Lets be frank, this is shaping up to be a rather demoralising election. Not only are our results nothing like what we expected, Clegg looks like he is going to pass up the chance for reforming our electoral system. Clegg’s argument that Cameron has more of a mandate seems hypocritical when you consider that the voting system has once again resulted in our vote share being a lot higher than our share of the MPs. We get around 7% less than Labour but end up with around 200 seats less than Labour – this is why electoral reform is so key.
I have talked to a few people who I managed to convince to vote LibDem – including my mum and my sister. After talking to them, and my own personal view, if the LibDems prop up a Tory government, I will feel ashamed to have argued that voting the LibDem’s would be a forceful anti Tory vote. Both my mum and sister have commented on how they wish they had voted Labour. These views, you will find, are pretty universal when considering Clegg’s cosey approach towards the Tories. If Clegg supports the Tories, this will seriously damage the party’s chances of becoming the ‘real’ progressive party in politics. You will see the rise of Labour, as people wont think the Liberal Democrats are any more committed to their central values than the other two parties.
It is not only the historical event of electoral reform that we will throw away, it is the ability to achieve economic stability. Vince Cable has already made it clear he is against the Tories budget, as are most sensible economically minded people. It appears as though Clegg is making economic deals the basis of the deal. Well then that shows how the ‘deal’ should be even more of a no brainer. Vince Cable has to be listened to, yes Clegg has gained popularity recently, but Cable is hugely respected and has warned about the dangers that the Tories’ economic policy would result in. It is rather interesting that Vince Cable seems to have vanished.
Hopefully, even if Clegg tries to pass this Tory deal the democratically structured LibDem party will reject it, as most of us are progressive left/centre minded people and would feel sick at the thought of supporting a party so ideologically in conflict with our values. Clegg really needs to think carefully before jumping into bed with Cameron. He needs to remember that he will not have a much better chance for political reform, he definitely would be able to get STV onto the referendum paper with Labour too. All he will get with the Tories is a Jenkins commission 2 – and I am of the understanding that thankfully this is a key area that is causing disagreement with talks between us and the Tories.
Speaking in general terms, we are obviously going to be disappointed with the election result, but at the same time I think we should be happy about the gains and the holds that we managed to achieve (Sarah Tether for example). I think the loss of Lembit Opik is a testament of many of the concerns that were voiced by people such as myself. My specific issue, as many of you know, was his attitudes towards women – especially his column within the Daily Sport where he often used patronising language to dehumanise women. I don’t think that writing in a ‘newspaper’ such as this really corresponds to fighting for the equality of women – I am not proposing for the abolition of porn etc but what he effectively was doing was undermining key areas of our campaign such as the Real Women campaign. Opik’s seat loss was more a personal not a political incident.
Clegg may think that the LibDems wont be tarnished if we don’t support the Tories in a formal coalition, instead just allowing them to have minority rule - but he should think again. He will have let so many people down who are ideologically committed to electoral reform, people who have switched from smaller parties to change the system for the better. People, including me, are going to wonder why they bothered for a party who were wiling to compromise all their values on the basis of a so called ’mandate’ – even though it is important to highlight, no-one actually achieved a majority! We need to think again, or I am afraid, Clegg will see many of his supporters feeling rightly cheated – the Tories will destroy the lives of so many, and I, as I am sure most LibDems agree with, really do not want to be part of a positive endorsement of that!
May 7, 2010 at 8:35 pm
I’m not a Lib Dem voter but this is an extremely well written piece which has voiced all my concerns about a possible Lib/Con deal.
Nick Clegg is effectively playing Russian Roulette with the non-core Lib Dem support he gained during this election campaign. I do not see how a deal with the Tories will do him anything but harm, and I hope he realises that it will probably do him more harm than propping up a Labour government.
May 7, 2010 at 8:40 pm
Worth it for the introduction (not referendum on) multi-member constituency STV. Fair elections are worth anything; we may never get another opportunity. Neither of the other two parties will ever voluntarily vote for Christmas in the turkey coop.
May 7, 2010 at 8:40 pm
Thanks for the comment, I am glad you agree.
Yeah, I totally agree – i think he is playing it with the core members too – I would certainly consider whether I would want to support LibDems if they support the Tories.
I agree, we have so much more chance to make a real difference with our policies with Labour – the Tories would block all of our policies. We are so ideologically opposed.
May 7, 2010 at 8:43 pm
@Jude – What non-core support?; we gained 1% because a whole load of people who now see fit to lecture Nick on his ‘progressive’ duty decided to vote in the bunch of crooks and charlatans who have monumentally screwed up the government deficit over the past 13 years, taken us to war without justification and stripped the country of some of its most sacred civil liberties. There’s plenty of us that find the idea of any sort of alliance with Labour just as odious as one with the Conservatives.
Worth it for reform. Only for reform. Hold your nose til the next election.
May 7, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Duncan,
The public would not just impose an electoral system onto the public without a referendum – it is undemocratic.
I agree with your reservations around Labour, but we would be able to achieve so many more of our policies through them. We have to remember how ideologically opposed we are to the Tories. We are only going to have more power over reform with Labour. This is a unique opportunity.
May 7, 2010 at 9:01 pm
I agree about the prime importance of GETTING THE REFERENDUM ON PR IN PLACE.
