Warning to Osborne:

Lib Dems fear guilt by association with Osborne

By Andrew Grice, Political Editor

Friday, 30 July 2010

Nick Clegg is facing Liberal Democrat concerns that the cuts agenda will look like a crusade and is costing them support

Reuters

Nick Clegg is facing Liberal Democrat concerns that the cuts agenda will look like a crusade and is costing them support

Liberal Democrat ministers have warned that the Conservatives will inflict lasting political damage to Nick Clegg's party if voters think the coalition Government is relishing the task of cutting public spending.

Although the Cabinet has agreed to try to blame the cuts on its inheritance from Labour, senior Lib Dems are worried that some Tory politicians – including George Osborne, the Chancellor – give the impression they are on a Thatcherite mission to shrink the state.

One Liberal Democrat minister warned yesterday: “If we look as though we are enjoying it, we’re dead. We have to take people with us.”

Related articles

Another minister from Mr Clegg’s party said: “Some of the language coming out of the Treasury is causing concern. We have to remember that we are talking about the jobs of real people and vital services that people depend on.”

Liberal Democrats are arguing that is it vital for the coalition to show voters there will be some “light at the end of the tunnel” after a four-year programme of cuts, so that it does not look like an ideological crusade.

They fear that the severity of the cuts of up to 40 per cent that the Chancellor has demanded of Whitehall has not yet dawned on the public. They say the outcry over cuts to the school building programme – the biggest cut noticed by voters so far – is a foretaste of what is to come after a government-wide spending review is concluded in October.

Some Lib Dems believe privately that David Cameron is more sympathetic to their plight than Mr Osborne.

Anxiety about the spending squeeze is also growing on the Liberal Democrat backbenches. Three MPs – Bob Russell, Mike Hancock and Adrian Sanders – have signed a Commons motion expressing concern that almost one million people, including 170,000 pensioners, will lose an average of £12 a week from cuts in housing benefit announced by Mr Osborne. It says that he is hitting the unemployed the hardest.

The MPs joined forces with Labour backbenchers to call on the Government “not to proceed with policies which will force those on low incomes to leave their homes and existing communities”. They warn that there is a real risk the benefit cuts will push hundreds of thousands of people into poverty, debt and even on to the streets if they are evicted from their homes.

Liberal Democrat ministers insist they will ensure the coalition “cuts with care” and protects the most vulnerable people in society. As the Commons begins its summer break, Mr Cameron warned of “difficult decisions” ahead on the cuts as he moved to quell concerns on his own backbenches about the coalition.

In a letter to all his MPs, he said: “Of course there are challenges ahead, and yes, there have been compromises as a result of this coalition. People will be disappointed that some policies have had to be discarded – and so am I. I’m not going to pretend that having two parties in one government is going to be easy, or that there will not be more difficult decisions ahead of us. But we must remember the most important thing of all: Britain now has something that all Conservatives believe in profoundly – a strong and stable Government acting in the national interest to do the right thing for the long-term.”

The Prime Minister said that in just 10 weeks, the coalition had shown its intent to be a great reforming government.

Liberal Democrats fear the looming cuts are responsible for the party losing about a third of its support in the opinion polls since the May election. Much of it appears to have switched to Labour, which has made Mr Clegg’s party the focus of its attacks.

Yesterday Labour accused Mr Clegg of misleading voters at the election after he suggested that he decided before polling day that the cuts would need to start this year. At the election, the Lib Dems and Labour opposed the immediate cuts backed by the Tories.

The Deputy Prime Minister told a BBC Two documentary last night on how the coalition was formed that he did not change his mind during the negotiations with the Tories after the election resulted in a hung parliament.

“I changed my mind earlier than that... between March and the actual general election, a financial earthquake occurred in on our European doorstep." Asked why he did not announce his change of heart, he told the BBC political editor Nick Robinson: “Ah, to be fair we were all I think reacting to very very fast-moving economic events.”

Liam Byrne, Labour’s shadow Chief Secretary, said: “This shows Nick Clegg simply misled voters. He’d clearly decided before the election that David Cameron was his partner of choice.”

Lib Dems believe that, while many Tory supporters will back the cuts, they will be opposed by many of those who voted for Mr Clegg’s party in May.

A ComRes survey for the BBC this week found that 57 per cent of the public believe that cuts of 25 per cent – Mr Osborne’s minimum demand for most government departments – would be too severe. The same proportion (57 per cent) of Lib Dem voters agree, compared to only 46 per cent of Tory supporters.

  • Guest
    In the early1930s the National (coalition) Government gave way to a Conservative one in which National Liberals sat and supported. The last National Liberal was still around in 1964. The Tories won the 1935 election.
  • VivaLaRevolution
    What are we seeing every day. Do we see george coming out with cuts policy? No just at the budget.


    Every announcement made is being made by a Lib Dem. WE have a Lib Dem in charge of cuts who took over from Laws. He knows absolutely nothing about finance at all.

    What do we see the Torys doing, just going on Question Time and Newsnight as there needs to be a 'balanced debate' against Labour. Two against One.

    The Lib Dems in being given power by Dave have been set up. They have not been able to resist it either. Every department has a Lib Dem reporting to Nick. That is inspite of the Lib Dems only getting about 50 MPs.

    WE are hearing abouy coalition cuts, we are seeing Lib Dems announce everything. Mud sticks. And when the real bad stuff happens in September when people find out their jobs realy have gone. All hell will break loose. It needs to be now, then will be too late. Why are the unions being so quiet?

    The people know how to stop this.

    Firstly get all the money back from the banks immediately, they have miss-used it if they are paying any bonuses again and not lending to companies.

    Secondly as the coalition will not do first point.

    "We are all in this together"
    MPs are payed by the public purse too (they do not mention that do they)

    For every 1,000 Jobs cut and people sacked, ONE MP will be sacked too.
    So 600,000 cuts and jobs to go will result in 600 MPs being sacked too.

    Do not worry because the private sector is going to take up the slack (oh yeh) and as we are all told MPs are worth so much more in the Private sector they will be clamouring to be the first to go. So they can be so much richer.

    How will this pan out at election time. I do not know. Lib Dems will say they have shown the iron will needed to be in power. The Tories will say they have saved the country. What can Labour say but they messed up, but will not next time.

    The People will hopefully realize that 'None OF THE Above' deserve power at all.
  • drg40
    Don't you think that analysis is awfully convenient for the banks?

    Consider an alternative. Because of the failure of Labour and Conservative Governments to properly supervise the banking industry - probably born of the fact that the banking industry contributes large sums of money to all three major parties - the average high street bank manager lent like a man who had money to burn, to people who had not the faintest hope of repaying the sums involved. He even went on telly to persuade the gullible that he, and his credit card fantasies, were a problem free route to Nirvana. How many people complained here that they were startled to recieve credit cards for which they had never applied offering them many thousands of pounds worth of instant, trouble free, credit.

    These toxic loans, engineered by high street banker's greed, were then sold off to the highest bidder, who is now getting the blame. What's that got to do with the US, except that they had a similar problem? AIUI the scale of individual debt is actually SMALLER in the US

    The writing has been on the wall for at least 30 years that banks were being inadequately supervised. Labour are directly and immediately to blame in equal measure to the Tories. But remember, there's one constant thread running through all this, the Treasury, of which one must speak no ill.

