Was this the creation of Gordon Brown?
July 29th, 2010
Was it his inaction that made the coalition possible?
Lots of things are popping up ahead of tonight’s big programme on the BBC telling the story of how the coalition came about.
The presenter, Nick Robinson, has a long piece in the Telegraph giving us a flavour of what to expect.
“..The Tory leadership was well prepared for a hung parliament. They had analysed the overlaps and the gaps between the Conservative and Lib Dem manifestos so that a day after the election they could table a series of documents focusing on 11 areas of policy, highlighting where agreement would prove hardest to achieve, and possible compromises. Although all claim that their minds were on the likelihood of a minority government, William Hague and George Osborne confirm that David Cameron spoke to them before polling day about a possible coalition.
In stark contrast, Gordon Brown had not prepared a policy offer, nor got the backing of his Cabinet, nor developed a relationship with Nick Clegg. This despite the fact that he must have known that a Lib/Lab deal was likely to be his best hope of political survival. When I put it to Peter Mandelson that Clegg found Brown impossible, the Prince of Darkness replied with a wry grin that “No… he’d found him Gordon-ish”.
Instead of building a relationship with the man with whom he might have to share power, Gordon Brown relied instead on his contacts with former Lib Dem leaders – Charles Kennedy, Paddy Ashdown and Menzies Campbell – and Vince Cable. Cable, who has known and liked Brown for three decades, was a regular pre-election visitor to Number 10. There were even hints of a ministerial job for him. Brown ignored the advice of Cable and all his Lib Dem friends to find a way to get on with Clegg….”
In the end it does come down to those personal releationships and maybe if Brown had planned then we would have a very different government today.
This programme could have a big political impact. I agree with the Speccie’s Peter Hosken when he writes: “.What happened during the coalition negotiations - who said what, why and when - could impinge on everything from the Labour leadership race to what the coalition members think about each other.”
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Biff. Bamm. Pow. err, 1st?
Look at the body language between Cameron and Clegg at the debates or when they were flanking Lumley etc and that is what made it possible.
Gordon Brown was totally irrelevant from the moment he called the election.
FPT.
“I wonder whether Mr. Jack Straw has made a mistake in making the Coalition move to create equal-sized constituencies the reason why Labour will oppose the electoral reform bill that includes this and the AV referendum?”
Peter Hain pushed this argument on Newsnight last night and made Simon Hughes task in tipping him over so easy were it not for the fact that he was obviously embarrassed at having to deal with such a dishonest argument without using the word ‘Liar’.
The only people interested in the gerrymander is the gerrymander of the present distribution. How can anyone justify the MP for Arfon getting elected with fewer votes than the guy got who came a poor third in Sefton Central? And the Lib Dems need to abandon their ‘Special case for the Scottish Isles’ rubbish. That was pertinent in the days of the coracle but not today. Scottish MPs anyway do not have to deal with Health, Social Services, Education etc etc.
No, because the numbers weren’t there.
I’m surprised you aren’t focusing on the reports that Clegg has admitted in the programe to not telling the truth to Cameron about Labours position on a referendum, and perhaps more damagingly that his story about changing his mind on the scale of cuts was made, not after chat with Mervyn King but before the election, and that he ommitted to to tell anyone.
Damaging stuff for Clegg.
I see the Big Bad Wolves are out and about. Keep huffing and puffing timmy.
Here is another blast from Scottish Labour’s extraordinarily murky past:
‘Bid to reveal Wendygate facts’
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/bid-to-reveal-wendygate-facts-1.1044428
Ought to be fun! I’ll get the popcorn in.
FPT 221.
“The Tories and LibDems know all this, of course, but they are… pressing ahead with boundary changes to reflect those who are currently registered, without any new effort to address the issues above”
The most ludicrous thing Hain said last might was to raise this issue of ‘off-register’ (courtesy of LabourTory government stupidity) electors. He raised this issue in respect of Simon Hughes talking about the ridiculously small size of Arfon constituency. I would have thought that Arfon was probably the least likely place in the UK to have excess non-registration other than by sheep.
Hain also went on about under-registration of blokes because their girlfriends, with whom they live, want to claim single-person discount on Council Tax. There are also debt-dodgers, illiterates and the lazy but probably no massive variation between constituencies. There is nothing to stop the government paying a decent agency to do a proper Electoral Roll update, which might also get excluded a lot of duplicate entries and entires for foreign nationals from non-commonwealth countries who are on by mistake (or not).
This is what Gordon Brown created
http://www.dakotavoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/wildfire956.jpg
Since most of his own colleagues couldn’t work with Brown, it’s hardly surprising that Nick Clegg couldn’t.
In the event, it didn’t make any difference. As tim rightly points out, the numbers weren’t there. What’s more, the shrewder Labour ministers (such as David Miliband) didn’t want to be in government now, and quite rightly so from their point of view.
If Labour had limped on, the cries of ‘betrayal’ and ‘vicious ideological cuts’ which are now being addressed at the coalition would have been addressed at Labour, because there is no universe in which Brown’s manic spending spree could have continued.
Having misled the electorate so comprehensively, Labour would have been in an absolutely possible position if they had remained part of government.
Much better to wait one term, let Osborne sort out the locust-ravaged mess, and then come back with promises of milk and honey in 2015.
It might work - we shall see.
It was still the seat totals that set up this Coalition.
If Labour had held on to 20 more seats, things could have been different.But the brutal truth was that Lab+Lib did not have a majority. So it wasn’t on.
All these shenanigans are overstated IMO to make better TV/blogs.
And why not.
9. “there is no universe in which Brown’s manic spending spree could have continued. ”
But, that’s where Ed Balls lives…
Nah - like Tim says, the numbers weren’t there. It was always going to be hard, and when various Labour tribalists started popping up saying they weren’t sold on the idea and hinting that they wouldn’t vote for whatever concessions Labour made it became impossible.
They should have called the TV programme: “Five Days That Shook The Guardian”.
As Jonathan, tim and Richard Nabavi have already noted, the numbers weren’t there for a Labour/Lib Dem coalition.
11. Remember that photo of him in a fetching uniform? He could have been lecturing Dr.Schact…
Oh dear, David Miliband is not too hot on logic, is he:
“According to the electoral commission, there are currently more than 3.5 million eligible voters missing from the electoral roll, and there is no way that problem can be significantly tackled in just six months. … Conducting a review on the basis of the December 2010 register will therefore socially skew the process and produce a distorted electoral map of the UK, excluding millions from the electoral process.”
Err, how exactly are these millions being excluded? They have between now and 2015 to obey the law and get on the electoral roll; they will then be able to vote in the next election.
The only effect of the ‘distorted electoral map’ is that the constituencies won’t be entirely up to date. But the distribution of constituencies will still be better and fairer than it is now, and not a single person will excluded from the electoral process as a result of the proposed changes.
Are you Labour supporters really sure you want to select this guy to lead you?
15. How will they react I wonder when thousands of voters vanish from the rolls when IVR comes in? Will they demand ‘votes for phantoms’?
14 runnymede, did you mention Herr Balls admiring buttocks?
http://www.tinyurls.co.uk/U8060
tim @4
Would they be the ’savage’ cuts first raised at the Libdem conference last year?
18 Were those cuts to be as ’savage’ as Darling’s?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8587877.stm
There are over 4000 schools in England
Only 150 have applied to become GOVE Academies, and it is expected that less than a dozen will have changed to Academy status by September.
Less than 4 % of schools have responded to GOVES Radical Reforms ( have you noticed that every policy is announced with a dramatic precursor , “Radical”, “Violent”, “Utter” “fundamental” “far Reaching “ etc etc etc )
Another Goveing Success.
On topic, yes it was. If Brown had resigned on the afternoon of Friday 7th May, we’d probably have a minority Conservative government now. He gave it time to develop by staying out of the way.
As for Brown’s relations with Lib Dems, hardly surprising that he sticks to and around those he likes and ignores the rest (despite those including the leader). That’s how he’s behaved with pretty much everyone else. Also no surprise that three of the four Lib Dems named are Scottish and that the other was leader over a decade ago, when LD-Lab mutual feelings were closest.
3.5 million eligible voters. 6 months.
600,000 voters per month.
20,000 voters per day.
200,000 Labour Party members.
0.1 voters per member per day.
Sounds doable. Can we have a Yes We Can?
9 The numbers would have made the survival of a minority Lib/Lab Coalition dependent on smaller parties difficult enough but I find it hard to really believe such a coalition would have survived 6 months with Gordon Brown’s people management skills. The hope that might have kept it staggering on would be his promise to go in the Autumn but as would it have stood to the daily testing from media and markets?
This is such apologist nonsense from all our right wing nutters. Right up until the last minute on polling day, every nutter was predicting a Tory majority of 40 Plus…..FACT. For 4 Years the Cameron led Tory party had poll ratings of 40-42%. They consistently led Labour by 10% or more for much of those 4 years, and at times their lead was 15%+.