Mr Brown has offered this on a plate. Mr Cameron has set his face against it. ( A Committee to report indeed ! ).
Plus there are quite a few Labour ministers and parliamentarians who are longstanding supporters of PR so even if for Brown it was a deathbed conversion his colleagues are still more likely to prove trustworthy on the issue than is a Party which ( as it is perfectly entitled to do ) strongly opposed PR.
What happened to Clegg’s BRAIN during the campaign ? What is the logical or moral theory underpinning the idea that the minority party with most votes / seats has some kind of ‘right’ to form a Government ?
The only Party with such a ‘right’ would be one with 50% plus 1 – and no such Party exists.
What is more important is that a substantial majority of the electorate did indeed vote for Parties which support PR ( or a referendum on such as in Labour’s case).
Surely that voting majority has its own right to expect that the Parties they voted for will now get together at least for as long as necessary to at last change the vilely unfair voting system ? Everything else can wait a year or so. We need the version of PR which allows voters to not only vote for a Party but also prioritize in order of preference the candidates on that Party’s List.
The real problem is that Cleggy shot off his mouth a few times too often during the campaign and now he’s afraid of looking inconsistent if he goes into alliance with Mr Brown.
Well, having come a poor third, despite getting a good hearing, he’ll just have to eat a bit of humble pie : the idea that just because he has a personal dislike of Brown because of some slight or other, real or imagined, he will construct great theories to obstruct the obvious : a temporary alliance of Lib and Lab in Government to get PR through – is just repellant.
He disguised the privileged, entitlement, publicschoolboy arrogance quite well at first but half way through the campaign it showed through – maybe that had a lot to do with the falling back in the vote. Maybe that’s what he and Cameron have in common after all.
Yes Brown ‘lost’ the election – but only on the same basis that Cameron lost it, as did Clegg.
PR could be the great prize of this election – unless Clegg single-handedly torpedoes it.
May 7, 2010 at 9:06 pm
If he could get a referendum from the Tories would it change your view at all?
You maybe know already but there seems to be a coalition of pro-electoral reform groups organising events across the country tomorrow to demonstrate for reform. Might put some pressure on the Tories?
http://www.takebackparliament.com/
May 7, 2010 at 9:07 pm
Excellent piece. Millions of voters were persuaded to vote Lib Dem to keep Cameron out and as a progressive choice. If their vote gets Cameron into number 10 that’s unfair. There’s a clear and sizeable majority of voters who want a left leaning centerist government. We can get it with a Lib Lab coalition. Be Lib Dems not Con Dems or Lib Cons!
May 7, 2010 at 9:28 pm
Been a lot of talk about the ‘National Interest’ today and I think that is the key. The lib-dems have the opportunity to go into an alliance with the tories and influence the decisions taken on the economy. It is hard to overstate how much we are looking in to the abyss at the moment. I know electoral reform is important but the opportunity to be in power at this most crucial time and provide a stable government capable of setting the country back on the long road to recovery has to be priceless. Going into a shaky alliance with Labour at this time would be disastrous for the lib dems and for the country. Perhaps electoral reform is not as important as some folk think it is…
May 7, 2010 at 9:42 pm
Isn’t calling for consideration of a deal with Labour just sticking our heads in the sand, though? The bare facts are that the seats in parliament just don’t add up. You need 323 MPs to have a majority in the commons, as long as Sinn Fein stay away. A Lib-Lab coalition adds up to 315. Adding their allies in Northern Ireland you get 319. You need another 4 MPs from somewhere. SNP? Plaid and the Green? To try to get a left of centre coalition together, you’d have such a fragmentary rag bag of people, it just wouldn’t be workable. A couple of rebels could bring down the government; are we sure there aren’t a couple of Labour MPs who would rebel against PR anyway?
If you want to argue that Nick would be doing something awful by making a deal with the Tories, you need to demonstrate that there is a viable deal to be done with Labour. Otherwise, the question is just: what would you rather have, a Lib-Con government or a Con government?
May 7, 2010 at 10:07 pm
I am in my 60s and have always voted liberal or lib dem currently in Guildford.
Be very careful what you do now. The tories may have got more votes and seats than the LDs but if you add up the labour and LD votes you get a very different answer. If Nick Clegg supports the tories now who are light years away from you in outlook and aspiration you will probably consign the LDs to at best years of oblivion or at worst extinction. Most of you will not remember the fifties and sixties where liberal all MPs could travel around in a single taxi!
Do you really believe that Cameron will deliver or even help to deliver PR he is only interested in one thing his and his parties power! He will be no friend and will smear you with electoral poison. Go for labour and get PR. Under 10% MPs from over 20% of the votes is unjust and you will have huge public support. You talk about breaking the mould of the two old parties PR is the only way to do it and it is being offered. Dont turn the offer down because of a spurious desire to support the largest party. If you and labour get together you will be the largest party by far.
May 7, 2010 at 10:32 pm
I am in full agreement with you. I would not want anything to do with the Tories. Call me small minded, but I will never vote Tory, ever. To get into bed with them when we have little in common would be ridiculous.
Now is the time to be strong. Now is the time to push for electoral reform, when we can see that an increase in popular vote does not play out in regards to seats. The Tories will never vote for reform. Their agenda is not ours.
By the way, I am not a fan of Opik, and felt a rebellious leap of joy to see him ousted (I apologised for it afterwards), although the loss of a seat was painful.