    But I can think it.
  • The huge deficit was caused by bailing out the banks due to the INTERNATIONAL financial crisis caused by American bankers. If Labour had not bailed them out the banks would've gone under and people would have lost their life savings. Gordon Brown won World Statesmen of the Year in New York for his handling of the crisis, funny how the right wing press failed to report that. The idea that the recession is all Labour's fault is Tory spin for the Daily Mail generation who have no grasp on economics. These cuts will throw us back into recession, we need to spend to encourage growth, not start cutting.
  • The cuts are just as much Lib Dem cuts as they are Tory cuts , those from the Right in the Party such as Clegg and Laws are simply pursuing their own agenda at the expense of the rest , they are all in it together and they won't be able to worm their way out of it or disassociate themselves from economic wreckage that the cuts will create .....
  • drahcir38
    Guilt by association? I thought that was where you hadn't done anything dreadful, unacceptable and unpalatable, but had lived with, slept with, eaten and drunk with someone who had? In this case surely Clegg and co are very much part of what is happening, but hey, that's the price of putting power above principle.
  • Aquarius1973
    "propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state" (Media Control - N.Chomsky)
    so, never ever trust politicians! they need "us" only during the election day. after that we should be quiet and don't dare to ask questions...
  • olivercromwell2
    Most politicians make me vomit, its not just the way some of them take up office to feather their own nests, but the fact they are selling the public down the river to acheive their greedy agendas. All governments should be in power to support the masses, and not the few. Maybe its time for me to return from retirement ( seeing there will be no default retirement age anymore) and start dissolving Parliament again. "Trust in your god and keep your powder dry" : )
  • Ponkbutler
    The LibDems are already dead as a political party with any coherent economic or social policy of their own.

    And to those who blame Labour for the economy, it's about time you got some grasp of the complexities of modern economics. And it's about time Osbourne and Clegg did too, if they really care about this country. They will be disastrous if the continue failing to understand that you have an inter-related flux of factors and cannot act on only one or two. And that the more violently you intervene on a few - as with these proposed cuts - the more you risk provoking long term instability.

    Labour's intervention in the financial crisis helped us avoid another depression on the scale of the thirties. They may have lost their minds over Iraq and civil liberties, but at least they kept their marbles together on this one.

    The Con/LibDem smear campaign over the economy is dishonest and irresponsible party politics of the lowest kind. For all Clegg's election whining about "traditional politics" he has revealed he has nothing new to offer.
  • Cedav
    I can't believe that they have only just cottoned on to this. If Clegg hadn't "cosied up" to Cameron during the campaign they would probably have had 50 more seats in the first place! There were plenty of people like me, that were sick of Brown but petrified by the Tories. When Clegg made his preference for Cameron clear during the campaign loads of us switched back to Labour in a desperate attempt to keep the Tories out. We hoped after this that at least they would force the Tories to be moderate, but these hopes are dashed within weeks as well. The only way to detoxify the Lib Dem brand is to get rid of Clegg quickly and let him join the Tory party where he would clearly rather be. Simon Hughes anyone? He is a man of principle.
  • voxpop2012
    I don't think anyone disputes there has to be cuts, of course there has to be cuts and lots of them but what infuriates me is the lies they use to justify these cuts. I'd like to be respected as an adult and told the facts. As an adult i believe i'm mature enough to handle the truth, good or bad. it upsets me when i am lied to, it makes me feel undervalued and disrespected. I feel lied to when the government say they are cutting disability allowances by pretending most disabled are not disabled and then adding insult to injury by pretending there are jobs for these people to do. That's a lie, what they mean is they are picking on the week and vulnerable as these people have not got the strength or often the mental capacity to fight back, so it's an easy to do. Or they say they are cutting jobs and then pretending it will be a good idea to get the country involved in voluntary work - it will be good for society! It's a big society plan. ERR no, since when was it good for society to create an army of slave workers to replace real jobs. ( oh yea, Ancient Rome did it) Do they think we can't see through it all? If they do, then it shows how much contempt they hold towards us by deciding that we are not adult enough to deal with or handle the truth of the matter. How can we as a nation, or even as individuals, make informed decision about anything in our lives if we are not given the real facts. It's not the cuts that are harming people, it's all the lies that go with it, it alters your sense of reality and who you are, It's a form of subtle manipulative control, it's not unlike being in an abusive relationship. it's starts off all lovey -dovey but very soon, you get a sense of something not being quite right but you just can't put your finger on it as it all seems so justifiable and before you know it, you loose all sense of self.. Now that the government, it matters not if they are a coalition, they are still the government, have started the lieing process, they will have to keep it going to cover their tracks.. Just keep watching out for those lies and don't let your sense of reality falter before the next election.
  • leeblued
    If Clegg and the Lib Dems didn't realise they would be used as "scapegoats" or "co-conspirators" by the Cons as and when it suited them ,then they are bigger fools than what what I thought they were. Having said that, the whole political spectrum in the UK and just about all western democracy's is a shambles. We ,are constantly lied too ,manipulated, cheated out of our taxes , the list of negatives is endless but when I look at other forms of Government, I just shake my head in sadness at the whole sorry mess.
  • mind_ful
    It isn't whether the public believe the cuts are being relished, but whether they happen at all, in this way and at this speed, that is concerning Lib Dems. The public is not stupid. It did not vote for a coalition, let alone one diminated by conservative policies. The LIb dems have thrown away almost everything just to be 'in power'. This means we have no one to vote for anymore - unless we vote labour. The whole idea of coaltions is misguided. It is much beter to have small parties with no majory and use your 'power' as influence on each issue as it arises. Having been gobbled by the whale, what worries people is that until the lib dems are regurgitated from its belly, there is no lib dem party any more. Those who have gone into the coalition are now tainted lime green, not lib dem yellow. The only solution is to leave the coalition before it is too late. Sorry guys! It didnt work at the start and will not work in the future.
  • crashtestmonkey
    Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas. I suppose being thrust from the political wilderness into actually having to make some decisions must be a harsh adjustment to make. But Clegg was so desperate for power he would have trampled his Grandmother to get into #10.
  • I am bcoming increasing sick and tired of listen to the ridiculous rants by Lib Dem voters like yourself, throwing a paddy because the Libs did not form Government with Labour as you and ofter left wing extremeists in the Lib Dem ranks would have liked. When will you understand that a) Labour had no intention of offering voting reform to the Libs, again this has been proven that Labour had lied about this in order to woo the Lib Dems before the election. b) Labour never had any intention of forming any coalition Government with the Lib Dems, the lack of negotiations from Labour had indicated this. c) Cuts are required, do you think it is right that the country carries on with unprecidented levels of debt indefinately? With massive borrowing year on year meaning we sink further into the red with no way out?
    Nick Clegg has NOT sold out, he said that he would hold negotiations with the party that polled the highest at the election, that was the Tories so no pledge has been broken. However because that was not Labour, the Labourite Lib Dem voters have since becaome vocal because they did not get their own way. Nick Clegg has managed to get his voting reform agenda through and we will have the opportunity to vote for this next year. He has also managed to pupil premium in education for the poorest students. Understand that there are some of us on the other side of the Coalition coin that are not overly happy with some of the concessions made the Lib Dems, however I am happy to conceed if it means keeping Labour out of power. If Lib Dem voters like yourself cannot see that Labour is bad news and are not to be trusted (the last 13 years should be enough evidence) more than the Tories then there really is no hope at all. Additional Comment: There has been far to much waste in Government for far too long, yes there does ned to be some severe cuts across the board, again sometheing that Labour has not been entirely honest about, continually criticisng the coalitions efforts to cut waste created by THEM. Some areas of the cuts I do not fully agree with such as unemployed people getting back into work, as an unemployed person I am continually being told by the jobcentre that this and that is "no longer available due to Government cuts". However a large number of workshy individuals that have spent years out of work or never worked in their life, living at our expense encouraged to do so by the Labour government, are now starting to receive the kick up the backside they should have gotten years ago. It makes me angry listening to these individuals boasting abiout how they have cheated the system for so long and now they will get their comeuppance.
  • And show they should worry they've done nothing to curb the indecently speedy excesses of this government particularly in terms of VATand cuts to the benefits which the most vulnerable rely upon to survive because as those who actually are genuine and get the benefits there is no way work would pay less and you certainly cannot live comfortably on benefits which fail to keep pace with the increasing extra costs of being disabled.I'M ASHAMED I wasonce a libdemIleft when Clegg became leader because it was obvious to me he is a conservative and is in the wrong party my decision has been vindicated after having changed their minds on the major issues overnightthe passed a particularly vindictive budget favouring the haves over the have nots, they've done nothing that support the most right wing regime for thirty years andf will no be forever known as one half of the condems they even copped out over Pr opting for the alternative vote combined with Shirley pPORTERESK boundary changes to ensure labou combined with the tories and the 80% of the media who support them will mean the chance to at last be rid of the undemocratic first past the post system, which with a largely three party system means two thirds don#'t support the government of the day even though the commane enormou parliamentary majorities making one wonder if clegg really believed in it anyway!THEY HAVE LET US DOWN BIGTIME NEVER HAS A Liberal party aided and abetted such a right wing agenda in government they are utterlydisgraceful, complicit and deserve electoral oblivion I urge llibdem voters to vote green in future they'll grt more liberal policies
  • And789
    Of course they're guilty by association, it's a COALITION. That means doing things together. I voted LibDem for the first time in my life at the last election, but never, ever again. As for the Tories, why is anyone surprised at the cuts? It's what they do.
  • VivaLaRevolution
    "We are all in this together"
    Unfortunately we the people are in it, politicians are not, protected by the privilages and high pay of parliament, which they will not give up. Even though we cannot afford anything - except their high pay, expenses and staff and office costs, oh, and the Afganistan war. And EU Imigration.

