[Closed] How big a price will Clegg have paid for his seat at the top table?

Ernie - I've no idea who in labour supports electoral reform

How about Alan Johnson for starters ? ........a Labour leadership contender so presumably a fairly senior Labour politician.

[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8066663.stm ]Johnson urging electoral reform[/url]

OK - so you're now saying they did indeed talk to them?

I didn't say that they didn't speak to them. What I was taking issue with was the idea that they spoke to both sides [b]at some length[/b]

I don't think they did.

I think they spoke to the Tories [b]at some length[/b]

Then as a negotiating tactic quite late on went and spoke briefly to Labour, before coming back to the Tories.

I don't think there was ever any serious negotiation with Labour.

"Gordon Brown should [b]hold a national referendum[/b] on electoral reform"

Same referenum offer, then, from one senior - and seems he got in a bit of trouble for it, from that BBC piece

started meeting in the morning, shifted position late that evening - that's [i]some[/i] length, surely ?

It's all relative.

What did they say?

I expect they spent most of the time deciding whether to order in Bourbons or Jammy Dodgers.

It's all relative.
What did they say?

grum - Member
Do you think when the Lib Dems get obliterated at the next election Nick Clegg might try standing as a Tory instead?

If he did that he'd either have to move constituency or the Tories would have to do some amazing stuff.

Yeah maybe they'll give him a safe Tory seat somewhere.

Yeah maybe they'll give him a safe Tory seat somewhere.

The House of Lords?

Here you go. Nice unbiased reporting form the FT.

[url= http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2010/10/did-the-lib-dems-ever-want-a-coalition-with-labour/ ]click[/url]

unbiased but basically just recanting other peoples' versions given 5 months later, bathed in the glow of hindsight and the need to protect theor own posisitions and actions. Bit like calling the radio coverage of Prime Minister's QUestions unbiased; clearly true, but still no clarity:

It does state that they had about 3.5 hrs of talks though - and that these were then used to improve the deal they got from Dave on AV (possibly incorporating giving a false impression of what Labour offered regarding voting) rather than CLegg taking a principled stance

I'll stick by my original suggestion that you questioned

the way I see it is that they prob did a deal with whoever offered the best chance of a change in the voting system

I'll stick by my original suggestion that you questioned

But the quote from Andrew Adonis says "we had about three and a half hours (of talks)….we didn’t reach an advanced stage of negotiations."

This was 4 days after the election.

You are being obdurate.

So they began their principled approach, didn't like what they saw on offer and went off to the alternative. 3.5 hrs of formal disussion (plus who knows what else informally) and maybe some disinformation later they are offered a deal that likely could never be bettered by labour with such a fragile number of seats when aggregated. Unless Labour said they could have AV on a plate, it was never going to get serious.

I'd ask in what way would it be in the interests of either of those individuals to say (5 months later) anything other than "nah, we were just going through the motions" - the parliamentary equivalent of "I never fancied her anyway" ?

3.5 hrs of talks regarding possible coalition is, in my view, talking at some length. Clearly we differ on that. Regardless, I suspect the outcome was "the best chance of a change in the voting system" - improved by virtue of their talking to labour.

("I did not have sexual relations with that Labour") 😉

Here's what the [url= http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/05/lib-dems-labour-clegg-tories ]New Statesman[/url] said about it.

let Cameron run a minority government.

Would have been irresponsible given the financial/economic crisis - it would not have lasted more than a few months. The arithmetic for a LibLab govt was bad, and forming a govt with the party that just lost the election would be weak too. Nick's a bright bloke and I'm sure he knew he risked his political cache. He was being principled, not a sell out for deputy leader. As party leader, what position do you think he should have taken? PM's boot cleaner?

ConDem was the only combo that arithmetically worked. Don't blame the politicians: it was our votes, using a crappy two-party voting system that produced the bad arithmetic!

scaredypants - Member

"Gordon Brown should hold a national referendum on electoral reform"

Same referenum offer, then, from one senior

Why highlight "a national referendum" scaredypants, have you got a problem with that ? If it had been tied to the general election as Johnson had suggested, then it would have put enormous pressure on any incoming Tory government to honour it, so not a bad move by Johnson, even though I'm no great fan of his. If you want more senior Labour politicians who support PR then google it yourself, I can't be bothered - you could start with Peter Hain.

EDIT : Not the "same referendum offer" at all, Johnson was suggesting a referendum on PR, something which most of the electorate would probably have supported.

Would have been irresponsible given the financial/economic crisis

Putting his weight behind Osbourne's policies [b]is[/b] responsible ?

He was being principled, not a sell out for deputy leader.

Are you on the same planet as the rest of us ? Tuition fees ?

what position do you think he should have taken? PM's boot cleaner?

Well for all the influence he's ended up exerting, boot cleaner would seem like a step up.

