The news that Nick Clegg's 'world class' strategist, Ryan Coetzee, has been appointed to run the yes to EU campaign has at least one supporter:
Put your money on a big NO vote...
Showing posts with label Nick Clegg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nick Clegg. Show all posts
8 July 2015
So what did the Lib Dems actually stop the Tories doing?
Today's budget rather gives the lie to the Lib Dem 'Scooby Doo' message of 'look what the Tories would have done if it wasn't for the meddling Lib Dems'.
The budget contained two major public policy changes. Firstly switching the focus from the government subsidising low pay to the government forcing employers to pay a living wage. And secondly lengthening the period of fiscal consolidation to smooth the public spending cuts. These two changes would almost certainly (rightly) have been supported by the Lib Dems if they had remained in government (and the latter was basically the party's economic position two months ago).
The fact that both leadership candidates slammed the budget on the basis that the Tories were returning to right wing form without the Lib Dems was as predictable as it is wrong. And it is extremely worrying for the future of the party that both contenders simply basically rehashed the disasterous Coetzee/Clegg messaging - the messaging that was comprehensively rebuffed by the electorate a few weeks ago.
The Scooby Doo message was ineffective as it relied on people understanding a bunch of imponderables - it's impossible to judge the effects of things that didn't happen. And it was part of a wider failure of the Clegg leadership of failing to define a distinctive Lib Dem agenda for government meaning people could not tell what part of the coalition policy was down to which party.
But now that Osborne and the Conservatives have comandeered a fairly major part of both the Lib Dem and Labour economic policy and are likely to dominate the economic centrist space for the foreseeable future some rethinking is needed - and fast.
I don't expect Labour to come up with any credible rethink, but the Lib Dems must. If whoever wins the leadership can't find a new and better vision for the economy that understands the values being promoted by Osborne's budget today, then there is little hope for the party.
The budget contained two major public policy changes. Firstly switching the focus from the government subsidising low pay to the government forcing employers to pay a living wage. And secondly lengthening the period of fiscal consolidation to smooth the public spending cuts. These two changes would almost certainly (rightly) have been supported by the Lib Dems if they had remained in government (and the latter was basically the party's economic position two months ago).
The fact that both leadership candidates slammed the budget on the basis that the Tories were returning to right wing form without the Lib Dems was as predictable as it is wrong. And it is extremely worrying for the future of the party that both contenders simply basically rehashed the disasterous Coetzee/Clegg messaging - the messaging that was comprehensively rebuffed by the electorate a few weeks ago.
The Scooby Doo message was ineffective as it relied on people understanding a bunch of imponderables - it's impossible to judge the effects of things that didn't happen. And it was part of a wider failure of the Clegg leadership of failing to define a distinctive Lib Dem agenda for government meaning people could not tell what part of the coalition policy was down to which party.
But now that Osborne and the Conservatives have comandeered a fairly major part of both the Lib Dem and Labour economic policy and are likely to dominate the economic centrist space for the foreseeable future some rethinking is needed - and fast.
I don't expect Labour to come up with any credible rethink, but the Lib Dems must. If whoever wins the leadership can't find a new and better vision for the economy that understands the values being promoted by Osborne's budget today, then there is little hope for the party.
12 May 2015
After the rout...
Last week's results weren't a complete surprise to everyone - as far back as May 2012 I postulated that without a change of srategy the party faced an existential crisis.
The result on Thursday and the hole the party now finds itself in is a direct result of the strategy pursued by those at the very top of the party - both at Westminster and at HQ.
Nick Clegg to his credit (and in some style) has done the decent thing; taken responsibility and resigned. Now is the time for his coterie of incompetents to do the same. Tim Gordon, Hilary Stephenson, Ryan Coetzee, Tom Smithard et al should now resign too – taking responsibility for the disaster they caused and preventing any more of our membership fees going to waste on over inflated salaries. Doing this will also make sure the junior staff and volunteers – who were not responsible for the strategic decisions – aren’t blamed for their bosses failings.
And with more than 10,000 new members since Thursday - they if no-one else - deserve to have their subscriptions spent on a clean slate.