Sarah Teather deserves full credit. My respect for her went up when see decided to take on this challenge, and it paid off!!!!
May 8, 2010 at 12:59 am
I dont exactly think Liberal principles are that opposed to Conservative ones at all. I do however believe that to side with a Labour party that is content on increasing state control and has clearly lost the people’s mandate would throw egg in the face of our principles.
I also fear that if we do side with Labour we will be significantly discredited, and our vote will suffer in the coming election. This is our chance to finally alienate Labour, our chance to be one of the big boys but if we join Labour then its little more than the Lib-Lab pact that wiped us out in the first place.
Nick has done a great job and I would fathom that +1% is down to him alone, before the debates etc. we were facing disaster, I think we need to bite our tongues and see what plan he can come up with.
May 8, 2010 at 6:27 am
[...] propping up an unelected government. But the core are feeling betrayed by what was seen as an an anti Tory vote, and the thought of having to leave behind all their principles, including giving up [...]
May 8, 2010 at 10:11 am
What a relief to find your blog. I felt I was the only one who felt this way and was feeling very despondent. You have put into words everything I kept saying but yours are more coherent. Thankyou
May 8, 2010 at 1:05 pm
If the LDs refuse a real offer & break on anything but PR the voters will, correctly, see them as simply an adjunct to Labour. In the next election, which would follow shortly, they would lose half their supporters. The Conservatives have the same problem in reverse if they break on allowing the voters a referendum on PR.
May 8, 2010 at 5:12 pm
Nicely written piece but i think Clegg has totally hoodwinked Lib Dem rank and file at heart he is a Tory wet in the old tradition . Cameron is not the tree-hugging reborn one nation Tory he was painted, again that was all a smoke screen to make him more palatable to middle England. He is a Thatcherite and moneterism is his coin so really the two are really closer together ideologically than many would think . You only had to see the way he was so unconvincing on Immigration and Trident during the leaders debates, he was utterly unconvincing because he does not believe in those policies wholeheartedly
Either way if Clegg gets this wrong then its the end of the Lib Dem story
May 8, 2010 at 6:26 pm
A deal with the Tories would be beyond demoralising. It would be a catastrophe. All Lib Dem voters would defect in disgust and the party would de facto cease to exist.
Worst: we’d be left with a Tory dominated government and I don’t need to spell out the damage.
An alliance with the Tories seems so against the very core of the Lib Dem ideology that I cannot believe N. Clegg seriously considers it. Maybe he’s just putting pressure on Brown to stand down. Maybe this considering a Tory proposal is only saying to Labour “I could be your ally if you had another leader”.
If Mr Brown has any sense, he will stand down and free his party to make an alliance with the Lib Dems.
May 8, 2010 at 9:10 pm
Thanks for all these comments, going to have a go replying now lol!
Rhys,
Exactly, it is only Labour who would offer us that – Cameron has no chance of getting that past his party!
I totally agree! Cameron and the Tories have as much mandate than any of the other parties do! Clegg really seems to have gone against what he campaigned for, a fairer system.
I totally agree, Clegg really should have thought about this. He has cornered himself. Clegg really is showing his true comments.
Michael,
No, the Tories are fundamentally against nearly everything we stand more. Electoral reform is not all we need in terms of political reform – we need an elected house of lords for example.
Yeah, I saw it on the news today. Very good, but just done a blog about whether Clegg will act on his response.
Jack,
Thanks for the comment. I totally agree, Clegg is not listening to the voters, as he claims to be. He needs to realise that most voters want a progressive alliance, and that they voted LibDem as part of an anti tory movement!
thevaleman,
You really think that we would have any influence on economic policy with the Tories? Cameron very much dislikes Cable, and Vince Cable has also already completely rejected the Tories’ proposals on the economy. There is no way we support an approach to start cutting now! You might just want power, but it has to be with the right intentions and interests – and we simply cannot support the Tories’ economic policies.
Andy Hilton,
No it isn’t. SNP and Plaid Crmyur have come out today saying that they would do so, and the Greens would, and the SDLP would support us – that is enough to form a coalition. It really would be workable, you hear some of the campaign themes that the nationalists were talking about in particular – such as on Trident – and we all have comprehensive economic policies.
Chris,
I totally agree. If the LibDems support the Tories, I think it will be the end of this party as we know it. Cameron will never give us PR, it will never let them into power again.
Daniel,
You’re not small minded, you are just sensible! This is exactly the view that most LibDem voters took, and that is why it is even more demoralising as the LibDems have backstabbed its voters if it joins Tories.
Ha! I am glad to hear from another anti Opik! I was also joyful to see him go, but like you, it was sickening to see such a majority lost. They should have replaced him long ago!
I totally agree about Sarah Teather – if Clegg messes this up, maybe we should push for her to be the leader!
Chinola,
I disagree, we are opposed to them on political reform especially. We would not get our tax policies through as the Tories are too concerned on getting through tax breaks for the rich and their backwards marriage tax. They distrust Europe we are very pro Europe. They are homophobic, we have a comprehensive set of policies to promote homosexual rights. They want to cut the economy right way, we don’t. I could go on forever.
I don’t think so, if we get PR then we wont. If we go to the Tories however, when most of our members really dislike them – we will. I don’t think joining the Tories will alienate Labour at all. Instead, it will squeeze us further. Labour can claim to be the party of reform as we passed it up, and Tories will take over us in the south – we will become a nothing party.
