“We should both want to trample the Tories in to the dirt and ensure a permanent democratic socialist/social democrat political future for Britain”

How very revealing.

Incidently, do you think that EdM is going to stand on a platform of reversing the Thatcher era union reforms and privatisation?

If the majority of the country is democratic socialist then why didn’t Blair try and win on a socialist platform in 1997?

Speaking as a Labour member, I very much do want coalition with Lib Dems. I don’t mean a parliamentary, governmental coalition (though that might be good in the future). I mean a coalition at grass-roots level that takes place in non/cross-party spaces like the anti-cuts movement, the campaign for AV, etc.

In Oxford Save Our Services (www.oxfordsos.org.uk) we had Evan Harris along to our first meeting in June. He hasn’t been back. But if any Oxford Lib Dems want to work with OxSOS against the cuts, come and get involved!

If you are going to lovebomb those Lib Dems into coming over to the Labour side, getting the smuggest, holier-than-thouest Labour blogger in the country to basically say “Come over or you’re Tory scum” probably isn’t the way to do it.

Still, with Ed Miliband’s insightful analysis that David Cameron can’t understand the working class “Because he’s a Tory”, perhaps the self-righteous Tory-hating high ground is what you want most of all.

@2 A donkey with a hat on could have won in 1997.

As a Lib Dem, my ideal government would be a Green-Lib Dem coalition. Mainly because I think no party should be trusted to govern on its own.

The burning question I have after all this is whether Bob is expecting anything better from the new Labour (not New Labour) leadership? Not sure if that was what Bob wanted to impart mind.

To be fair, I suspect say Norman Tebbitt would probably agree with most of the feelings expressed here as well – it is normal in political parties to have a range of opinions, and therefore those that are losing as well as winning. And most people will probably realise this – as Bob did sensibly point out.

As a Libdem I think that the present arrangement is by far the best available

Imagine a government of unbridled Tories or (even worse) another five years of Labour’s warmongering control-freakery!

Chervil: your comment implies that an ‘unbridled Tory government’ would be even more right-wing.

Actually, I’m not sure it would be. We can certainly point to specific progressive things that the government is doing that it might otherwise not have done due to Lib Dem influence, e.g., the pupil premium.

But one also has to consider that in other areas the Tories are acting more audaciously, in a right-wing way, because the Lib Dem participation gives them some cover and legitimacy they wouldn’t have governing alone. I wonder, for example, if the Tories would press ahead with the Lansley reforms to the NHS if they were governing alone and so more worried about being slammed as the ‘nasty party’ both by Labour and the Lib Dems?

Overall, and on balance, its not at all clear that the Lib Dems are a brake on right-wing policy in the government, rather than facilitators of it. Worth thinking about, if you are a Lib Dem…

@ #1 – how revealing?

What else is the aim of any political party other than to keep the opposition out of power? Crushing the right-wingers is one of the key aims of this site. We’re proud of it

Sunny/10: What else is the aim of any political party other than to keep the opposition out of power?

Well, I was hoping for getting their own policies implemented (which neither requires the opposition to be out of power nor the party to be in power, though both make it easier, of course)

Guess I’m not cynical enough about you political types.

What I find remarkable is how little The Lie Dems have got out of this surrender (sorry coalition)

A review on trident? (which means hold off anything until the tories think they can win on their own) A referendum on the electoral system, but the tories get a reduced parliament with no referendum. (And why are the Lie Dems supporting a reduction in elected seats, when at the same time the tories are stacking the House of Lords with unelected lobby fodder?) 20% Vat, which we know is tory ideology at it’s worst.

Dear old Vince Cable is having his credibility sliced away piece by piece. The man will have no dignity left soon.

Will you still be running on the the “We are not like the other two parties, we are different “ shtick , at the next election?

“What else is the aim of any political party other than to keep the opposition out of power?”

The problem is that one-party rule is potentially corrupting and bad for democracy. In 1997 even Tory supporters accepted it was time for their party to pack it in for a while.