The result on Thursday and the hole the party now finds itself in is a direct result of the strategy pursued by those at the very top of the party - both at Westminster and at HQ.
Nick Clegg to his credit (and in some style) has done the decent thing; taken responsibility and resigned. Now is the time for his coterie of incompetents to do the same. Tim Gordon, Hilary Stephenson, Ryan Coetzee, Tom Smithard et al should now resign too – taking responsibility for the disaster they caused and preventing any more of our membership fees going to waste on over inflated salaries. Doing this will also make sure the junior staff and volunteers – who were not responsible for the strategic decisions – aren’t blamed for their bosses failings.
And with more than 10,000 new members since Thursday - they if no-one else - deserve to have their subscriptions spent on a clean slate.
31 December 2014
Only pizzas are delivered
Only pizzas are delivered is sound advice contained in a jargon busting document issued by the coalition government in the summer of 2013.
It's advice those around Clegg should have taken when launching the party's summer campaign earlier this year which I criticised in similar terms at the time.
And it wasn't just the jargon strewn language of the summer campaign that was a problem - it was its poverty of ambition.
Sadly, this poverty of ambition (along with some more Whitehall speak) is apparent in the party's pre manifesto - which is a collection of timid technocratic proposals - designed to keep the wheels of Whitehall turning slowly under another coalition government.
However, the public have had four and a half years of timid coalition government and so far have taken every opportunity they can of punishing the Liberal Democrats for their role in it - something those around Clegg fail to understand while continuing with their busted strategy.
They have just a few short months to change tack if 2015 is not to go down as an historic and wholly unneccessary rout.
Happy New Year!
It's advice those around Clegg should have taken when launching the party's summer campaign earlier this year which I criticised in similar terms at the time.
And it wasn't just the jargon strewn language of the summer campaign that was a problem - it was its poverty of ambition.
Sadly, this poverty of ambition (along with some more Whitehall speak) is apparent in the party's pre manifesto - which is a collection of timid technocratic proposals - designed to keep the wheels of Whitehall turning slowly under another coalition government.
However, the public have had four and a half years of timid coalition government and so far have taken every opportunity they can of punishing the Liberal Democrats for their role in it - something those around Clegg fail to understand while continuing with their busted strategy.
They have just a few short months to change tack if 2015 is not to go down as an historic and wholly unneccessary rout.
Happy New Year!
16 September 2014
Why we're not better together
Thursday's Scottish referendum looks set to go to the wire and despite the best efforts of the Westminster establishment the last days of scaremongering looks like it has only halted YES's momentum - but has clearly not turned it into any movement for the NO campaign. So its likely effect is to reduce participation and drive turnout down - particularly from those who don't usually participate in the democratic process.
The pitch of the NO campaign is basically that it is too risky and uncertain for Scotland to take any decisions other than those Westminster, Whitehall and the City of London are happy to give away to the Scots. The upsurge in YES voting intention didn't change this essential power relationship it only made the list of things the establishment were prepared to give to the Scottish Parliament to determine a bit longer (assuming the Westminster parties can agree an any of it).
The UK remains one of the world's most centralised states - with more than 95% of all public revenues and spending being the responsibility of the Treasury - just 4.4% is raised and accountable to local authorities through the Council Tax. This bureacratic over centralisation drives out local initiative - in England as much as elsewhere - and contributes to the disconnect between the government and the governed - particularly the further you go from the south east of England.
Now this isn't news and liberals have had a long held belief in political and constitutional reform - and particularly decentralising power to local communities.
So it wasn't surprising that many in the party were confident post 2010 with the Liberal Democrats part of the coalition and with Nick Clegg having responsibility for constitutional reform that progress would have been made in recasting the UK into a more modern decentralised and pluralistic democracy. Sadly reform of the House of Lords and the voting system have been an abject failure, localism proved nothing more than spin and with MPs snouts in the expenses trough like never before Clegg and the Coalition have failed to make any meaningful progress.
So all that's left of the constitutional reform agenda is the Scottish independence referendum courtesy of the SNP government in Edinburgh.