On the day of reckoning ( As Dave called it ), the Tories failed to make the gains they expected … FACT. And that is why we have a shaky wobbly collection of collation c*unts in power…OK
Ted @23
Clegg would have been a complete fool to accept a post-dated cheque from Brown, promising to go in the Autumn. It would be just like Brown’s promises to reform the way he worked, or to cut public spending: he could always find an excuse for not actually doing it quite yet.
Mind you, it would have been an amusing spectacle.
24 - nice alliteration at the end there.
22. I’m sure all these disgruntled individuals will flock to register and cast their vote for the People’s Party when Ed or David Milibandovic take charge.
177.
“did you mention Herr Balls ”
My cat gets these. Makes her choke, like we humans do over phrases like ‘Big Society’ and ‘We’re all in this Together (sic sic sic)
26 Georgie must be one of LOL’s drinking buddies.
22 - Doable indeed.
And remember, we’re not looking for voters in safe Tory seats.
22. I imagine the response of many of these people to being knocked up by spotty Labour activists trying to register them to vote will be ‘F*** off’.
tim @30 Right, you need to unregister them…
Nice to see that Labour have made their first post-election genuine grade-A f*ckup over their AV U-turn/unequal constituencies shenanigans.
Afternoon all
I shall watch tonight with interest though assume we aren’t being told the whole story and won’t be told it for a number of years.
Sounds like those who already have an axe to grind will carry on grinding etc, etc. OGH is broadly correct though I would love to know the point at which senior Conservatives decided to try for Coalition rather than minority Government because that was pivotal.
Nick Clegg had made the LD position clear - the Conservatives won more votes than Labour so they had first refusal. That didn’t exclude LD-Labour negotiations of course but as others have argued, the numbers weren’t there and for all that Vince Cable and one or two others might have wished differently, the dynamic wasn’t there either.
The LDs and Conservatives had only two options - either get together or see Cameron form a minority Government. The inherent instability of the latter option made the former the only choice. Naturally, Clegg tried to get the best deal for his party - who wouldn’t ? - and although it’s all taking time to settle, it’s not going too badly so far.
I’m astounded by those who think propping up a party which has polled just 29% of the vote was a credible option. I’m also astounded that the SNP, having cosied up to the Tories in Scotland, didn’t decide to join the Coalition either. There was much pre-election talk of a Conservative-SNP deal as a prospect.
22 Good luck. I’d imagine most of the 3.5 million have their own good reasons for not registering, and will let you know accordingly on the door step. Expect hostile reactions, and dogs.
Where does the 3.5m figure come from. And I’m presuming these are all people eligible to vote?
Georgie @24
Sigh! Another one for the ‘Ignore’ button.
I listened to R5 Live this morning with all five labour leadership contenders with increasing dismay. The first hour sounded promising but then when it came to talking about ‘cuts’ they got away with murder and Victoria ’screeching’ Derbyshire let them off the hook. This was probably one of the last opportunities to pin them down over this. It was also clear the audience were mainly Labour supporters.
I’m not a Labour supporter but if I was, I would have no idea, which one I would vote for. I just might give the edge to Ed Milliband as he doesn’t have the arrogance of Milliband Senior.
I thought David Milliband’s comment about the prime minister ’shouting his mouth off’ was totally out of order and he should have been slapped down for this.
When the prime minister is abroad trying to drum up business for this country, which hopefully create new jobs, then opposition mps should shut up
36. It’s probably largely a fantasy.
Frank Booth @36 I got the 3.5 million number from Richard Nabavi @15, who seems to be quoting a report that seems to be quoting David Miliband who seems to be quoting the Electoral Commission.
Ann @38: “It was also clear the audience were mainly Labour supporters.”
You would expect this to be the case. It was a debate between candidates for the Labour leadership. Only Labour members can vote, so why would non-members be in the audience?
Didn’t get chance to hear it. Does anybody know if it’s on the iPlayer?
36. The number comes from Milibland’s lunatic Grauniad article
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/29/labour-supports-electoral-reform-not-unfair-bill
18 - Christina.
Clegg is alleged to have lied about his cuts conversion.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/29/nick-clegg-changed-mind-cuts
and what he told Dave about a referendum.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/politics/article-23861369-tory-rebels-line-up-to-threaten-plans-on-electoral-reform.do
40. The original report is here
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/47252/Undreg-FINAL_18366-13545__E__N__S__W__.pdf
@43:
Yeah, Clegg was so secret about cuts, he even mention them (’savage cuts’) at conference last year.
Note to The Guardian: if you’re going to lie about Clegg, remember to delete the articles from your archive that prove you’re lying.
http://bit.ly/ataVG1
Note to tim: try not to believe everything you read in The Guardian, at least until they get over their cuckolded husband phase with Clegg.
38 Cameron shouting his mouth off regarding Pakistan. How very dare he. The Pakistanis are brown in colour and largely Musselmen.
Therefore they may cheat, lie and steal all they want to. Bloody Eton boy being critical, It takes a real statesmanlike arse licker of Millibands class to set Cameron straight.
45 - You are confused.
Cleggs claims relate to this year, which he specifically ruled out during the campaign.
The Liberal Democrats have distanced themselves from the Conservatives by warning they would not support plans to cut public spending too early in the next parliament.
The party’s leader, Nick Clegg, said early deep cuts would be “economic masochism”.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/mar/14/lib-dems-refuse-support-tories
40 - The electoral commission report is an estimate based on the 2000 census, so they think it is likely to be an underestimate.
Martin Coxall @45
From that Guardian article:
“[Clegg] says he worked with Vince Cable, the party’s Treasury spokesman, on Cable’s radical pamphlet calling for £80bn in cuts and suggesting debt be repaid more quickly than Labour has so proposed. Cable proposes that fiscal tightening should be 8% of national income, instead of 6.4%, spread over five years rather than eight.”
To be fair, I think you could find other articles where LibDems seemed to be saying the opposite before the election, when they were attacking Cameron and Osborne. Clegg himself, though, always seemed to be quite realistic on the deficit.
The only real U-turn was on the £6bn cuts in the first year, but surely no-one ever seriously believed the argument that such a piddling amount of savings would wreck the recovery.
runnymede @44
Almost half that number is 16 and 17 year olds.
@47:
Then The Guardian really should make its mind up about which Clegg lies they want to settle on. Constantly changing their mind like this makes them look a little silly.
The Guardian’s current line of attack, then, if I’m reading it correctly is “Nick Clegg has conversation with Governor of the Bank of England, and in the face of established Labour procedure, *listens* to him.”
49 - Cleggs faulty recal about his phone call from Mervyn King specifically relate to this years cuts.
And what do you make about him lying to Cameron about the referendum?
Asked on BBC2’s The Five Days that Changed Britain whether he misled his MPs, Mr Cameron responded: “No, because I was absolutely certain in my own mind that was the case.
“And I had, I think, good reason to be certain … A number of people had told me what was — what they thought was — going on and conversations that were taking place about AV without a referendum. And also I’d had a conversation with Nick when I’d argued very vigorously that you couldn’t do alternative vote without a referendum.”
But Mr Clegg told the programme that no offer of AV without a referendum was ever formally made to him.
“The perception, which I think was accurate, was discussions are out and it might have been an offer that might have been made and might have been considered,” he said. “Was it ever formally made to me? No it wasn’t.”
This seems to be giving the Tory Right fuel.
tim..it seems to be getting you more excited than the Tory Right..
tim @52
There is no contradiction in those two statements. Any chance you could explain why you went to such lengths to post them all formatted any that?
@52:
I think Clegg should be congratulated on the successful deployment of a bluff as a negotiating gambit.
Remind me never to play p0ker with the man.
50 - Thats not true, the sample study on page 30 shows eligible 16 and 17 year olds make up 2% of the total unregistered.
22% of people who move house are missing within the year they move, etc etc.
There seem to be a lot of “coalition deniers” about these days.
Clegg should be commended for doing a deal with someone he COULD do business with.
Crying foul is missing the point completely. Labour ought to take a long hard look at themselves. The signs that they will are fortunately not encouraging.
Oh dear, the Big Bad Wolfers seem to have got their teeth into what Nick Clegg might or might not have said.
None of this matters - why are people getting so obsessed about what a politician said or didn’t say during an election campaign ? All politicians say things suring elections they probably didn’t mean - it’s called making it up as you go along.
You’re asked a question and you have to come up with an answer. Three months later, somebody with nothing better to do trawls the volumes of the Internet and finds an inconsistency - again, who cares ?
It’s an aspect of politics that seems to surprise people but politicians will say things to try to win votes. Fretting over it months later is just very very sad.
tim @52:
Well, it’s Nick Robinson’s presentation of the various quotes in order to promote his TV programme. That doesn’t mean it is false, but we are talking about a hectic few days of negotiations and bluff, as Martin C points out.
Anyway, giving the Tory Right fuel also dampens down smouldering fires on the LibDem left, so it works both ways.
@58:
Stodge, may I introduce you to tim?