    WE just cannot afford The People who keep this country going. Lets all get on boats out of here and just let them get on with it. When the power has run out. And there is no food. Then it will be a different tale. We can boat them out and get the country back on its feet, just like after the 2nd world war, but without the politicians.

    "We are all in this together"
    MPs are payed by the public purse too (they do not mention that do they)

    For every 1,000 Jobs cut and people sacked, ONE MP will be sacked too.
    So 600,000 cuts and jobs to go will result in 600 MPs being sacked too.

    Do not worry because the private sector is going to take up the slack (oh yeh) and as we are all told MPs are worth so much more in the Private sector they will be clamouring to be the first to go. So they can be so much richer.

    How will this pan out at election time. I do not know. Lib Dems will say they have shown the iron will needed to be in power. The Tories will say they have saved the country. What can Labour say but they messed up, but will not next time.

    The People will hopefully realize that 'None OF THE Above' deserve power at all.
  • Carrieten
    The Scottish Government are not a coalition..they are a minority Gov.., the SNP did try to form a coalition after the 2007 election with the libdems, the fundamental stumbling block was the Nationalists' demand for a referendum on independence. IMV this was my first experience of libdems actually being undemocratic, as surely a referendum is the most basic and democratic way of allowing the electorate to make a decision on their future themselves, irrespective of the result of such a referendum
  • Absolutely. Guilty as charged. The Libcons, formerly the LibDems, deserve to lose ALL their seats in the next elections, be they for local councils, the UK parliament, the Scottish Parliament or the European one. I'll certainly never vote for them again and I hope they do lose them all. Green Party, here I come!
  • alf001
    If we go back to the hung parliament situation of 1974, if you recall Jeremy Thorpe decided not to back either party as he did not believe it was in the national interest ,not in the party's interest . If you have bed fellows in a coalition which have opposite political and cultural views , it does not bode well for the party which is sacrificing the most, as it is committing political suicide due to short sighted thinking , by misleading voters into believing that the Lib-dems were going to oppose Thatcherite policies, if they were to form a coalition , in "The National Interest".
    The Lib-dems have sold out on policies with regards to abolishing taxes on people earning £10K or under . As Dutch politics and Dutch culture is different to British Politics , I find coalition Government thinking to be very different from the mis- match coaliton in Britain .The British Lib-Dems were not voted in by the people , to support policies which are against their own principles , as the Lib dems are concerned regarding the low income earners (over 30% of the British working population) , but the Tories are not . And yet, Nick Clegg has sold out his parties principles for the purpose of becoming deputy PM , without consulting those who voted for him .
    The fact that the Conservative party were not given the minimum number of seats required to form a majority , should have made Clegg realise that nearly half the country do not approve of Tory party policies ,and do not want them implemented by collaborated pacts by parties who are only interested in coming to power . Nick Clegg promised a new politics , which now appears to be a figment of his own imagination .
  • alf001
    I have to say you do make very credible points sir . How ever the fact that the Lib-dems said one thing one week , then changed their minds and decided to back the Conservatives after agreeing not to disagree with some Labour points regarding the economy , especially from Vince cable,after the televised debate with Allister Darling and George Osborne . It suggests that the Lib-dems decided on supporting any party for a coalition , as an opportunist attempt to get their hands on power . The problem is they have forgotten that the voters dont like being taken for mugs , as they did not vote the Lib-dems in to support Thatcherite policies .
  • alf001
    The cuts will definitely kill the Lib dems politically , in the next general election ,if they are to associate them selves with the planned cuts . It is more than likely that they will loose half their seats , which they have maintained for their lack of supporting Thatcherite policies in the past . People did not expect Liberals to bend over backwards to share power , they wanted the Liberals in so that Cameron and his Thatcherite Cronies who supported him , do not succeed in taking the country back to the days of Thatcher ism and high unemployment ,and huge cuts in public spending to personally benefit those making the cuts . For the Liberals to claim that they are working in the "National Interest" ,by approving and not opposing the cuts in parliament , will show the Liberals as nothing more than a bunch of political opportunists who took the voters for mugs .
  • Trojan_Horace
    It isn't a "presentational" problem the Liberal leadership have: It's the fact they shouldn't be participating in a raft of policies, like hikes in Educational fees, or scrapping of National Film Council, that directly conflict with the desires of the Liberal voter and are 180 degrees in conflict with their Manifesto. The public are completely sick and tired for voting for politicians who make promises they don't keep and then give them even less of what they already had, but charge them more for getting it. It's not rocket science
  • themanwithadog
    By admitting this "astounding" theory that the coalition is not working proves beyond doubt that the ordinary Joe in the streets is far wiser than the numbnuts who represent us in Parliament. It was a forgone conclusion that the ludicrous idea that Cons and Libs could work together was just idealogical thinking, this same thinking is being practised by both (opposing) parties. The cons agreed to the coalition knowing full well that they could put certain Libs in charge of particular departments and then they could be used as scapegoats and subsequently ridiculed by the powers that put them in that office once that their little empires fell down
  • RobertPrice
    The cuts are driven be a very perverse ideology, neoliberalism or neoconservatism, which has caused corruption and massive suffering worldwide. This Conservative government, like the last Labour government is stinkingly corrupt, and is willing to betray the people and this country to line their own pockets; and in the service of precisely the same corrupt backers. As for possible perceptiuon of guilt by association, too late, it's already happened. It happened when, instead of a deal which pushed policies, the Lib Dems got seats in government. The Lib Dem policies are not evident or visible, the government jobs are.
  • gritpype
    The House of Lords was the only effective 'opposition' to Thatcher (see Donald R Bull, 'The House of Lords and the Thatcher Government'), so don't just dismiss it as some kind of anachronism to be got rid of on a whim. Sometimes, its very independence from the electorate works in our favour (sometimes). I agree with your point about Conservative strategy. Clegg has done more damage to his party than he realises.
  • What we really need in Britain is an elected upper house - like they have in Australia. Aussie voters, who face fines if they don't vote, are generally well informed. At state and federal level, with a very few exceptions, the party in government seldom controls the senate. So, you end up with reasonable checks and balances. Some years ago, there was a situation in which the senate was hung on whether we'd get a GST (read VAT) tax. The Australian Democrats, whose slogan was 'keep the bastards honest' voted against. The Liberals (read Conservative) voted for it. The senate was hung and came down to one lone and very very honest independent. He procrastinated for 24 hours, said he'd examined his conscience and voted against it. Within minutes, the Australian Democrats voted with the government in a show of mind boggling self destruct.The Australian Democrats are now decimated, virtually a spent force. Gone! In Britain, if the Lib Dems don't stand up for what THEY believe in rather than just rubber stamping the Conservative Manifesto, they too are gone. And I actually think this was the Conservative strategy right from the start. If they decimate Clegg's party at the next election, we could have a very long period ahead with a Conservative government that can do exactly what it wants with impunity.
  • alf001
    Precisely! That is exactly what Thorpe had done in 1974 , when no single party had an over all majority . To form a coalition with another party in the pretext that ,the Lib-dems opposed immediate cuts and agreed with Labour and then turn round and say the Conservatives were right all along , suggests an extremely short sighted attempt to con voters , just to come to power , or extremely amateurish politics to imply that the Lib Dems are electable to form a Government . If it is a bit of both , then indeed it is extremely short sighted for the Lib-Dem party leadership , and will never be trusted again by voters , who believed that the Lib-dems had something new to offer . There is nothing emotive about that , but just pointing out the obvious facts , being proved by the slump for Lib-dem support in the opinion polls less than 12 weeks after "sharing power",together with a slump in their votes in a recent local council elections in the Westmidlands , where the Lib_dem vote slumped by 92%.
  • alf001
    Well carrying on as before would mean NO to THATCHERISM (well in a round about watered down way), as opposed to the lying style of the Lib -Dems supporting Thatcherism which only benefits the Tories ,who were lying about the economy . You surely dont think people would have voted for a hung parliament if the majority believed in the Thatcherite Trash the Tories tell , do you ? I voted for Thatcher in 1979 , so I do know exactly what tactics the Tories use .
  • You need to wait and see how the cuts will affect you. As does everyone. Only then will the popularity of the Liberal Democrats, and the Conservatives, become clear. Conservatives of middle England (stereotype Mail readers) love to complain about the benefit scroungers, the huge pensions allegedly enjoyed by public sector workers. But wait until the cuts affect the Mail readers, when their or their Mothers meals on wheels, or their home help is cut or their libraries are shut or their free bus passes are withdrawn, etc, etc. Cuts (or the idea of cuts) are all well and good as long as they affect everyone but oneself.
  • Ponkbutler
    I'm writing here because for some reason I can't directly reply to your last response to this post paul999, which shows your poor grasp of economics and ad hominem rhetoric in support of the LibDems throughout this and other replies of yours to posts responding to this article.