The break up of the failed centralised UK state and the opportunity to decentralise power - not just to Scotland - but to the parts of England that are being squeezed by the sucking of power and wealth into the south east ought to have been a no-brainer for the Liberal Democrats. But sadly the current leadership of the party north and south of the border have rejected a 100+ year history of campaigning for Home Rule and turned the Scottish party into an empty vessel of the Labour dominated and Tory funded unionist NO campaign.
When I was a member of the party in Scotland I never counted myself as a unionist and rejected the label vehemently - but that is sadly what they have now turned into - consigning the party to the margins in the post referendum landscape (whatever the result). A more sensible positioning as Scotland's honest broker between the unionists and nationalists would have given the party a role and relevance and made it the fulcrum of bringing both sides together after the vote.
But it is all too clear a NO vote on Thursday will send the message to the Westminster establishment - now sadly including the Liberal Democrats that they can carry on - with a few more tax trinkets thrown to Scotland and a new gimmick or two - such as more executive Mayors - to England's northern conurbations. The essential power relationship of the UK's unitary state will be unaffected and London and the south east will continue to suck in more and more people and resource. And that will only encourage the Poujadists of UKIP and promote a narrow and insular English nationalism that won't be good for any part of the current UK in the long run.
That's why I'm hoping Scots vote YES on Thursday - it's the last remaining hope to bust the system that is so clearly broken. Voting to stay together is a vote for more of the same. And that's not in anyone's best interest.
The pitch of the NO campaign is basically that it is too risky and uncertain for Scotland to take any decisions other than those Westminster, Whitehall and the City of London are happy to give away to the Scots. The upsurge in YES voting intention didn't change this essential power relationship it only made the list of things the establishment were prepared to give to the Scottish Parliament to determine a bit longer (assuming the Westminster parties can agree an any of it).
The UK remains one of the world's most centralised states - with more than 95% of all public revenues and spending being the responsibility of the Treasury - just 4.4% is raised and accountable to local authorities through the Council Tax. This bureacratic over centralisation drives out local initiative - in England as much as elsewhere - and contributes to the disconnect between the government and the governed - particularly the further you go from the south east of England.
Now this isn't news and liberals have had a long held belief in political and constitutional reform - and particularly decentralising power to local communities.
So it wasn't surprising that many in the party were confident post 2010 with the Liberal Democrats part of the coalition and with Nick Clegg having responsibility for constitutional reform that progress would have been made in recasting the UK into a more modern decentralised and pluralistic democracy. Sadly reform of the House of Lords and the voting system have been an abject failure, localism proved nothing more than spin and with MPs snouts in the expenses trough like never before Clegg and the Coalition have failed to make any meaningful progress.
So all that's left of the constitutional reform agenda is the Scottish independence referendum courtesy of the SNP government in Edinburgh.
The break up of the failed centralised UK state and the opportunity to decentralise power - not just to Scotland - but to the parts of England that are being squeezed by the sucking of power and wealth into the south east ought to have been a no-brainer for the Liberal Democrats. But sadly the current leadership of the party north and south of the border have rejected a 100+ year history of campaigning for Home Rule and turned the Scottish party into an empty vessel of the Labour dominated and Tory funded unionist NO campaign.
When I was a member of the party in Scotland I never counted myself as a unionist and rejected the label vehemently - but that is sadly what they have now turned into - consigning the party to the margins in the post referendum landscape (whatever the result). A more sensible positioning as Scotland's honest broker between the unionists and nationalists would have given the party a role and relevance and made it the fulcrum of bringing both sides together after the vote.
But it is all too clear a NO vote on Thursday will send the message to the Westminster establishment - now sadly including the Liberal Democrats that they can carry on - with a few more tax trinkets thrown to Scotland and a new gimmick or two - such as more executive Mayors - to England's northern conurbations. The essential power relationship of the UK's unitary state will be unaffected and London and the south east will continue to suck in more and more people and resource. And that will only encourage the Poujadists of UKIP and promote a narrow and insular English nationalism that won't be good for any part of the current UK in the long run.
