Liberal democrats

The Tunnel Ridge Fault election

At times the chasm between Britain’s political parties is as great as the San Andreas Fault. Sometimes the difference is more like a small rift, a matter of tone not policy. In this year’s election, the difference between the parties is somewhere in between, like the lesser-known Tunnel Ridge Fault in Eastern California. In part, the appearance of only minor differences may explain why the polls are showing such different things; some predict that Labour will hang on to power, others that the Tories will be able to win. But campaigning will bring out the differences between the parties – and the party leaders – into full view to an

Oh, and the Lib Dems too…

Nick Clegg – who he?  According to a poll this morning, that’s what two-thirds of the country will be thinking when they see the Lib Dem leader on their screens over the next few weeks.  But, regardless, he and his party are worth paying attention to.  Most importantly, of course, because of the possibility of a hung parliament.  But there’s also the matter of the leaders’ debates, in which Clegg will have a bigger platform than he’s ever had before.  You sense that Lib Dems activists think they really matter this time around. So all eyes on Cowley St, where Clegg kicked off his party’s election campaign earlier.  Two things

The Inter-Generational Election

Geoffrey Wheatcroft has kicked off the election campaign with possibly the most depressing article I have ever read about British politics. Jetting off to the States for an academic engagement, the old curmudgeon says he feels no regret at missing an election in which he has lost interest.  This say more about the author of the piece than the election, which promises to be the most fascinating in my adult life. But then I am nearly twenty years younger than Mr Wheatcroft. His central argument is that the Labour and Conservative messages are uninspiring. The Labour government will admit that the situation is dire, but claim it would be worse

Now’s the time

If there’s anything we don’t already know about today, then I’m struggling to find it.  The election will be declared for 6th May.  Brown will make a pitch which bears close resemblance to his interview in the Mirror today: “We have come so far. Do we want to throw this all away?”  Cameron will say that the Tories are fighting this election for the “Great Ignored”.  Clegg will claim that the Lib Dems represent “real fairness and real change”.  A hundred news helicopters will buzz around Westminster.  A thousand blog-posts (including this one) will have headlines to the effect of “And so it begins…”.  And we’ll all read the Guardian’s

Two steps forward for the Tories, one step backwards for the Lib Dems

Last week, the Tories strengthened their tax-cutting credentials with a smart policy on national insurance.  I’m sure you didn’t miss it.  But one part of the recent Tory resurgence is, to my mind, being underplayed: they now have a much stronger message on government waste.  After all, the NI policy is being funded by cutting waste.  And then there was that spoof website which pulled the limelight onto Labour’s wasted spending.  And then there are the interviews in which Tory frontbenchers – such as William Hague today – say stuff like: “If there’s waste in government spending, which the Labour Government says there is, we should be saving the waste,

The Lib Dems attack Labservatism

In this post-expenses election, there is going to be a considerable vote going for the none of the above party. The Lib Dems are clearly determined to try and tap into this vote. At PMQs in recent weeks, Nick Clegg has constantly sought to attack Labour and the Tories as different sides of the same coin. Last night in his closing statement, Vince Cable accused Labour of being ‘in hock’ to militant unions and the Tories to millionaires with their snouts in the trough. The message their trying to get across is clear: they’re both as bad as each other. Now, the Lib Dems have launched quite an effective site

Fraser Nelson

Osborne’s silent victory

I think Osborne’s main victory tonight would be to reassure those who thought him a clueless idiot. The left demonise him, and it’s easy for the right to despair at him too (yes, guilty). But the figure we saw tonight was calm, collected and assured – and I reckon this was his achievement. He allayed fears. Expectations of his performance would have been rock bottom, and he’d have surpassed them easily. He was playing it safe. Vince Cable did his after-dinner speaking comedy act (I met William Hague in the ‘spin room’ afterwards, who swears that some of Cables lines were nicked from his repertoire), and the studio audience loved

Do Debates Really Help the Liberal Democrats?

Well, in one sense, yes of course they do. By putting Vince Cable and, later, Nick Clegg up against their Conservative and Labour peers the Lib Dems are granted a status and respect they never achieve in other circumstances. So in terms of exposure and credibility then yes the debates help the Liberal Democrats. The format helps too: since Labour and the Tories will sensibly ignore the Liberals the third party is rarely tasked with the awkward business of defending its own proposals. Instead it can scamper around picking off the low-hanging fruit dangling from the Labour and Toriy trees. Since, god help us, there’s no shortage of that then

Few fireworks – but solid performances from Cable and Osborne<br />

So now we know what happens when you put three would-be finance ministers into a room, and start asking them questions.  There’s plenty of esoteric language, a good dash of posturing – and next to no fireworks.  Thinking about it, perhaps we shouldn’t have expected much else. Not that the pyrotechnics were completely absent, of course.  Both Cable and Darling rounded on Osborne over the Tories’ national insurance plans, and Osborne hit back with some well-directed attacks on Labour’s own tax and spend agenda – even getting Darling to waver and admit that a “death tax” is no longer on the cards.   But, for the most part, calm and

Chancellor’s debate: live blog

2057, PH: We’ll sign off for now. I’ll be back with a summary post shortly. 2057, JF: Osborne gets his closing statement just right, sounding humble and emphasising this is the voter’s choice. I expect Osborne will be very satsified with his night’s work. 2055, PH: And Osborne has the closing word.  He’s not quite as direct as Cable – saying that the Lib Dems won’t be in government, and that the Tories have “shown, under the leadership of David Cameron” that they’ve got what it takes – but its a neat enough closer. 2054. PH: Punchy stuff from Cable, who says that you can’t trust Labour because they got