55 - A bluff to get something he didn’t want (AV referendum) by lying about something he didn’t want (AV without Referendum) when the truth (He was offered a three choice referendum including PR) was what he actually wanted.
Well I’d love to open him a betfair account.
60.
“Stodge, may I introduce you to tim?”
Politicalbrokeback,com?
Georgie @24:
When making statements about poll data which is a matter of record it is wise to check.
The Tories did not start getting double digit leads until about May 2008 - a situation that continued for barely 18 months.
http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/media-centre-voting-intentions.php?month_from=5&year_from=2005&month_to=12&year_to=2010&order_by=sort_id&direction=desc&button=Apply+sort+%26+filters
58. Quite right - it’s all totally irrelevant flim-flam.
It says a lot about our so-called political journalists (and the accompanying penumbra of cesspit dwellwers) that they continue to obsess about this kind of stuff despite the massive issues facing the country.
59.
“Well, it’s Nick Robinson’s presentation of the various quotes”
“Hullo Viewers, You may recall that at the time that they set up this Coalition thingummy, me and my fellow overpaid BBC pum pundits hadn’t got a clue what was going on and were totally taken by surprise. Now, to make out that we are not quite as dumb as you think we are, we are throwing together this retrospective programme to cover our erases. David Aaaronovitch is 94. “
58 - We do know Cleggs ratings are in freefall, good luck in your assertion that it’s all irrelevant.
@61:
Yes, but he was offered a three-choice referendum by people he hated (Labour) that he knew had neither the willing nor the ability to deliver.
Extracting an AV referendum from the Tories was the best he could hope to realistically achieve, and via a deployment of a well-timed bluff, was able to get it.
65. Guido has already commented on Toenails epic lack of clue…
http://order-order.com/2010/07/29/robinson-i-must-try-harder/
@66:
Do we? He’s got decent positive approval ratings, so I doubt he’ll be weeping himself to sleep.
43.
“Clegg is alleged to have lied about his cuts conversion.”
Are these Ashdown-level lies? Or Bliar-level lies? Or even Charmereon-level lies:
“We are all in this Together!” (sic sic sic)
It would be very hard for any lies to match the porkies which Liebore MPs are now telling about why they are opposing the AV referendum and re-configuring the constituencies! ‘Turkies and Xmas’ springs to mind.
69 - Biggest 3 month fall ever registered by MORI, 1% better than Gordon Browns following his non election trauma of 2007. (from memory)
71 - Second biggest, sorry.
This mornings comedy hustings appears to be up on iPlayer
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00t7f6q/Victoria_Derbyshire_29_07_2010/
@71:
Yes, but you’d have to be a moron to expect the Cleggasm to sustain itself once faced with the vagaries of power.
Clegg’s approval ratings have returned to a level you might describe as “decent” rather than “An elder God walks among us”.
@73:
I listened twice, so I could decide who made the biggest arse of themselves.
The first time it was Ed Balls.
The second time it was still Ed Balls.
Though Victoria ’screeching meat’ Derbyshire came close both times.
I’M BACKING BALLS.
Martin Coxall @75
I thought we’d agreed Tories4Balls was a busted flush and we should switch efforts to Tories4EdM?
@76:
I don’t viscerally hate Ed Miliband to the core of my being. In fact, I find him intellectually affable in that way all highly-regarded Fabians are. He reminds me of a number of my leftie chums.
I need somebody to hate.
76. paulwaugh
Interesting that Andy Burnham seen by all 3 punters in vox pop as best Lab candidate in 5Livedebate. Most in touch, they sd
78. Great sample, that.
@78:
He was brandishing his cloth cap and whippet with aplomb.
Gordon Brown had not prepared a policy offer, nor got the backing of his Cabinet, nor developed a relationship with Nick Clegg. This despite the fact that he must have known that a Lib/Lab deal was likely to be his best hope of political survival.
Perhaps he didn’t want to survive? Wasn’t interested in a coalition deal at all? Preferred opposition?
In the end it does come down to those personal relationships and maybe if Brown had planned then we would have a very different government today.
In other words, if Brown had a completely different personality to start with. In other words, if Gordon was so rubbish. Gordon being different would have meant a completely different outcome in terms of seats, not just a different outcome in terms of government/opposition.
There seems to be an underlying presumption here that Labour actually wanted to be in government again. Why would they? To have to undo all the spending increases of the last decade? To have to cut deeper than Thatcher ever did, as Darling admitted? All that in minority coalition that would be on life-support from the moment of conception. It would fail in a year max with Brown at the helm, and the Tories would be in with a thumping majority.
Instead Cameron has to clear up the mess, and Labour can peel off disaffected lefty LibDems. The new leader has time to grow into his job.
Labour as a whole chose the better route.
O/T.
Iain Dale is heading up his column today: “I want you to humiliate me.”
Has he ever been seen in the same space/time continuum as Mark Oaten? Or Sion Simon?
83. Why does anyone read Iain Dale?
80 Here’s Dave brandishing a cricket bat this morning.
He appears to be mighty afeared by the tennis ball, and batting right handed but signing left handed.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1298258/David-Cameron-hot-water-accuses-Pakistan-exporting-terror.html
You’ll note that the bat is supplied by one of his Latvian friends.
Re: 62 - I am aware of Tim, who seems to spend his entire days posting his pro-Labour anti-Coalition nonsense on here. He is entitled to his view, he is also entitled to be wrong.
Re: 60 - Let’s cut to the chase, Tim. The LDs favour STV because it is the system which works best for them - it is opposed en bloc by the Conservative and Labour parties because STV would prevent either winning a majority in their own right in perpetuity and without that prospect their very raison d’etre ceases to exist.
The Conservatives support FPTP because they do best from it - Labour probably would prefer AV or AV+ because it works best for them.
The Conservatives knew they had to offer the LDs something on electoral reform and a referendum on AV (which they don’t really support) is as far as they could go and the least the LDs would accept. A more sensible approach would have been to offer FPTP, AV and STV because FPTP would probably win.
So the compromise is AV vs FPTP and because Labour are looking solely at their own political advantage, they will do a volte-face on their pre-election position and support FPTP.
Next time you want to come on here and point out every slight inconsistency in what Nick Clegg said or didn’t say, just consider that if you can.
84
Errr I do, and I don’t know why.
Looks like Foxy is going to be the first of the gang too die.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/7916513/George-Osborne-Trident-is-not-exempt-from-budget-cuts.html
I blame the Libdems meself.
86 - AV locks out proper reform, they won’t go back for another referendum for decades, thats why it’s better to stop it in parliament, rather than let the Lib Dems like Mike, the Labour tribalist and Tory right destroy it in a vote.
Support the Carswell amendments and maintain some dignity.
Or decouple the bill from the date and the boundary commission and at least give yourself a chance.
Kamran Akmal = the gift that keeps on giving.
All about the Irish and the chippy northerner today.
Engalnd to win this from here.
More on Clegg’s li…….sorry bluff.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/politics/article-23861369-tory-rebels-line-up-to-threaten-plans-on-electoral-reform.do
Upto 54 and rising, looks like Clegg’s electoral reform is going down the pan.
wage slave @83:
I thought the voters did that pretty resoundingly back in 2005.
@85:
After the release of the Afghan War Logs, anyone still pretending that Pakistan is a reliable ally is frankly dangerously delusional.
So, it’s good to see Dave laying down the law with Pakistan. They may be doing their ‘best’ (whatever that is) but it isn’t good enough, and it’s about time they knew that.
Frankly, if and when Pakistan goes rogue, we’re gonna need India onside, so it’s great that Dave has managed to undo the damage done to Anglo-Indian relations by David Miliband.
@90:
What odds will you offer that the bill won’t pass Parliament?
92
Strange Mrs T was very keen on Pakistan when it was used as a base for attacking the Russians in Afghanistan, they were good guys then.
Even Martin can’t pretend this ‘aint a lie.
“The perception, which I think was accurate, was discussions are out and it might have been an offer that might have been made and might have been considered,” he said. “Was it ever formally made to me? No it wasn’t.”
Martin, thats a f*cking lie, that ‘aint a bluff thats a f*cking lie.
@88:
The Carswell amendments could carry only with Labour support.
But Labour have already humiliated themselves by committing to an AV U-turn and support for unequal constituencies. The chances of them doing a second volte face and digging them out of their hole is very slim.
Labour will bury the Carswell STV amendments. I’m sure you’ll be very happy.
@94:
I know what a f*cking bluff is, you imbecile.
A bluff is a deception deployed to over-represent the strength of your position for a negotiation or betting advantage.
Clegg bluffed Dave, and got his referendum concession. Good on him.
The only question I have about the programme is why did they agree to talk in this detail with Nick Robinson now? What did any of those interviewed think they stood to gain by airing the coalition negotiation details so early in the life of the coalition? For the life of me, I can’t see an upside, and loads of potential pitfalls.
Walk, Liam, walk.
