• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Where did it all go wrong for The Liberal Democrats ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,970
Location
Taunton or Kent
Interesting. We've had Hartlepool, and Chesham/Amersham. We have Batley coming up. What's the 4th one?
That the LibDems win a seat from the government in a by-election in a seat where there is a major local issue is not really a surprise and, in itself, probably won’t worry the Conservatives much. What might worry them a bit is the way that supporters of other parties abandoned their usual allegiances and voted for the party most likely to defeat the Tories. (That is how I interpret the various shares of the vote.)


Airdrie and Shotts on 13 May: SNP hold.
There might be a fifth by-election on the way very soon as well in Wakefield, as the incumbent Tory MP (one of the red wall blue-turners) is charged and facing trial on a child sexual assault allegation. Were he found guilty, a by-election would be inevitable, but it's possible they might stand down before then, and would be a test to see if Labour get it back. I don't think the Lib Dems stand a chance though, having never come above 3rd there, so won't go into too much detail there.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
So.. is this a one-off or part of a potential new trend in by-elections? From this perspective it looks like a very well organised local protest vote that the Tories will overturn at the next general election.

I think that there's an under-reported trend of the Tory "soft underbelly"

At the moment, reporting Labour's problems gets a lot of media attention because:

a. it fits the agenda of Billionaire press barons
b. Tories want to read about Labour's struggles
c. a lot of Corbynites love to read about Labour struggling (and how "it'd have been so much better if we'd kept Magic Grandad" etc)

But (as I've mentioned before), the Tories have been struggling underneath the radar. They've gone from winning London twice in a row to coming nowhere near in the subsequent two Mayoral elections. Labour winning Canterbury seems to have annoyed the Corbynites more than it annoyed the Tories (since Rosie Duffield is The Wrong Sort Of Labour MP in their eyes). Kensington has a Labour MP. Recent LibDem gains in places like Oxfordshire only got a little press coverage.

But the media focus on Hartlepool, Hartlepool, Hartlepool, which ignores lots of other parts of the country and other narratives.

Johnson is canny enough to hold the disperate wings of the Tory party together for now, because he's good at campaigning (rubbish at governing but good at campaigning, which is why he'd rather keep stocking up short term debates about statues than deal with long term problems - remember the promises to deal with the Social Care crisis?). But Johnson isn't going to be around much longer - he wants to be getting big money from his writing - dash of a barnstorming essay for the Telegraph front page for a lot more money than you get paid as a Prime Minister. So where do the Tories go from there? Will Gove be able to assimilate with the humans? Can Patel/ Raab/ Sunak/ Hancock follow Johnson? The Tories weren't able to retain the London mayoralty without him.

But the problem for Labour right now is that... whilst the LibDems were able to attract anti-Tory voters in a traditional Tory constituency, it may be harder for Labour to attract LibDems in Batley'n'Spen - some LibDems are going to feel that Labour is still the party of Corbyn... meanwhile, some people are going to fall for the seductive patter of George Galloway... so it'll be a lot harder for Labour.

Things might be okay for the LibDems though - there's a lot of the Ken Clarke/ Rory Stuart Tories who aren't being represented by the Prime Minister/ Cabinet/ Government - they might keep supporting the Tories at the moment because Johnson is a winner and people like to vote for winners, but any subsequent Tory leader is going to struggle to keep the "wets" and the "Kippers" in the same tent, which means the LibDems could find a good niche, especially if the Tories go for a hardliner like Patel to keep the Kippers onside.
 

Gloster

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
8,290
Location
Up the creek
...especially if the Tories go for a hardliner like Patel to keep the Kippers onside.
God forbid! And that is not sexist (because she is a woman) or racist (because of her colour), but because she appears to be someone who is absolutely ruthless in what she does and totally lacking in humanity. Many of the other politicians are like that, although they try to hide it, but most are nothing like as competent in what they do.
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
2,544
Location
North West
The Lib Dems probably hold on to about 50% of their by-election gains - often depends on the time gap between the by-election and GE. The Lib Dems tend to be better constituency focused than other parties.
This proved true in the Scottish Parliament election where they held all 4 seats where they had constituency MSPs. As even that left them "over represented" they lost their regional list MSP.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,828
Location
Yorks
This is a very impressive victory for the Lib Dems.

