The BBC is reporting that Vince Cable has argued that there’s been no betrayal of students by the Lib Dems, and that he’s working to get the best deal for students.
We didn’t break a promise. We made a commitment in our manifesto, we didn’t win the election. We then entered into a coalition agreement, and it’s the coalition agreement that is binding upon us and which I’m trying to honour
Vince speaks in an interview to be broadcast on the Politics Show later today.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Why community politics matters (Mark Corner)
A Federal Britain: 1. Renewing democracy through fair representation (Iain Donaldson)
A roadmap to Queer Equality (Tara Foster)
A strange but welcome feeling (Jennie Rigg)
Fifteen years ago today…… (Caron Lindsay)
How Chancellor Reeves torpedoed the economy
The Disneyfication of Haley Mills
Hodge and his Masters and The Choirmaster's Burial
Survation now put Andy Burnham 10 points ahead in Makerfield
A perpetual pirouette of prevarication?
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Debt-ridden graduates claim they are seen as cash cows
Chris Cory 
Ruth Bright 
BigTallTim 
Daniel Walker 
Richard Good 
45 Comments
If he didn’t sign the Pledge then that is fair enough. If he did then he’s broken a promise.
So to take Vince’s argument, the Party said it would scrap tuition fees if we won and we didn’t so the party hasn’t broken a promise but MPs individually pledged to vote against fee rises. Those who don’t are breaking their pledge, not the party. I see. That’s quite clear. Some of our MPs have restated their commitment to vote against fee rises. Good for them. The others?
From further on in the BBC article:
“Asked whether it would have been better if he had not signed the pledge, he added: “From the point of view of political judgment it may well have been, but it’s not an issue of trust.
“We and the Conservatives separately made a whole series of commitments in our manifesto and outside it.
“We haven’t been able to carry all of them through, partly because we have a coalition and have had to make compromises and partly because we’re still in the middle of this appalling financial situation.”
For Dr Cable, breaking a signed promise is “not an issue of trust.”
Does he really not understand that, the more someone talks like that, the less likely anyone is ever to trust them again?
New dictionary definition: Pledge; noun; something you may say or make before an election that isn’t legally binding and has no meaning whatsoever. A solemn binding promise that can be broken once in power. A Cleggism.
Yet another article on ‘betrayal’. MPs, Ministers and Contributors to LDV are falling over themselves in an attempt to re-write the dictionary. Mind you it’s not the first time, the definition of the word ‘fair’ seems to have changed recently as well
As for all these articles, The lady doth protest too much
“but it’s not an issue of trust”
Sorry but he signed a personal pledge, the Lib dems signed a coalition agreement. In this country we vote for MP’s as individuals, he made the pledge as an individual, he lied.
By trying to wriggle he has shown he is no better than those from the Tory and Labour parties who have also been shown to be liars.
He is a pathetic disgrace and is helping to ensure his party are destroyed at the next election. The public link trust to anything to do with the Party, kiss goodbye to AV…….
Perhaps it would have been clearer if the pledge were made conditional on the Lib Dems
winning the election. Since this was never likely the entire Manifesto was pure fiction.
Next time it would be better to offer a one line pledge saying there are all sort of things
we would like to do but it all depends on the outcome and who we get to partner with
but we”ll let you know after you vote.
Yep – the meaning of fair as used by this condem government has really really changed. To think that I was taken in by Clegg and St Vince prior to the election and even canvassed on behalf of local candidate. I hang my head in shame.
Vince is deeply confused. The Coalition agreement is an agreement between two parties. Breaking of the agreement is an issue of trust between the parties.
The manifesto is an agreement between the party and the electorate. Breaking the manifesto is a breach of trust between the party and the electorate. However, in a coalition government this may mitigated by the need for compromise.
The pledge is an agreement between the individual MP and the electorate. Breaking the pledge is a breach of trust between the MP and the electorate. Doing so is completely indefensible.