What do we have here, then? Another public disagreement between Downing Street and Liam Fox? Certainly looks that way, as George Osborne assures an interviewer in India that the entire cost of Trident should be borne by the Ministry of Defence’s budget. As the Telegraph reminds us, Fox suggests that the running costs of Trident should be part of the MoD’s responsibilities (as they are currently), but the approximate £20 billion capital cost of renewing the nuclear deterrent should be paid for by central government. In his words, on Marr a couple of weeks ago: “To take the capital cost would make it very difficult to maintain what we are currently doing in terms of capability.”
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/6176058/the-coalition-needs-to-think-harder-about-renewing-trident.thtml
Martin Coxall @95
What will Labour do if Clegg calls their bluff and offers to separate the AV bit from the rest?
Another principled U-turn? Or a principled ‘well, we’ll have to think of another excuse to argue against our own manifesto promise of ten weeks ago’?
@97:
It’ll stop people like Tim Montgomerie spreading largely falsified whispers and smears amongst the disaffected about who said what to whom.
In then end, Clegg’s happy to boast about how he managed to bluff his way to success, and Dave’s happy to show what a magnanimous, inclusive, progressive PM he is.
96
Its a lie, he told Dave that Labour had said he could have electoral reform without a referendum, Dave then told the 1922 that they’d better support the coalition ‘cos of that. You can play with words and terms all you want, thats a f*cking lie.
Oh on Iain Dale, some months ago I was told off ‘cos I said the reason Dale was a diabetic was because he ate crap and was overweight, the usual suspects went into overdrive and called me nasty etc. If Dale had someone like me bending his ear he, A. wouldn’t be fat, (which of course the Coalition recommends all overweight people should be called) and B. wouldn’t be a diabetic.
@98:
Ah, the Treasury are going to stitch Fox right up like a kipper over Trident. Poor old Liam, what a shame.
101 - That’s Iain Dale sorted, now how are we going to get you a sex life?
97, perhaps those nice men at Labour would’ve had an uncontested opportunity to spin events as they saw them and the Coalition preferred an alternative.
F1: Massa claims the sun orbits the Earth.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8868309.stm
Sad really, I think he’s a top chap. I hope Alonso’s wheel falls off again.
103
Sex…life……hmmmm I’d need a referesher course first.
103
s*x…..life….hmmmm I’d need a refresher course first.
Politicians like to talk about themselves and make themselves sound brilliant SHOCK!
@101:
Coldstone, are you simple?
We all know that a bluff is a lie. They are both deceptions. That’s one way you win at negotiating. P0ker players refer to it as “playing tight”.
I think I know what’s going on here. You’re furious that we Tories aren’t angry with Clegg for his little gambit, aren’t you?
In fact, that I’m actually commending Clegg for the success of his bluff seems to be making you insensible with rage.
Would you like a hug?
Also, Coldstone. I’m still wondering what odds you’ll give that the AV referendum bill won’t pass Parliament, bearing in mind it will be a three line whip.
103 The word sex is superfluous in your question .
What a shot to make his maiden test hundred!
Cracking knock By Morgan.
tim @98
Des Browne was right on that - it is pretty ridiculous excluding Trident from the Defence Review.
(FPT) Factors which complicate the issue of “equal electorates”:
Students who are registered in more than one constituency
Foreigners who are not allowed to vote, but contribute to the economy and need services
Asylum seekers who ditto
Migrant workers who ditto
Children who partially ditto
People who have moved house and fall off the register in between homes
Stupid or lazy people who are eligible to vote but don’t bother to register/ can’t / don’t know how to register / don’t want to register
Criminals or tax-dodgers who want to avoid being found / caught
There are big variations in the proportions of these different groups, so it is necessary to be clear about what you’re trying to “equalise”. For example, in somewhere like Westminster I think there is a difference of something like 15 or 20,000 between the parliamentary elections electorate and the local elections electorate. The percentage of people who are eligible to be registered but not on the register is often said to be 7% but it probably varies between 2% and about 30% according to what constituency it is.
@99:
That would be a bad idea. Labour have made themselves look like complete arses, frankly, with their machinations over the bill.
Splitting the bill would give Labour an easy way out of their hole.
The bill will pass with or without Labour votes, so it’s best to leave the stupid buggers twisting in the wind while Lib Dems lob hate grenades at them.
Progressive alliance succeed.
Every time I read about Liam Fox and George Osborne, I keep thinking of biscuits.
56 It is not correct to say that 22% of people who move house are missing from the electoral register within the year they move . They will remain on the electoral register where they previously lived but not be on the register where they now live . They may even still be in the same parliamentary constituency .
Richard Nabavi @99:
They’ll find a reason - maybe the colour of Clegg’s tie on the day of the second reading.
It’s great to see them wriggle.
109 Pakistan utter dog sh!t today with the exception of Amir,
Akmal atrocious behind the stix
The Danish Song Bird is still woefully out of form
England should walk this series.
113
54 and rising!
Not that the guy didn’t deserve it, (in fact he should have got longer) but I though that Ken Clarke opposed short sentences.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1298672/Protester-hurled-egg-Muslim-Tory-minister-Baroness-Warsi-guilty.html
Will he be attending one Blunt’s party nights perhaps.
73. OH MY GOD
Somewhere in his trillion dollar castle Tony Blair both laughs and cries
115 - A good subject for a thread would be: Why Do Labour Supporters Hate Nick Clegg So Much?
It’s actually blinding them to their own best interests.
Dyed in some wool somewhere @116
The saffers disappointed again though.
@113:
You are SICK.
113.
“Every time I read about Liam Fox and George Osborne, I keep thinking of biscuits.”
Fag rolls?
113
What sort of biscuits?
120 Yes, although the Trott man was relatively stolid for a while.
Pietersen is an overrated peacock and deserves a nice long break from Test cricket.
Give him this series to get his act together or drop him for Bell for the Ashes.
Cook needs a ton in the next test, he is due a run of scores or he might be on the way out..
121 - You’re a slow learner if it’s taken you that long to work that out.
Mmmm, biscuits:
http://images.foodepedia.co.uk/xmas_2009/Foxs_biscuits2.jpg
http://kohchongho.com/images/KG753-OsborneBiscuit.jpg
@123:
Soggy ones.
It’s how Osborne’s conducting the spending review.
101.
“he told Dave that Labour had said he could have electoral reform without a referendum”
The Charmereon told you that when you were sharing a bath, did he? What Clegg said and what the Charmereon said to his colleagues he said may have some points of overlap but are unlikely to be anywhere near similar.
Personally, I expect that The Charmereon (who wanted to be bluffed anyway) was told by Clegg that “It LOOKS LIKE Labour will offer us AV/PR/whatever without a referendum……” That would be enough for the balding one to go running to his mates saying “It’s this or else” which is what he really wanted to say to them anyway.
Dyed in some wool somewhere @124:
Not a lot to disagree with there.
Colly has had a wobble or too, but should get hit ton here.
Eoin should be looking for a big score.
Pietersen guilty again of not taking the opposition seriously.
@127:
Wage Slave has just said something I both understand and agree with. I think I’m going into shock. Fetch me a foil blanket.
128
Hmmm well lets see, Cleggie is now saying he supported cuts, even though he was saying he didn’t, who knows what he said, he’s obviously having problems with the truth whatever it is.
119 I think you’d struggle to get a rational explanation for that. Most of them don’t seem to have had any serious desire to attempt to cobble together an anti-Conservative coalition, (sensibly enough), but still somehow think that he betrayed them by forming a Coalition with the Conservatives.
Southam Observer, for example, is a very astute poster, yet I just can’t figure out why he feels betrayed by the Lib Dems acting the way they did.
coldstone @130
I thought Clegg supported cuts prior to the election? I’m sure I remember them saying something about cuts…?
97 - The only question I have about the programme is why did they agree to talk in this detail with Nick Robinson now? What did any of those interviewed think they stood to gain by airing the coalition negotiation details so early in the life of the coalition? For the life of me, I can’t see an upside, and loads of potential pitfalls.
Very good question, it’s not only Clegg that has exposed himself, Sir Gus o Donnell seems to have done a PB hysteric and claimed the markets were going into meltdown on monday
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2010/07/sir-gus-odonnell-plays-god-with-cleggyand-with-the-constitution.html
122 I have to say that thought hadn’t really occurred to me. It’s not a very pleasant mental picture.
When will Nick Clegg throw in the towel ?
Nick Clegg’s shameful U-turn on cuts http://bit.ly/bG8CMW
@134:
I think GOD was indulging in some ‘enlightened self-interest’ there. Being Cabinet Secretary for a coalition gives him a lot more influence than a minority government would.
http://sniffpetrol.com/2010/07/29/george-monbiot-to-be-switched-off/
120 - Attacking Clegg personally, for which he has now provided some great ammunition on his honesty, while being nice to the Lib Dem voters who are still left, is exactly what Labour should be doing.
Look at that chunk of Lib Dem voters who are now don’t knows.