Reaching out the olive branch to Lib Dems? – Am I missing something? – like the lessons of historical experience. Have you forgotten the gang of four renegades and what that led to? It might make electoral sense to some – currently – to cosy up to shell-shocked and demoralised Lib Dems – but Lib Dems instincts are always to hold fast to middle of the road policies – however much to the right the middle of the road may be at any given time. Their Alliance with the Tories will hurt them badly – but for Labour to make alliances with the Lib Dems will, as in the past, only drag the Labour Party down, disrupt and inevitably give succour to those who have, essentially much more in common with Tories and Toryism, (not to mention Blairites and Blairism) – Labour should steer well clear – the country needs a party that remembers all those it represents and sticks to those democratic principles – not govern in the narrow interests of the members of it’s gentlemen’s club.

What else is the aim of any political party other than to keep the opposition out of power? Crushing the right-wingers is one of the key aims of this site. We’re proud of it

Spoken like a true Leninist.

OP: “But I doubt many Lib Dem members thought that entering a coalition would result in their MPs accepting a complete u-turn on issues like tuition fees.”

The tuition fees issue has been a clusterfuck for the LibDems, without argument. Tuition fees are a social/economic issue, however, not a philosophical one. Thus, the LibDems will not dissolve in the same way as 100 years ago following internal conflict about Irish nationalism and WWI conscription. _The Strange Death of Liberal England_ will be on my holiday reading list.

I’m not aware of any sensible debate about the tuition fees policy within LibDems. Apologists note that public relations were mishandled, which is true but also a form of denial. The reality is that it was a tolerable policy when the next government appeared to have loads of money (most of the post 1997 period) and undeliverable in 2010.

Thus LibDems are faced with Vince Cable offering the least worse solution that might follow the Browne report, but one that entirely contradicts the unrealistic optimism in the 2010 manifesto.

I have been reminded of two things from this as a LibDem:

1. Don’t use populist issues as a voter rallying point unless they are liberal issues. Provision and funding of post 16 education is a genuine liberal concern, all very complicated. Liberal philosophy can guide policy; populism fails. Free university education is a populist argument, and it is not a liberal one.

2. Keynes: “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” LibDem manifesto writers should have modified policy to reflect reality.

Chervil,

As a lib dem….for my sins!..I don’t agree.

I know what you are saying but if we’d have a Labour coalition, we would’ve been centre left, instead of centre right.

You know-I’m sure you do-how many lefties there are in this party who are liberal and it’s v hard to stomach.

You can say well the Tories were always going to get in, fair enough but we seem like kamikaze pilots and further more, this has enlightened the more economic liberal section of the party, which I knew it would, making this centre right.

On my non ‘rantersparadise’ days, I am in 2 exec committees and I will say one of them, are soo centre left that we barely discuss next steps. In fact they are v left. These people are the grassroots, who go out all the time to leaflet etc and all sorts and they have been ignored, completely.

I see what you mean BUT you were left and then went centre right with nu labour, not the same thing and which is why I went to the Libs-what ‘you’ all did was shocking.

I renewed my membership the other day-as I’m in certain positions-and we will wait and see. I’m being loud and if things don’t change for the better…..what is the point?

I’ve never been a fan of groups or religion,which is why I became a lib and I’m gutted at the lack of democracy, especially was we’re allowed to vote at conference and have differing views.

My beef isn’t with what is happening but the lack of transparency but I think the party realises that a big, huge part of the part are grassroots members, who are all very left.

We can’t join labour simply because labour is about the state. I want a smaller state but then I think we need to also effectively work with those who have less opportunities the others, either through entrepreneurship-building more small businesses or through co-production action with the govt in communities.

Big ol sigh!

Another thing, the lob dems has always been a broad church of right wing libertarians and left libertarians. Being in the middle, you HAVE to get on with each other and it has worked. On the outside, out of respect.

The end goal was/is freedom. From the state and corporations.

What has happened with the right wing Libs was that it was freedom from the state but not corps.

The Lie Dems did not have to do a deal with either the main parties.

What they should have done is let the tories form a monority govt , and then let them set a budget so everyone could see what that would mean. Then just let then swing in the wind. Tories would have been fighting tories because the right wing thought they had it in the bag and they were pissed off when they did not win outright.

The Lie Dems in their lust for power, gave away the farm.

Sally

I love your commentary but choose your words and say’clegg et al’.

From all the people I spoke about this, it’s not true. At all.

We’re just all against a huge state involvement. Right,Left or Middle, which makes things hard.

“Labour should steer well clear – the country needs a party that remembers all those it represents and sticks to those democratic principles – not govern in the narrow interests of the members of it’s gentlemen’s club.”