Vince’s statement that “it’s the coalition agreement that is binding upon us and which I’m trying to honour,” shows that he is more concerned about the trust of the tories (which keeps him in office) than he is with the trust of the voters.
“Perhaps it would have been clearer if the pledge were made conditional on the Lib Dems
winning the election.”
You’re forgetting that the pledge campaign was organised by the NUS, and the pledge was signed by candidates of all parties. It had absolutely nothing to do with the Lib Dem winning the election.
In fact a Lib Dem victory was the one circumstance in which the pledge would have been completely redundant, because the Lib Dems were committed to abolishing fees altogether! The whole point of the pledge was that if a non-Lib-Dem government proposed to increase fees, the MPs who had signed it would vote against that increase.
Cable’s attempt to argue that the pledge is invalid because the Lib Dems didn’t win an overall majority is absolutely nonsensical.
It is clear from what George Kendall now tells us that Vince, like Clegg, never actually believed in the Liberal Democrat deficit reduction and university funding policies on which they fought the general election campaign, they agreed with the Tory ones. Fair enough, they are human beings with free will and they will inevitably form their own opinions. What they are not entitled to do is substitute their own personal beliefs for those of the party on which they campaigned and on the basis of which they were elected. Not unless there is overwhelming justification for so doing. And there isn’t. The economic situation did not become catastrophically worse during the weekend following the election, contra the narrative that the dwindling little claque of Cleggmaniacs is spinning.
As Matthew Huntbach has pointed out, Clegg is not a deep thinker, and as David Allen has said on these pages, he is a second-rate chancer (though from Chalfont St Giles, not Sheffield). If the Liberal Democrats had ignored the hype in the media and had elected a competent leader worthy of our trust, then we might not be in this mess. We might be exercising more influence over Cameron’s right-wing Tory government by forcing it to govern as a minority.
Vince hasn’t personally betrayed us. The Cleggmaniacs, as a collectivity, have done.
The problem is not that we are not able to fulfill the manifesto pledge of scrapping tuition fees. Everyone accepts that we didn’t win the election, therefore we could not do this. The problem is that we are doing the exact opposite of scrapping tuition fees by allowing them to be raised.
I would feel far less betrayed if the central figures of the party said this this is a Conservative policy, but due to the coalition agreement we won’t oppose it, but instead I see them actively promoting it. When the shoe is on the other foot, regarding AV for example, are Tories going to promote it. Not a chance!
I see what he’s saying about being bound by the Coalition agreement and not a manifesto due to not governing alone, but on that logic Vince has to abstain on a vote on fees, not enthusiastically argue that £9000 is a fair sum and vote for.
This kind of interview doesn’t help us volunteers, councillors and campaigners that much though. The leadership line on university should be like their line on immigration – “I prefer the Lib Dem version, but in a coalition we have to compromise”. Not “I believe the Tory version and actually I thought £9000 fees were a good idea all along”.
Ming Campbell needs to have a soft word in his ear about credibility. Ming said his credibility would be shot to pieces if he voted for a fee rise.
The leadership have got to sort out a clear narrative on voting for things that weren’t in the manifesto – otherwise there are going to be fudged announcements about the manifesto being wrong every single time, and it will damage not only those ministers but also the MPs who do stick to their promises, and councillors who’ve worked incredibly hard over 4 years on local issues but will find themselves out of a job because a few men in westminster have told the public their ideas were never any good in the first place.
I have a feeling Nick and Vince need to hire their own Alistair Campbell to sort out this mess
oh, stop clegging on Cable
I can’t see the point of another piece that attempts to portray what has happened as progressive, positive and as something that will actually improve the lot of students. The truth is there for all to see despite persistent attempts to redefine the meanings of commonly used words.