    The graph is posted on Wikipedia (easy for you and others to access) but the analysis of the figures there which you quote is no more insightful than your own. The figures in the graph are not "Wikipedia's" as you claim, but Nationwide's figures with their own adjustments for two decades of inflation. Nationwide, like anyone else with a modicum of knowledge about economic and financial affairs, recognises that adjustments for inflation are required to make valid and responsible comparisons of this nature across any period of time.

    Your vitriolic attack and black and white views on who is good and bad in politics fit with your simplistic initial analysis of what caused the crisis and similarly limited understanding about what slowed and mitigated its effects.

    If we care about politics as something other than party politics, then perhaps we can start thinking about more than Lab vs Lib Vs Con, and simply look at what really has happened and has been done and works and doesn't. Others have pointed to Ireland's problems, where the coalition's policies are already clearly showing their failings. Perhaps that would be a good place for you to start, when you tire of bandying insults.
  • Ponkbutler
    Not too impressed by the responsibility of your own post, paul999, which seems to for some reason forget that average house prices in 1989 were in fact close to 110,000 using the Nationwide Building Society's figures.

    And of course it also, quite conveniently, forgets what others have pointed out, namely what happened on the real estate markets in other countries, as well.

    Your analysis of the financial crisis being mainly caused by house prices and "too much lending" is well up to Osborne standards of simplification.

    I'm afraid it's all rather more complicated than party politics would have us believe.

    People may treat politics like football, each with their own favourite side, but unfortunately the consequences are a bit more serious.
  • nsandersen
    Well, it is not Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition's job to disrupt the running of the country. Apart from that, how far that should be taken probably depends on how seriously they want to be taken.
  • drg40
    I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand your point. You use emotive phrases like "sold out", but being the smaller party in a coalition means that some of your policies will not be acceptable to the majority. Is that "selling out"? These arguments go round and round, mostly from people who demand that the LIbDems should have refused to join a coalition with the Tories. The logical conclusion to that is that Clegg would have had to go to the country and tell them that, given the result, he hadn't in mind doing a realistic deal with anyone, so lets re-run the election.
  • drg40
    I think there were a lot of LibDems who thought that Labour were their natural bedfellows. IMV if you're going to deal, you're going to deal. But if you are of the view that the single purpose of a political party is to gain power, power to implement as many of your policies as you can, then to suggest that to seek power is "opportunist" simply means that political parties are "opportunist". After all, if they didn't strive to gain power when they could, you wouldn't think them much of a political party, would you? Just one final point. The Dutch government have been trying to carve out a coalition for some months now. Nobody thinks that's abhorrent, no great newspaper headlines. But in the UK a couple of days and it's meeja induced panic.
  • drg40
    We have been round this circuit before you know, and it still doesn't work nth time out. The voters chose a hung parliament. Ted Heath magaged to prove the glaringly obvious when he went back to the country for another election after he got a difficult answer and got slung out for his pains. They don't like being told they didn't do it properly, you know. Despite people who are convinced they know better. If a "loose association" had been the route forward instead of a coalition what would have happened then would be the party trying to govern wouldn't know what legislation would go ahead and which not until it reached the floor of the house. You couldn't run a whelk stall like that. You certainly couldn't have a legislative programme and you couldn't possibly deal with any minor difficulties (like a huge financial crisis, for example) I would also point out that it is the duty of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition to oppose, oppose anything by any legal means, not to decide to allow some Bills through on the nod, 'cos their "loosely associating". That way lies some really magic ways for corruption So if you're going to have a Parliament, and it would seem to me that's what they were elected for, you have to have a coalition. Trying to put Labour back into power, even if possible (which it really was not), would be a death knell for any party given the ordure in which Brown had lost his way. That doesn't leave much of a choice, does it? And if your going to serve as required for the period the people expect, you'd better start doing some fast co-operating. I would also bring to your attention the fact that the gutter press sells more papers if they can make up some bad news. Good news never fills the proprietor's back pocket, so be prepared to wade through mischief, lies and deceit from the meeja about the workings of the coalition, every day in every way.
  • littleglimmer
    Here's an expert on the subject - "?The interesting thing I have discovered over the last week is that we have been using different words but we mean similar things,?" Nick Clegg, May 19.
  • drg40
    I used to think that about an elected second chamber too. My problem is; who will ever take on the corrupt media in the UK? It can't be someone elected, for they would be so vilified in all forms of the meeja with lies and distortion as well as putting their lives and their relatives lives under a microsope of lies that they would be eiteher quickly unelected or quickly retired. The meeja keep on telling Joe Public that he can believe what they tell him is truth. You and I both know that simply is not the case, but if you prove to Joe Public that his favourite source of "news" is a tissue, even then he will continue to take it all in with his breakfast cereal.