Cleggy has been lying to them, that needs ramming home.
@136:
Ah, the Mad Mullah speaks. He seems to think that the Coalition has cut spending by a third already, rather than the titchy tiny £6bn that have actually been announced.
@139:
I disagree. I think it’s making Labour look like mental, obsessive bullies, and is driving the Lib Dems deeper into the Tories’ welcoming arms.
Far from weakening the Coalition, Labour’s hysterics are making it stronger.
I guess this is what Antifrank was referring to.
136 The Coalition is not proposing to cut public spending by a third; whether it is carrying out “macho cuts” depends on one’s political viewpoint. Clegg can quite reasonably argue that his current stance does not contradict what he said on 19th March.
All three parties shied away from the uncomfortable truth that there would be cuts in public expenditure after the election. I can’t see that Clegg was any more reprehensible than anyone else in that regard.
139 - That makes sense, though turning Nick Clegg into Ramsay MacDonald will also suit David Cameron just fine. But that is not what the Labour party is doing. It is opposing anything and everything, and is making itself look as though it would be anti-milk and honey if the milk and honey had a coalition provenance.
Incidentally, on topic, by far the most important clause of the coalition agreement is its length. The Lib Dems should have insisted on a shorter agreement with the possibility of renewal. By agreeing to five years, the Lib Dems are going to struggle not to split, be absorbed by the Tories, be blamed for the collapse of the coalition, be annihilated at the polls at a time of the Tory right’s choosing or a combination of these.
Herbert Proper Snr @136
Come on, that is the New Statesman and Mehdi Hassan, for heaven’s sake, and weak even by Hassan standards:
Asked by Robinson if he had changed his mind about cuts during the five days of negotiations, Clegg says:
“I changed my mind earlier than that… firstly remember between March and the actual general election …a financial earthquake occurred in on our European doorstep.”
Hmm. Yet see Clegg’s comments [above] in Yorkshire. Does he sound like a man who is having second thoughts about the Lib Dems’ opposition to “early” cuts? Does he give any indication to the audience that he plans to junk the Lib Dems’ position on the timing of so-called fiscal consolidation?”
Err, no, maybe because, as Hassan’s own article points out, the Yorkshire comments were made on 19th March.
130.
It’s cos you’ve adopted the Coalition Missionary position.
@143:
Truly, I do not think that such an outcome would be seen as terrible by either Nick or Dave.
141 - Here’s the exchange with Clegg.
Meanwhile, Nick Robbo also managed to get Nick Clegg to admit that he had first considered ditching his economic policy as early as March.
Here’s the exchange:
Clegg: “I changed my mind earlier than that, em, ah, firstly remember between March and the actual general election ah, a financial earthquake occurred in on our European doorstep.”
Robinson: “Forgive me in the election you didn’t say things have changed I’m in favour of cuts now?”
Clegg: “Ah, to be fair we were all I think reacting to very very fast moving economic events.”
So Clegg is claiming he changed his mind before any of the debates on cuts this year.
Oh dear, knock another few points off his approval ratings
142 Sean Fear repaste FPPT “So whenever Goldsmith is no longer the Tory nominee Richmond would likely fall you think. On that point Boris will only run for two terms if he wins again. How might you think Goldsmith would fare if he wanted a run at it.”
@147:
I think we can be thankful that at least he’s aware of the sovereign debt crisis sweeping Europe. Labour has never shown any need to recourse to external economic reality, which may explain why they now plumb the depths of fiscal incompetence with such alacrity.
Regardless of when he changed his mind, he saw the light eventually, and that’s what matters.
I agree with Nick.
147.
Q. How do you tell when politicians lie?
A. Their lips move.
Q. even when they are working a glove puppet called Tim?
A. That’s why we’re on a blog, not TV.
tim @147:
I hate to break it to you tim, but Nick Clegg’s approval ratings aren’t going to help in your ultimate goal. The lovely Miriam still won’t move to Liverpool.
Perhaps Labour should bear in mind that if it ever finds its obsessions aligning with tim’s, they’re probably doing it wrong.
34. Excellent summary Stodge.
Bit more of you and a bit less of Tim will improve PB immeasurably…
@151:
He’s just waiting until Nick’s husband approval ratings take a dip, before he can swoop in and form a progressive coalition with her.
152 - Don’t worry the Tory right are chipping in with the ideal attack lines.
Clegg is dishonest, but only because he’s always been a Tory.
This isn’t to say that Clegg doesn’t have questions to answer, particularly to his own party. The fact that Clegg was railing against ‘Tory cuts’ in May leaves a sour taste – was he, on some level, being dishonest then, or being dishonest now? But I’d prefer to characterise this apparent “U-turn” another way: once a hawk, always a hawk.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/6176298/clegg-confirms-his-fiscal-hawkishness.thtml
130. Did someone mention foil blankets? The police were giving out foil blankets during the night outside Buckingham Palace on 4th August 2000. Later that day, I sang the frog song, which confused Emily who was celebrating her 8th birthday:
(To the tune of “There’ll always be an England”)
There’ll always be a tadpole,
And tadpoles will be frogs,
And frogs will always wear top-hats
And loin-cloths and clogs;
The frog is quite enormous:
It’s taller than a house;
The same size as an elephant,
But smaller than a mouse.
@155:
That’s the question, isn’t it? Which one is the real Nick Clegg? I think we all now know the answer to that one.
Tories always instinctively sensed that Clegg was a bona fide Liberal, and therefore been one of us to an extent. Labour are just a little slower and dumber and it took them a while to realise.
Still, I would argue that it’s all rather pointless and academic. As Mr Nabavi points out, the amounts cut this year are a minuscule £6bn, and will be soon lost and forgotten amongst the chaos and carnage of the 2011 cuts.
Great correction in the Guardian:
“• This article was amended on 29 July 2010. The original referred to a hair’s breath. This has been corrected.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/29/david-cameron-india-smarm-offensive
157 - I’m sure there will be lots of quotes to dig out from Nick in the period after he claims his mind had changed but before the election.
Coming after his claims about Sheffield Forgemasters and the lie about the referendum, it is starting to look like a bit of a habit.
155.
“Clegg………’s always been a Tory”
In what way do you think that he’s like Bliar Gordo Byrne Blunkett Mandelson, Prescott, Milburn Clarke Blears, Byers, Reid etc etc. You know, the Tories who spent the last thirteen years widening the gap between rich and poor while filling their own boots and those of their rich mates? The ones who were so far up George Bush’s behind that he felt it in his throat. The ones who let the retirement pension drift down and down while their own salaries and perks went up and up.
This red sofa lark says it all. You always know the priorities of a LabourTory animal.
http://order-order.com/2010/07/29/yvette-and-hazels-furniture-shopping-spree/
Or does green suit you better?
http://order-order.com/2010/06/27/pickles-highlights-harmans-serene-room/
@159:
I’m really not sure you’re in a position to be talking about habits, Mr Labour Bingo.
159 Poor old tim, clearly still in denial mode. He’s just like one of those Japanese soldiers that refused to accept the war was over, twenty years on.
@162:
*snort*
Worse than that, it’s like tim’s been living on a tiny Pacific island all those years, and has formed a cargo cult around a bust of Nick Clegg’s head he found lying around.
112. Voting in UK elections should be restricted only to British nationals, local and european elections should be open to to citizens from other member states. We need to get over this rubbish about Irish citizens and commonwealth citizens being able to vote.
163 The cliff tops are adorned with hand carved statues of Hague, Lansley and his other Tory heroes, against which he makes regular ’sacrifices’.
163 - As long as there is a culvert for stalker Ed to pop out of.
166 Ah timmy, you’ve mentioned me. How sweet. Is that one of the steps on the road to recovery at Obsessives Anonymous?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/29/labour-leadership-who-worries-tories-most
136
‘Nick Clegg’s shameful U-turn on cuts http://bit.ly/bG8CMW‘
Has anyone told the mad mullah of the career opporunities and interesting jobs in Saudi Arabia plus unlimited Islamic claptrap to go with it.
I am sure he would be much happier there.
The MSM is really going to town on David Cameron’s ’straight talking’ re Pakistan. I’m not sure what games are being played her but it has completely overshadowed that this was the biggest trade delegation any PM has ever taken abroad.
I do think he has missed a golden opportunity to say ‘look I’m doing everything I can to bring new business to the UK and create new jobs etc, instead he’s just given the MSM a stick to beat him with. Not to mention giving Miliband Senior a chance to ‘posture’ over his ‘loud mouth’ comments.
David Cameron and those advisers around him should remember that the vast majority of people in this country do not follow politics like we do on this site, therefore simple messages like I’m over to get new business for UK plc plays better than ‘coded’ messages to Pakistan, which would have gone over most peoples heads.
He is meeting the Pakistani PM next week, any comments could have been made to them in private.
I hope Alonso’s wheel falls off again.
by Morris Dancer July 29th, 2010 at 5:43 pm
Amen and pass the ammunition.