Zoe,
Aww, thanks for that. I am glad to have helped:) Don’t worry, you are definitely not alone on this one!
Neil Craig,
Yeah, the Libdems really have to take up the offer of PR, i agree. If not, we will be as bad as Labour who didn’t do it in 1997 when they could have!
Rod,
Thanks for the comment. I totally agree, I think Clegg has defo got Tory links in him. I agree with the Cameron comments too, again, it is smokescreen. I think Clegg and Cameron have always secretly wanted this, but the thing is, LibDem members and most MPs don’t – so Clegg I really don’t think, if he joins the Tories, will last that long – nor will the party!
I totally agree on immigration and trident comments! He has downgraded our policies, i disagree with the regional work permits – it is illiberal – and trident – what happened to scrapping it and not replacing it at all?
MadameDeMerteuil,
I totally agree, there is a real worry there would be mass defections! We are totally ideologically anti Tory, I am also in total disbelief that it is even a consideration! The thing with Brown standing down now, is that it makes it easier for Cameron. We firstly need to have talks and then there will in time will be leader ship challenges amongst Labour – but it appears the cogs are already turning within Labour for a leadership challenge.
May 8, 2010 at 9:52 pm
The election result is done, nothing can change it, and I don’t think anyone disagrees it would have been much better had Labour and the Liberals had another 20 seats between them and Gordon Brown had been ditched well before the election by those spineless self-serving idiots (anyone who would care to challenge that last comment I would suggest spend 10 minutes with my local Labour MP).
Labour has dragged us into a full blown national emergency that could make 1974 look like a walk in the park – a fact that wasn’t much debated during the illustrious election campaign.
Given all that, and leaving aside what is best for the Liberal party, what do you think is the best outcome for _Britain_ in the wake of this election result?
May 9, 2010 at 11:33 am
Staggering amount of waffle on the news today but here is a thought . Clegg mugs the Lib Dem Parliamentary Party into a coalition with Cameron but talks on electoral reform don’t pan out unemployment rises with Fiscal plan put in place by Tories we go into double dip , and for one reason or another there is a mid term election in a previous safe Lib Dem seat and the rank and file unhappy with Clegg the Tories and dissapointments on electoral reform vote Green or Labour > Thenit really is worse case scenario after that
May 9, 2010 at 12:25 pm
PR, probably following a referendum, is something the party shouldn’t compromise on. However if, with that on offer they walk away on something else who is going to vote for them in the immediately following election. Certainly no voterwho is not completely anti-Tory & while a lot of activists feel that few of your voters do.
A point about a referendum. If one is held & theLDs go into enthusiastically & the Tories overwhelminglt & about half of Labour oppose it & then the public vote overwhelmingly for PR the effect on party credibility will be enorimous. If the Tories were wise they should either give PR without a referendum or campaign for whichever sort they decide they favour, but I doubt if they will.
May 9, 2010 at 8:47 pm
[...] If LibDems support the Tories, it will top of a very demoralising election on Jane Watkinson’s My Liberal Democrat Political Ramblings … “We need to think [...]
May 9, 2010 at 9:07 pm
Michael,
I totally agree, if only things had been different – but we have to deal with the present reality. Whilst I agree there are serious problems, we have to remember some of the comments of the Tories during the economic recession – they would have let Northern Rock and other banks just fail – you think that would have helped the economy? They want to introduce a nice tax break for the richest in society – is that going to help?
Personally, I think the best thing for this country is a progressive alliance of the more centre left parties as I really don’t think this is the time to let a party that is ideologically committed to cuts and helping the rich and punishing the vulnerable to get into power. Nor should the LibDems be a part of that.
Furthermore, I am not talking about what is best for the LibDems in a self interested centred way. What is best for the Libdems – such as electoral reform, is what is best for the country too. It is not fair that their vote is often in many seats wasted (i dislike that word as it puts people off voting for us, but I couldn’t think of another word).
Rod,
I don’t think that is an unrealistic thought at all. If we get dragged into supporting the Tories and we enact their policies, then we have serious problems. We will be seriously squeezed – Labour will gain the more northern areas (which they did in the council elections no one is talking about! – we lost control of councils like Sheffield! Not good). Then why would the South vote for the LibDems when we just prop up a Tory government anyway, we really need to think about this!
Neil,
I agree, PR should not be something we are willing to let go – not after all these years of trying to get it! I agree, the Tories need to think about it more carefully, but the fact is they will find it hard to ever get in power again if they did change the electoral system!
May 9, 2010 at 9:48 pm
Jane: I accept that on pure numbers, we could just about scrape a Lab-Lib coalition together. But the government which would be formed in that way would be incredibly vulnerable to the whims of any of the MPs which supported it. Remember that the magic number of 323 is what you need to have a majority of *one*. A single rebel MP from the government benches might bring down the government over anything they felt strongly about. And as I suggested in my first reply, there would almost certainly be at least enough Labour MPs who opposed PR to defeat it. Add to that the fact that such a coalition would attract a lot of derision as a “coaltion of the losers”, and I have to reach the conclusion that I just don’t think it could end well.