It cannot have helped that he was a Treasury insider at a time when his boss, Selwyn Lloyd, had introduce an extremely unpopular pay policy that hit the usual targets - nurses, teachers, etc, and increased taxes on sweets, ice cream and the like (the 'Pocket Money Tax', that was not lost on me). Selwyn Lloyd was sacked in the 'Night of the Long Knives' as MacMillan desperately tried to cling to power and popularity. I hadn't heard about the anti-semitism before, but I can believe it, they were not tolerant times.

Ironically, taxing sweets and ice cream would be a pro-public health position nowadays !
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
2,544
Location
North West
There might be a fifth by-election on the way very soon as well in Wakefield, as the incumbent Tory MP (one of the red wall blue-turners) is charged and facing trial on a child sexual assault allegation. Were he found guilty, a by-election would be inevitable, but it's possible they might stand down before then, and would be a test to see if Labour get it back. I don't think the Lib Dems stand a chance though, having never come above 3rd there, so won't go into too much detail there.
I know this is a coincidence, but as Wakefield is adjacent to Batley & Spen the result there could provide an omen if there is a by-election in Wakefield.

However, if like Hartlepool, people are appalled at the reason for their MP standing down, this could help the vote for the main rival party - so Labour in Wakefield.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,828
Location
Yorks
I know this is a coincidence, but as Wakefield is adjacent to Batley & Spen the result there could provide an omen if there is a by-election in Wakefield.

However, if like Hartlepool, people are appalled at the reason for their MP standing down, this could help the vote for the main rival party - so Labour in Wakefield.

I live in the Wakefield MDC area - is there an election due in wakefield ?
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
God forbid! And that is not sexist (because she is a woman) or racist (because of her colour), but because she appears to be someone who is absolutely ruthless in what she does and totally lacking in humanity. Many of the other politicians are like that, although they try to hide it, but most are nothing like as competent in what they do.

I'd be terrified but I can see it happening - she's done her very best to outflank Tory leaders and play to the hardcore, which could do down depressingly well if there's a leadership election (since typical Tory members are generally to the right of typical Tory voters)

All of the "hostile environment" stuff is red meat to these people - Patel seems to take pleasure in this kind of thing (witness her cosplay with branded jacket, turning up at a raid) - I agree that she's been pretty ruthless and seems to love it

It doesn't actually, Emma Dent-Coad lost in 2019...not by a great deal if my memory is correct.

Ah, apologies - thanks for pointing out
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,624
Location
Another planet...
The promise was based on them being the sole party in government. When in coalition you have to compromise, especially when you are the junior partner.
Then a few years later, the DUP showed them exactly how to get what you want out of a "senior" partner... all the Lib Dumbs got was a mishandled and ultimately pointless referendum on the voting system.
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,331
Then a few years later, the DUP showed them exactly how to get what you want out of a "senior" partner... all the Lib Dumbs got was a mishandled and ultimately pointless referendum on the voting system.
That's rather airbrushing history, don't forget:

Pupil premium
Increasing income tax personal allowance to £10k
Scrapping ID Cards
Reintroduction of border exit checks
Extended shared parental leave
Right to request flexible working
Restore the link between state pension and earnings
Scrapped compulsory retirement ages
Creation of the Green Investment Bank
Various building energy efficiency schemes
Designated gardens as Greenfield sites to make infill development harder
 

deltic

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2010
Messages
3,201
Then a few years later, the DUP showed them exactly how to get what you want out of a "senior" partner... all the Lib Dumbs got was a mishandled and ultimately pointless referendum on the voting system.
As @IanXC has pointed out that is not true. You can also add gay marriage to the list.

The continual attack on the Lib Dems for their coalition is a great example of the left's desire for political purity over actually getting in power and getting things done. Politics is the art of compromise, something that parts of the labour party dont seem to get and why they are likely to be out of power for over 20 years and they deride their most successful leader.
 

