It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon


10:00 am - December 19th 2010

by Sunny Hundal    


      Share on Tumblr

Amidst all the growing energy around direct action on the left, there is an oft-repeated claim that if we keep this up the Coalition will fall by next year.

This is highly unlikely for several reasons, a key one being that nothing as divisive as tuition fees will come up any time soon.

But there’s another major reason: Cameron really wants it and Nick Clegg has no incentive to escape it; together they will do anything to keep it going.

Former Spectator editor Matthew d’Ancona, writing in the Sunday Telegraph today about the upcoming Oldham by-election, says:

Cameron’s [Oldham] tactics will feed into a swelling anger among Conservative backbenchers and activists that the Coalition is a Westminster conspiracy from which they are excluded, a dodgy pact in which Tory integrity was wantonly sacrificed. “Some of us feel very much as though too much has been given away to a few people to achieve too little,” Nadine Dorries, the MP for Mid Bedfordshire, said on the Today programme last week. For such Tories, it is a test of the party’s collective faith that it campaign vigorously in Oldham East.

“We are not idiots,” Miss Dorries added. In which case, she ought to be the first to recognise that the Coalition is enabling the Tory party to go further, faster, than it could ever have done with a small majority – or even, perhaps, a decent one. George Osborne’s deficit reduction programme, Iain Duncan Smith’s welfare reforms, Michael Gove’s education revolution: how much easier these radical policies are to sell to the public as bipartisan measures. If you think the student protests are ugly, consider what they would be like if the Conservatives were governing alone. As the Kaiser Chiefs put it first and best: I predict a riot.

The second paragraph is spot on: the Tory right are idiots, and very unlikely to succeed in their tantrums because Tory voters fully support Cameron. Moreover, the Coalition arrangement has neatly helped Conservatives escape blame while the Left screams ‘betrayal’ at Libdems.

That isn’t to excuse the Libdems of course. As Matthew d’Ancona points out, what the Tories are planning in welfare, education and cuts goes far beyond what the Libdems ever pledged. But they have managed to position themselves as the scapegoats and attract all the ire.

To leave the Coalition at a time when their poll ratings are very low would be political suicide. Nick Clegg’s argument to Libdem MPs is that they have to stay on board for another 2-3 years and then the Libdem sweeteners will start flowing just before the election.

By that time, the electorate will have forgiven them (don’t underestimate the forgetfulness of voters) and Libdems will recover to about 20% in the polls. It’s very possible.

Cameron needs Libdem cover to keep pushing his plans: it keeps his opponents divided (as Libdems have to swallow compromise) and helps when Labour and lefties focus on Libdem betrayal.

So, I think there are two main challenges for the left over the next five years.

One, our focus should be on emphasising where Conservatives have u-turned (EMAs, SureStart, NHS) rather than hoping a focus on Libdem betrayal will bring down the Coalition. Undermining Conservative support is more important than undermining Libdem support from now on.

Second, this is why I keep saying that we have to plan direct action and build networks for a five year war not a 6-month battle. I love what UKuncut are doing but they also need to start thinking how this could be sustained all of next year and after. The same applies to any other group planning similar action.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,The Left ,Westminster

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


1. Mike Killingworth

I broadly agree, Sunny, with two reservations:

– we have no idea what the media narrative of the cuts as they take effect will be;

– the Lib Dems will go into the next election with no option but to seek to renew the coalition. (Things will get very messy if it produces a result where Labour is a handful of seats short of a majority but 30+ ahead of the Tories.) This means that the third or so of their 2005 voters who are “Lib-Labs” will have no incentive to them. I would suggest 15% as a LibDem ceiling – might well be enough to give them 40 seats or so, especially if they do a deal with the Tories in key constituencies.

I am assuming (as I think you are) that the AV referendum passes, and that the coalition’s preferred boundaries survive judicial review.

The aim has to be to prevent the government from implementing its cuts agenda. Otherwise, what are we in this for? And if the aim is to to do that, that means depriving the government of its majority, and calling the viability of the coalition into question. To counsel against aiming for the coalition to fall is actually to counsel surrender. Straw men and sock puppets to one side, I haven’t seen anyone argue that this will happen next year if we just keep on as we are. To achieve a rupture in this coalition would involve a serious escalation, with direct action complemented by disruptive nationwide strike action. That is very much on the cards, as anyone who has been to a grassroots trade union meeting recently can testify.

