What will the day bring?

Posted on by

I watched the comings and goings of the negotiating teams yesterday – like everyone else. Not much given away in terms of what the real substance and/or sticking points of any arrangement with the Conservatives might be.

Outside of the evident desire on all sides to make sure the markets don’t take fright I spent the day wondering how we, Liberal Democrats, would resolve a dilemma which sees us pretty much between the devil and the deep blue sea.

There is no question in my mind that Nick Clegg was right during the election to say that the party with the greatest number of votes and seats would have the right to try and form a government first. Respect for democracy must come first otherwise it would make a mockery of the election. But how to square a circle on which so much depends will not be easy.

Whilst narrow party interest cannot hold sway over national interest – it is clear to me that changing the electoral system is in the national interest too. When a country manages to deliver a hung parliament under a first past the post system – that is a cry from the heart for a democracy where votes count.

Labour offer this carrot from their deathbed from a position of such weakness that the offer is virtually untenable. If they had not been so blown away with their success in ’97 – that would have been the right moment in history to change politics for good. But with a huge majority – their heads grew so big they forgot about progressive politics – and now we are where we are.

Labour lost the election. The Conservatives didn’t win it outright. And Liberal Democrats’ burgeoning hopes of demonstrating that the brief upwelling of those who would vote Liberal Democrat under a different system were dashed as the establishment waters closed over our heads.

The only thing that is certain as I write – is that none of these decisions will be easy and there will be no perfect answer.

0 thoughts on “What will the day bring?”

  1. Well anything anything is better than the last lot. As well you know Gordy and Gang really need some rest. LD may gain credibility in Government should they activily join. But God help us the last lot! Redefine the National Interest.

  2. Well from my experience of working with some of the best negotiators in the UK, I’m surprised that talks weren’t held in parallel. One should be playing each side against the other to gain concessions even if one believes one side is stronger. The way they are playing it is giving them less leverage in the first party talks and, if the first talks fail then the second party will have a stronger position. This is really exasperating me as a Liberal born and bred … to the point of disgust.

  4. The problem is that the electorate have given you the opportunity to show them how PR would work in practice and this insistance on electoral refrom, not to mention the guff about Labour being a progressive party, is in danger of proving that PR doesn’t work

  5. I’m with Hilary F. I do not think we are playing this as best we can. We should be actively playing both sides at the same time even if we think the majority that a Lib Dem Conservative pact will create a stronger and longer lasting parliament. The leadership should be aware they may find a lot of the traditoinal 20+% who vote for the Lib Dems cannot stomach the compromises required. I will certainly not be able to remain a Lib Dem if a referendum on proportional representation is not part of the deal. The idea that this is less part of the national interest than the economy is for me a joke. All 3 parties will probably be able to manage to aviod a Greece like crash – I may find some ways of doing this more palitable than others BUT I would totally compromise in all areas EXCEPT changing the voting system. I would prefer simply to fail to form another government than compromise on this! However I do not beleive this would be necessary. I believe the left leaning coalition, even with only a few seats majority, worth the risk if they will guarantee a referendum (preferably before the end of the year). I know the rightwing press tells us labour will not be able to guarantee it but I would have more faith that they will not be able to ride rough shod over us once they are in power than the conservatives.

  6. Lynne, remember that over 83% of you electorate voted against a Cameron Government!

  7. Electoral reform has to be top priority and the Lib Dems have every right to demand it in return for propping up a minority government given how badly their share of the national vote translated into seats in this election.
    Also, to say that electoral reform is ‘in the national interest’ is a massive understatement. Our country is trying to face down 21st century problems with a 19th century democracy – we’ve been lagging behind the rest of Europe for far too long on this. The complexities of the current global recession and necessity for large, unmandated cuts to public services require the nuanced, well thought out actions that result from consensus government, not one-party ideological sledgehammers.

  8. BBC
    1026: Nick Clegg, speaking a short while ago, talked about his commitment to “political reform” not “electoral reform”, says the BBC’s chief political correspondent Laura Kuenssberg. We may be reading too much into this, but he did talk throughout the election campaign about the latter – fundamental change to the voting system. It does appear he’s softened his language somewhat now.