I see from a link at the right that Paul Walter is being a bit naughty by quoting the BBC’s report of Cable’s gyrations under the headline:
“Promise”, “Break”, “Betrayal”, “Commitment”, “Manifesto”, “Pledge”, “Trust” – all these words get shoved into the great Vince Cable word marmaliser, and an insipid goo comes out the other end
http://liberalburblings.co.uk/2010/11/promise-break-betrayal-commitment-manifesto-pledge-trust-all-these-words-get-shoved-into-the-great-cable-word-marmaliser/
I’m tempted to say that it may _look_ like goo, but it might be wise to have a sniff to be sure what it is.
Vince has gone native, just like the rest of the Lib Dem front bench. Plus he is being advised appallingly in media relations, just like his Lib Dem colleagues.
There is a strange change in mindset in power – every government minister I can ever remember adopts it as soon as they get their ministerial Jags. From being a force of attack against the incumbent government – to being forced to defend every one of their pronouncements from the media, opposition, disgruntled supporters etc. What effects this has is seen in Cable’s every word. Obfuscation, denial + ‘clever’ counter-argument.
I truly believe that they can’t see just how much they have betrayed their student electorate with this one.
So according to Vince Cable, because the Lib Dems didn’t win the election they do not have to carry out any of their manifesto commitments. He is now using the fact that they are in a coalition to say everything they said before the election can be ignored.
Someone had better get Vince out of that JCB in that hole he is in. If he digs any futher he will reach Sydney by Tuesday.
Oh and to show how much VInce is out of step with your party. Six councillors have resigned in Rochdale, one of the reasons they are doing it is due to the tuition fee u-turn and to quote one of the now independent councillors “how can I go and ask people to vote for me when our MP’s promises don’t seem to last more than a few weeks, all I keep hearing are the words “tuition fee” and” liars””.
There are rumours more Lib Dem councillors in Rochdale will soon follow.
Can’t someone in the party have a quiet word with Vince and simply tell him to stop digging?
“So according to Vince Cable, because the Lib Dems didn’t win the election they do not have to carry out any of their manifesto commitments.”
If that were all he was claiming it might not be quite so bad (though obviously the way most of the party’s policy platform has been glibly jettisoned doesn’t inspire confidence that they believed a word of it in the first place).
But what he’s saying in this interview is that they also do not have to fulfil a pledge that clearly related to the situation in which they _didn’t_ win the election. A pledge that would be completely redundant if we had a Lib Dem government. It’s absolute nonsense.
There are two parts to this, Vince is absolutely right to point out in coalition you have to compromise, even though Labour will still point fingers and say “You said this but supported something else”, they all do this, even the coalition are continuing Labour policies and trying to dress them up as their own, it’s the immature side of politics, but compromise and coalition go hand in hand and most people understand this.
However, the pledge is a different matter, the Lib Dems must have seen this coming, why on earth didn’t they negotiate a better face saving position for themselves? They should have negotiated a free vote on this, the Tories managed to do this on AV, the Lib Dems could have given themselves more wiggle room by keeping it as a free vote.
You have to laugh.
Does he really think this second rate sophistry helps?
“My old mate used to say
‘If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything’
That thought returned to me after seeing what Cable had to say. All I can say is I hope he is able to look in the mirror at night-time, because I cannot , having asked people to vote on their principles for people, that now appear to have absolutely none.
As a Labour Supporter and former member of that party I often railed against the party’s parliamentary leadership playing fast and loose with manifesto commitments and party policy.
Lib Dems assure me that the declared party policy is still the abolition of tuition fees and I accept this is the case.
Manifesto Commitments fall if the party concerned does not gain power – although party policies remain – and I accept that it was wise for any major party in the run-up to the last GE to look at policies and manifesto commitments to see how they might be affected by the party joining a coalition government.
So everything is fine till that point and I suppose after the GE and the coalition negotiations that the Tories and LibDems hammered out their coalition agreement which becomes their joint manifesto although it is rather disturbing at the number of policies coming through which aren’t in the coalition agreement/manifesto or the separate pre-election manifestos for the two parties.