Further, it’s actually not true that there will be no issue as ‘divisive’ (ie unpopular) as tuition fees and higher education cuts. Tuition fees doesn’t stand out as a commitment any more than the commitment to oppose deep and rapid cuts to public spending. There are quite a few Liberal MPs who are not happy with this agenda, and a few more who will have reason to fear for their seats as this proceeds. But so far, the reaction has come first of all from students over further and higher education, so that is the issue which has ‘divided’ the parliamentary Liberals. But it would be myopic to expect the reaction to end there. Public sector workers and professionals have provided the Liberals with a decent chunk of their support over the last decade or so, and so there will still be ample opportunity to force a split over future struggles.

Lastly, you’ve missed the big story. The split in the Liberals is not a passing frenzy, but a culmination of secular trends. Since 1979-1983, there was a more or less stable coalition between market liberals and social liberals. Oweing to the crisis, market liberalism is no longer compatible with social liberalism. You can’t have neoliberalism with a soft, social democratic veneer any more. Hence, either one side trounces the other, or there will be a split. Keep the political-economic context in mind.

“Undermining Conservative support is more important than undermining Libdem support from now on.”

Absolutely – I said a couple of weeks ago that it was important to remember that the LDs are enablers, but not the architects of, these cuts – the Tories must remain Public Enemy No. 1.

It’s already been documented that a lot of Lib Dem seats are in former Conservative seats, and the number of LD-Labour marginals is pretty small. ( http://lordashcroft.com/pdf/20072010_av_article.pdf )

Bashing the Liberal Democrats can only get Labour so far, and to continue to do so is to take aim at the Conservatives’ human shield. If we keep attacking the LDs at the expense of exposing Tory policy for what it really is, the net result could well be a Conservative majority at the next election as a fair few seats in the South of England turn blue.

Hi Sunny,

Yup, I agree with Richard. I certainly wouldn’t predict that the Government will fall, but I think you’ve missed the most likely way it will happen – a split in the Lib Dems. I certainly don’t think Nick Clegg will walk, but for many of his MPs, their only chance of keeping their seats will be if they are seen to have brought an end to this coalition: even if the Lib Dems do return to 20% in the polls, that vote will surely be made up much more of the soft right suburbs than of terraced academic towns and the Highlands of Scotland/rural Wales?

So, I think there is a real chance that, if it becomes particularly difficult to Govern – mass strikes, etc, there will be either an anti-coalition leadership challenge against Clegg, or a split in the party.

But we’ll see.

David Cameron’s strategy is do the patrician/parent/chairman thing. Floating above the naughty ministers of state, only stepping in when necessary (ie. managing the PR). .. offers the invite to see him as the good guy… eg. ordering the treasury to put more money into the NHS.

Osborne is kept well out of sight, Danny Alexander and Cable being the public faces of the cuts.

Frontloading the 30% cuts on councils is aimed at distracting the blame onto local authorities, and probably LP councillors after May 11… and the repeated mantra of the mess left by the LP.

The LP needs to learn from UKuncut, who’s strategy is so strong because they are exposing where the money goes. Ed M and the LP needs to be pinning the unnecessary cuts firmly to Osborne and Cameron. They should be questioning and criticising an electoral system in which a government can dismantle wholesale our society’s infrastructure without pre-election notice to the electorate. The LP must stop the fussing about the LD’s … it is just a distraction.

Many of the values on which Liberal Democrats campaigned were good ones so we have to assume that they are sincerely held by some in that party. Those people are our natural allies.

Blanket accusations of betrayal will encourage a siege mentality where Liberal Democrats band together for the sake of the party. It also lets the Tories off scot-free.

Strategically, it makes sense to focus on the weak points in both parties in the coalition: the natural division between Clegg’s faction and the socially progressive Liberal Democrats who are dismayed at what is being done in their name; and also the division between those Conservatives like Cameron who understand the propaganda value of the coalition and those who are too rabid to abide a Liberal even when being used as a human shield. Divide and conquer.