  9. A death-bed offer of PR from Labour is an offer of PR. Take it and change this country.
    It may be a hard truth for MPs to accept but the electorate has chosen the situation we now have, WE have decided that no one party should have control. WE are asking our elected representatives to work together in the best interests of our country and we do not have sufficient faith, trust or belief in a single party to do this. Far from being marginalised by the outcome, LD’s have an opportunity that will not come this way again soon. PR does work – monolithic First Past The Post is not subtle enough for a sophisticated electorate who deserve a little more effort from all the parties. Negotiating, the art of the possible, reasonable compromise – this is politics. If many policy decisions will require consensus and compromise then so be it. We do expect consideration, deliberation, not steamroller politics. The rooms are no longer smoke-filled, albeit still too testosterone-filled.
    I am quite sure Lynne that your electorate do not want a Conservative government – they used to vote Labour, nationally and locally, for Pete’s sake – and it would surely damage the political structure of the Borough if one half supported a Tory regime. And this. They will chew you up and spit you out. Dave will engineer an election in 18 months time and you will be history. You need not fear the media and their entrenched, frightened anti-progress agenda. To go back to my starting point, the electorate has asked for change, has created the opportunity for change. Tell Nick; don’t blow it.

  10. “Whilst narrow party interest cannot hold sway over national interest…”

    What is all this talk of “the national interest”? If Nick Clegg is not acting in his own “narrow party interest”, he’s failing to do his job!

  11. I feel Nick Clegg needs to be very careful what he agrees to and who he aligns the LibDems with. He could lose all credibility and alienate core voters if he gets it wrong. Better to let Tories try to govern and support/not support individual issues as they arise. We will probably end up with a quick election anyway.

  13. You say that “nothing is certain” in the present circumstances. But I would suggest that one very good bet is that a Lib Dem majority of 6,875 in a seat with Labour in second place would be very vulnerable indeed at the next Election (which could be fairly soon) if the Lib Dems now prop up a Tory Government engaged in heavy spending cuts. I think you should be very worried.

  14. As a Lib Dem in a true blue area – thus with no political representation I am writing on this website because I can find no other place to express my position. Lynne I am asking you to represent me on this. Please please do not support Nick to soften the PR position. I am begging you. My level of disgust with politicians is extremely high – I have been a lobbyist in Canberra Australia but I imagine it is no different from here. I know that important decisions are made based on friendships and chance meetings as much as rational discussion. If he compromises on this I will be impossibly angry – nothing new there – but also very very sad at the lost opportunity. Why are we being so negative about the possible coalition of the left? So Clegg does not like Brown – get over it. It is a far more rational place for us to be and one that I believe the core membership of the party will be much more comfortable with. To be honest if you do not get agreement to a referendum then proving you can roll over and let the conservatives rule does not prove coalitions are a good idea/work and therfore everyone should want PR. They just show that power (or the posibility of a little bit of power) is very corrupting.

  15. Lynne, your latest blog sounds a lot like you are softening everyone up for a deal with the Tories. So what that Labour are having a death bed conversion to PR – do you really think the Tories would be negotiating with you if the electorate had not delivered a hung parliament?

    A very large number of your constituents would never had voted for you if it had been clear how easily you would abandon a progressive manifesto for a small slice of power.

    As your constituent I would like you to use the libdem weight in the balance of power to force Brown from office, secure a committment to PR, remain true to the spirit of your manifesto in a liblab alliance and plan for a second general election within 2 years.

  16. Labour cannot guarantee any form of PR, a Lib-Lab coalition, with no other parties, would not deliver a majoriy – that’s why one front bench Lib Dem has said that the biggest problems with the negotiations is the arithmetic.

    Let’s also remember that Labour have supported some form of AV, whereas we have – like the Electoral Reform Society – always favoured STV. Not only this, but our Manifesto commitment was to a referendum on PR, during which we would campaign for STV. This is a weaker commitment than saying we will introduce PR.