171, great timing by me [I've just come back and saw your comment]
I hope Massa has a better race though. If Massa wins I’d be thrilled. Especially if Alonso gets lapped. By a Virgin.
….. I’d be thrilled. Especially if Alonso gets lapped. By a Virgin.
by Morris Dancer July 29th, 2010 at 7:56 pm
Lap with a virgin? Naughty.
Here’s a little quiz question whilst we wait for toenail’s hour of waffling:
You’ve heard of Super Output Areas (SOAs) as used by the ONS?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ONS_coding_system
Off the 100 SOAs with the largest population declines between 01-08, how many were in Labour held constituencies between 05-10?
And how many are in Labour constituencies now?
168 - A smart article by a Tory.
The baying “they are all useless - Con Maj Nailed On!” PB herd could learn a thing or two.
Labour is tantalisingly well-placed to win the next election – or even to govern before it takes place. The coalition may go the full five-year distance or fall apart long before. In the latter case, Labour could just about make a go of a rainbow coalition, and its new leader cross the threshold of No 10 within the next couple of years. In the former, the party will fight the poll from a reassuring base of 258 seats, a reminder of how bountifully it is rewarded by the voting system it pledged to scrap at the last election.
The lack of interest in its leadership election is therefore, in a sense, surprising. It’s true that the contest has failed to take wing, and that its talk of “values” and “vision” has the vanilla quality of so much of modern politics. But though scarcely an explosion, it’s not an implosion, either: Labour hasn’t turned in on itself as it did during the 1980s. It still looks like a party of government.
tim @175
Paul Goodman is an editor of Conservative Home…..
175 Labour did not look like a party of government even when it was in government .
177 - Don’t be like that Mark, 25 seats more and you’d be looking at a PR Referendum rather than Osbornes chopper.
antifrank @120:
A good idea. Maybe tomorrow.
Labour people have gone potty.
178 Nope Brown was lying , Labour always lie .
tim @178
But still clearing up Labour’s mess would have been the big priority.
181 - Ah but you’d be able to campaign for a yes vote in the referendum, rather than destabilising the coalition with a No.
169. Reading the comments under that article it’s noticable that whereas Cameron is accepted Clegg seems to be despised by everyone. It must be depressing for a Lib Dem who above all likes to be loved
176: ‘Paul Goodman is an editor of Conservative Home…’
These ConHome Tory controversialists who get to pen articles for the Guardian are always good amusement value!
183. It must be depressing to be Roger and despised by all and sundry.
Grow up Roger and act your age!
Does Zippy appear in Toenails’ Magnum Opus, or was that just today’s sound-bite?
186 - It was todays quote after Clegg coughed.
PS.Zippy and Toenails in the same sentence is impressive.
Rust Never Sleeps!
This is a great piece -
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/anthony-seldon-how-brown-and-clegg-let-it-slip-2037835.html
186. Liam Byrne accuses Clegg of misleading voters!
I can’t think why they agreed to do this programme given the fact that it is just going to provide the opposition with a never ending ‘narrative’ over the silly season.
I don’t think I’ll bother to watch.
179
No need for a thread Mike. It is as easy as A,B,C,D
A) Labour thought they had a right to govern and are in denial about losing the election.
B) They always viewed the LD’s as their emergency backup.
C) They never believed the LD’s could do a deal with the Conservatives
D) They believe Clegg betrayed them.
Of course they are wrong in each instance.
188 - How many seat short of Clegg going for a PR referendum do you think it was, Labour 270 or more would be my guess, quite a small margin.
Mike, there’s a difference between hatred and opposition. I’ve nothing against Nick Clegg personally - he seems pleasant enough and I’d be happy for him to marry my sister if I had one. However, I don’t think the long-term survival of the coalition is in either the national interest or the Labour Party’s interest. You wouldn’t agree, but in discussing Labour’s view that’s the starting point.
Now, it seems to me unlikely that the LibDems will reconsider even when the Parliamentary arithmetic makes it possible unless they are clearly losing ground by staying where they are, no matter how nice we are to them. So it’s unreasonable to expect us to be helpful as they pursue their pet issues, especially when they are assisting the Conservatives to load the electoral system against inner-city constituencies where high turnover makes voter registration levels lower. Hatred and pottiness have nothing to do with it.
A more promising subject, perhaps: don’t we think Cameron may decide to give Clegg a nice bonus by scrapping Trident? Osborne would be pleased on budgetary ground. Fox would be relieved. Voters seem relaxed about it. Cameron isn’t on record as saying it’s crucial to our safety. What would that do to morale and the polls?
Maybe -
But labour and LDs would still have been a minority. Can you imagine the level of economic confidence with them together as a minority gov. and being unwilling to make necessary cuts.
Plus not knowing who would be the PM in 12 months time? Lets not forget brown would have had to receive his marching orders (allegedly) to make a Lib/lab deal possible.
No doubt all sorts of scenarios can be painted by journalists as they seek to make a living. The realistic ones do not make sensational TV though.
Whoops, even Angus Redid has Cleggs ratings falling further.
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/35822/cameron_keeps_stable_numbers_in_britain/
190.
“A) Labour thought they had a right to govern and are in denial about losing the election.”
- No we’re not. Many of us are quite relieved that we weren’t wiped out and can now rebuild. We never expected to win last time.
“B) They always viewed the LD’s as their emergency backup.”
- No we certainly didn’t. We’ve hated them on a local level for years and know they are not some sort of Labour-Lite.
“C) They never believed the LD’s could do a deal with the Conservatives.”
- Yes we did. As they have in countless local councils. And it always ends with the Tory policies enacted with little to show for the LD’s. So no change there then.
“D) They believe Clegg betrayed them.”
No we don’t - we never believed he would do anything else. See above.
Nick Palmer @192:
What absolute bollox. Complete and utter bollox. There is no allowance currently for turnover. There is no adjustment made for some ephemeral and impossible to quantify turnover. There is no bonus for these places. Nothing. Nada.
In fact, as it stands, some of the biggest constituencies in the country are East Ham, Camberwell & Peckham, Holborn & St Pancras.
Ergo, you are talking out of your ars, a coward to say what you really think and essentially risible.
Lord Adonis reveals the game. Nothing to do with an unwritten constitution, all about power. Power for power’s sake.
194 The number of Con/LD run councils is not countless , it numbers around 12 several of which have LibDems as the major party . There are around 6 Lab/LD run councils and 3 Con/Lab run councils .
Your point C therefore is complete fantasy in fact it is false ie a lie .
Howzat! Cameron hits it for six (twice) as he plays cricket in Delhi
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1298699/Howzat-Cameron-hits-twice-plays-cricket-Delhi.html
scroll down,the picture of ed balls,now that is funny
“I didn’t know Nick Clegg” seems to be the standard position for the whole of Labour it seems…
Mandelson burying Gordon.
Toenails’ program is pretty mundane really.
Nothing that pops out as extraordinary.
Nick Palmer. When you were an MP you supported an illegal war.That’s as bad as it gets. God help you.
Labour had no plan at all. What a shambles!
192 ‘However, I don’t think the long-term survival of the coalition is in either the national interest…’
Well, yes it is, unless you’re hankering for the bad old days, when the expenses bounty was plenty, and government spending ran riot. That would be self interest of course.
Ha Cameron and Clegg had a secret meeting that the media didn’t know about! First I’ve heard about this.
The coalition was the creation of the electorate voting as they did and the professionalism of the Tory and Lib Dem negotiations.
A Labour coalition was a non-starter. Only the most fanatical anti-Tory could really envisage a rainbow of all the non-Tories being acceptable or even desirable.
Brown and Clegg had a secret meeting as well under Whitehall. All a bit Le Carre.
205 - Spot on.
Although to be fair, everyone in the programme comes out pretty well.
207. Parlez_me_nTory
#tories met #libdems with a list of priorities @edballsmp didn’t even have a Post-it note
201: A bit short of concrete arguments on the subject, Ashes?
203: If we’re discussing Labour policy, as Mike and others were doing, you can’t really start from your viewpoint that Labour were the bad old days - it’s not realistic to think that we’re going to agree.
207 - Except Nick Robinson as we all remember how switched on he was…
209
I saw the C4 news report on the behaviour of Notts County Council re elderly care etc. If you stand again you’ll be elected by a landslide.
Interesting.
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/front_pages_console.html&article_id=12871
Brown and Clegg could have been the best of friends. A Lib-Lab pact was never going to work given the election result. Labour lost. Whichever way you cut it, Labour suffered a very bad defeat in 2010. It would have been completely unaceptable for Brown/Labour to have remained in office.
210 - It’s not a bad programme.
Clegg’s little smile at getting caught out lying over the referendum may come back to haunt him.
Everyone seems very nice even Ed Balls. Hague seems a little schoolboyish but he always does. It all seems very inevitable and probably the best result for everyone.
lol at laws and balls.
So Mr Cameron lied to his own MPs about Labour offering AV without a referendum, in order to win their support for the new deal on av with the libdems. Disappointing, to say the least.