(It’s a shame that there’s not an obvious way or at least nothing that is not underhand to encourage the Tory hardcore to split from what they see as the wets / progressives / appeasers in their party.)

Undermining Conservative support is more important than undermining Libdem support from now on.

Practically, how do we do this? I’m not sure we’ll do that with street protests. They have given people hope and may well embarrass the government into not appointing another tax avoider like Green in future but they possibly drive uncertain Tory voters further away (particularly when the press largely ignores peaceful, witty protests and paints a very negative picture of demonstrations where trouble flares).

I’m not saying stop the protests: absolutely not. But they can’t be the only front of the campaign.

Who votes Conservative? Why do they vote Conservative? Are they basing their votes on half-truths repeated uncritically in segments of the press or on deep-seated beliefs? If the former, what statements and beliefs (eg “Labour messed up the economy”) lead them to vote Conservative? Why do they believe these things? If the beliefs are true, how can the Labour Party do better (I’m thinking in particular of the last government’s record on human rights) ? If the beliefs are wrong, how can we set the record straight?

Answers to those questions might suggest areas where we can begin on a longer campaign.

I think aiming to fracture the coalition is actually a big mistake. The effective elimination of the lib dems – which would be the likely result of an early break up – i do not see as being in the long term interests of “the left” (broadly defined).

This isn’t about getting rid of one party, and replacing it with another (putting all our hopes that Ed Milliband doesn’t simply become another blair or brown). It is about changing the rules of the political game so that the terms of debate are far more favorable to our long term objectives, and changing the incentive structure and climate that politicians and political parties operate in. Which means changing the nature of the state ( i.e. constitutional reform) and the nature of politics (ending adversarial 2 party politics that merely encourages both to chase headlines and ignore evidence based policy).

And to do that really does need a strong lib dem party able to push forward constitutional changes and take away tory paranoia about coalition government.

Consider who you’d rather have as justice secretary – Ken Clarke or Phil Woolas.

“The aim has to be to prevent the government from implementing its cuts agenda.”

Richard, I’m surprised at the lack of ambition 🙂 Is all we really want to return spending levels and delivery mechanisms back to 2004-2007 levels (in real terms)?

This must surely be about changing the economic paradigm away from an economy reliant on financial services to finance mediocre services.

“We are not idiots,” Miss Dorries added

Anyone spot the deliberate mistake in this sentence?

This is fine for those who have the luxury of predicting they will survive mostly unaffected for five years, this is not a luxury millions have. You attack at the Coalition’s weakest point, that is LibDem unity, those who are not hardcore Neoliberals will not relish helping implement this extreme Austerity Doctrine. You are right to always keep a long range strategic approach in mind, but accepting the coalition will run its full five years is to preclude possibilities. I know cynical wonk Labour types are chuffed to little mint balls the coalition will reign for five years and get all the blame for the crisis response, but in the words of Thomas Paine I believe ‘Fuck that shit’. This is not about party strategies it is about survival for millions of Britons who are under threat of profound life diminishing cuts. Keep the long game in mind, but don’t talk yourself out of action now. You are right Sunny, don’t expect it to fall. Make it fall.

I agree with many of the posters above, i.e. it is wise to bear the long term factors in mind, and be prepared for the long haul, but your risk being “surprised” by a snap GE if you don’t take account of the real possibility of a split in the LD’s.

A lot of the “what if-fery” people will indulge in is dependant on what happens with the economy, how the Coalition weathers the coming storms, and to what extent Labour manages to detoxify itself.

I also think your analysis of people forgetting things by the next election is flawed. Assuming the Coalition lasts the full term, even if it isn’t a total disaster the LD’s will definitely lose a large proportion of their former following; this needn’t even be due to a formal split or melt down. Many former LD voters & supporters just aren’t going to vote for them again.

It makes sense for the Labour party to make overtures to social democrats/left leaning LD’s…. but don’t expect them to fall into your arms either, ‘cos absent some fairly radical changes, it just isn’t going to happen!