On the NUS signature pledge I think those who signed and the party leadership were incredibly naive in not seeing what a hostage to fortune they created and with no small print get-outs like ‘only if we win the election and form a government on our own’. Clegg said on signing the pledge that he would vote against fees in the next Parliament – he didn’t qualify this in any way despite the clear possibility there might be a coalition government.
I am just watching poor old Vince make heavy weather on the Politics Show – same old politics and desperately clinging on to the fantasy that it’s not an issue of trust – tell that to the students and their parents.
However, back to the flaw in Cable’s argument and that of apologist LibDem mouthpieces and spinners. The decision to change the policy and manifesto commitment came in March before the GE and the coalition negotiations.
The pledgers apparently knew nothing about this secret change in policy and I can’t see how Alexander could actually ditch LibDem policy in such a cavalier fashion. To be fair to the pledgers, I think if they knew, most would have refused to become involved in such a tawdry piece of vote winning political opportunism.
Of course, some very deluded LibDems might claim that party policy is still the same and all I can say to them is if that’s what you genuinely believe then you are in a very small minority of people.
I believe that faced with no alternative, Liberal Democrats have served their Country best, by signing up to the foreseeable terms of the `Coalition Agreement’ for an ostensible 5 year Parliament.
Vince Cable has said that that no one Party won the General Election and had the L/D`s won it then it would have be held accountable to a broken promise on Students Fees, in unjustified increases, had the promise not been implemented.
I am a supporter of the `Coalition Agreement’ and believe that Nick Clegg and Vince Cable should be judged over the full term of this Parliament.
I hope that they are able to lead in a shared Government that brings about many Liberal principled reforms including the AV referendum for the people to choose an outcome.
I do believe that it is the current increase of `students` Fees’ is currently wrong and as it places an unfair burden of payments on students when bankers are not been sufficiently asked to pay.
It is too excessive to ask vulnerable students to pay up to almost £30k, if earnings exceed £21K,a level of earnings that most should aspire beyond, as a defacto `graduate tax’ so most graduteas will in fact end up with a millstone round their necks for some years.
However, the real culprits are the Tories, in this policy of austerity towards vulnerable working class individuals and least off future generation of higher education students but say the NUS wrath should be nailed on the door of the Tories.I do not see it as a crucifixion betrayal Issue for Vince Cable or Nick Clegg as they are now leaders of a `Coalition Agreement’.
Had the Tories formed an absolute majority Government, which they do not,then clearly it does not suspend belief that ther would have been greater racked up future personal debt for students and less help for P/T students, then has been possible with L/D Ministers in Cabinet.
It was also Labour who first introduced student fees at £3,329 per year and they would have increased it as they would have brought in ID Cards and persisted with child detention and abuse of `MP Expenses’ ..
Its all a load of emotional tosh. In the coalition agreement the Lib Dems gained the right to sit on their hands. However, if they had, and stuck to their “promise” or even wrung their hands railing against tory/brown(hired by labour) plans, then any affect they would have had on the outcome would have been ZERO. The ministers, by going along with the majority of the government have ensured the fairest output possible. Not good but at least some good news for the poorest.
Meanwhile students have access by right to EU Universities, and any of them that have bothered to learn a foreign language could go to top universities in Germany, France, Spain Netherlands etc – where they would pay little to no fees.
Ha ha ha ha!!!
This is superb.
So, from now on we can expect the LibDems to promise to give everyone who votes for them £1M, a private jet and a mansion with a pool. They won’t get a majority so it’ll never happen. Awesome!
Here’s a new campaign slogan: “We’ll promise anything to get your vote!”
Nowhere in that pledge did it say “if we win a majority”,if it had you would have been laughed off every campus,tell the truth,you had decided to drop this policy last march when you where stitching up the electorate with your grubby little deal with tories yet you still stole those votes off students and their families,as the AV vote is in the coalition agreement will all tories be supporting it as wholeheartedly as cable,alexander and clegg support every tory element of the agreement.
Cable should just say nothing. His weasel words are convincing no one.