A smart move by Osborne – but he needs to ready himself for his opponents’ attacks

There’s little doubting it: the Tory plan to (at least partially) reverse Labour’s national insurance hike has handed George Osborne a high-calibre weapon for tonight’s TV debate.  It is, I suspect, an attractive and attention-grapping policy in itself.  But it also helps the shadow Chancellor paint the Tories as the party of aspiration.  Or, as Tim Montgomerie has put it: “Seven out of ten working people will be better off if Cameron becomes Prime Minister.” But announcing the policy this morning has also given Alistair Darling and Vince Cable a chance to very publicly denounce it later today.  We’ve already had a preview of what’s likely to form the central

Three Sunday polls have growing Tory leads

We’re operating in or around the margin of error here, so we can’t be certain whether this is truly the result of the Budget – but it’s still striking that three polls in tomorrow’s papers have growing Tory leads.  The ICM poll for the News of the World has the Tories up one to 39 percent, Labour down one to 31, and the Lib Dems on 19.   YouGov’s daily tracker has the the Tories unchanged on 37 percent, Labour down one to 32, and the Lib Dems on 19.  And Anthony Wells is reporting a BPIX poll for the Mail on Sunday, which has the Tories on 37 percent, and

Both Labour and the Tories need to get stuck into Vince

The public remains infatuated with Vince Cable. A Politics Home poll reveals that 31 percent want Cable to be chancellor. It’s a crushing endorsement: Don’t Know is his nearest rival on 24 percent, followed by Ken Clarke on 16 percent. Cable’s reputation rests on his sagacious airs and an apparent contempt for party politics. His eminence is baffling. Fleet-footed fox-trotter he may be; economic guru he is not. Andrew Neil’s interview shattered Cable’s invincibility. The Sage of Twickenham admitted to changing his mind over the HBOS Lloyds merger and his constantly shifting position on cuts was exposed. Add to that the ill-thought out Mansions Tax and Cable begins to look

Clegg’s consigliere: Lib Dems would “sustain the Tories in power”

Everyone has been guessing at what Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats would do if the voters return a hung parliament after the next election. The Lib Dem leader has sent all kinds of mixed signals. But if there is one person worth listening on the party’s intentions it is Julian Astle, the head of CentreForum, Britain’s leading Liberal think-tank, and a former political advisor to Paddy Ashdown. Astle has, in recent years, acted as one of the Lib Dem’s unofficial consiglieri – but one that has never shied away from challenging party orthodoxy. He has, for example, argued against the Liberal Democrat pledge to abolish tuition fees – showing

The Lib Dems keep ’em guessing

Last week, Nick Clegg was singing the blues.  But, this week, it’s clear that he’s doing as much as possible to distinguish his party from the others.  Indeed, his performance in PMQs yesterday was a case in point: he went out of his way to attack both Brown and Cameron, and positioned his side as the non-Unite, non-Ashcroft choice.  Given the Lib Dem’s recent history with dodgy donors, that’s a move which – at the very least – is going to ruffle a few red and blue feathers. So it’s striking, today, that the Lib Dems are probably going even heavier on the Ashcroft story than Labour.  While Peter Mandelson

Words fail me…

…when it comes to the Lib Dem’s offical election song, performed by the Liberal Democrat Community Choir: You can, er, buy it on iTunes if you like. Hat-tip: Guido

PMQs live blog | 17 March 2010

Stay tuned for live coverage from 1200. 1201: And here we go. Brown starts with condolences for fallen troops, and also for the late Labour MP Ashok Kumar and his family.  For the first question, Tony Baldry takes on Brown over his claim that defence expendintue has risen in real terms under Labour.  A note from the House of Commons library has since shown this to be “incorrect”.  Brown says that he is already writing to Chilcot to correct this.  Brown: “I do accept that, in one or two years, defence expenditure did not rise in real terms” – but it did rise in cash terms.  Not a good start

Nick Clegg pulls those fences down

Continuing the current vogue for sensible economic debate, here’s what Nick Clegg said on Radio 4 just now: ‘We’re not entering into this dutch auction about ringfencing. Good outcomes aren’t determined by drawing a redline around government departmental budgets.’ Given the current speculation about a hung parliament, you’ve got to wonder what this might mean for any potential Lib-Con partnership.  The common wisdom, almost certainly correct, is that the resulting political paralysis would sink the public finances.  But it would be intrigiuing to see if Clegg could get the Tories to tighten their fiscal plans, and perhaps even smash a few of their ringfences.

Cameron must win outright

Heaven forbid that the Tories and LibDems end up in coalition – but the Guardian asked me to write a piece war-gaming what would happen if they did. The result is here. I really do believe it would be a short-lived calamity because no one would be playing for the long-term. The Westminster system does not handle coalitions, and hung parliaments lead to second elections. From day one of any Lib-Con coalition, everyone would have an eye on that second election. The Tories would want to accuse the LibDems of recklessly pulling the plug, the LibDems would be briefing against the Tories making out that they were the only competent

34 percent  think a hung parliament is in the country’s best interests

It would be news if the Tory lead didn’t contract every Sunday. James has already noted the latest retreat in the Tory lead, detailed in the Sunday Telegraph’s ICM poll. Tory poll contractions are the new banking bailouts – so numerous you scarcely notice them. What struck me about this poll is the large minority who want a hung parliament. Not just those who think such an outcome is likely, but actively seek its realisation – 34 percent according to this poll.   I do not understand this impulse. Coalition and co-operation are laudable but, as the recent care row proves, fanciful aims. Other than fighting World Wars, modern British politics has struggled to accomodate coalitions. The Tories are losing