If “Newer” Labour actually comes up with a radical, progressive alternative the the Coalition…. then bring it on. Until then, by all means let us all point out where the Tories and their LD enablers are leading us, and ensure that the AV referendum passes, because it is in all our interests to start the process of reforming our pathetically outdated system.

Labour have their new approach spot on, the damage has now been done to the LD’s they will not recover (IMHO) from this.

now time to focus in the tories and the NHS policy will be a massive weak point, with almost all the professional bodies against it the unity is there for a massive campaign against them and Cameron has recognised this.

As waiting queues grow this is one thing they can not blame Labour on.

It appears you may have your finger on the pulse Sunny. In the Observer today there in an article calling for Labour to highlight the coalition as an idealilogical Tory led government

“In a memo to his front-bench team, obtained by the Observer, the Labour leader’s director of policy, Greg Beales, says that from now on they must use the term “Conservative-led government” to describe the alliance of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.
“This is not a partnership and it is not a centre-ground coalition,” the memo says. “To highlight this, we are changing how we talk about the government. It is wrong to talk about their policies as coalition policies when so many are right-wing Conservative ideas.”

The left must press this argument to try to influence media coverage as much as possible.

@12 “Conservative-led government” is inspired. Belittling the Liberal contribution to the partnership is also an excellent way to encourage Lib Dems to try and distinguish themselves, perhaps by delivering on a few of their promises.

@Sunny, although not as divisive as tuition fees, failing to scrap control orders may prove a compromise too many for progressive Liberal Democrats.

The Conservative-led government (yup, that works) are dragging their heels on their promise, bundling the decision into a Home Office review of counter-terror laws the date of which has been pushed back at least once.

Whether the public will be outraged though remains to be seen: it’s too easy for governments of any party to evoke the spectre of terrorism to justify themselves.

14. margin4error

The Lib Dem presense in government means the Tories can run a much more right wing government.

It can do this because unlike Labour in power alone, it doesn’t have to hug the middle ground and strive ceaselessly to be moderate and cautious and pragmatic.

Instead it can be as rabidly right wing with its tearing down of the state as it likes – knowing plenty of voters will feel it must be pragmatic or cautious because the lib dems wouldn’t allow it otherwise.

But the coalition can still fall.

While the lib dem leadership is, largely, in tune with tory small-state thinking – many of its MPs and councillors are not. And elections loom large next spring, where they are likely to face heavy losses in scotland and wales, and in town halls across the country.

When that happens the mood of those who might bring down their leadership may harden. Not because of principles (this is the lib dems after all) but for the same reason they bought down Ming. Because they fear for their seats and wards.

It is that fear that brings down coalitions.

That fear may still do so.

“It can do this because unlike Labour in power alone, it doesn’t have to hug the middle ground ”

Another reason is that they don’t care about polls. They view this 5 year period as essentially a hit and run attack, during which time they change the nature of the state, service delivery and constitution. After 4 years they’ll probably start handing out the goodies in an attempt to regain power, but that is secondary. If labour regains power they know much of what they do will not be undone, because they will have re-defined what it means to govern and moved the terms of the debate on.

16. margin4error

Planeshift

If the tories really are thinking that way then Tony Blair achieved the greatest prize he ever aspired to.

New Labour as a project was about making Labour the natural party of government. The 20th Century was one in which this nation was guided long term by tory hands. It was interspersed with occasional short bursts of Labour government mitigating the worst aspects to tory rule – but the tories ran us long term, set out direction, and set the terms of debate for the best part of a century.

If the tories are thinking in terms of a short and radical burst then Tony Blair may have achieved the shift that Labour never managed before. He might actually have set the country on a different course for the 21st century in which the tories get in occasionally to mitigate the worst aspects of labour rule through radical activity, but throughout which Labour guide the long term direction and set the debate.

I hope you are right.

– to make Labour the natural party of government, and the tories an occasional government rather than the hand that steers our long term course as a nation.

“We are not idiots, Miss Dorries added”

HA HA HA

Want a bet ? You are getting 99% of what you want, and you are still whinging like a spoilt brat. The only thing you are not getting is the policies the nuts and fruits like you want to push through.

How can the Lie Dems work with vermin like this?