There is only one reason for Clegg's actions and it has already been stated on this thread :-

I think the fact that he is a right-wing free-market neo-liberal probably came into it too.

Of course that profile would have enabled him to climb in to bed with NuLab too which I'm sure he'd have happliy done had the numbers been favourable.

No seriously I disagree with the idea that Nick, Vince etc have been seduced by [silly voice] [i]lust-for-power[/i]. But I do think Cameron has smoked them like kippers. 😀

Let's see what happens when AV is rejected. Nick and Vince will have a powerful excuse to break off the coalition. If they do, it will be to save their careers from political oblivion, and I'll change my mind and agree with you. If the coalition remains, you're wrong, IMHO.

Why highlight "a national referendum" scaredypants, have you got a problem with that ?

The vote on AV was no concession. The introduction of AV would have been. Referendums are extraordinary rare in the Britain compared to other comparable countries, the Tories didn't even bother with a referendum when Britain joined the EEC. And the last Labour government didn't bother with referendums on issues such as whether there should be direct mayoral elections in London, or the GLA. No one was asked if they wanted the first past the post system, there was no need for a referendum to change it. The Tories gave the LibDems nothing, and the AV referendum was designed simply so that the question of electoral reform would not be raised again for a very long time. [b]Any future Labour government will now struggle to introduce electoral reform without a referendum as a result of the precedence established by the Tories. Smart move by the Tories, stupid move by the LibDems[/b].

it would have put enormous pressure on any incoming Tory government to honour it

Lib Dem voters make me laugh,
''I voted LibDem but I never thought they would actually have the audacity to get any power''
HA!

Clegg's got his oar in, I would be happy with that.

ooohh its got onto AV on question time

watch paddy explode!

I so enjoyed watching Paddy pwn that smug twit Murray.

No problem with it Ernie. Highlighting it because you were implying in yr earlier post that labour might have introduced electoral reform without one

No I didn't. I said that a referendum wasn't necessary. Why can't you read what I'm saying - is my English that bad ?

No wait, it's that you just miss out the bits you don't want to read, RE : [i]"the BBC link you put up suggested that Johnson was promoting AV+, not PR"[/i]

And yet the link clearly says in black and white :

[i]"Most seats in the Commons would be filled with locally elected MPs, but the remainder would be allocated by proportional representation according to the number of votes cast for each party. "[/i]

So Johnson's proposals were to introduce an element of PR. I don't necessarily support Johnson's idea, but it a very obvious example of senior Labour politicians being committed to electoral reform, something which appeared to doubt was the case.

BTW, you can respond to this post if you like scaredypants, but I doubt whether I'll bother much more - you appear to be more interested in nitpicking and "scoring points", which frankly I can't see much point in.

Oxboy - Member

Lib Dem voters make me laugh

And BNP voters make [i]me[/i] laugh. BNP voters like you Oxboy.

Oxboy - Member

The BNP got a councillor in about 5 miles away too.
Not protest voting either, people are beginning to open their eyes, lets hope you lot wake up soon eh?!!! Before I have to say I told you so . . .

Oxboy - Member

The BNP and UKIP are the ONLY parties who actually, genuinely give a sh*t about the country.

Oxboy - Member

You lot go on about being disgusted at the BNP being Racists etc, I'm disgusted at the state of our Country our MP's and the massive influx of immigrants and the drain on our taxes.

No I didn't. I said that a referendum wasn't necessary. Why can't you read what I'm saying - is my English that bad ?

No wait, it's that you just miss out the bits you don't want to read, RE : "the BBC link you put up suggested that Johnson was promoting AV+, not PR"
And yet the link clearly says in black and white :
"Most seats in the Commons would be filled with locally elected MPs, but the remainder would be allocated by proportional representation according to the number of votes cast for each party. "

[b]The new system Mr Johnson favours is known as Alternative Vote Plus[/b] and was ...

Anyway, g'night

Thanks for confirming that you are more interested in nitpicking and scoring points scaredypants. I appreciate it. And I will now take that into consideration in the future, before I naively enter into any discussions with you.

well if the scottisw exit polls are right lib dems will have no seats in scotland 3% forecast down to 3 % thus no seats at all

~~Buzz imb no buying it. Clegg made a huge blunder and he will(hopefully) pay the price. He misjudged the electorate, his own party and the tories

seriously he looksso lightweight amongst lightweights

I'm not familiar with MSP election numbers from the past but Jeebus, the LDs polling figures are woeful. They're down in the hundreds 😯 Looking like the swing is towards the SNP so far. TeeJ, you must be nursing an enormous erection this evening 😉

Clegg was damned if he did, damned if he didn't. Look at the alternative scenarios:
Attempted coalition with Labour - already broken his promise to deal with the party with highest support, looks like he's supporting the party which "lost" the election, part of a "government" which would struggle to get anything through parliament given they were still a minority government - I can't see them coming out of it looking good.
Supporting Conservative minority government - they'd have had no real power, the government would have struggled to get business done and they'd have been blamed for not doing the right thing for the country at a time of need - I can't see them coming out of it looking good.