    So who is there left? The one advantage the house of Lords has is that it's members cannot be thrown out thanks to the slander and distortion of the media acting in concert with their agreed story line.

    I long for the day when the Lords use their freedom from the electoral process to propose legislation to the elected house that even they cannot pretend there isn't a problem. I'm still hoping. But if the House of Lords becomes elected we might as well give the keys to number 10 to the next passing anglophobic, europhobic meeja magnate, peddling a line intended solely to maximise his profit.
  • gritpype
    Accusations of hypocrisy? From someone who argues in favour of Clegg's Lib Dems?? CLEGG'S Lib Dems? Hahahahahahahahaha............
  • snotcricket
    Nerr! Opportunist.
  • snotcricket
    Which of said cowboys do you refer?
  • 987mike
    I bet you voted for the cowboy!
  • drg40
    I'm afraid that's a bit of a giveaway, old fruit. We don't vote very often do we?

    If we did we would have noticed that up and down this land hung local councils have come together to provide local govt. and felt it their duty to do so. There have been some damned strange coalitions, but almost all have been made to work by the feeling that the voters deserve to be served. Of course, they're out of the glare of the national meeja, so they've had an easy ride because they only have their voters to answer to.

    Isn't the Scottish Parliament a coalition? The European Parliament too?

    IMV the whole problem with a coalition is that so few people actually know their MP, that when the manifesto has to be put to one side and basic principles become the driving force, few people know enough about their local man or woman to trust them.

    But, stunning thought. If you feel so badly about what's going on why don't you send your local rep an email, letter or whatever, respectfully asking for the reasons why he is (or is not] going along with the things that so upset you. Instead of shrieking into the darkness you have the perfect right to ask what the hell's going on from the person who knows.

    And despite pathetic attempts to persuade us all to the contrary, here and in the meeja, you may find you get a perfectly sensible answer even if you didn't vote for them.
  • snotcricket
    As yet very little has hit the statute, give them a bit more than 3 months before judging.

    Your frustration or is it resentment seem to echo the right of the Tories, perhaps you could become the latest coalition & become the disaffected but then again you'd be like the rest of the electorate.