May 10, 2010 at 8:30 am
Is the case for PR weakened if we cannot form an effective Government in this situation? We’ve argued for years and years that a system of effective representation of the countries views is what is required, and this sort of situation will be the norm under PR. If we show that we cannot agree in the national interest in this simple example, are we showing that in fact our politics in this country is so entrenched in dogma, we cannot do a deal under a system that demands it?
May 10, 2010 at 9:45 am
Jane the only way the Tories could expect never to get back in power under PR would be if they knew for a certainty that a large LD party holding the balance votes would, under no circumstances form a coalition with anybody but Labour. Thus keeping Clegg’s promise to deal first woyh the largest party must be kept (I suspect yhat if the voters thought the LDs were simply an adjunct to Labour they would lose votes too).
May 10, 2010 at 10:25 am
I’m amazed that Neil and Andy don’t see that even withthe majority provide by a Lib Con pact that such a marriage of convenience is doomed to failure and the subsequent position of the Lib Dems electoraly is catastrophic.
If Brown steps down for the good of a Lib Lab pact then that has to be the position that everybody hopes for .
Clegg is now a vote loser either way for the Lib Dems he’s now tarnished by his asscociation with a a potential Tory Governmenty which will become the most devicive in modern political history remember 60% of the voting public did not vote Tory .
May 10, 2010 at 10:36 am
Something else which has just occured to me is if we believe in PR then a Lib Lab pact with Greens and others is a perfect expression of that ironically under the present circumstances, it certainly is’nt a LibCon stitch up.
May 10, 2010 at 10:47 am
Your amazement Rod, would be more useful if you had said exactly why a Con/LD pact, based as promised on a deal with the largest party is “doomed to failure” while one based on the losing party, with no hope of a stable majority isn’t.
If the LDs are to maintain support from people who would otherwise vote for both parties they must be seen to be willing to work with either of them. They must also insist on a PR referendum if they want to be seen as worth voting for.
May 10, 2010 at 12:54 pm
Well thats glaringly obvious , firstly the vast majority of the voting public did not vote Tory, secondly any administration that pushes throught the sort of cuts in Public services that the Tories wish to acheive would be unelectable for a generation . Thatcher only managed it with the huge revenues from North sea and totally decimating manufacturing in the process with the double wammy of cuts in funding to nationalised industries and the effects of recessionary factors would anyone in their right mind be associated with a Government in any shape or form who aspired to the destruction of what remains of the manufacturing base of this country and huge rise in unemployment from public service cuts. Who in their right mind !. Now everyone agrees there has to be cuts but the difference is we do not agree fundamentally withthe Tories in the manner and the timing of those cuts we are far closer to labour on that score plus we get fundamnetal changes to the voting system in this country its a no brainer.
May 10, 2010 at 1:04 pm
There are going to be cuts under any government because we are borrowing as much as Greece. I would suspect that a Labour government imposing such cuts would get even more oprobrium than a Tory one since they are the ones who got us here. LDs in coalition with Labour would suffer from the greater fall-out in that situation.
The logic is that the LDs should, under no circumstances support any government. The seats being as they are I don’t think that is an option. Sometimes you get what you wish for.
May 10, 2010 at 1:20 pm
How on earth did Labour single handed create a Global economic meltdown sorry but that is nonsense , If they had’nt refloated the Banks then we would have gone to hell in a handbasket even Vince Cable knows that is true .
Indeed he has gone as far as to say that Brown did actually do the right thing. Where we can lay blame is not seeing it coming 7 / 8 years ago and legislate accordingly to prevent the Halifax RBS and the Like from exposing themselves to the subprime meltdown that George Soros and Vince predicted.
and i’ll repeat what i posted before if we believe in PR then a Lib Lab pact with Greens and others is a perfect expression of that ironically under the present circumstances, it certainly is’nt a LibCon stitch up.
May 10, 2010 at 1:31 pm
If you actually look at it you will find there was not only no “global economic meltdown” but probably no net global recession at all since neither China nor India ceased growing. Britain was one of the first in, deepest & lastest out. To call saying the government were responsible for running Britain “nonsense” would certainly require you to have some compelling evidence that Brown had never been PM or Chancellor.
May 10, 2010 at 1:35 pm
your not a Tory Blogger on the qt are you actually China didsuffer because of a drop in demand for manufactured goods and frankly with a cheap labour market and hage cash surplusses like Idia its not surprising !! so your last statement has got Jeremy Clarkson written all over it mate
May 10, 2010 at 1:50 pm
So many comments, here and elsewhere, from the completely unreal brigade. Here’s the thing:
1/ There’s no realistic Lib/Lab option. I’d love it if there was; but you’d need to corral a whole bunch of nats and regionalists into the pen to scrape a majority, which would then be at the mercy of any MP with a grudge, or indeed a couple of by-elections or a bout of flu. The numbers aren’t just points that Gordo, Camergoon and OurHero get to play, they’re not block votes at the disposal of the leader’s whim; they’re individual MPs, who need to be convinced again and again to turn up and vote the right way. You can get *most* MPs to do that; but never all of them. (If my experience of Lib Dem councillors is anything to go by, especially not if they’re Lib Dems!) That’s okay if you’ve got a decent majority, like Labour had in the last parliament or a Tory/LD coalition would have in this one; but when your maximum theoretical majority in the House is about two, it’s just not going to work.