2192

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2020
Messages
372
Location
Derby UK
"Where did it all go wrong for the Liberal democrats?" is the title of this thread. Ask that in Amersham & Chesham!
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,284
I think that there's an under-reported trend of the Tory "soft underbelly"

At the moment, reporting Labour's problems gets a lot of media attention because:

a. it fits the agenda of Billionaire press barons
b. Tories want to read about Labour's struggles
c. a lot of Corbynites love to read about Labour struggling (and how "it'd have been so much better if we'd kept Magic Grandad" etc)

But (as I've mentioned before), the Tories have been struggling underneath the radar. They've gone from winning London twice in a row to coming nowhere near in the subsequent two Mayoral elections. Labour winning Canterbury seems to have annoyed the Corbynites more than it annoyed the Tories (since Rosie Duffield is The Wrong Sort Of Labour MP in their eyes). Kensington has a Labour MP. Recent LibDem gains in places like Oxfordshire only got a little press coverage.

But the media focus on Hartlepool, Hartlepool, Hartlepool, which ignores lots of other parts of the country and other narratives.

Johnson is canny enough to hold the disperate wings of the Tory party together for now, because he's good at campaigning (rubbish at governing but good at campaigning, which is why he'd rather keep stocking up short term debates about statues than deal with long term problems - remember the promises to deal with the Social Care crisis?). But Johnson isn't going to be around much longer - he wants to be getting big money from his writing - dash of a barnstorming essay for the Telegraph front page for a lot more money than you get paid as a Prime Minister. So where do the Tories go from there? Will Gove be able to assimilate with the humans? Can Patel/ Raab/ Sunak/ Hancock follow Johnson? The Tories weren't able to retain the London mayoralty without him.

But the problem for Labour right now is that... whilst the LibDems were able to attract anti-Tory voters in a traditional Tory constituency, it may be harder for Labour to attract LibDems in Batley'n'Spen - some LibDems are going to feel that Labour is still the party of Corbyn... meanwhile, some people are going to fall for the seductive patter of George Galloway... so it'll be a lot harder for Labour.

Things might be okay for the LibDems though - there's a lot of the Ken Clarke/ Rory Stuart Tories who aren't being represented by the Prime Minister/ Cabinet/ Government - they might keep supporting the Tories at the moment because Johnson is a winner and people like to vote for winners, but any subsequent Tory leader is going to struggle to keep the "wets" and the "Kippers" in the same tent, which means the LibDems could find a good niche, especially if the Tories go for a hardliner like Patel to keep the Kippers onside.

The loss of Tory votes is significantly underreported.

Locally in 2015 the Tory votes could have lost down the back sofa 50% of all votes (all for them) and still have won (66% of all votes).

By 2019 (although still getting about 60% of the vote) the second place party got 25% of the votes.

Neither of the candidates had changed, it's just that there's a growing level of realisation that the cuts are impacting us all and not just those poor people who are living off benefits (not my viewpoint, but something which can be seen within certain sectors of Tory Voters).

For instance one of the villages (which has a significant level of snobbery) now only has a library as the community is now running it with volunteers.

Hard working parents were threatened with the removal of the school buses for their secondary school aged children, even those parents who are stay at home parents would have lost a significant amount of their morning due to having to have taken their children (and likely for stuck in traffic) up to 3 miles to school.

Whilst others for stuck in, the local MP just said "not my problem as it's a local government issue" totally ignoring that the reason for the cuts was the significant reduction in grant to those local governments from national government.

Add to that a level of NIMBY's not wanting any development and a growing realisation that whatever is happening at a local level is directly related to national policy (which has a target of 300,000 homes to be built each year, even though there is a government report saying that 265,000 homes is the needed target).

Likewise whilst changing the level of the Aid Budget will attract some, it's also something which puts others off.

As such there's a growing level of discontent with the Tories within "the blue wall". Whilst not likely to be enough to result in the loss of the Tory government next election it could over time change the makeup of government.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,624
Location
Another planet...
I was rather talking of the public perception, rather than the reality. The "man on the Clapham omnibus" won't necessarily be aware of many of the things listed above, but they'll know about the tuition fees u-turn and the AV referendum. Marriage equality rather depends on whether that particular Clapham bus passenger is in favour or not: if they're against it they'll blame Cameron for selling out on a Conservative principle. If they're in favour, they'll praise Cameron for bucking a trend and doing what Blair/Brown either couldn't or wouldn't do.
Perception of the DUP agreement with the May administration is that despite being a much smaller party, and with a less formalised form of co-operation, they didn't allow themselves to be steamrollered into supporting the Tories more negative policies against their will. (That the truth is they were and are far more dangerous in their beliefs than even a complete fruitcake like Rees-Mogg is besides the point).
 