That's why I'm hoping Scots vote YES on Thursday - it's the last remaining hope to bust the system that is so clearly broken. Voting to stay together is a vote for more of the same. And that's not in anyone's best interest.
31 August 2014
The Clacton danger for Clegg...
... the Liberal Democrats will not win the forthcoming Clacton by-election. If tonight's opinion polls turn out to be at all accurate Clacton will be the scene of the largest ever by election swing - at a massive 47.5% to UKIP.
I think a UKIP victory of that size is unlikely, but they are rightly clear favourites:
At the last local elections (the counties in 2013) UKIP were just 1,000 votes behind the Tories (8,200:7,200) with Tendring First picking up almost 4,000 votes - Labour were a bit behind in fourth and the Lib Dems and Greens fighting over avoiding fifth. On these kind of figures it is clear UKIP has the essential ingredient for winning parliamentary by-elections - local organisation and credibility.
The longer term risk for Clegg is that the expected UKIP victory doesn't just give them their first elected Westminster representation (and possibly unlocks further defections) - it consolidates UKIP as England and Wales's third party in terms of popular vote. With just eight months before the next general election there is not much time (and no evidence that Clegg or his highly paid strategists have the ability) for the Lib Dems to turn it around.
And if the Lib Dems were to come fourth (or even fifth) in the popular vote at the 2015 general election - it would be the worst result in the party's history - regardless of how many MPs were returned - and put the party's very existence at risk.
A new leader before the election might not make the difference - but what is clear is the current one is going down to a historic defeat from which the party may not recover.
I think a UKIP victory of that size is unlikely, but they are rightly clear favourites:
At the last local elections (the counties in 2013) UKIP were just 1,000 votes behind the Tories (8,200:7,200) with Tendring First picking up almost 4,000 votes - Labour were a bit behind in fourth and the Lib Dems and Greens fighting over avoiding fifth. On these kind of figures it is clear UKIP has the essential ingredient for winning parliamentary by-elections - local organisation and credibility.
The longer term risk for Clegg is that the expected UKIP victory doesn't just give them their first elected Westminster representation (and possibly unlocks further defections) - it consolidates UKIP as England and Wales's third party in terms of popular vote. With just eight months before the next general election there is not much time (and no evidence that Clegg or his highly paid strategists have the ability) for the Lib Dems to turn it around.
And if the Lib Dems were to come fourth (or even fifth) in the popular vote at the 2015 general election - it would be the worst result in the party's history - regardless of how many MPs were returned - and put the party's very existence at risk.
A new leader before the election might not make the difference - but what is clear is the current one is going down to a historic defeat from which the party may not recover.
27 August 2014
The easiest job in the world...
Nick Clegg is looking for a new member of staff - and it's the easiest job in the world.
Here's how a typical day might go...
Nick Clegg's new member of staff: "Hi can we arrange a leader's visit to your marginal seat?"
Marginal seat member of staff: "No, thanks, we'd like to win thank you"
Nick Clegg is on -43%.
Here's how a typical day might go...
Nick Clegg's new member of staff: "Hi can we arrange a leader's visit to your marginal seat?"
Marginal seat member of staff: "No, thanks, we'd like to win thank you"
Nick Clegg is on -43%.
28 June 2014
The new Lib Dem summer campaign is an admission of failure
I had the dubious priviledge earlier in the week to listen in to Nick Clegg and a couple of his teenage acolytes (who are apparently big in the campaign department these days) launching the party's summer campaign.
It is rather strangely entitled 'A record of delivery' - which sounds like the CD you might buy on the way out of the new Postman Pat movie. Nick Clegg - with his tin ear to party history - claimed this would be familiar to Lib Dem campaigners - referring to the ALC inspired 'Record of action' - but failing to understand the crucial difference.
Action is a word used by people on the street - it's what they expect their politicians to take Delivery is what people who work for the Post Office (or indeed Lib Dem activists) do.