    Turning to the topic of national interest, probably the biggest topic during the respective campaigns was that of the economy. What is being argued is that decisions need to be taken during the next 12-18 months that will stop a “double-dip”. Because of the election result, there needs to be some kind of co-operation – be it through a proper coalition or a softer agreement – to ensure that legislation can be passed to stabilise the economy without becoming bogged down in the usual one-up-manship that is sadly characterised by so many of our representatives in the House.

  17. It is important to remember that Lib Dem MP’s like you have a say on if the party sells out to the Tories. I voted for you, not the Conservatives and it annoys me terribly to think that you will basically give my vote to another party.

    Support the Tories and a lot of people who voted for you will be disappointed, and next time they will take their votes elsewhere. I know I would.

  18. 1219
    BBC
    The Lib Dems face a stark choice, says the BBC’s Nick Robinson. An arrangement with the Tories which does not deliver electoral reform, but does produce a stable government committed to introducing some Lib Dem priorities. The fear many Lib Dems have is that they’d be tainted by association with the Tories, who could call a snap election at a moment’s notice.

    The other option is a coalition with Labour with seats in cabinet, a pledge to change the voting system and a promise that Gordon Brown will not be around for ever. The fear here is that they will be harmed by the allegation that they have created a “coalition of the losers” which could collapse long before it could deliver electoral reform.

    HC
    In addition, the state of Public Finances and who takes the blame for the pain that the expenditure cuts will entail.
    It was the Labour Party that recklessly failed to control spending and Gorden Brown as Chancellor who oversaw the 50% increase in spending. Labour are quite happy to sit back for a year or two whilst the Cons+-LDems deal with the mess they created. Then in an later election blame Cons+-LDems for the pain then play all sweet and innocent about “Progressive” and “Caring” they are. They are that cynical. And worse.

    Should LDems join Labour then LDems become further embroiled in the Public Finances mess and electoral reform disappears along the way.

    Margaret C says:
    Why are we being so negative about the possible coalition of the left? So Clegg does not like Brown – get over it.
    Answer –
    “It was claimed Mr Brown’s approach was to begin “a diatribe” and “a rant” and the source said the Labour leader was “threatening in his approach to Nick Clegg”. Mr Clegg was said to have came off the phone assured that it would be impossible to work with Brown because of his attitude towards working with other people.”
    And worse.

     

  19. Jon, are you saying that SNP, PC, Greens etc would not support PR? Getting the labour party whip on PR is a unique opportunity. Libdems supporting the Tories ensures that the vote would collapse next time around.

    What a shame to see that you are down to semantic wriggling on the wording of your manifesto. How much of a weaker commitment would you say it is, 90%, 80%? Does it decrease inversely to the cabinet seats being offered by the Bullingdon boys?

    Moving the focus onto the economy is all well and good, but how are the proposed immediate Tory cuts in line with LD economic policy?

  20. Lynne,
    I hope that once a deal between Lib Dems and Cons is finalised, with the inclusion of PR, that Nick opens an invitation to like minded Labour MPs to switch to the only real progressive party in British politics. Once we have PR many good Labour MPs will lose their seats and the Lib Dems will need an increased number of political heavyweights (no slur intended on the abilities of you and your 50 colleagues) In the next government you should expect at least a third of government jobs and select committees, you need to make sure you have the best people in the party who share Liberal Democratic principles.

    You aim to start with should be to at least have more MPs than in the last parliament!

    Bringing in the best of the Labour Party will improve the Liberal Democrats and give you a bigger vote in the hung parliament. Labour MPs will have the option of keeping Brown as leader, choosing for another second rate leader from a bunch of discredited senior cabinet ministers, or finally breaking with the old politics, and supporting the voice of change in a party that is finally able to make a real difference.

    Good luck in government!

  22. Bank Governor In Stark Election Warning

    “Whoever wins the election will be out of power for a generation because of the depth of funding cuts needed, the governor of the Bank of England has been quoted as saying.”