2/ The vast majority of the voting public do not think (1) “Am I going to vote Tory or Someone Else”, and if Someone Else (2) “Which variety of Someone Else am I going to vote for?”. There are many people who voted Lib Dem because it was the best alternative to _Labour_, just as there are many who voted for us as the best alternative to the Tories. (I don’t say “there are just as many”, because I don’t know just how many there are of each: neither do you!) There are also many (like me) who voted and campaigned for Lib Dems because we believe in Lib Dem policies, principles and people, not just because they’re not Tories.
3/ What you, your mum, and your best mates think does not equate to what every Lib Dem member/helper/voter thinks.
Whatever the party chooses to do, we will lose some people’s support. That’s what happens when the sleep of opposition ends, the dream is over, and it’s time to wake up; it’s what happens when you get into a position of actual power and influence. We’re not a philosophical debating society, and we’re not the party-for-Labour-voters-who-didn’t-like-nasty-Tony-Blair. It’s time to accept that there are difficult choices to make. It’s time to get real.
May 10, 2010 at 1:56 pm
China did “suffer” from their growth rate dropping from 10% to 8% (it is now 12%). Would that we were all suffering so.
If you followed LD blogs with any diligence you would know who I am – that I am a traditional liberal with particular emphasis on opposing illegal wars & have the documentation from the party to prove it.
May 10, 2010 at 2:16 pm
i don’t see your point are you saying we should have a totalitarian state run economy with people being forcibly removed from their homes massive pollution state birth control, vast underclass poorly paid creating fripperies for the western midle classes to consume does’nt sound very Liberal to me, Libertine maybe
May 10, 2010 at 2:36 pm
If you can point to anywhere where i have said anything that any remotely honest person could have read as saying that then I will answer.
If not you are simply being personally abusive because you know that the argument you have been putting is intellectually & morally indefencible. In which case you are intellectually & morally bankrupt & owe a public apology.
I await your production of a link quoting me saying those words or not as the case may be.
May 10, 2010 at 4:41 pm
Oh grow up ! you have’nt made the case for a Lib Con Pact and then you hide behind an attempt to say i am putting forward a morally and intellectually bankrupt case for Lib Lab pact then good luck to you mate if thats your idea of being morally and intellectually bankrupt then thats fine by my because this is the first and last time i vote LibDem when individuals like you climb into bed with right wing protofascists like Cameron and his ilk you can kiss my vote and interest in the LibDems goodbye and history will make a mockery of your pretentions of being of,being LIBERAL !!
so really i should thank you .
May 10, 2010 at 4:54 pm
Mmmm had a look at your blog Neil and i noticed you’ve actually been expelled from the LibDems is that right ?
May 10, 2010 at 4:55 pm
I take that as an admission you know I never said any such thing & your claim that I did merely represents the highest standard of honesty to which you aspire.
Whatever Cameron’s faults he is not any sort of fascist & I strongly doubt your claim to have ever voted liberal (such phraseology certainly proves you are not a liberal). You are merely trying to make waves in the Labour cause.
May 10, 2010 at 4:56 pm
Yup Rod as you would already have known if you had been a regular reader of LD blogs.
May 10, 2010 at 4:57 pm
now your talking drivel Neil … boring drivel and your definition of Liberal is becoming more bizarre by the minute
May 10, 2010 at 5:05 pm
You know looking back over your posts Neil you have’nt made a single reasonable point why the Lib Dems should go in with the Tories not One !!! and having looked at your Blog your not actually worth arguing with because your not actually a Liberal are you , your actually a good old fashioned Tory Wet mate
May 10, 2010 at 5:18 pm
well Neil one minute your making some pretty scurrilous accusations about Paddy Ashdown and the next minute Cameron is not a proto fascist aligned with other suspect groups as part of the European Alliance group which has some neo nazi and protofascist groups aligned to it. You really are not a liberl are you mate your a Tory go and blog on Tory blogs where you belong .
May 10, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Such insults Rod are simply further examples of your lack of any honest points you can make.
You are, of course, lying in your claim I have not given any reason for coalition with the Tories – I said PR which is a matter of some importance to party members.
Since you are being personal may I ask if you are the Rod Brownlie described on google as “Independent Think Tanks Professional” which basically means you make your living by lying (aka spinning) for whichever political party hires the “independent” think tank – ie you are currently a paid Labour aparatchik.
They ain’t getting their money’s worth.
May 10, 2010 at 5:46 pm
Paranoid as well as delusional always a good combination in a Tory
May 10, 2010 at 8:44 pm
It appears as though Rod and Neil are having a rather extensive discussion, so I will leave you to that.
Andy,
Well there are talks of forming fixed parliaments, so that make it harder for the government to fall to pieces. Tbf, how do you think that a tory libdem coalition, when we are ideologically opposed on so many areas, is going to be any better? It just isn’t. We have to go with our values, and the Tories are no where near!
May 10, 2010 at 9:01 pm
Malcolm,
In reply to your points:
I disagree, I think it is possible to form a Labour LibDem pact – you have more chance of remaining stable when you have closer ideological values instead of just pure numerical significance. Furthermore, they are talking about having fixed parliaments, which would make sure that the hung parliament was in for four years – so there would be chance for comprehensive reform.
2/ Yes, that is true. But we are closer to Labour than Tories, and therefore, there are many who voted LibDem who were fed up of Labour but do not want the Tories in. I cannot claim to have any numbers, yes, I agree with you there. But, I think it is pretty clear that the policies and principles we stand for have a much better chance of gaining implementation within a Labour/LibDem coalition.