But one big criticism isn't the ugly, soulless (focus grouped) language (or indeed the typos in the document) - it is the fact that the party is now launching a campaign that one of these acolytes - Steve Jolly, the party's 'Head of National Campaigns' - says "Tell(s) voters that we have delivered a Liberal Democrat agenda in government"
I argued as long ago as September 2011 that the big failing of Clegg's strategy was his utter inability to communicate any sort of Liberal Democrat agenda for government. So it is no wonder over the last four years that voters have decided this is a Tory government in all but name.
So now Clegg and his team are basically wanting what's left of the party to try and recover the ground (in ten months) he has lost over the last four years. You have to admire his chutzpah if nothing else. But it is a huge admission that his strategy over the last four years has utterly failed.
The other big criticism is the bit after the 'Record of Delivery'. The 'Promise of More' works where Lib Dems have dealt with local concerns, campaigned for improvements and can point to solid successes over the years. Sadly without that public acknowledgement that the party has achieved anything in goverment (which apparently the party's own polling recognises as a major issue) a promise of more sounds simply like a plea to keep Clegg and his dozens of (frightfully bright) advisers in highly paid jobs for another five years.
And the five policies that form the 'promise of more' are hardly going to set the heather on fire:
Sorry Nick - your time's up.
It is rather strangely entitled 'A record of delivery' - which sounds like the CD you might buy on the way out of the new Postman Pat movie. Nick Clegg - with his tin ear to party history - claimed this would be familiar to Lib Dem campaigners - referring to the ALC inspired 'Record of action' - but failing to understand the crucial difference.
Action is a word used by people on the street - it's what they expect their politicians to take Delivery is what people who work for the Post Office (or indeed Lib Dem activists) do.
But one big criticism isn't the ugly, soulless (focus grouped) language (or indeed the typos in the document) - it is the fact that the party is now launching a campaign that one of these acolytes - Steve Jolly, the party's 'Head of National Campaigns' - says "Tell(s) voters that we have delivered a Liberal Democrat agenda in government"
I argued as long ago as September 2011 that the big failing of Clegg's strategy was his utter inability to communicate any sort of Liberal Democrat agenda for government. So it is no wonder over the last four years that voters have decided this is a Tory government in all but name.
So now Clegg and his team are basically wanting what's left of the party to try and recover the ground (in ten months) he has lost over the last four years. You have to admire his chutzpah if nothing else. But it is a huge admission that his strategy over the last four years has utterly failed.
The other big criticism is the bit after the 'Record of Delivery'. The 'Promise of More' works where Lib Dems have dealt with local concerns, campaigned for improvements and can point to solid successes over the years. Sadly without that public acknowledgement that the party has achieved anything in goverment (which apparently the party's own polling recognises as a major issue) a promise of more sounds simply like a plea to keep Clegg and his dozens of (frightfully bright) advisers in highly paid jobs for another five years.
And the five policies that form the 'promise of more' are hardly going to set the heather on fire:
- More deficit reduction - but do it fairly
- Further increase in the personal allowance
- New 'fair' rules on immigration
- Write pensioners 'triple lock' into law
- Invest more in education
Sorry Nick - your time's up.
13 June 2014
6 June 2014
Cleggonia wins victory in the battle of Newark!
Communique no 1,843 from the Ministry of Truth was issued today at 09.42 hours:
"In the small hours of 6th June1984 2014 the forces of Cleggonia won a massive victory over the lacky forces of Protasia!
With our glorious Conservasian allies the so called 'peoples army' of counter revolutionary bourgeois Protasia was destroyed in combat. All hail Big Clegger!"
Inner Party member O'Ashdown added, "This victory confirms the superiority of IngCentrism. Under the rule of Big Clegger we have seized coalition power and we will not be relinquishing it. Coalition is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a coalition in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the coalition . The object of campaigning is campaigning. The object of Focus is Focus. The object of Connect is Connect. The object of power is power.
"I have today by way of celebration increased the Focus ration to 250 leaflets per week"
"In the small hours of 6th June
With our glorious Conservasian allies the so called 'peoples army' of counter revolutionary bourgeois Protasia was destroyed in combat. All hail Big Clegger!"