    Could it be the Labour & Tory party are not fans of either AV or PR & at this time look likely to ensure any referendum is voted down that is the problem with Lib/Dems voters because if so the majority of Lab & Tory supporters probably reflect their party reticence to the Lib voters dream.
  • snotcricket
    Anyone would think you'd been daft enough to have voted for Brown's mobsters in May?
  • paul999999
    Given that the only thing I did was initially disagree with you point of view and then you come back with a patronising post I have to say I find this latest piece of yours quite breathtaking. Apparently if I disagree with your point of view it is a 'vitriolic attack' - wow must be fun having conversations with you. But apparently no - we can talk again when I 'tire of bandying insults'. Insults such as these perchance? "which shows your poor grasp of economics" "black and white views" "your simplistic initial analysis" "similarly limited understanding" If you could show me where I insult your intelligence, or call you simplistic or accuse you of having limited understanding I would much appreciate it. Yours is such a wonderfully hypocritical post. But as I obviously can't compete with your dazzling intelligence I shall bid you farewell from this conversation and shall think twice before locking horns with ponkbulter again.
  • Ponkbutler
    For some reason I can't reply to your response to this post paul999, which shows your poor grasp of economics and ad hominem rhetoric in support of the LibDems throughout this and other replies of yours to posts responding to this article. The graph is posted on Wikipedia (easy for you and others to access) but the analysis of the figures there which you quote is no more insightful than your own. The figures in the graph are not "Wikipedia's" as you claim, but Nationwide's figures with their own adjustments for two decades of inflation. Nationwide, like anyone else with a modicum of knowledge about economic and financial affairs, recognises that adjustments for inflation are required to make valid and responsible comparisons of this nature across any period of time. Your vitriolic attack and black and white views on who is good and bad in politics fit with your simplistic initial analysis of what caused the crisis and similarly limited understanding about what slowed and mitigated its effects. If we care about politics as something other than party politics, then perhaps we can start thinking about more than Lab vs Lib Vs Con, and simply look at what really has happened and has been done and works and doesn't. Others have pointed to Ireland's problems, where the coalition's policies are already clearly showing their failings. Perhaps that would be a good place for you to start, when you tire of bandying insults.
  • andronico
    (deleted)
  • dandan26
    Bromham...what complete and utter tosh! Another person who can't understand that politics is not all about black and white, right and left, Labour versus Tory. Get over it..we live in a multi-party system in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland and it aint gonna change. Clegg is a threat to the establishment and to the status quo in this country which is why the knives are out for him from every corner of the media at the minute. All of you here, whether you like the Lib Dems or not, please sit back and look at the media narrative. It's largely 'make sure the Libs are blamed for everything difficult and make sure no focus is made on any positive proposals they bring through government'. They are determined to destroy the Lib Dems full stop!! The other night, some patronising idiots on Sky tried to sell me the line that Vince Cable shouldn't be saying he was 'arguing his case' in gvmt. Apparently it showed naivety to say the word 'argueing'. What complete and utter nonsense. But this is the spin that's being used to undermine the Lib Dems. So whatever your views of decisions made or not made by Clegg and co, please sit back and wonder how much you're being told and how much of it is being told to you in a fair and balanced fashion. There's lots of Lib Dem policies that have become law. i bet most of you haven't a clue what they are because you've not been told by the media which controls you all
  • dandan26
    Now then, there's an awful, awful lot of spin going on at the minute. Clegg is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Whether you agree or disagree with him, can none of you actually see that there are certain elements of the media who are out to destroy him?? The narrative largely at the minute is 'make the Lib Dems take the blame for everything and don't utter anything positive about what their influence in government is having. Even where it's significant, avoid mentioning it.' And that is largely what the media is doing - both print and broadcast. They can't understand coalition but really they don't like the fact that the Lib Dems threaten the status quo. And from what i can see, most of you writing here are falling for it all. Yes the Lib Dems have made some good decisions, they've made some bad ones but so have the Tories. But on the whole the Government is having some real Liberal influence. You cannot ignore that. And to people like me a coalition with Labour where the Libs would have had to back down on civil liberties would have been more abhorrent. But essentially what i am asking you all to do is to take a step back and look at the media you are being fed and ask why it is that it's so so negative at the minute. Could there be an agenda? I mean i watched Sky the other night and there was two pundits and a presenter saying Cable shouldn't be saying he was 'arguing his case' in gvmt. Do they think I'm thick??? No, they're spinning it. Making it out that Cable is proving his inexperience and that Lib Dems largely are inexperienced and can't cope with gvmt. It's absolutely outrageous
  • So what would be your brilliant plan of action to tackling the debt mountain caused by the Labour party? Carry on as before, spending recklessly without a care in the world on how the money would be paid back resulting in the UK being declared bankrupt within a couple of years. There is no option but to cut, do you not understand that there are numerous ways that cuts can be made without cutting front line services without much impact. Do you not understand that there is unprecidented waste, such as expensive contracts, non jobs, ridiculously high salaries for execs that contribute very little but take a lot. Once again I state I am sick and tired of listening to this pathethic attitude that comes from left wing Liberal Democrats because their leader chose not to go into power with Labour (again I state that Labour were not interested in forming Government with the Lib Dems). If it were Labour making such swinging cuts to the public sector do you think we would be listening to you and others ranting on about the cuts? Probably not as they would be coming from your "prefered partner" in Government. Labour would had to have made big cuts in public spending whether they care to admit it or not, they by not admitting it prove what a bunch of hypocrites they are! There has had to be a lot of give and take on both sides of the coalition forces, however the majority of supporters on both side have had to settle with compromises to their beliefs, and those that do not listen to reason we have had to endure on here and in particular The Guardian.
  • paul999999
    Oh, I'm really sorry Ponkbutler. When you said in your original reply to me that "using the Nationwide Building Society's figures" i thought that I should use the "Nationwide Building Society's figures". I didn't realise that the goalposts had changed between each of your postings - apparently now I need to use the Nationwides own figures adjusted for inflation using Wikipedia - that completely reliable reference source. Well using that - cut and paste straight from it "The average (mix-adjusted) house price in the first quarter of 1998 was £81,722, but at the peak of the market in the third quarter of 2007 the average price was £219,256 ? over two and a half times higher or a total increase of 168%." So picking and choosing as I want (something you seem to approve of) apparently house prices went up more than I realised between 1998 and 2007. My thanks for showing me how wrong I was - the situation is worse than I realised.
  • paul999999
    "Not too impressed by the responsibility of your own post, paul999, which seems to for some reason forget that average house prices in 1989 were in fact close to 110,000 using the Nationwide Building Society's figures.". I have no idea what figures you were looking at, but attempts to be patronising can blow up in your face if your facts are completely wrong - not a great basis for a discussion. Dots and slashes removed www nationwide co uk hpi historical.htm Select middle drop down box and pick UK house prices since 1952 Data taken from All Houses Q1 1989 59,534 Q2 1989 62,244 Q3 1989 62,782 Q4 1989 61,495
  • paul999999
    Average House Price 1980 22,676 Average House Price 1990 59,587 Average House Price 2000 77,698 Average House Price 2010 162,887 Now I am not an economist but looking at these figures there seems to be something seriously wrong with whatever joke counted as 'Labours economic policy'. The price rises in the 80s can to some degree be put down to the fact inflation was in double digits most of the time. But the last 10 years of Labour have seen prices more than double in a period of generally low inflation. The financial crisis was caused by many things but mainly an overinflation of house prices and too much lending. But people kept spending while their house prices went up and interest rates stayed low increeasing the government coffers and allowing them to keep spend money on building the bureaurocracy of government. And so the circle continued until the inevitable happened. In 1980 the average house price was 3 times average salary, now it is 7 times - to Labour that seemed to be a good thing. So I will add financial irresponsibility to Iraq and Civil Liberties.
  • omasta
    Labour are insincere in their attacks on the Lib-Dem. During the elections they called for voting on Liberal-Democrats just to prevent overall majority of Conservatives. Fortunately it happened, and in the hang Parliament the Clegg's party restrain the right-wing politicians such as Osborne or Davis and reduce the influence of Eurosceptics. The Labour know that there is no alternative for this government and they will do better to prepare their own, coherent political programme and choose a competent leader as soon as possible, the sooner the better.
  • JohnnyReb10
    Sleep with dogs, get up with fleas. ... and don't expect your next date with Miss Voter to go at all well. (Your romance was fleeting and is now probably toast. )
  • The problem is that they are using dodgy economics to justify it. A government is not a household. Because it is the currency issuer, not a user it doesn't have to 'balance the books'. It's job is really to manage aggregate demand and ensure the population doesn't suffer.

    Those in power understand this 'fallacy of composition', but they know that most people will automatically assume that 'I have to save before I can spend, so the government surely must too'.

    Then they can use the 'we can't afford to' argument against everything.