There’s dramatic news about the negotations between ministers and Lib Dem backbenchers in a blog post by William Cullerne Bown:
“on Friday Universities UK, which has been kept abreast of developments in the talks by ministers, lifted the lid in a confidential briefing to vice chancellors that suggests the two sides remain far apart and may be unable to reach a deal that allows the whips to guarantee Cameron a majority.
…
And in its calculations of Commons arithmetic, the briefing assumes that Nick Clegg will be unable to whip even his ministers into supporting the government. Consequently, the government may face defeat in the Commons if 28 Lib Dems stick to their pre-election pledge and vote against the plans.
…
Such a defeat could be interpreted by Cameron as a violation by the Lib Dems of the Coalition Agreement and provide him with grounds to dissolve the agreement and call a general election. With the Lib Dems currently hovering around 10 per cent in the polls, an election could lead to a wipe out of the party’s MPs.”
http://exquisitelife.researchresearch.com/exquisite_life/2010/11/it-really-is-now-a-coalition-crisis-universities-uk-warns-of-disaster-on-student-fees.html
Obviously this is what’s behind yesterday’s report in the Guardian that Universities UK had urged vice-chancellors to lobby MPs to avert the danger of the government modifying or abandoning its plans:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/nov/21/tuition-fees-vice-chancellors-universities-uk
William Cullerne Bown says the vice-chancellors were advised to focus their efforts on Lib Dem MPs.
At least if we were wiped out we would go down with our honour, if not intact, at least not completely besmirched. We could fight back from that, which we won’t be able to do if the majority of our MPs break their promise.
I pledge to vote against any increase in tuition fees and in saying this I am pleased to have persuaded you to vote for me but what I am not telling you is that if my party gets into power in a coalition I will vote for an increase in tuition fees.
On the remote Island ofIona lies the grave of John Smith who I once worked for and where he lies, an uneven stone slab half buried in the grass shows an inscription “An honest man’s the noblest work of God”
Oh Vince, I am so sad for what has happened to you
For those who think that Britain cannot afford higher education spending then have a read of this page and follow up links.
Britain is n has an appalling record on investment in Higher Education and the cuts that the coalition are putting in place are hardly going to help that
http://www.tonybates.ca/2010/09/09/international-comparisons-in-higher-education/
I am trying hard to describe precisely how I felt about Vince’s TV perfomance on tuition fees today. I know what he wanted to say. I know what he wished the viewers to take away from the experience. He failed miserably on all counts. John Sopel’s face said it all. It read: “Mr Cable do you really understand what a complete idiot you are making of yourself, turning someone who was one of the nation’s best-loved and trusted politicians into a shifty so-and-so in a matter of minutes???”
I was more impressed with Phil Woolas defending Tony Blair’s conduct leading up to the invasion of Iraq. And I’m a Coalition supporter!
Anthony Aloysius St
There is no chance of Cameron calling an election. All of the polls indicate that Labour would be the largest party and several indicate an overall majority. If Cameron were to lose the election the tory party machine would destroy him. He has nowhere to go, which is why the Lib Dems are in such a strong position and can vote honourably.
Nigel
Yes, I agree. The threat of a snap election isn’t a credible one now, which may indeed be why the backbenchers seem to be putting up some resistance.
The blog I referred to suggested that the government may offer them a concession by imposing a cap of £6,000 rather than £9,000 – which of course wouldn’t please the universities. It will be interesting to see how things turn out.
The more i see that clip of Vince Cable http://www.bbc.co.uk/politicsshow/ on the politics show. The more in angers me.
I really do not get the shear audacity that he can sit that and say that “We have not broken the pledge, as were not in government, Then after a brief period of uncomfortable farting and spluttering he says, were not able to implement it. were not able to implement it.
Ok the guy is obviously a hell of a lot older than what I am so, I can not complain about my taxes funding his education, but why the heck did my grandfather and his father before him, slog their gut’s out for this country, and fort in 2 world wars. All to give this man the “Free University Education” that he received, when that education failed to teach him the simple understanding of the English Literacy.