Sorry, when did this happen over the past 13 years? And for that matter, if democracy is a Labour principle then how come the party doesn’t have a democratic internal structure?

Actually, I don’t feel sorry for LibDems.

Perhaps, yes, in an empathetic sense I do, but ideologically, no way. And this has little to do with Clegg et al…

In my view, anyone who considered themselves to be left-wing would not vote LibDem, let alone LibDem mark Orange Book.

Think guys, fucking think.

@17

“I know what you are saying but if we’d have a Labour coalition, we would’ve been centre left, instead of centre right.”

I know where you’re coming from, but I think it’s a mistake to see Labour as left wing.

It used to be, but the repositioning started by New Labour has been completed by Milliband. That’s why neither he nor his comrades see anything wrong with retaining the services of the race-baiters behind the Woolas campaign.

Of course some Tories (and some Libdems) are bigots too, but the big, big difference is that when they’re caught they’re binned.

Labour, on the other hand, are quite happy for candidates and staffers to stir up all kinds of racial and religious hatred, even in places like Oldham where tensions are already high.

For this reason alone I wouldn’t consider entering into a coalition with Labour. Their record of racist campaigning makes them unacceptable partners in any coalition.

@16

“Don’t use populist issues as a voter rallying point unless they are liberal issues. Provision and funding of post 16 education is a genuine liberal concern, all very complicated. Liberal philosophy can guide policy; populism fails. Free university education is a populist argument, and it is not a liberal one.”

Hear bloody hear. Let’s not make this mistake again, eh FPC?

Mr Potter; – the past 13 years – yes indeed – my point exactly – the Blairite New Labour project was Toryism with very little water – the Lib Dems – with the possible exception of the honourable Charles Kennedy and few others – would have been at home in that ‘wearing the Tories clothes’ media-pleasing mess of potage.To their eternal credit the Lib Dems ( of the time) opposed the Iraq war – do you honestly think today’s Cleggites would have shown such principled independence? As to Internal democracy – the Coalition Lib Dems exercise theirs subject to the approval of Millbank don’t they? By the way – Who do the LIb Dems represent?

Let down? You have no idea.. at least Labour gave a bit of a lead in to the idea they were moving to the right. The Liberal Democrats had everyone smiling for the camera one minute and saluting Herr Cameron the next. Unbelievable.

“So, if there are Lib Dems out there thinking of packing it all up, my message to you is don’t despair. Clegg may be just a blip, a small hiccup in the long history of your party.” Absolutely, if Labour folk were able to stomach the worst of New Labour and fight for their party, then Liberal Democrats should stick around – replace Clegg with Fallon in a couple of years.

@1

“How very revealing.”

Liberal Conspiracy shocking reveals that political parties, on the whole, prefer it when they win elections!

We’re through the looking glass here, people.

14

“but for Labour to make alliances with the Lib Dems will, as in the past, only drag the Labour Party down, disrupt and inevitably give succour to those who have, essentially much more in common with Tories and Toryism, (not to mention Blairites and Blairism) – ”

This has to be one of the most politically ignorant things I’ve ever heard. Were you in a coma for the past 13 years, or abroad with no access to any media? New Labour has tarnished your party so badly that it is difficult to see how it can ever recover. You are certainly in no position to lecture anyone about left of centre, radical, progressive politics until the Labour Party actually puts its own house in order.

Whatever happens to the LD’s (and my betting is on them getting a right good kicking at the next election), don’t expect too many people who voted for them or supported them to start supporting Labour until we have some real evidence they aren’t either just a bunch of continuity New Labour crypto Tories, or hopeless far left fantasists.

With luck, a reformed electoral system WILL actually bring about positive results for the future…. if so it will be no thanks to Labour or the Tories.

As for the LD’s, they should go back to their constituencies and prepare to diminish into something more like the classical Liberals, unless those on the left/Social Democratic side of the party can bring the leadership to it’s senses. Given the number of members they will have lost recently, and even more supporters outside the party, it;s not looking good for them at all.