    And …

    He said: “I saw the governor of the Bank of England (Mervyn King) last week when I was in London and he told me whoever wins this election will be out of power for a whole generation because of how tough the fiscal austerity will have to be.”

    And …

    Talking about the election in the interview Mr Hale said: “Right now the polls suggest it could be a hung parliament, and if a hung parliament… could not produce in June a meaningful budget to reduce their fiscal deficit, I think the risk is very, very high that you will see Britain’s credit rating cut from triple A to double A.
    And …

    “A hung parliament [would] make it very hard to impose the tough fiscal policies Britain will need.

    http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/Bank-Of-England-Governor-Mervyn-King-Quoted-As-Saying-Election-Winner-Will-Loose-Power-For-Years/Article/201004415622410?f=rss

  23. Don’t do a deal with the tories
    I voted labour last three times,this time I voted lib dem on the basis of PR and a progressive agenda.
    Don’t do a deal with the Tories!
    The Tories will eat you up and you won’t get PR instead you will seen as the great betrayers of the progressive agenda,and the lib dems will be wiped out at the next election probably in a few months?
    The arithmetic may not be great with a lib lab pact but you will get a referendum and the country will get PR.From a party point of view you get to keep your honour
    I didn’t vote Lib dem only to have my vote handed to the Tories
    if the deal with the Tories is done I shall never risk a lib dem vote again and will stick to labour
    Jonathan

  24. HC, mate, are you seriously quoting the WSJ and Sky News on the prospects of a progressive alliance? The WSJ is owned by whom? And Sky News? Does this gentleman have perhaps a personal interest in the outcome of these negotiations? Perhaps due to putting the full weight of his publications behind a party that failed to secure a working majority?
    Wise up lad.

  25. HC, mate, are you seriously quoting the WSJ and Sky News on the prospects of a progressive alliance?

    (1) WSJ
    He simply argued a case coherently. It’s a question of context and full (wider ) information that I don’t / can’t put up. Mostly I just thought this chap sum’s the situation up precisely.
    (2) Sky News
    The only reason for Sky News quote is that I remembered that “Melvin King Governor of the Bank of England ” had said that “Blurb”
    did quick search on Google. A bit Shock Horror I admit but I could quote the IFS or more indirectly. That’s “Melvin King Governor of the Bank of England” by the way
    More formally
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8667929.stm
    It’s a mess.
    (3) “progressive alliance” What? Labour are progressive? Do you have a clue?

    From a LibDem Perspective both parties are “Dangerous liaisons “.

    Deepest Creeeeeepy Voice. Heavy Breathing.
    Be careful who your friends are!
    Heavy Breathing.
    Be careful who your friends are!
    Heavy Breathing.

  26. So, Lynn, I thought you agreed with Clegg in agreeing to give the party with the greatest votes and seats first go at forming a government? Will you agree he’s two-faced and dump him now??? I’m just absolutely disgusted by this possible latest double crossing of the Conservatives by Nick Clegg on the heels of Gordon’s self-sacrifice as PM. If Clegg and the LibDems join with Labour, it will not only prove beyond doubt that Clegg is a man who can never be trusted, but it will be a huge betrayal of the larger numbers of voters like myself who voted CONSERVATIVE because they are tired of big government, ever rising taxes, wasteful public spending, overregulation by the nanny state, excessive immigration, and anti-business/anti-wealth creation policies. Such a marriage between Labour and LibDems will show that Britain is not a Democracy, but a Banana Republic. Watch the Pound drop off a cliff, and the British economy with it.

  27. HC, talking to yourself is the first sign of madness… hang on a minute, if Nick Briggs ever needs a holiday, you’d be a great presenter for the 7th dimension.

    Seriously, though, I’m relieved that the negotiations have opened up with labour for leverage, if nothing else. I agree that either party will be a risky proposition. The only reason for a deal in either direction is if it delivers more of what we want/need than no deal, taking into account the downsides and risks of any of the three options and it may be that no deal is the best option after all, who knows.