Typhoon

Established Member
Joined
2 Nov 2017
Messages
3,488
Location
Kent
The loss of Tory votes is significantly underreported.
For instance one of the villages (which has a significant level of snobbery) now only has a library as the community is now running it with volunteers.

Hard working parents were threatened with the removal of the school buses for their secondary school aged children, even those parents who are stay at home parents would have lost a significant amount of their morning due to having to have taken their children (and likely for stuck in traffic) up to 3 miles to school.

Whilst others for stuck in, the local MP just said "not my problem as it's a local government issue" totally ignoring that the reason for the cuts was the significant reduction in grant to those local governments from national government.

Add to that a level of NIMBY's not wanting any development and a growing realisation that whatever is happening at a local level is directly related to national policy (which has a target of 300,000 homes to be built each year, even though there is a government report saying that 265,000 homes is the needed target).
In the party political cycle, there is often a stage where local government can point the finger at national government and vice-versa because they are of different political persuasions, as you suggest. The problem that the Conservatives have in places like Chesham and Amersham is that everyone electable (the national government, the county council, the district council, the Police and Crime Commissioner) are all Conservative. The LibDem candidate was able to point to issues (closed police counters, flooded underpasses, fly-tipping) and rightly blame the Conservatives. It is unlikely to get better any time soon, the Treasury has been doling out money like Lady Bountiful (some of it just wasted), but companies keep coming back for more. Our Prime Minister comes up with schemes that he thinks will cheer us all up but cost money (and we don't show a great deal of gratitude). I don't think local government is a good place to be right now!

The local MP - there are far too many of them who think they have a job in Westminster and nowhere else. One of the real failings in the past few years has been the acceptance of candidates parachuted in from elsewhere, haven't got a clue about the constituency and aren't really bothered. The success of the Conservatives in the Red Wall seats might be that they do seem to select local candidates, councillors, people who know the area. Labour slipped up there during the Blair/ Brown era.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
In the party political cycle, there is often a stage where local government can point the finger at national government and vice-versa because they are of different political persuasions, as you suggest. The problem that the Conservatives have in places like Chesham and Amersham is that everyone electable (the national government, the county council, the district council, the Police and Crime Commissioner) are all Conservative.
I agree with your point, but for the sake of accuracy would point out that the LibDems took control of Amersham council in May. This would be too late to make any difference to anything, even without considering the limited ability local government has to do so, but worth noting as a precursor of change that the Tories should probably have paid more attention to. If you look hard enough there are others in the London commuter belt too.
 

Typhoon

Established Member
Joined
2 Nov 2017
Messages
3,488
Location
Kent
I agree with your point, but for the sake of accuracy would point out that the LibDems took control of Amersham council in May. This would be too late to make any difference to anything, even without considering the limited ability local government has to do so, but worth noting as a precursor of change that the Tories should probably have paid more attention to. If you look hard enough there are others in the London commuter belt too.
Thank you that. LibDems have traditionally done quite well in the outer constituencies in South-to-South West London. As you say, there are a few winnable seats in commuter land that don't require the same sort of swing as happened last Thursday, rather more south of the Thames than I was expecting.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,970
Location
Taunton or Kent
Then a few years later, the DUP showed them exactly how to get what you want out of a "senior" partner... all the Lib Dumbs got was a mishandled and ultimately pointless referendum on the voting system.
As birchesgreen alluded to, the end result for the DUP appears to be no better, if not worse than the end result for the Lib Dems, with the first minister post set to go to Sinn Fenn next year the way things are heading.

In the meantime I've seen a number of reports now analysing concerns from Tories in the Southern "blue wall" and an increasingly likely prospect of the planning reform proposals hitting a brick wall thanks to Southern Tory rebels, all because of this by-election result.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
The continual attack on the Lib Dems for their coalition is a great example of the left's desire for political purity over actually getting in power and getting things done. Politics is the art of compromise, something that parts of the labour party dont seem to get and why they are likely to be out of power for over 20 years and they deride their most successful leader.