” – but the tories ran us long term, set out direction, and set the terms of debate for the best part of a century. ”

I am sorry but that is not true. It is just the same old “tory century” clap trap we get from the right. There were 4 govts of the 20th century that really mattered.

1 The Liberal govt that broke the power of the Tory House of Lords.
2 The coalition govt of the second world war which got us through the war.
3 The Atlee govt of 1945-51 which introduced the welfare state, and the national health service.
4 The Thatcher govt.

Of those, only 1 was out right tory, and many tories did not even think Thatcher was a tory. 60 years after the national health service was founded Call me Dave spent the last election saying he would match Labours spending on the health service, and how he loves it. That is lies of course. He trying to sell it off, but he was forced to defend the big policy of the 1945 govt. Something Thatcher did not even try to sell off.

Sorry I haven’t replied earlier…been a bit distracted today.

Richard:
The aim has to be to prevent the government from implementing its cuts agenda. Otherwise, what are we in this for?

Ok, but practically how do you plan to do this? I’m talking about government majorities and the obvious thinking on both sides of the Coalition here and you seem to be under the impression that preventing the government from signing bills is going to be easy.

To achieve a rupture in this coalition would involve a serious escalation, with direct action complemented by disruptive nationwide strike action.

I’m afraid I don’t agree. This sounds very much 1970s, and the public didn’t have much sympathy for massive strikes then either.

A serious escalation means building well organised local campaigns that aree effective at turning local opinion against the Coalition over a couple of years.

In other words, losing them council seats every year would be the surest sign that they’re losing the local argument, and would turn around thinking.

There seems to be this truism on the left that if we can get enough people out on a demo, or on strikes, we’ll win. I’m not sure that’s true.

Further, it’s actually not true that there will be no issue as ‘divisive’ (ie unpopular) as tuition fees and higher education cuts.

I’m afraid you’re still not clarifying what signatures issues you think will force such a divisive battle like tuition fees. Control Orders has been mentioned to me… but I doubt it highly. There won’t be any massive demos against that.

Europe is perhaps the only other major sticking point between the two parties. But none of the parties wants to bring it up, least of all the pro-Europe contingent.

You can’t have neoliberalism with a soft, social democratic veneer any more. Hence, either one side trounces the other, or there will be a split.

Again – I don’t agree. The Labour party also has a range of coalitions and thinkers who could have split over the last 13 years. They didn’t. Will the Libdems split like this? I’d say the new generation are a lot more pragmatic than the past, and it would be wishful thinking to hope they’ll follow historical trends.

Adam – when you say: “if it becomes difficult to govern” – if by that you mean mass strikes, I’m afraid that only means lost public sympathy. You want a return to a situation where rubbish piles up, the transport system doesn’t work? It didn’t work last time, and it won’t work this time either.

their only chance of keeping their seats will be if they are seen to have brought an end to this coalition:

Perhaps… but I doubt Libdem support will go below 6-7%. And like I said – the voters are unlikely to reward Libdems for bringing down a Coalition at the height of their unpopularity. If I was advising them, I’d advise against that too. Doesn’t make any strategic sense.

Tim Hardy – good questions. People don’t want to think about how to peel away Tory voters, they would much rather hope that Libdem voters can be peeled away or Libdem MPs made to commit suicide so we don’t have to make any Middle England noises.

But I’m afraid this war isn’t won without appealing to Middle England and pointing out how the Tories will wreck their public services.

That, I believe, has to be done locally, and bringing ordinary people into campaigns that are inclusive of all…

I think planeshift at 7 is spot on.

Rick B – I’m not trying to say it’s just one type of action over another. I’m all for action now… I’m just saying that if the action is just focused on the next 6 months, then by next year we’ll be demoralised and exhausted. I don’t want to see that happen.

I don’t want to be in a situation where everyone is so expectant that the coalition will fall soon, that they give up within a year and become depressed.

Secondly, of course we need to fight. But you have to point the path to a quick disintegration to me first… because I don’t see it. And if the Coalition keeps the main Libdem cabinet on board (Cable, Clegg, Huhne, Alexander, Farron, Hughes, Laws et al) then the rest of the, will have to follow. Charles Kennedy might not but he’s not running for leader any more.