@ 3. Stuart White

I like it. That at least lets old fashioned Liberals like me regain some credibility. What these comments – including Sally’s – tell me is that this coalition is parallel to little more than a particularly nasty strain of venereal disease

Galen – politically ignorant is it? – well pardon me all to Hades O wise one For your information New Labour was never my party – don’t make assumptions on only poorly digested evidence – that really does border on political ignorance.. Do take time to read and absorb posts – even when the red mists rise half way through. Time will tell whether Labour can recover or not but it will only ever be hamstrung by coalitions or understandings with the Lib Dems – even more so now that the LD’s are tarnished in the public’s eye through accepting the Cameron shilling. ‘By their acts shalt thou know them.’

Surely these postings now put the argument about Alternative Voting firmly back in Labour’s favour ? ie. No to AV ? From my point of view the author has made a strong case for a number of issues.

@Sunny
“What else is the aim of any political party other than to keep the opposition out of power? Crushing the right-wingers is one of the key aims of this site. We’re proud of it ”

I’d like to congratulate LC for helping to create the context where formal coalition became a more acceptable proposition. That’s a major acheivement!

This site has had unprecedented success… in getting the people you want to crush into power and allowing them to enact the very things this site fundamentally opposes.

So, hands up if you think dogmatic ideological purity is more important than incremental strategic gains.

“A strong Liberal Democrat opposition to what you perceive as the excesses of a Labour Government should be the short term aim, not the shabby little compromise you now find yourselves locked in to.”

Thanks very much for the patronising pat on the head; so the Lib Dems should never form a coalition, just remain as a ‘legitimising’ opposition to the perpetual Labour Government?

They should AIM to be a receptacle for Labour voters too disgusted by the Labour party’s authoritarian bullshit? Well Thank You for your gracious dispensation, that the Liberal Democrats should ‘allowed’ to serve such a useful purpose to Labour.

Has it occurred to you that people back the Lib Dems because they are Liberals? With ideas, opinions and policies, none of which are drafted for the convenience of the Labour party. Hell, some of which aren’t even drafted for the ‘convenience’ of the Liberal Democrats.

The one thing which winds up Lib Dems about Labour more than anything else is the assumption that they have a ‘right’ to win, and that the only ‘right’ government is a pure Labour government. This belief that any Tory government is somehow illegitimate or a horrible mistake – A reminder, The Tories in 2010 had the same share of the vote as Labour in 2005, if the Tories lack legitimacy, so did Labour.

The notion that the LibDems are innocent bystanders while the Conservatives roll out their austerity agenda is a load of romantic fiction. The truth is that LibDem MPs are engaged in that agenda up to their necks.

This is the reality with what is happening in the NHS:

Hundreds of thousands of NHS patients are being denied routine procedures as dozens of trusts cut back on surgery, scans and other treatments in order to save money, a Daily Telegraph investigation has found.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8208958/Patients-denied-treatment-as-NHS-makes-cutbacks-Telegraph-can-disclose.html

But Paul Burstow, a LibDem MP, is the minister of state in the Department of Health. Here he is being recently interviewed by the BBC saying that he expects the NHS to cope under the spending plans:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11988858

“The notion that the LibDems are innocent bystanders while the Conservatives roll out their austerity agenda is a load of romantic fiction. The truth is that LibDem MPs are engaged in that agenda up to their necks.”

An excellent point. As any genuine economist will tell you, there is no need for austerity measures.

The economic genius of the Great Helmsman Brown left the country with more money than it could ever possibly spend. That’s why the state should be spending more money, not less.

Evil Nick Clegg only wants to reign in government spending because he hates nurses and the unemployed.

34 Ed

Many people are quite prepared to accept that it is the logic of reforming our political system that coalitions are necessary, and perhaps even desirable; however, what many people who have previously supported and voted for the LD’s believe is that THIS Coalition is ill-conceived, did not result in the necessary concessions from the Tories, and will quite possibly cripple or even destroy the LD’s as a political force.

Of course there may be times where a centre party has to make a deal with a right wing party….but that doesn’t mean you have to offer them the soul of your first born, and conjugal rights to your wife.

Yes, some LD’s are classical Liberals. Many others however are not; they are left of centre social democrats who are horrified with the deal you have struck. Not because we/they are fundamentally opposed to ANY Coalition with the Tories at any point, under any circumstances…. rather because we ARE convinced that this deal, at this point is simply wrong.

Time will tell who is correct of course….. but if you think that the classical Liberal wing of the LD’s can be anything but a pathetic rump (like they were for decades before the Alliance/SDP) you are sadly deluded.