Inner Party member O'Ashdown added, "This victory confirms the superiority of IngCentrism. Under the rule of Big Clegger we have seized coalition power and we will not be relinquishing it. Coalition is not a means, it is an end. One does not establish a coalition in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the coalition . The object of campaigning is campaigning. The object of Focus is Focus. The object of Connect is Connect. The object of power is power.
"I have today by way of celebration increased the Focus ration to 250 leaflets per week"
1 June 2014
Nick Clegg's strategy exposed (part 497)
Former Winchester candidate, Martin Tod has a very good analysis of the Clegg bunker's failings.
28 May 2014
Why I'm backing Libdems4change (despite the use of a '4')
Last Thursday's election results were a disaster for the Liberal Democrats. But they were no isolated event. They come on top of almost equally disasterous results (particularly in the big cities) over the previous four years. In fact the party's losing streak began as soon as Clegg took over the leadership and before the party joined a coalition government in 2010.
The scale of that disaster is huge - no councillors in Manchester, Southampton, Islington, Lambeth or Lewisham (where just a few years ago we either ran the council or had high hopes of doing so), replaced as the official opposition in Liverpool by the Greens with a mere four councillors and returning just 118 councillors across all of London - more than half in just two boroughs: Sutton and Kingston. And that's before you get to the utterly disasterous Euro results, after a campaign fronted by Clegg and promoting his European vision.
The leadership's initial reaction to this was crass and patronising - implying those losing candidates (of which I was one) didn't work hard enough.
And then Nick Clegg gave his view, saying in a 'lady's not for turning' moment:
It is perfectly possible to govern as radical outsiders trying to change the system - but this has been repeatedly rejected by Clegg and his team. Instead Clegg argues that the Lib Dems can be either a party of protest or party of government - a line he has used ever since he was being advised by the world's worst political strategist - Richard Reeves.
So, Clegg gives me no choice. He's not prepared to change a strategy and direction that can only end one way. If he was, I would have no qualms about backing him - this battle is not, and should not, be about personalities. But Clegg and his advisors are now wedded to a strategy that plainly is not working and if he won't change, he needs to go and be replaced by someone else who will make that change.
You can sign the Lib Dems for change petition here.
The scale of that disaster is huge - no councillors in Manchester, Southampton, Islington, Lambeth or Lewisham (where just a few years ago we either ran the council or had high hopes of doing so), replaced as the official opposition in Liverpool by the Greens with a mere four councillors and returning just 118 councillors across all of London - more than half in just two boroughs: Sutton and Kingston. And that's before you get to the utterly disasterous Euro results, after a campaign fronted by Clegg and promoting his European vision.
The leadership's initial reaction to this was crass and patronising - implying those losing candidates (of which I was one) didn't work hard enough.
And then Nick Clegg gave his view, saying in a 'lady's not for turning' moment:
I don’t begrudge anyone for raising searching questions, for asking challenging questions about strategy and about leadership, all of it. It’s the most natural thing in the world after the electoral losses of the last few very very difficult days. But the question is, is that really a shortcut to doing what the Liberal Democrats want to do for Great Britain. And I think that losing our nerve, buckling down, washing our hands of all the decisions, exactly at the point that our decisions are being proved right, would be the wrong thing to do.But unlike Clegg I believe it is clear the party cannot go on as it is. The party's strategy of essentially rejecting most of its previous support base in favour of a new centrist electorate who vote for governing parties has been tested to destruction.
It is perfectly possible to govern as radical outsiders trying to change the system - but this has been repeatedly rejected by Clegg and his team. Instead Clegg argues that the Lib Dems can be either a party of protest or party of government - a line he has used ever since he was being advised by the world's worst political strategist - Richard Reeves.
So, Clegg gives me no choice. He's not prepared to change a strategy and direction that can only end one way. If he was, I would have no qualms about backing him - this battle is not, and should not, be about personalities. But Clegg and his advisors are now wedded to a strategy that plainly is not working and if he won't change, he needs to go and be replaced by someone else who will make that change.
You can sign the Lib Dems for change petition here.
27 March 2014
Nick v Nige factchecker
LBC have very conveniently published a fact checker after last night's debate. And it suggests neither participant's claims were fully compliant with the actualité...