What I’m saying is – it is easy to say we must fight and fight hard. But it isn’t clear how this will happen very quickly…. if we wanted to stop this rout of public services then we should have worked to get a Labour majority (or at least more seats).

I didn’t see the article about Ed Miliband calling it a ‘tory-left government’ but I think it’s spot on.

I think it is fairly safe to say now that Libdems aren’t even junior partners… they’ve become an afterthought.

Thanks for the reply Sunny, I think 2011 with certainly be..uncertain, on TU action I think they could and should do a lot more to fight media war (strikes are a defensive response to an attack and need to be framed as such, media will paint strikes as cause of trouble, not management malfeasance/cuts but unions can do more to challenge that framing). Also if all the protests start to join hands who knows what could happen, we do need some pacing and strategy but staying flexible enough for targets of opportunity. Burn out may not be an issue as coalition policies impact, I have heard quite few people saying wait until the policies have an effect then protest (moderates I would broadly describe them as), which I disagree with but that second wave of wait and see people will activate in 2011 too. Now if only EdM can align with public opposition as opposed to simply being Her Maj’s loyal opposition. AV and new politics, who knows…


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  2. sally

    RT @libcon: It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  3. Helen Thomas

    It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/dRb7MXQ via @libcon 2nd to last para important

  4. Alicia

    RT @Hellsbells265: It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/dRb7MXQ via @libcon 2nd to …

  5. Matt Hayes

    RT @libcon: It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  6. Tim Fenton

    @sunny_hundal keeps a straight face while observing Nadine #dorries saying "We are not idiots" http://bit.ly/enAgu8

  7. Jonathan Davis

    "'We are not idiots,' Miss Dorries added" <– I'm afraid you are Nadine. (From: http://tinyurl.com/2wxz9bv)

  8. Broken OfBritain

    RT @Hellsbells265: It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/dRb7MXQ via @libcon 2nd to …

  9. sunny hundal

    Why I think it makes no sense to expect this Coalition to fall apart before 2015 http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  10. Eleanor Sharman

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why I think it makes no sense to expect this Coalition to fall apart before 2015 http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  11. Chris

    YES! What he said > RT @sunny_hundal: Why I think it makes no sense to expect this Coalition to fall apart before 2015 http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  12. Jessica Wing

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why I think it makes no sense to expect this Coalition to fall apart before 2015 http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  13. Mairi Sharratt

    It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/kYr4v6v via @libcon

  14. Naadir Jeewa

    Reading: It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon: Amidst all the growing energy around direct … http://bit.ly/hG1rDz

  15. Chantelle West

    RT @libcon: It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  16. Colin Green

    RT @libcon: It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  17. Anthony Barnett

    @sunny_hundal: is right a five year approach is needed #UKuncut, #solidarity #demo2010 http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  18. Naadir Jeewa

    RT @AnthonyBarnett: @sunny_hundal: is right a five year approach is needed #UKuncut, #solidarity #demo2010 http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  19. conspiracy theo

    It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon … http://bit.ly/dREAfv

  20. DougRouxel

    RT @libcon: It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon http://bit.ly/eqnSNR <= agree, plan for the long term.

  21. Nitin sharma

    RT @sunny_hundal: Why I think it makes no sense to expect this Coalition to fall apart before 2015 http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  22. Rachel Hubbard

    It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon | Liberal Conspiracy http://goo.gl/TeM7U

  23. Gods & Monsters

    "Undermining Conservative support is more important than undermining Libdem support from now on." RT @sunny_hundal
    http://bit.ly/eqnSNR

  24. Greener London

    Excellent piece on cuts and protest by @sunnyhundal at Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/RMgI1oa #ukuncut #tuitionfees #cuts #demo2010

  25. red trev

    It makes no sense to expect this Coalition will fall soon | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/LKp4qyl via @libcon

  26. Vince Cable, Murdoch and the Coalition | Lunchtime Legend

    […] They have managed to make the Libs there human shields, escaping blame whilst Clegg et al take all the ire for Tory policies (And man the Left really has to wake up on this, really focus on the Tories….), and the Libs are now effectively locked into a death embrace. […]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.