    Maybe people wanted a hung parliament because they didn’t really fancy any one party having all the power… in which case proving that this can work might be a good thing.

    As to “progressive”, folk use words loosely nowadays. In my book (the OED) all it means is “favouring progress or reform”. 100 years ago it might have differentiated political parties. Nowadays, I”m not sure it does so much. Far better to describe things more exactly so we all have the same understanding.

  28. GChen

    A coalition of libdem and labour will represent 51% of those who voted. Much better than any previous government (maybe there was one a very long time ago but at least let us say since world war 1). SO get off your high horse and understand that the present voting system has been biased in your favour (and labour’s) for a very long time and an alliance with the conservatives is fairly unlikely to change this reality. So despite the difficulties that a lib lab coalition will have I voted for that. I want electoral change more than anything else. As I said on a previous comment I think all 3 will manage to weather the financial situation – tough which ever way we go – so unless the conservatives will seriously offer a referendum on PR (not just AV which by the way is much less proprotional than STV and there are a number of other options) I will be leaving the Liberal Democrats and many others like me will have been badly let down by Clegg.

    All this **** **** about Clegg letting YOU down. His responsibility is to the whole population and more of it voted against YOU than for you so sorry if he jumps the otehr way he will have let less of us down. You will have the opporunity to cast a vote on PR and will then have to decide, with everyone else, how you want our democracy to function in the future.

  29. GChen,

    Relax, its not a douible-cross, its a sensible strategy. Nick Clegg is only doing what any sensible business man would do. Or would you rather he be thought of as a fool for not doing it?

  30. How disappointing to have the prospect of a return to a labour government and one allowed by the lib dems – it would be far more daring to go with the conservatives and encourage change from within a government with a true majority and thereby demonstrate to the conservatives the benefit and fairness of cross-party government.

  31. Hilary, I hope you’re right. The thought of my vote helping to prop up this appalling government fills me with despair. Lynne, I didn’t vote for you (for the third time) to end up with Ed Balls as prime minister. The horror, the horror.

  32. I am sure that I as one who voted for Lynne as a natural Tory (amongst many others in Hornsey) as she is an extra-ordinary good local MP and the Tories have given up on this seat long ago – and it was very clear from her campaign literature she wanted the Tory vote!

    It would be utterly staggering if the Liberals went with a party who lost 90 some seats in a minority coalition where no matter how good a deal can be got as it won’t last more than a few months, as opposed to a deal with the Conservatives (understanding many Liberal supporters wont like it) where there will be stable government and is exactly what Nick Clegg promised ie negotiating in good faith with the largest party and their will be a honest referendum on vote reform and a majority to deal with the terrible economic mess Brown has got us into.

    If Lib and Lab join up there will in the forthcoming election, that will then be months away, I would suspect the electorate will punish this alliance sternly, especially as it delays the harsh budgetary issues that must immediately be confronted.

  33. HC

    1. He argues ONE SIDE coherently, neglecting to mention the intrinsic problems with a Tory-Lib Dem coalition – specifically the differences on spending cuts (timing and focus) and tax threshold raising/closing non-dom loopholes. Would a Tory-Lib Dem alliance be any less stable with the number of Lib Dem abstentions you’d see when the Tory policies were put to a vote?

    2. Fairplay – but the article you’ve linked to now just indicates how clearly demarcated tax and spending goals are and how much the differences in opinion on how to achieve these goals will be exaggerated in ANY coalition.

    The Lib Dems can’t avoid getting involved in government (the Tories can’t govern as a minority). A confidence-supply arrangement will only work if the Tories defang their spending cut plans which won’t play with the 1922ers. The Lib Dems have more in common with Labour on the major issues of tax and spend so is a progressive* alliance that much more unlikely in reality?

    *3. Labour are more ‘progressive’ than the Conservatives (in almost every sense of the word) therefore, out of the two options, Lab-Lib is the progressive alliance.