    There is a lot of waste in the public sector and the majority of non-core positions should be reduced to minimum wage and left empty if nobody wants them at that price. However at the moment I think there would be plenty of takers.
  • 987mike
    and a group of gutless wonders called the libdems put them in power no one else
  • clare62
    Rents won't come down because rental housing is an over subscribed commodity especially at a time when the lack of credit will not enable people to buy. The benefit system does not create rent levels it merely enables those who lack resources to compete with those who do to obtain housing. Those without the necessary resources will now have to move out.
  • cm999
    There is no guilty by association. This is straight guilty for the Lib Dems. As soon as they agreed the coalition document they were straight guilty. We all knew that the tories would go on a slash a burn campaign they always do, the only difference this time is that they have some cover from the lib dems and the mess labour left to make it easier. Take the NHS for example, they want to cut 20bn out of the budget by getting rid of managers. The only flaw in this argument is that if you got rid of EVERY manager in the NHS so there were none left you would save less than half what George wants to cut from management costs. The current reorganisation that was promised not to happen is just a privatisation job dressed up as efficiency savings.
  • sona50
    "Isn't this all a bit late in the day?" my thoughts exactly it was naive to walk into a coalition with the tories and not expect such carnage - osborne is not a new face in uk politics and his politics have been known for years i had been hoping for labour support for electoral reform or at least force amendments so it is not av but pr uk debates - well, another hope that bit the dust
  • 987mike
    and they didn`t win the last one
  • We are an Innovation Nation. We are also currently a ConDemnation and like it or not, no one voted for the ConDem coalition, no one wants their obnoxious Agenda and no one will mourn the hastening of their ignominious departure. That said, they might redeem themselves with good works instead of the Damnation they have it in them to bring upon the heads of all of us. One worthy action which I seek is out-lined in my submission on Parliamentary Prejudice. If this shower cannot set their own house in order then the task before them of setting the country in order is way beyond them, and even at this early stage the signs are there that the time approaches for them to throw in the towel and admit there is no Mandate for them to govern if there is no electoral support for their project. All else is of passing relevance here. Emancipate the disenfranchised and accede to the wishes of the electorate and then a mandate can show through. Without it, puppetry and shadow-boxing is a diversion but no substitute for bowing to the will of the people in fresh elections. That is who it is for.
  • Nickscribe
    If the Lib Dems genuinely are worried about "guilt by association" and this isn't a typical Indy anti-Tory flight of fancy, then there's a simple answer for the Limp Dem whiners: GROW UP! If you want to be in Government, if you want to be "relevant" in the political world then you have to realise that you have to make tough calls and do unpleasant things. You can't expect to be loved by the public and the media AND be part of the Government. Wise up, grow up and stop snivelling!
  • 987mike
    in your dreams or this country is full of masochist.
  • I am getting the feeling that Lib Dems are being told what they think by the independent. Every day a new story about what the lib dems think, how the coalition is going to fail etc etc. However I haven't heard any Lib dem come out and say they aren't happy with whats going on and despite all the scare sories of internal strife I haven't heard any member of the coalition say it's not currently working. All I see is a decent amount of progress given the short time they've been in power. Contrast that to what we would've had with the labour party back in power - a bunch of politicians busy trying to justify all the wrong decisions they've been making.
  • gritpype
    Spot on. Although many are, or so it appears, do they think that we're ALL thick? This "we've just got to get the presentation right and the public will see that we're correct" horse excrement is patronising beyond belief, although I fear that with the current PR-ime minister, we're going to see this so-called 'argument' used over and over again. It's just appearance over content, repeated time after time after time.
  • dandan26
    Ok, VivaLaRevolution, what's your answer? Don't make out politicians are different to the people. They are not. You could be in Westminster too. Anyone of us could be. And MPs can easily be ex-MPs very quickly. Politics is brutal but it's life too. It's not US and THEM as you seem to imply
  • paul999999
    Wow, your vote finally counts for something and now you want to throw it away again because they actually have to make the difficult choices. Great idea.
  • 987mike
    Lets have an election now!
  • Blimey they've done a lot in the last month haven't they? Of course none of those things existed under the last government
  • snotcricket
    Guilt by association? By agreeing to coalition they are culpable. Its a meerkat thingy.
  • snotcricket
    The Tories would win.
  • oilrag
    'Plus ca change, plus c'est ca la meme chose' We are forever doomed to be controlled by the rich and powerful, for the benefit of the rich and powerful.
  • vhawk1951
    "The words of which our contemporary language consists, convey, owing to the arbitrary thought people put into them, indefinite and relative notions, and are therefore perceived by average people ?elastically.? In obtaining just this abnormality in the life of man, a part was played in our opinion, by always that same established abnormal system of education of the rising generation. And it played a part because, based, as we have already said, chiefly on compelling the young to ?learn by rote? as many words as possible differentiated one from the other only by the impression received from their consonance and not by the real pith of the meaning put into them, this system of education has resulted in the gradual loss in people of the capacity to ponder and reflect upon what they are talking about and upon what is being said to them. As a result of the loss of this capacity and in view, at the same time, of the necessity to convey thoughts more or less exactly to others, they are obliged, in spite of the endless number of words already existing in all contemporary languages, either to borrow from other languages or to invent always more and more words; which has finally brought it about that when a contemporary man wishes to express an idea for which he knows many apparently suitable words and expresses this idea in a word which seems, according to his mental reflection, to be fitting, he still instinctively feels uncertain whether his choice is correct, and unconsciously gives this word his own subjective meaning" from a book
  • rustybees70
    Hi Dave (no it?s really THE Dave??!!) Please explain the locking up of innocent children please. I work in the Youth Justice System (sorry but you aint getting your money back!!) and my daily reality does not see ?innocents? getting locked up. In fact I see and read those like me being ridiculed for being do-gooders, who are soft on these feral, hooded thugs!! Also this little ?yardstick? may be of assistance for you. Whilst the notion of left/right wing has changed so much since 'Thatcher the Milk snatcher' was running wild across the nation, with her parties commitment of looking to roll back the State and cutting public services. However general rule of thumb and starting point when determining right/left wing allegiances is thus (RIGHT-WING) the money spent on the public sector has been a waste of time (LEFT-WING) the money spent on the public sector has been a good thing Having looked at your post and surmising that you are in the first camp may be you a bit more right-wing than you think. But no worries Dave this new Progressive/Radical Dudes have given back free thinking and free speech to the masses after the years of suppression by the NuLabs so have no fear right-wing views are the new black, or in right-wing parlance it is the new ..............!!!!
  • andronico
    Isn't this all a bit late in the day? Supporting Slasher Osborne's every whim, for which he has little mandate, and now it's "oh, we're a bit worried"? What about being honest in the first place? I voted lib dem because I felt they were MORE progressive and reasonable than the Labour party, and then they turn out to support the most right-wing sets of reforms since, oh, 1914? Shame! For shame! I want my vote back!!!! Shame on you!!!
  • Trojan_Horace
    That's a lotta ifs! Much more likely, their dreamed of electoral reform will fail to get the public vote (I'll take any odds on that one... dumb carrot to have taken) - and thereafter the party will come to a savagely damaging split between genuine Liberal values with a strong concern for social-justice... and this New-Liberalism (if you will) that offers nothing more than Thatcherism without the steel handbag. The concept that Cameron could use the Liberals as a stick to beat the right-wing of his own party into supporting a Centrist party has proved largely elusive.
  • Ponkbutler
    The figures you're posting don't allow meaningful straight comparisons to be made. For that you should use the Nationwide's own figures adjusted for inflation, which you can see in a graph at Wikipedia for ease of reference. Just enter UK house prices and search.
  • Ponkbutler
    The figures you're quoting don't allow straight comparisons to be made. You should be using the figures adjusted for inflation supplied by the Nationwide. You can see them on a graph for ease of reference at Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UK_house_prices_adjusted_for_inflation.png
  • 987mike
    so the cowboy loves thatcherism?
  • 987mike
    Hughes, man of principle, don`t make me laugh, he is worst than clegg, he knows what is going on is wrong, but stands by and lets it carry on, more like gutless.
  • olivercromwell2
    Time has mellowed me, I am not interested in burning witches and catholics, it is soooow last year.
  • 987mike
    cameron and his cronies are governing unfettered.
  • gritpype
    True, Clegg is an ECONOMIC Liberal, he LOVES an unfettered market.
  • 987mike
    Tell us, what policies have become law?