ISTM the problem wasn't what they decided to do, but the election result which forced them into taking such decisions - such irony that a hung parliament results in long term damage for the LDs.

I agree with paddys comments on newsnight ; that labour being split on av meant it was doomed, milliband looks weak for it, unable to unite his party - dinosaurs like Prescott still carry some weight with voters.
which brings us nicely onto the next sham reform of camerons 'new politics' the house of lords.......

Clegg was damned if he did, damned if he didn't. Look at the alternative scenarios:

You missed off: Don't go into a coalition with either of them, forcing a fresh election one way or another
The electorate were clearly underwhelmed by the lot of them, they could have gone away and re-thought their plans
Brown would probably have gone and possibly Gideon too and maybe they would have come back with policies that suited people better

or maybe not 🙂

In what way do you imagine a fresh election would have helped the UK out of crisis, or even yielded a significantly different result? It's like saying "Sorry electorate, you gave the wrong answer; try again". LibDems would have been blamed for not grasping the nettle after the first result. Damned every way.

Somebody pointed up that Nick has appeared too chummy with Cameron, esp. the interview on the lawn. I agree and think that was his error, what has turned off his support.

AV+ is a proportional representation system, proposed by Lord Jenkins.

I agree with paddys comments on newsnight ; that labour being split on av meant it was doomed,

Yes I heard Ashdown claim that it's the Labour Party's fault. It must come as a huge relief to him to know that it wasn't the LibDems fault.

I don't know why folk are saying a minority conservative government would not have worked - the SNP minority government has in Holyrood.

It would have meant that they Tories would have needed to persuaded other parties to vote for them - a great moderating influence and would have meant no stupidity like the NHS reforms.

Its clear to me that that is what clegg should have done had he not been seduced by the prospect of ministerial titles.

He has finished the lib dems as apolitical force by supporting this tory government

He has finishad the lib dems as apolitical force by supporting this tory government

I've no real love for them as a party but things are too bi-partisan already.

Whoever ran the "YES" campaign seems to have made a pig's ear of explaining AV and what the benefits would be. That's the sad bit. Unless something unbelievable happened last night with the voting, we've missed out on a great chance to shovel in electoral reform.

I do wonder though, would we be ANY better off from that standpoint if LD hadn't cuddled up with the tories ? (a vote wouldn't have been lost, but the issue proably wouldn't have come up to any real extent IMO - given that Labour rejected the request from LibDems to bring it in)

Loving the way the Libs are getting all bent out of shape about Tory policy when it comes to AV but are perfectly happy to go along with anything else.

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/06/liberal-democrats-david-cameron-election ]Titty Lips all round[/url]

Libs ... are perfectly happy to go along with anything else

We're livid about every stinking compromise, esp. tuition fees. But it's the nature of attempting a stable coalition government. We believe and have the nerve to stick to that principle, even if we despise our Tory bedfellows.

It's the nature of coalition govt.s to do as you're told in order to get half a compromise on one issue ?

I thought the nature of a coalition govt. was that a range of views get to be represented and that a rabidly ideological govt. can be tempered.

From the BBC Vote2011 site:

😆

A crumb of comfort for Nick Clegg. According to BBC polling expert David Cowling, if these local results were repeated on a national level - and first-past-the-post was retained - the Lib Dem leader would still keep his seat. His colleagues in Cambridge, Manchester Withington and Bradford East wouldn't be so lucky though.

Oh teh ironing.

Not a single lib dem who ran got a seat in Manchester. 😆

Looks like the Lib-Dems have been nuked from outer-space

That'll learn them for getting into bed with the nasty party

While I'm glad that they're getting their comeuppance, I hope that people don't lose sight that this is a Tory govt. and that the Libs aren't the party that need removing next time around.

We're livid about every stinking compromise, esp. tuition fees. But it's the nature of attempting a stable coalition government. We believe and have the nerve to stick to that principle, even if we despise our Tory bedfellows.

but the issue proably wouldn't have come up to any real extent IMO - given that Labour rejected the request from LibDems to bring it in

To ensure that every MP is supported by the majority of their constituents voting at each election, we will hold a referendum on introducing the Alternative Vote for elections to the House of Commons.

You may note how the labour leader campaigned and how Dave campaigned to see which side supported AV- Clegg has ****ed up big time.

I'm really disappointed by the apparent failure of AV. Sure it wasn't the perfect system by any means but a step in the right direction. Now we are condemned to the same old shite indefinitely.

Next general election - I know who I don't want to vote for (Labour, Tory or Lib Dem), so who do I vote for?

**** it, I'm moving to Scotland.