  34. It certainly is a double cross. If Clegg was also in formal talks with Labour, he should have said so from the start rather than leading the Conservatives on. Now he’s lost huge trust with the Conservatives and many other voters who might have been impressed with him at first for coming across as an honest broker. Trust is everything in business and politics, and Clegg seems to be showing that he’s not someone in whom a person should place too much faith. This so called rainbow coalition that some dreamers claim will have 51% of the vote is unlikely to last more than a few months before breaking down as each group goes its own way under stress. If Clegg has any sense, he will go with the Conservatives since they won the most seats and votes…however, the damage he’s done to his credibility and that of the LibDems with his cloak-and-dagger skulduggery, as Boris Johnson so colourfully described it, has been huge, and it’s difficult to see how Clegg is ever going to fully regain trust with any party he decides to marry- particularly the Conservatives. It is the Conservatives who won the most votes and Labour and LibDems who lost them or had disappointing results. If democracy is to work and be seen to be representative of the people’s choice, then the Government should be turned rightfully over to the Conservatives.

  35. Paul I/GChen
    I guess the fact that for 23% of the votes we only got 57 seats is not so obscene to you that your arguements around the Lib Dems “not doing so well” at this election seems reasonable. We have a system where the Lib Dems need Tories and Labour supporters to vote for us to get a seat. In a system of Promortional Representation we would all be able to vote for whom ever we believe in. You cannot expect to change the Liberal Democrat beliefs because you voted for them. The core 20+% who have voted and believe in the ideals of the party are those that Clegg must focus on. If you feel angered and let down once this process is over then go vote else where. I may also go vote else where – Clegg has to make a very hard choice and, unless he can get electoral change, will probably be damaged at the next election whatever he does.

  36. Lynne, simply put: what the hell are you and your party doing supporting a Conservative government? This is not what we voted for.

  37. I really have no idea what MargaretC is going on about- her comments make no sense to me. I just thank the heavens that the Coalition of Losers didn’t win, that Brown is gone, Clegg has finally seen the light, and Cameron and the Conservatives are back in power as they should be according to the vote! Hallelujah!!!

  38. Margaret C you are so right – you certainly will be “probably be damaged at the next election”.
    As Paul says, people in this constituency didn’t vote for Lynne so that her party could support a Tory government, which, whatever the cosy rhetoric from Mr Cameron, is planning a massive attack on public services, replacing Trident, continuing the deadly war in Afghanistan etc etc.
    This is a TORY government which will be kept in power by Liberal Democrats.
    Well, Lynne, I have always respected you as a hard working constituency MP, but you will certainly not get my vote next time as it will be a case of “vote Lib Dem, get a Tory government”.
    The whole thing is a disgrace.

  39. Margaret C you are so right – you certainly will “probably be damaged at the next election”.
    As Paul says, people in this constituency didn’t vote for Lynne so that her party could support a Tory government, which, whatever the cosy rhetoric from Mr Cameron, is planning a massive attack on public services, replacing Trident, continuing the deadly war in Afghanistan etc etc.
    This is a TORY government which will be kept in power by Liberal Democrats.
    Well, Lynne, I have always respected you as a hard working constituency MP, but you will certainly not get my vote next time as it will be a case of “vote Lib Dem, get a Tory government”.
    The whole thing is a disgrace.

  40. Dear Ms Featherstone.

    I am very dissappointed in you and your party. I am a born and bread Lib-Dem supporter, and as such I consider myself to be a progressive woman: pro-choice, pro sexual liberation, pro single-mothers, pro social reform and reducing the gap between the richest and poorest. The Tories stand for the polar opposite of these principles, and for this reason I will never again vote Lib Dem.

    It is sad to say that the Lib Dems, by their actions, will be joining in coalition with a Tory party, some of whom want to see the Human Rights Act 1998 repealled. I feel disgusted that the Liberal Democrats have treated the Tories with such deference, given their regressive politics.

    In addition to always voting Lib Dem, I have also expressed a committment to the Libs by working for the office of Sarah Teather MP, but I now feel betrayed. I will actively be campaigning against you from now on. This is all I wish to say.