19 September 2013
Clegg speech: more of the same please
I have finally caught up with Nick Clegg's speech having been in Birmingham for work yesterday. And it is much better than previous ones as he sought to explain some of the process of government and the Lib Dems successes both behind the scenes and in public. Most interestingly he tried to reestablish the party's 'outsider' credentials with a return to the 'red, blue' theme of the last general election - something I've been wanting to hear for a while.
But I do think Clegg has got it in for me personally with his policy announcements:
Improved leave for new parents - too late for me.
15 hours free nursery time - just after my youngest went into reception class
And now free school meals for all kids at infant schools - you guessed it in the year my youngest joins the jumiors!
But I do think Clegg has got it in for me personally with his policy announcements:
Improved leave for new parents - too late for me.
15 hours free nursery time - just after my youngest went into reception class
And now free school meals for all kids at infant schools - you guessed it in the year my youngest joins the jumiors!
18 September 2013
By-election woe for Lib Dems on day of Clegg speech
The Lib Dems failed to hold their seat in Woking in the most emphatic way - coming fourth behind UKIP.
Vote UK reports the result as follows:
Con = 1,057
Lab = 833
UKIP = 255
Lib Dem = 252
Vote UK reports the result as follows:
Con = 1,057
Lab = 833
UKIP = 255
Lib Dem = 252
29 August 2013
Clegg should listen to Alex Wilcock on Syria
Love and Liberty by Alex Wilcock sums up perfectly my view on the unfolding Syria crisis:
"One of the few bits of moral high ground we still have that lets our supporters sleep at night (and still vote for us) is that unlike the Labour Party, at least we didn’t invade another country and soak ourselves in blood in defiance of international law."
You can read the full post here.
"One of the few bits of moral high ground we still have that lets our supporters sleep at night (and still vote for us) is that unlike the Labour Party, at least we didn’t invade another country and soak ourselves in blood in defiance of international law."
You can read the full post here.
27 June 2013
Clegg to quit in Feb 2014?
Liberator 's blog reports that Lib Dem activists may be moving against Clegg as he "seems to have reached a stage in his leadership, where he can no longer disguise his contempt for his own party."
Clegg's speech at the conference of what's left of ALDC at the weekend certainly gave that impression.
I haven't heard anything that suggests an active campaign to oust Clegg, but I have heard from a number of sources within the party that Clegg had been planning to stand down as leader next February, with the aim of handing the baton on to Ed Davey.
The timing is significant in that it is a few months before the Euro elections and a new leader bounce might save the skins of four or five MEPs who are facing defeat if the party continues to bump along under Clegg's leadership. MEPs are extremely important to the party's campaigning capacity with well funded offices and the ability to engage with voters in all parts of their huge constituency regions.
But the handover plan was apparently scuppered by the rise of Tim Farron - who now looks like the favourite to win a post Clegg leadership election. A Farron leadership would be unlikely to enjoy such cordial relations with Cameron and the Tories and would certainly mean an end of the Clegg project.
The fact that these rumours are re-circulating perhaps suggests the plan is back on - with the Cleggites perhaps emboldened by Farron's internal troubles over his voting record on Gay marriage meaning he is no longer such a clear favourite.
But regardless of whether any of this is true - I think we are seeing the start of the party turning its mind to what a post Clegg leadership might look like.
Clegg's speech at the conference of what's left of ALDC at the weekend certainly gave that impression.
I haven't heard anything that suggests an active campaign to oust Clegg, but I have heard from a number of sources within the party that Clegg had been planning to stand down as leader next February, with the aim of handing the baton on to Ed Davey.
The timing is significant in that it is a few months before the Euro elections and a new leader bounce might save the skins of four or five MEPs who are facing defeat if the party continues to bump along under Clegg's leadership. MEPs are extremely important to the party's campaigning capacity with well funded offices and the ability to engage with voters in all parts of their huge constituency regions.
But the handover plan was apparently scuppered by the rise of Tim Farron - who now looks like the favourite to win a post Clegg leadership election. A Farron leadership would be unlikely to enjoy such cordial relations with Cameron and the Tories and would certainly mean an end of the Clegg project.