I pledge to vote against, any increase in fee’s. In the next parliament, and to put pressure on the government to introduce a fairer system.
It really is not that difficult, my 5 old niece at pre-school could probably understand the concept of the pledge.
There are no If’s or buts, there are aren’t even any maybe’s about it. The pledge covers all scenarios.
A) If liberal democrats had won a majority government, they would introduce the pledge and their manifesto
or
B) IF Liberal Democrats, went into coalition, They would need to get a fairer system and also Vote NO to any increased in Fee’s- This should have been the parties red line in the coalition agreement and not abstention
or
C) If Liberal Democrats where in opposition , They would vote NO for increases in Fee’s and lobby parliament for a fairer policies
The Pledge pretty much covered any outcome the Liberal Democrats would find them self, in after the election.
Now stop all this spinning and carrying on. and just be straight with the electorate. its undermining your own intelligence and is extremely disrespectful to others to persist with this nonsense
Nigel, Anthony Aloysius St
The main point is not that Cameron will want to call an election. If you look into the links from the article you cited, you’ll find I’m not convinced he’d want to do that either. The main point is to illustrate the essential quality of the forces and decisions in play.
I disagree though about the polls putting the Lib Dems in a strong position on this. Cameron may not want an election, but he can contemplate it. Clegg just has to look on it the prospect with terror. That puts Cameron in the best position.
Having heard part of Cable’s interview on the “Politics Show” yesterday, i am thoroughly ashamed to be a Liberal Democrat. Correction: I am thoroughly ashamed of the Liberal Democrats who have joined this government. Cable actually asked viewers to believe that the pledge which MPs signed before the election was not binding whereas the coalition agreement whch they entered into subsequently is “a binding agreement”.
It is , of course, arrant nonsense.
If Liberal Democrat ministers wish to retain any respect at all, their best course is to confess that they have broken trust with the electorate on this issue. this continual wriggling is convincing no-one and simply bringing them, and the party, into further disrepute.
If MPs who signed the pledge and are not in government wish to retain any credibility, and to salvage something of the party’s reputtion, they must honour the pledge and vote against the increase in fees.
So it’s OK to break an electoral pledge if you are in a coalition. And proportional representation = coalition.
So if the UK gets PR then any LibDem manifesto will always be a load of empty tosh.
Well I hope it was worth it for Nick and Vince to sell their voters down the river for a promise of an AV referendum.
Pity for them, there’ll be no LibDem supporters left to vote in favour of this scam.
Just how stupid would we all have to be to vote for anything a Lib Dem promises?
If George Osborne can now pledge a Euro bail out for the Irish Economy of the order of 9 Million Euros, surely our stduents are ahead of the queue in terms of priority for a lower Cap than the proposed £9K per student in one year of study?
Incredulous makes a good point.
The Liberal Democrats want us all to support AV at the referendum in May.
AV will, in no doubt give us more coalition Governments.
And yet Vince Cable tells us, that if we end up with a coalition government, we can not expect to hold a party to account on their manifesto and their pledges.
Whahoo lets all run out and support AV
How ridiculous Vince, any people that where still swaying over whether to support AV or not, have probably well and truly made their mind up now.
I know I have
And
Nick Clegg calls Vince into his office
NICK :-Vince what is the status on the Bankers bonus?
VINCE :- Well I’ve got good news and bad news.
NICK :- What is the good news.
VINCE :- All the bankers have signed a pledge to not have any bonus this year!
NICK :- Thats great! whats the bad news.
VINCE :- Well after I left they had another meeting and the Bonus is tripling .
NICK :- Oh well never mind. Next.
Our party is becoming a joke and not a very funny one!
“We then entered into a coalition agreement, and it’s the coalition agreement that is binding upon us ”
That binding agreement allows Lib Dem MPs to abstain on this issue
Nick has said that Lib Dem MPs will not be penalised in any way if they vote against the Coalition on tuition fees
So there is no binding agreement that compels you to vote for these proposals.