Nick Palmer @192:
Quite possibly. When LibDem and Tory policies are opposed, the (wise under the circumstances) solution usually seems to be to go with whichever one is cheaper.
Fox and Osborne seem to be setting it up for Fox to be able to blame the Treasury for cutting the Trident budget, and Osborne to say it’s Fox’s decision based on Ministry of Defence priorities. And neither looks strictly like a concession to the LibDems.
Ed Balls “We came out the meeting on the monday night thinking they aren’t serious, it’s not going to work” cut to clip of Balls outside the meeting “we’ve had a good meeting, made good progress…”
216 - He believed Clegg had told him the truth, as he did over Forgemasters I guess.
Gosh these Coalition people do like their ‘bluffing’ as Martin calls it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/7917305/Coalition-misled-public-over-academies.html
Or telling lies as the rest of us call it.
217 - And this one is objectively right. Getting a replacement for Trident is lunacy.
214: ‘Everyone seems very nice even Ed Balls. Hague seems a little schoolboyish but he always does. It all seems very inevitable and probably the best result for everyone.’
Hooray! We’re all friends. Can’t Labour just disband and then we’d all get along swimmingly? Labour really is a horrible thing that creates despair and animosity at every turn. The country really would be so much better without it.
213 So weak timmy. Keep huffing, and puffing.
216 Ed Balls.. Two pieces to camera, one contradicting the other.
192 Currently, the electoral system is loaded in favour of inner city constituencies.
Equalising constituency sizes just brings it back into balance.
F1: Alonso claims his reputation is intact:
http://www.formula1.com/news/interviews/2010/7/11090.html
I agree. The problem is that he’s reputed to be a whining, grumpy spoilt brat who wants everything his own way.
221 Somehow, I don’t think our abandonment of nuclear weapons will cause the lion to lie down with the lamb.
Cameron: I was ‘absolutely certain’ Labour had offered AV without referendum to Lib Dems
Born in a lie, it will live as a lie, it will die as a lie, the Coalition.
220 - I suspect reading between the line of the Lib Dems on the Goves rush job, including those who post on here, they all knew they were being taken for a ride over the Academies Bill.
To his eternal credit, Clegg seems to really despise Brown.
221.Absolutely, let’s just all rely on the Americans.
If Labour disbanded the country would lose its conscience. Getting rid of Brown was sufficient.
225. If the British people vote NO in the AV refernedum, as I think they will - Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas and core Lab-Con voters aren’t going to see FPTP go down any time soon - Does the re-sizing of Labours inner city seats still progress?
209. Nick Palmer.”Dodgy documents” aren’t “concrete”,but they were enough for you.
limesmoothie @230:
Post of the day.
DoYouCare2010
“antagonistic, dismissive, a bit arrogant” …Brilliant self appraisal from Ed Balls. #5days
The Cornerstone Group will have Cleggy’s little smile about how he lied on the referendum up on their screensavers faster than Ronaldos wink.
221 IIRC the US are extending life of their subs and upgrading the missiles at no huge cost (nothing like as expensive as the UK plan to build a new class of subs) - it was discussed when Blair first bought the subject up. Wondered at the time if it was a deliberate move to talk of replacement on basis that costs could be cut later by announcing upgrade instead perhaps funded by cutting missions back and reducing other operating costs of the nuclear fleet (mothball one sub?)
So Clegg wanted cuts all along, we need not have given them so much after all.
238, what have the Lib Dems been given? The £10k tax threshold, in phases, and the referendum… anything else?
Clegg seems pretty genuine and I don’t think he did show he despised Brown. I though he was a very genuine in saying how difficult it was saying to Brown that he had to go. I like Clegg a lot more than I did an hour ago.
232 If Labour disbanded, it would be like losing an embarassing uncle who you want to keep away from public view.
227 - Lions don’t prowl the immediate vicinity and it’s far too expensive to carry the ordnance.
We need to regroup to a more realistic interpretation of our place in the world. Who do we want nukes to protect us from? This is not the 1980s.
237 And that is probably the likeliest outcome, IMO.
239. Rape policy?
242 Actually, trident isn’t terribly expensive.
239.Have you seen how the Home Office/Justice Department is working? Please God I hope we are only doing such things because we are in coalition and not because we actually believe that the world would be a better place if we locked up fewer criminals.
Morris Dancer @239
IHT, Marriage allowance, CGT, some vague green stuff, DPM and Chief Sec?
Thought that was alright. Learnt a few things I didn’t know before, not least that Gus ODonnell is quite likeable.
242.You sound like Ramsay Macdonald
Breaking news. US Senator Menendez is throwing his toys out of the pram.
I bet Senators would be queueing to come and give evidence to a British inquiry into an American legal case.
YouGov
Latest government approval rating +2 (Approve 40%, Disapprove 38%)
YouGov
Latest YouGov/Sun voting intention CON 41%, LAB 35%, LDEM 15%
246 - Ken Clarke believes in it, as have most post war Tory Home Secretaries to be fair..
The windpower crap and the homeopathy look like it’s Huhne 1-Lansley 1
247, I’d call CGT a compromise, both sides giving way.
Agree on the other bits, but I’d be unsurprised if IHT/marriage allowance come back either as the Tory side of the Year Five Pre-election Giveaways or in the manifesto of 2015.
As for the jobs, you’ve got to give some. It’s fair enough, I think.
Not a bad effort from toenails. Could have pinned a few people down some more, especially Balls and Clegg. Also, I felt he fawned over Dave a little too much.
But quite well done.
Still, it did succeed in making me hate Ed Balls *even more*, and I wouldn’t have thought that possible.
Well! That Toenails hour was much ado about nothing.
Not a single new fact came to light. I wonder how much money the BBC spent on this non program?
Nick robinson though, can’t keep his dislike of the coalition from overwhelming the whole piece.
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: by far the most significant term of the coalition was its duration. The Lib Dems made a big mistake signing up for five years.
235
I suspect history will be a lot kinder to Brown than Clegg.
248 - When someone can tell me what purpose would be served by replacing Trident other than getting the world’s most expensive pen1s extens1on, I’ll be open to persuasion. SeanT spent one afternoon trying to persuade me that Britain was in imminent danger of being nuked by Iran. Forgive me if I raise an eyebrow in disbelief.
YouGov Labour Leadership poll:
http://today.yougov.co.uk/politics/labour-leadership-results
252 - Morris.
Swapping IHT and marriage tax for a detox, was like the Tories walking in to a party, leaving a bottle of piss in the fridge and taking a nice Pol Roger home.
valleyboy @256
I suspect not. Clegg will never get the opportunity to go over budget by 200 billion in 8 years during a boom. as Brown did.
Brown = worst minister evah.
@254:
Mr Cock, were you watching the same programme as me? Toenails was jizzing his pants with glee over the Coalition in the one I saw, much as he was during the negotiations.
@255:
You’re assuming that Nick Clegg isn’t well aware of the possibility of tying the Lib Dems permanently to the Tories, and finds it desirable.
242. Antifrank. Nuclear blackmail? What a triumph, for a small fanatical state with two and a half rockets with nukes on, it would be to say: “Britain backs down because they dare not face the consequences of opposing us”. Especially if the issue being disputed was a matter of survival to us.
The real point is that two and a half rockets with nukes on could seriously change our landscape. The ability to retaliate with certainty does just a little to reduce the probability of needing to do so. Pity nukes were invented but they were. Life’s tough.
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear! Take a look at ALL the pictures of the Labour politicians from this Mail article. Some scenes may be unsuitable for some people (I’m thinking of the last picture).
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1298699/Howzat-Cameron-hits-twice-plays-cricket-Delhi.html
@259:
As Hughes said at the start, Dave was throwing policies overboard left, right and centre without being prompted. He didn’t say what they were, but I think we can guess.
235
I suspect history will be a lot kinder to Brown than Clegg.
by valleyboy July 29th, 2010 at 10:07 pm
Oh my maiden aunt! Brown destroyed everything he to touched, and that includes large parts of Britain.
262 - Which small fanatical state are you proposing us to get into a confrontation with and how? Draw a 1000 mile radius around the UK. Now draw a 2000 mile radius around the UK. I’m genuinely interested.
258 - Much as expected, but a huge gap on this
Is most likely to lead Labour to victory at the next General Election
D.Mil 52
E Mil 24
242. Trident is relatively cheap for what it does, which is provide a great deal of defensive cover - it (and the French and American deterrents) stopped Saddam using WMDs in the 1990-1 war, when he really did have them. The point is, we don’t know where the next threat’s coming from and that uncertainty is reason enough. Though Iran and N Korea as possibles will do for starters.
262 In reality, the US or French would *probably* stand up for us if we faced serious nuclear blackmail, but I’ve never been keen on the idea of relying on someone else to look after us.
268 - In what circumstances do you see us anywhere near Iran or North Korea in a confrontation where we’re going to make the difference?
261. What colour are your spectacles Martin?
Or perhaps it’s the contact lenses that has made you myopic.