The fact that these rumours are re-circulating perhaps suggests the plan is back on - with the Cleggites perhaps emboldened by Farron's internal troubles over his voting record on Gay marriage meaning he is no longer such a clear favourite.
But regardless of whether any of this is true - I think we are seeing the start of the party turning its mind to what a post Clegg leadership might look like.
7 June 2013
Clegg speaks at Davey fundraiser
Ed Davey's annual fundraising dinner and auction was held last night in a Mayfair hotel. With the keynote speaker - one Nick Clegg. I suspect - given the number of corporate types there - a substantial five figure sum was raised. A far cry from the days of chicken stew and a raffle for a bottle of Lambrusco in a local scout hut...
17 April 2013
Lib Dem defamation u-turn farce
Yesterday Lib Dem MPs were going to support Conservative amendments to the Defamation Bill designed to protect large corporation's ability to threaten individuals with punative libel damages. A party spokesman gave the Independent a bizarre quote, “Unfortunately we are in a Coalition and this was one of those areas
where we could not get our Conservative colleagues to agree with us.”
Today Lib Dem Voice reports that Julian Huppert has pursuaded Conservative Ministers to put back in the bill the clauses that Lib Dem MPs voted to take out 24 hours earlier,
If this was an isolated incident of elbowarseitis then it probably wouldn't matter. But it's not. It follows in footsteps of Lib Dem MPs backing for secret courts in the teeth of opposition from the party (and manifesto commitments) and the internet snooping farce - which is soon to make an unwelcome return.
It is clear there are a cadre of advisers at the top of the party with a tin-ear for the key tenets of party beliefs and who take whatever nonsense the civil service tells them as gospel. And they are allowed to get away with it by MPs who are enjoying the trappings of power too much and have suspended both their critical faculties and belief in the political nous of the party.
There were always going to be difficult decisions as a result of entering coalition with the Tories - but Clegg's strategy always was to use the experience of government as a platform to win new support - 'Clegg Lib Dems'. So far all that has happened is that a large chunk of the party has been so disillusioned by MPs support for illiberal measures it has drifted off, preceded by many 2010 Lib Dem voters and much of the party's councillor base. And so far there is precious little evidence of them being replaced by these 'Clegg Lib Dems'.
Without significant change in attitudes (and almost certainly personnel) at the top of the party - there will be precious few left to fight the election in 2015. Further seat losses in the county elections (and particularly slipping behind UKIP in the popular vote) will take the party one stage closer to the point where it ceases to be able to function as any sort of election fighting force. The question is will what's left of the party allow that to continue?
Today Lib Dem Voice reports that Julian Huppert has pursuaded Conservative Ministers to put back in the bill the clauses that Lib Dem MPs voted to take out 24 hours earlier,
If this was an isolated incident of elbowarseitis then it probably wouldn't matter. But it's not. It follows in footsteps of Lib Dem MPs backing for secret courts in the teeth of opposition from the party (and manifesto commitments) and the internet snooping farce - which is soon to make an unwelcome return.
It is clear there are a cadre of advisers at the top of the party with a tin-ear for the key tenets of party beliefs and who take whatever nonsense the civil service tells them as gospel. And they are allowed to get away with it by MPs who are enjoying the trappings of power too much and have suspended both their critical faculties and belief in the political nous of the party.
There were always going to be difficult decisions as a result of entering coalition with the Tories - but Clegg's strategy always was to use the experience of government as a platform to win new support - 'Clegg Lib Dems'. So far all that has happened is that a large chunk of the party has been so disillusioned by MPs support for illiberal measures it has drifted off, preceded by many 2010 Lib Dem voters and much of the party's councillor base. And so far there is precious little evidence of them being replaced by these 'Clegg Lib Dems'.
Without significant change in attitudes (and almost certainly personnel) at the top of the party - there will be precious few left to fight the election in 2015. Further seat losses in the county elections (and particularly slipping behind UKIP in the popular vote) will take the party one stage closer to the point where it ceases to be able to function as any sort of election fighting force. The question is will what's left of the party allow that to continue?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)