  41. I read the predictions that a vote for Clegg was a vote for Cameron, but I genuinely thought the Liberal Democrats were still a progressive centre/centre-left party. I don’t think backing Labour was the right move, but surely it would be more honourable for you to be a loud voice of opposition to a Tory Government. Lynne, your leader has traded your values for a few crumbs from the Tory table. It’s a complete nonsense to say that this decision was made in the national interest. Or is that what you think – a Tory Government is good for the country? Perhaps you could explain this in the context of the Conservative Party’s rhetoric and policy on Europe.

    Disappointed, appalled and deeply concerned.

  42. I love the idea that somehow all Lib Dem voters are anti-tory. I suspect that just as many would-be Tory voters vote Lib Dem to keep out Labour as vice versa – or indeed because the Lib Dem candidate is better than the others.

  43. Lynne should hold a local referendum asking if we are happy with her supporting the Tories. If not, she should resign the Lib Dem whip.
    That would be a very democratic move, fully in line with Lib Dem values.
    How about it, Lynne?

  44. I am very, very happy that the LibDems are entering a coalition with the Tories.

    It is sad to see many people give conditioned responses without any thinking – what is more important keeping / putting a particular party in power or getting policies implemented? As a minority party, having any ability to introduce and pass primary legislation should be welcomed. The Tories are the obvious allies given the circumstances. Give it a chance.

    Has it not occurred to all LibDem voters that if PR were to arrive, such coalitions would be inevitable and commonplace? Think things through folks!

  45. transfatty acid – not suggesting for a minute all LD voters are anti-tory, but would you accept that the liberal democrats emerged from a broadly social-democratic (i.e. centre left) tradition and therefore are far from natural bedfellows with the conservatives. This does result in some significant policy differences, as well as some fundamentally different world-views. I would be fascinated if anyone could help me reconcile Lib Dem and Conservative policies and approaches to Europe.

    Mark Whitehead – great idea.

  46. Completely agree with Mark Whitehead, and judging by conversations around Muswell Hill today, if Lynne Featherstone has decided by proxy to cosy up to Cameron, then we have to call into question her credibility and integrity, given some of the banner headlines she was campaigning under.

    The problem is, people forget what the landscape looked like pre 1997 all too easily (Health & Education butchered, social ills spiralling out of control…)
    George Osbourne’s economic policies are further to the right than the early 80’s. How can the Libdems be aligned to this? Is this what we want to return to?
    It seems obvious now that Clegg is more into making personal history than being the strong, resolute, standard bearer in opposition that would have been ideal given Labour’s current chaos.

  47. I personally think that there should be a bi-election, with all local people allowed to reconsider their vote based on the information that is now before us, i.e. that the Liberal Democrats are not as liberal as they professed to be.

    I think all Liberal Democrat MPs owe this duty to people who, I would contend, were misled into voting for the party on the basis that they represented progessive politics. It is absolutely right that the Lib Dems emerged from a social-democratic framework and everyone who voted Lib Dem was fully aware of this when they voted. Liberal Democrat voters have been betrayed and we deserve the right to reconsider our vote in light of this.

    Put this way – what is happening is the equivalent of the Independant newspaper getting into bed with the Telegraph and the Daily Mail combined! How ludicrous it is to realise that precisely this has happened!!!!!

  49. Watching pictures of Cameron walking into Downing Street, I feel sick. I’m not voting LD again.

  50. It appears that commentators here would rather cut off their nose to spite their face. You would rather see no policies implemented than some! Coalition or not, all politics is about horse-trading, between and within parties. Four cabinet seats offered and you guys would say “no thanks” ?

    Get out of your trenches and deal with the political reality of modern times. The left and right traditions are meaningless in the context in which we find ourselves. There are Tories to the left of Nick Clegg and Labourites to the right.
    Worry about the issues in the round and not the labels attached to them.

    As for not being warned about this outcome, Nick made it perfectly clear before the election he’d be in coalition talks with the Tories (most votes, most seats). The media have been talking about a hung parliament for at least three months so there was plenty of warning.