236. After Clegg said it, had it been available as a dealmaker, Brown would have offered it.
Fact is, a Lab-LD coalition was viable politically but only as a minority government with all the danger that brings. That unchallengable truth hung over all the negotiations (it’s notable that no other party seems to have been involved at any stage).
266 I suppose in 1930 one could have credibly argued that no State within a 1000 mile radius would ever again pose a threat to us.
As we know, things turned out differently.
265
Weathercock
I repeat what I said earlier. History will be kinder to him than Clegg.
If we are still alive perhaps we can discuss this in 10 years time.
265. History usually tends to extremes or irrelevance. Hardly any PMs are remembered for being OK: they’re disasters, heroes or forgotten. Brown will be remembered as a disaster.
277, Brown was a bloody stool of a Prime Minister. The entire process was agony, and when you look and saw what happened it fills you with shock and dread.
269- Sean- what about the Italians, Germans, Spannish, Japannese, Swedish, Dutch…….
Why the heck do we have to spend money on nuclear weapons? Stupid, ignorant waste of money.
274 - We have rather better reasons for believing it today. The nearest country that hasn’t been a stable democracy for two generations is Spain, followed by Portugal. I suppose if we were looking for a small fanatical state, the Vatican City might fit the bill.
The question is whether the insurance premium is worth paying. The arguments of those in favour of shelling out a large sum of money at a time when we are broke are in effect reduced to “well, you can never really trust the Jerries”. We have better uses for the money.
266/274 - Trident is a cheap insurance policy, this is an occasion where the Healeyite wing of the Labour Party (Me) and the Thatcherite Tories (Sean Fear) are right, and the combination of the Lib Dems, leftist CNDers and Tory appeasers are wrong.
271. The purpose of a deterrent is to prevent a confrontation.
I agree that neither is likely but both are possible. A descent of Iran back to the radicalism of the 1980s is not out of the question, nor is an attack by North Korea on shipping of countries allied to South Korea. In both cases, the risk is of rogue states carrying the war to Britain or British interests, rather than Britain taking it to them.
Those are the known unknowns. There are many more unknown unknowns, which we can at best guess at.
253 The problem is that most post-war Tory Home Secretaries were quite happy to preside over rising crime rates, so long as they could appear civilised in the right circles.
275.valleyboy.In that Brown’s personal unpopularity negated Labour’s gerrymandering and returned Britain to sound governance,I’d agree that the cursed Brown will be blessed by honest historians.
Ref Nick Robinson’s programme. Anyone else notice that there was a Gordon Brown sized hole not just in the programme (which is fair enough - if he didn’t want to take part, there was no compulsion to do so), but also apparently in the negotiations - hence the complete unpreparedness the Labour ‘negotiating team’ had on first meeting the Lib Dems. Amazing that while even the civil service had gamed out scenarios, Labour, in government, hadn’t given the first thought to it.
My expectation is that Gordon Brown’s reputation has got nowhere near touching bottom yet. The Cabinet’s views on the economic policies of the last few months have yet to be fully expressed, but the early signs are not promising for Gordon Brown’s reputation to be salvaged.
280 One always has good reason to believe that war will never happen again, until it happens. Were one a Briton alive in 1890, one could point to decades of unbroken peace, save for the occasional colonial war.
279 Well, most of the countries you mention have US nuclear weapons located on their soil, and would expect the US to threaten their use should it become necessary.
220 coldstone - Many schools “expressed an interest” in academy status but not so many have yet “applied” for academy status.If you watched the debate in Parliament you would have seen Liebour complaining about the lack of time for “consultations” with “their communities”. That’s exactly what the schools are doing. Can’t see how that misleads anyone! Of course the DT, just like most of the MSM want a controversial headline, parroting Liebour and union claims.
257 Valleyboy. But all the PhD theses in 50 years time will be using Order-Order and PBC as primary sources. So what sort of write-ups do you think Gordo will get? And not to mention all the NuLabour memoirs over the coming years which will make Mandy’s damning with faint praise his best testimonial.
287 - I believe that’s a polite way of saying “you can never really trust the Jerries”. I have no doubt that war will continue to break out regularly. We seem as a nation to have forgotten that we don’t inevitably have to get involved in them.
283 - You are worried that Labour will outflank the coalition on crime aren’t you?
Betting Post.
Having a look at the UKPR write up on the Labour Leadership Poll, EdM’s odds will shorten on Betfair on the back of it.
2.98 etc were a decent buy.
289 - You worry about what those PhD students will make of Martin Day’s blogs.
Straw, MacAskill and Hayward need to stand firm and say no. They need to send a message that US senators need to recognise their jurisdiction. It is outrageous that a US senator thinks he can summon British citizens to an American inquiry into the legal (if disagreeable) decisions of an administration in Britain.
285 - David, we’re back to the numbers, perhaps as few as 15 more Labour MP’s and 15 fewer Tories would’ve brought Darling, Miliband etc into the game, but the numbers weren’t there.
antifrank @292:
Fans of Freud will have struck pay dirt.
So to speak.
285. David, Brown has been invisible since he left Downing St.
It is also obvious that He didn’t want anything do do with a coalition. If ever there was a mutual hate, it was across the floor of the commons as Clegg and Brown spat at each other at PMQ’s.
About that program, see my comments @ 256.
255 ‘Still, it did succeed in making me hate Ed Balls *even more*, and I wouldn’t have thought that possible.’
If Labour ever wonder why the chances of a Lib/Lab coalition were so remote, they only need watch Ed Balls contributions to that programme. I suspect the odds are even further against them now.
David Herdson @270:
Haven’t you missed out some points. The Israelis have nukes, and are probably far more ready to use them. If the UK didn’t have nukes, then the rather larger US ones would probably have done the business - or are you pretending that the UK has a foreign policy distinct from US interests. On your argument, if Sweden deployed nukes, they could ensure world peace.
roger at 233 “If Labour disbanded the country would lose its conscience.”
No. The country would merely lose a handy mechanism by which allows pompous and out of touch mildly rich buffoons to salve their consciences, about being pompous and out of touch mildly rich buffoons, by voting for something that they very mistakenly believe will somehow benefit those of us they invariably regard as the lower orders.
Oh, and we’re supposed to be grateful to you for doing so as well.
287 ‘Well, most of the countries you mention have US nuclear weapons located on their soil, and would expect the US to threaten their use should it become necessary.’
Documentation exists that shows many of those countries actually had full access to US weapons under special arrangements. Whether that remains the case now is an unknown.
So while Gordon was being accused of “clinging on to office”, we now know it was Clegg / Laws who wanted him to cling on for even longer ! More to wring out of the Tories perhaps.
This Clegg is a duplicitous bas***d.
298. Israel was under massive pressure from the White House not to retaliate which together with the pounding Iraq was already getting and an agreement to deploy special forces in Western Iraq to tie down or take out rocket launchers, just did enough to keep them out.
Whether or not Britain does have a foreign policy independent of the US, it certainly should have. France does. It is foolish to rely on the goodwill and good judgement of individuals as yet unknown.
I don’t get your Sweden reference. The UK deterrent is to protect this country and its allies.
That’s a very interesting YG and worth its own thread - the first concrete evidence that David M has a firm lead. The fact the Diane’s votes don’t transfer en masse to Ed M is significant.
Some of the other data is interesting too. As you’d expect, most members see themselves as left of centre, but the CLP membership is notably more likely to say it’s far left than the union members. That’s what I’d have expected, but it’s interesting to have it confirmed.
As tim says, the figure that leaps out is the ‘most likely to win’ difference - that’s what will decide it if things stay as they are. It’s too soon to say that DM has it in the bag as events can intervene (though less so in August when everyone’s away), but he should now be at least 2-1 on.
We alraedy have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. Why do we need “better” weapons. Killing everyone in the world 23 times over is not enough ?
303. Beautifully timed. New thread on that subject now up.
291 That would be a sensible thing for them to do. Crime really wasn’t a political issue, until Tony Blair made it so, as Shadow Home Secretary.
But I do actually believe Michael Howard was right to lock up more criminals, as were his Labour successors.
David Herdson @302:
If nukes are such a force for good, then much better for them to be in the hands of a peace-loving country like Sweden, rather than the war-mongering Brits! They might even use them to stop the UK mounting illegal wars.
You are living in cloud-cuckoo land if you think that the Brits could (in any real scenario) deploy nukes in any forseeable geo-political conflict without US approval (and they would only need them for political support - not because they are needed).
Iran, North Korea etc also apply your argument of “we need nukes (and chemical and biological weapons?)” just in case. Presumably, you support their case as well?
265 - that pic of Balls in lycra shorts should have been D-noticed. Its enough to make me consider taking up lesbianism.
antifrank @286:
Yes, I think that there is going to be a few more memoirs published that will see his reputation sink further, and of course the debt we will be paying off for years to come.
Josh @293
Did he summon them or did he simple send a request? A very important distinction.