who earn enough to pay tax, but unless we look at the impact of coalition policy in the round we are deceiving ourselves and those we expect to support us in the future. What has happened today was inevitable and a result of us being so seduced by the prospect of power that we failed to see the Trojan Horse this agreement has proved to be. Make no mistake, the Conservatives may be divided on many things, but they are totally united on their black widow objective to lure us into their lair and eat us for breakfast!
How long before it is just generally accepted by those of us left that we are being used as Tory puppets? They’ve broken the coalition agreement against the public interest, all bets should be off. Yet we are portrayed as the bad guys yet again. It will be a very dark night in May 2015 when the polls close.
@Linda Jack – spot on!
I don’t think Linda is spot on. All parties – including Labour – agreed before the election that there had to be cuts. So at least some of the things we dislike would have happened even had there been a Labour only, a LD only, or a Labour – LibDem coalition. The reality of every recession is that tax cutters don’t get the tax cuts they want, and high spenders don’t get the spending they want.
Is this a feel good moment?
You now know your place in Parliament is secure for a good few more years without the party’s whips being able to hold over you anything about your fate when reforms kick in, even if they should wish.
This is the case for all non cross benchers.
To paraphrase that famous qoute ‘i agree with Linda’. I think Lib Dems should think very carefully about their political strategy. Lords reform is important, but this is, what is known in psychology, as ‘self actualisation’ isssue; the issues which people get worried about once the basic needs are met, the basic needs being tuition fees, NHS, bankers’ criminality, schools etc. People of Sheffield will not forget how that loan to that successful steel mill was denied after coalition govt came to power; students of Cardiff or Cambridge will not forget how they have to pay so much more tuition fees. Patients will not forget Shirley Wiiliams’ support for the Lansley Bill, after promising no change in the NHS. I think you give the Tories far too much credit for AV loss: i voted against it, just to kick Lib Dems in the nut – although i supported lib dems all my life. The lesson? Support people’s ‘basic needs’ they will support your ‘higher needs’.
Mohammed: ” i voted against it, just to kick Lib Dems in the nut – although i supported lib dems all my life” – now why do you think I don’t believe you on the second part of that sentence or are you into self harm?
Shouldn’t Lib Dem peers (and all politicians) just vote on issues according to what they think is best for the good of the population rather than what serves the interests of their own political party?
‘The troubles for the Tories with the Lords have just begun..’ how right you are Mark, and especially if Nick now withdraws the LibDem whip from those Lords who are against reform, and then gets on with the job of making up our numbers in the Upper House. That would make it doubly difficult for Cam to get anything through without heavy scrutiny and amendment by our unelected Lords, – then the Tories might see the sense in reforming the place.
hmmn, what of the LD peers who – incredibly – also opposed lords reform?!
Tim – I don’t think anyone on the social liberal left is disputing the neccessity of spending cuts and fiscal consolidation as recognised and provided for in the Coalition Agreement; but rather how they have delivered, and the policy choices that have been made to implement them, such as the targetting of welfare cuts on disability benefits and legal aid cuts on social welfare law advice provision to give just two examples. The Coalition Agreement was largely silent on how the cuts should be achieved. In the actual practical policy and delivery by Government on cuts we seem to have gone along with the tory way of doing things – ie targetting the poor – as if this were part of the CA,,. rather than arguing for fairer alternative approaches (such as scrapping or at least means-testing some middle class entitlements under universal benefits). And yet we continue to continue to lecture labour councils etc about making the “wrong choices” in closing childrens centres to meet their own budget reduction obligations. We have faced such choices in Government and have consistently failed our own tests on “fairness”- would be good if our Think-Tanks could do more work on how to deliver cuts in ways that don’t adversely affect the lives the poorest and most vulnerable or lead to widescale closures of frontline services.
Anyway it just goes to show – as does the latest debacle on Lords reforms – that the Coalition Agreement is not a Bill by Bill binding “contract” as such, but rather a framework agreement for Government that is open to a myriad of different policy interpretations…that is how the tories have always treated it and gained the upper hand on us on a range of issues, We need much more realpolitik on our side now to redress the balance..
Nick Clegg leads and the Lib Dem MPs follow. Cameron leads but half his MPs don’t follow and can’t be persuaded even if they fought the last election with Lord’s Reform in their manifesto. Is this a big problem for the Tories? Thonk Thatcher and Major!