Agreed - the obsession with "purity" is really self-defeating - they'll alienate a lot of people who voted Labour in the past and share 90% of the same views but the focus on the 10% where people aren't pure enough is classic cult-like behaviour - incredibly frustrating

there's a growing level of realisation that the cuts are impacting us all and not just those poor people who are living off benefits (not my viewpoint, but something which can be seen within certain sectors of Tory Voters).

For instance one of the villages (which has a significant level of snobbery) now only has a library as the community is now running it with volunteers.

Hard working parents were threatened with the removal of the school buses for their secondary school aged children, even those parents who are stay at home parents would have lost a significant amount of their morning due to having to have taken their children (and likely for stuck in traffic) up to 3 miles to school

Good points - I think that there were a lot of people happy for bad things to happen as long as they were happening to "other people" - just like it was fine for automation to replace "poor people"'s jobs (e.g. check out staff in supermarkets) but these cuts are happening to traditionally "middle class" roles - "it was okay when it was only Sports Direct staff at the mercy of Zero Hours Contracts but now my employment prospects mean future jobs are likely to have some pretty harsh terms and conditions" - "I didn't mind when the blue collar people lost their final salary pension scheme but now similar changes are happening to the white collar employees too" - "it was fine to cut down on migration when it only affected poor people but now I've found that Brexit is going to stop me retiring in Lombarty" etc etc

Same goes for spending cuts - people were relaxed about closing down inner city youth clubs but now it's leaving villages in Shire counties with no bus service/ library and impacting upon what the local schools/ GPs can offer... people who previously felt secure are getting worried, slowly realising that modern Capitalism is more about protecting the billionaires than looking after the Daily Express readers that people used to think it was about

I was rather talking of the public perception, rather than the reality. The "man on the Clapham omnibus" won't necessarily be aware of many of the things listed above, but they'll know about the tuition fees u-turn and the AV referendum. Marriage equality rather depends on whether that particular Clapham bus passenger is in favour or not: if they're against it they'll blame Cameron for selling out on a Conservative principle. If they're in favour, they'll praise Cameron for bucking a trend and doing what Blair/Brown either couldn't or wouldn't do.
Perception of the DUP agreement with the May administration is that despite being a much smaller party, and with a less formalised form of co-operation, they didn't allow themselves to be steamrollered into supporting the Tories more negative policies against their will. (That the truth is they were and are far more dangerous in their beliefs than even a complete fruitcake like Rees-Mogg is besides the point).

I think that the reason for the "perception" that you're talking about is that the Tory press loved Cameron at the time, so it suited their narrative to show how well "Dave" had outfoxed the "wet" LibDems... but they turned against Theresa May (especially after she failed to get a majority), so they pushed the narrative that the DUP had struck a tough bargain (especially as the DUP's hardline views were quite in line with the "Rule Britannia, God Save The Queen, Flags, anti-feminist" views of many newspaper editorials - so Nick Clegg's 'achievements" were dismissed whilst the DUP were treated as master tacticians (I'm not saying Clegg was brilliant but he did better than people generally suggest)
 

MattRat

On Moderation
Joined
26 May 2021
Messages
2,081
Location
Liverpool
I think that the reason for the "perception" that you're talking about is that the Tory press loved Cameron at the time, so it suited their narrative to show how well "Dave" had outfoxed the "wet" LibDems... but they turned against Theresa May (especially after she failed to get a majority), so they pushed the narrative that the DUP had struck a tough bargain (especially as the DUP's hardline views were quite in line with the "Rule Britannia, God Save The Queen, Flags, anti-feminist" views of many newspaper editorials - so Nick Clegg's 'achievements" were dismissed whilst the DUP were treated as master tacticians (I'm not saying Clegg was brilliant but he did better than people generally suggest)
Clegg achieved more power than any other Lib Dem leader before or after him. His downfall was merely fickle voters. He had to compromise. Wouldn't have changed under Labour, and Labour were in fact considered unelectable at that point. He was put in a lose-lose situation. It really highlights how dire a two party system is and how it stacks the deck against anything other than the two major parties. We need voter reform like yesterday....
 

telstarbox

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
5,928
Location
Wennington Crossovers
As birchesgreen alluded to, the end result for the DUP appears to be no better, if not worse than the end result for the Lib Dems, with the first minister post set to go to Sinn Fenn next year the way things are heading.