3/ Don’t be obnoxious – every voter/member etc matters. Yes, we are in a lose lose situation, but if we really pass up the chance for real electoral reform, then there will be a much bigger lose of members/supporters. Most responses have been against the Tories’ ideologically, there are little within the party who would deny that we are closer to Labour.
Jonathan,
I totally agree, it is a worrying thing to think about.
May 10, 2010 at 9:11 pm
Jane, it isn’t just about “stability” though is it.
What the voters think is key too, and a LibLab alliance scraping through with the nationalists and another unelected PM is a very very tough sell.
I have a real concern a deal with Labour may be a Pyrrhic Victory.
May 10, 2010 at 9:19 pm
I might add I’m a Scot and I’ve been very worried by the anti-Scottish sentiment I’ve been hearing over the last 3 years.
I attribute this to Gordon Brown’s awful premiership, Labour’s disproportionate reliance on a strong Scottish voter base, and Scottish MP’s voting on English only laws which any sane person can see is fundamentally unfair.
Imagine how this plays out if you have to rely on the SNP and other nationalists to get laws through and see or perceive preferential treatment when it comes to cuts.
With Mr Clegg campaigning on a ticket of fairness, electoral fairness, he will probably be ripped to shreds by the media!
May 10, 2010 at 9:28 pm
The discussion with Neil was going nowhere so now Brown has stood down i’ll go back to a point iwas trying to make earlier. A PR system would deliver exactly the same make up of government as a Lib Lab Green Nationalist Coalition so why are we suddenly afraid of it , we keep arguing that it will deliver more balanced Government and yet some seem determined to lock us into a downward spiral with the Tories .I for one am nonplussed this is not what the majority of the nation voted for 60% of the country did not vote Tory so what is proportionate about a Lib Con Pact.
May 10, 2010 at 9:36 pm
Jane — sorry, I didn’t mean to be obnoxious! But there is a tendency here, and everywhere else I look for that matter, for people to say things like “well, I’d never support X or Y and neither would anybody else I know, so if you did that you’d never get another vote”. There’s at least an example or two of just that higher up in this thread. I get a bit fed up with the narrowness of understanding that this shows.
Obviously, if the people I know well were typical of the whole country, the Tories would never have won an election in my lifetime. I have absolutely no difficulty understanding why it doesn’t work out that way; and I’m infuriated that some Lib Dems don’t get this.
There are arguments, both practical and ideological, to be had about allying ourselves to whatever degree with one party or another. However, there can be no sensible discussion based on the idea that most of the party, or (even more so) most of our voters have assumed all along that we were part of some Lib-Lab anti-Tory progressive coalition, and that tactical voting only ever meant “vote for the party that can beat the Tories in your area”. That’s not how we won (and nearly won) seats off Labour, for a start: “Only the Liberal Democrats can beat Labour here.” Sound familiar?
May 10, 2010 at 9:37 pm
What is different about a Lib Con Pact is people voted for the Liberal and Conservative leaders. Don’t underestimate how much trouble an unelected Labour leader can cause, it hung over Brown’s premiership like a bad smell.
May 10, 2010 at 9:46 pm
Well they certainly did’nt vote Clegg /lib Dem and many Tories certainly did’nt vote for a LibCon Alliance . The only other option is to leave the Tories to try a minority Government either if the cuts come with or without a Lib/Con alliance in the manner prescribed by Cameron Osbourne and the City , i’ll put umemployment at 4.5 million in 8nths to a year and over 5million by the end of next summer after that were in terminal spiral deflationary pressures kick in we’ll default on some of the short term bonds Uk credit worthiness goes down it will be catastrophic, cuts are not the answer we need growth.
May 10, 2010 at 9:54 pm
Rod. 71% of the country did not vote Labour, so what’s proportionate about a LibLab pact. 77% of the country did not vote Liberal Democrat so…
I have no objection to a deal with Labour and Greens (I have slightly more problem with Nats). In fact, if I had my druthers we’d have a LibDem-led coalition with Labour, to keep our leaders honest. But away from that dream, the problems in our real situation are:
(1) The Tories got more votes and seats than anybody else: it’s a reasonable principle (and was clearly and explicitly set out by Nick Clegg during the campaign and before) that they should have first shot at forming a government, so to refuse even to speak to them about whether a deal can be reached would have been arrogant and dishonest;
(2) The parliamentary arithmetic is such that any coalition excluding the Tories will be very unstable. That’s risky for the country in the current circumstances, and *very* risky for our party. Brown’s resignation improves the chances, but it doesn’t change the numbers.
May 10, 2010 at 10:00 pm
It truly is the perfect snooker isn’t it.
The only positive thoughts I can muster about a Lib/Lib/Nat deal is at least everyone perhaps has something to gain from electoral reform.
Though the only gain for Labour really is avoiding the Tories redrawing the boundary lines and wiping out their FPTP advantage. So it’s a reluctant concession surely, can they even deliver on voting it through on such a slim number of votes.