In the meantime I've seen a number of reports now analysing concerns from Tories in the Southern "blue wall" and an increasingly likely prospect of the planning reform proposals hitting a brick wall thanks to Southern Tory rebels, all because of this by-election result.
I think the planning reform angle has been hyped up tbh. I can think of several large scale housing developments going up in the home counties (often approved by Tory-led councils) and the relevant seats haven't switched from the Tories in 2017 or 2019.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,284
I think the planning reform angle has been hyped up tbh. I can think of several large scale housing developments going up in the home counties (often approved by Tory-led councils) and the relevant seats haven't switched from the Tories in 2017 or 2019.

I suspect that is because no one campaigns in those areas, so most people just vote for who they voted for before.

I suspect that if there was an effort put into campaigning in those areas then it could be that you start to see seats switch.

Locality there's not even many hustings (in 2019 I believe that there may have only been one), which limits the amount of voter engagement.

However it should be noted that the seat is one that, at least in theory, could switch to Lib Dems as they in partnership with a local action group control the district council.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Clegg achieved more power than any other Lib Dem leader before or after him. His downfall was merely fickle voters. He had to compromise. Wouldn't have changed under Labour, and Labour were in fact considered unelectable at that point. He was put in a lose-lose situation. It really highlights how dire a two party system is and how it stacks the deck against anything other than the two major parties. We need voter reform like yesterday....
I believe his downfall was in the presentation. He could have come out straight and said words to the effect of "We're the minor partner in a coalition, we aren't going to get our full policy platform implemented - we've agreed these parts here but these others can't be achieved. And we will hold the Tories feet to the fire where we think they're going wrong or breaking the agreement". Instead of that, the impression was of a love-in with Cameron.

On a more substantive note they could have opposed the NHS reforms, which weren't in the manifesto or the agreement and probably left the NHS in a worse state. And Osborne ran rings round them on the AV referendum, scheduling it for a year in when austerity was biting but any benefits weren't yet obvious (in fact they never were). In fact Osborne's austerity, essentially a populist measure for potential Tory voters, created a lot of discontent in other groups that led to them giving the government a kicking in the Brexit vote. And by stitching up the LDs he ensured they weren't part of the next government, which might have prevented it being enacted. So, despite being a prominent opponent of Brexit, he did as much to make it happen as almost anyone else.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
Clegg achieved more power than any other Lib Dem leader before or after him. His downfall was merely fickle voters. He had to compromise. Wouldn't have changed under Labour, and Labour were in fact considered unelectable at that point. He was put in a lose-lose situation. It really highlights how dire a two party system is and how it stacks the deck against anything other than the two major parties. We need voter reform like yesterday....

Good points.

Charles Kennedy will always be well thought of (by me and by others), but Charles Kennedy never had to deal with the realties of Government (compromise, selling out some of the policies that people voted for you on)

But that's always the problem being a third party in what is essentially a "two party" state - you have all of these debates at Conference regarding your policies, you are standing in six hundred plus constituencies, you are giving the impression that you want to form a Government ("and here are the policies that we'd implement if we won a full majority"), but if you are ever able to help a minority administration form Government then you have to get your hands grubby (since the alternative is to sit sneering from the sidelines, which wastes the time of everyone who voted for you)

Our polarised media were happy to rubbish the LDs under Clegg (from both the left and right wing perspectives), which is why he's remembered for the Tuition Fees rather than lifting large numbers of people out of income tax and incentivising people getting proper jobs (similarly disincentivising the "black economy") - the actual version of charges on Students doesn't look too bad in terms of being a pretty progressive kind of tax that only applies to those earning above average wages and disproportionately kicks in for those who earn significantly above average - obviously not as nice as the experience that older people went though, of course, but nothing like as bad as it's often portrayed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top