May 10, 2010 at 10:07 pm
I cannot believe that anybody in the centre left of politics whether they be Blogger Politician or Voter would wish to see a Conservative Government in this country ther are obvious pitfallto either arrangement Lib/Con Lib/lab but he LibDems will lose a huge amount of goodwill if not votes as well when the Tories swing the Axe , The argument is not that cuts aren’t necessary its the manner and timing that are fundamentally at stake this is the poisoned chalice ‘ i can’t go with that 71% did’nt vote Labour the Labour party are centre left like the rest of the country , the Rump is the Tory misanthropes , again PR is not defined by a LibCon Pact its the antithesis of it when there is a better alternative
May 11, 2010 at 9:41 am
Clegg did the right thing in making the first negotiations with the biggest party (not the winning party or we wouldn’t be here). After 4 days the Tories had barely shifted on AV & not on PR at all. He is therefore right to look at a deal with Labour (even if Labour are employing wholly dishonest parasitic toerags like Rod to go online & simulate dissent). If the Tories match Labour’s offer on PR the LDs sgould still go with the Tories who have the better mandate. If they don’t & Labour can deliver (not an obvious certainty) they should go with Labour.
May 11, 2010 at 10:54 am
LOL !! i’ve read your blog Neil and you have simulated more dissent than any paranoid android could ever hope to !!!
May 11, 2010 at 11:24 am
It isn’t simulated if its real. I realise why you Westminster Labour Think-Tankists may not be able to tell the difference.
May 11, 2010 at 9:11 pm
Michael,
well you have your way – just remember that a lot of us did warn you. This will end in disaster. No PR either.
Rod,
I never thought of it like that. Why are we so scared of something we want to have all the time? That is such a good point.
Malcolm,
Well I don’t know, I think that every voter should count – and even if we shouldn’t take one person’s vote as gospel – this is not a unique viewpoint. Have you heard that Labour’s membership service has gone down because of so many people joining it with news of Tory/LibDem deal? Not good for the LibDems is it?
May 11, 2010 at 9:20 pm
Jane:
“Malcolm,
Well I don’t know, I think that every voter should count”
Could you point me to what you think I said that that’s a response to? I’m confused.
As to Labour’s membership: well, that was pretty inevitable. Same would have happened with the Tories if we’d done a deal with Labour. How would that have been better?
May 11, 2010 at 9:27 pm
Its just the comments around representation of people’s own viewpoint on who they would vote. But I may be reading things wrongly, I am tired lol.
I doubt it would have! This will be the LibDems leaving us, we wouldn’t have had that massive membership change if we had joined Labour.
May 11, 2010 at 10:02 pm
Jane, if we’d had my way there would have been an landslide for the LibDems, Nick would be moving into No. 10 and Vince would be Chancellor!
I guess we just have to hope the debate around AV might stimulate wider reform.
I suspect a bit of a drubbing is on the way for us in the Scottish parliament elections next year. Alec Salmond must be rubbing his hands in delight.
May 12, 2010 at 9:39 am
The leadership have folded on PR to get ministerial seats. We have a right to a referendum on whether we want a democratic system or a party managerial one.
May 12, 2010 at 9:57 am
Neil how would shirking the opportunity to get some of the Liberal Democrat policies actually implemented have improved the situation?
It wouldn’t have brought PR any closer.
However PR in the House of Lords and a referendum on AV would at least get the nation talking about the electoral system and is a perfect opportunity to campaign for proper PR.
You can’t moan on about needing PR but turn down the first opportunity for a meaningful coalition government that comes along, that’s the whole blinking point of it!!!
May 12, 2010 at 10:11 am
Got to agree with Michael, the ‘rainbow’ coalition was implausible – a tiny majority with no wriggle room for internal dissent. You can only work with the materials you are given, and this option is certainly more palatable than an outright Tory win (which they weren’t too far away from).
May 12, 2010 at 10:16 am
I am think that if the LDs had demanded PR but been willing to pay for it with less seats in Cabinet the Tories would have gone for it. If I am wrong we will soon hear that that offer was made & the Tories said they refused more seats.
May 12, 2010 at 10:31 am
I would be very surprised if every possible angle on getting a vote on proper PR hadn’t been explored.
I really don’t think these guys were blinded by the opportunity for power… let’s face it being a Liberal MP isn’t exactly the type of job to attract the power hungry personality is it, more likely to attract people of principle and conviction.
May 12, 2010 at 9:11 pm
Michael,
Well yes, of course that would be desirable – but we are not really going to get any other than AV now tbh – our commitment to STV seems to be a bit dead now.
Scotland is going to be a problem – Labour and the SNP will benefit from that.
Neil,
I totally agree with you, it seemed the lure of power was too great for good old mister Clegg and his pals. I don’t think that the options for PR were really that explored tbh – it was obvious that we wanted a deal with the Tories – well the leadership did anyway.
May 12, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Jane, what’s your evidence for saying the options for PR weren’t really explored? Were you in the room?
AV isn’t great, but on balance I think it’s a small advance on what we have now – and it’s a break in the dam, the biggest change in the way we vote (assuming we get it through) since about 1867. It had to be dragged out of the Tories. The idea that they’d have cheerfully coughed up full PR in return for Cabinet seats is sheer hogwash. The Tories know full well what PR for the House of Commons would mean. That they’ve agreed to a referendum on AV, and unconditionally PR for the House of Lords, is a huge movement for them.
(I’m disappointed to see there’s no mention of PR for local government in the agreement, though. I hope we can smuggle that in later…)