  • As someone who was recently made unempolyed, the cut in Housing Benefit will drive me from my home when it kicks in... and if no one is building new houses then the rental prices will increase - and I may not have another place to move to. It's hard to be a liberal Democrat when you feel you're being kicked in the nuts by them. For me to have faith in them, I need to hear them telling me that they don't agree with everything they have to do - and I need to know, in detail, that they are working hard to mitigate in the country's favour the extreme policies of a conservative plan.
  • Looks like Cleggie sold the libdumb birthright for a mess of pottage, didn't he?
  • Adrianmidwales
    No mention of the subject matter just a blame the last government and an attack on others opinion. Maybe you should do the prime ministers question time as that seems his rhetoric as well.
  • haplesswanderer
    So who are the ministers making these warnings. Without names this is a bit of a non-story.
  • Cedav
    I can see where you are coming from and I note what you said above about leaving the party. The trouble is that retaining "ideological purity" whilst in many ways laudable, means that in effect, you surrender your position within the party. Much as I dislike the idea, some form of Lib Dem coalition with the Tories is likely to remain. What I would prefer is one that tries to occupy the centre ground rather than the right. If Hughes were to be too openly an opponent of the Tories, we would close what is our most likely escape route back to a more Lib Dem and pragmatic form of government.
  • And789
    I think you'll find they need every vote they can get.
  • GW74
    oh dear. I think the Lib Dems will do just fine without your vote.
  • And789
    I am looking at the bigger picture: unemployment, homelessness, an upsurge in crime, longer hospital waiting lists, a divisive education system. Evil was your word, not mine, so I suppose you know more about the Libdems than I do.
  • GW74
    why? what evil have they done? Would you rather rapacious Tories govern unfettered? Lib Dems have tempered the Tory regime with fairness, equitable social measures, etc. They are doing what you voted for. Grow up and look at the bigger picture.
  • GW74
    "Lib Dems fear guilt by association with Osborne" ? Message to Lib Dems: grow some balls, get on with it
  • drg40
    You watch Sky? And admit to it? I thought that was something that old men wearing dirty raincoats did in semi darkness and then kept a sordid secret. Don't tell me you thought you were going to get thoughtful analysis as directed by our Rup.? Strewth.
  • vhawk1951
    Ted, i've asked that question many a time and am still no more enlightened. it's a blather term IMHO. a sign of woolly thinking, some thing to do with being that vile word 'nice' i guess. its users have no idea either, save a vague impressionistic thing, actually 'meaning' nothing, like most 'words'. the so-called 'meaning' of words is, as often as not, subjective and elastic. 9 times out of 10 all you get is another 'word' or an equally unhelpful phrase.or some eejit points you to a dictionary or word exchange, or wikipedia as if that 'meant' anything. they swap woolly for woolly, and you are no further forward.
  • Right wing reforms like abolishing ID cards & not locking up innocent children? Guess I'm more right wing than I thought. I want all the money back that was thrown at public spending so that Labour could pretend they'd achieved something but it isn't going to happen. Gradually cutting back on the quangos, bureaucracy and professionally unemployed is the next best thing.
  • Aquarius1973
    this may be the effect of so called 'special relationship' with 'blessed'...
  • paul999999
    Couldn't agree more with what you say, I was making a general point about posters rather than directing it at your good self. My point is if the LibDems had made the choice to go with Labour and all the other minority parties to form a government what chance is there anything would have been done? Things might be bad, but they could be a lot worse.
  • bromham
    My guess is that before the end of this Parliament, Clegg and a few of his perk enjoying mates will join the Tory party. Many Lib Dem grassroots members will join Labour. The much reduced Lib Dem party will then struggle on as a third party rump for a few more years, then cease to exist.
  • drg40
    Since in my last para I was careful to attribute blame to both lots I'm not sure I buy into your implied criticism. However, you may be prepared to wait, 3 months or more, but in my view the urge to take control of monetary policy is more than just pressing, it has pressed. With all the money flung by Brown at the banking system, inflation is a cast iron certainty. ISTM that the question is when will it bite and how much of my leg is it going to take. Adding together a huge national debt which must be paid for if not reduced, inflation peeping round the corner, pensions under further threat (a threat which inflation will only accelerate), inadequately restricted immigration leading to downwards wage pressure and all this and more giving an international value for the pound which is a disaster, if I were in this govt. I should count each day a blessing 'cos it does look to me as though this lot will end in tears! Fiddling with the capital budget (i.e. cuts in school building plans) while the revenue budget is sinking with nary a bubble seems to me one of the most inglorious examples of missing the point in all history.
  • drg40
    It was reported in the Indie that Lehmanns contributed a large sum to the Tory party before the election, and I believe there were other gifts. It was reported in these columns that Labour too had accepted money from the bankers and didn't the LibDems get heavily slagged off in the Tory press for accepting money from a banking source? Shocking it may be, but illegal it is not. That's one of the things you should expect when core funding of a political party comes not from the tapayer but from people who demand something in return.
  • paul999999
    Well as the sh*t hit the fan in Greece during the 5 days our new government was being formed I am for blaming the outgoing government for our current woes. 3 months into this lot I will wait and see what happens. I have started to find the message boards of the Indy rather amusing. For the last 2 years you couldn't move for posters pouring bile over Broons head and if you dared suggest that anything Labour did was worthy of praise - well just a good job they didn't have an UNLIKE button. Now after less that 3 months of the new lot it is a quick 180 degree switch and apparently Labour was wonderful and if only they could be in charge and keep spending all that lovely money they keep finding under the mattress.
  • Ponk post of the dayIt's good to see someone on the same wave length you've m,ade my day
  • paul999999
    "no one is building new houses" - seems to be a lot of building going on all over the country as I travel around. "It's hard to be a liberal Democrat when you feel you're being kicked in the nuts by them." Depends if you feel they have been able to soften the Tory policies that would have been put in place without them. My guess it that what will happen is that the private rental sector that has been bolstered by inflated housing benefit will have to reduce prices. I remember the days in the mid 70 when I couldn't rent anywhere because it was 'No DHSS'. Now that the middle classes have spent the last 10 years inflating house prices and paying little tax on their large capital gains the chickens are coming home to roost. The perfect storm is coming for house prices, difficult to borrow money, less rental and higher interest rates. Maybe my daughter will be able to afford a house before she is 40.
  • Cobblthe bbc is far from against the coalition even if Nick Robinson former chairman of both the young conservatives and the oxford university conservative association would prefer even less unbridled power to favour the wealthiest 2% at the expense of the rest includingdelude less wealthy tories who have yet to realise how much they will be damaged by the most divisive, destructive and right wing junta for dercades
  • And789
    I don't mind you returning from retirement, Oliver, and support you dissolving parliament. But would you mind not burning witches and Catholics this time. Much as I despise the Pope and his religion, I thought the wrong people caught the brunt of it last time.
  • Cedav I agree with most of your comment but Hughes? please he talks the talk but doesn't vote the vote he supported that disgraceful budget like all but 6 of the other lemmings!
  • Iunderstand mind_ful and agree if they are concerned about the haste and the lack of proper parliamentary scrutiny they could slow it down, heady with the fumes of power they've sat on their hands and done nothing!
  • kdf9012
    It's not the Tory cuts that'll do in the Liberal Democrats but the uselessness of the Liberal Democrat Ministers. Ministers such as Vince Cable who stands up and says, "the problems with the banks is that they don't treat their customers very well." Duh, the government practically owns two of the largest banks in the country and is in the position to set industry standards. Instead of action we get talk,talk talk. For God's sake CAble, where's your trousers?
  • @voxpop2012 "I don't think anyone disputes there has to be cuts" I do - I dispute the cuts. http://thecutswontwork.co.uk/
  • jackfruit
    "probably born of the fact that the banking industry contributes large sums of money to all three major parties" Does it really? How much? This is absolutely shocking if true.
  • This isn't a Dan Brown novel. Just thought I'd mention it.
  • TominLondon4
    It's too late. The LibDems are already f***ed. They've done so much damage already that there's no way back. Nobody will vote for them again.
  • The lasting political damage was done when the unholy alliance was made for crumbs of power.
  • caurnie1
    There is something missing in this report. Do these ministers exist or is it a figment of Grice's imagination? Why are are there no names against the ministers. Those ministers (if they exist) should remember the words of Truman "If you can't stand the heat then you get out of the kitchen." The majority of people I speak to think that this coalition is a good thing for the country. Those "anti" the coalition are the media and the BBC in particular. Face up to the truth if Labour were now in power the same cuts would be made to all services. Your taxes would have gone up to pay for Labour's bungling of the economy.
  • tedthedog
    Just a little question. All the parties claim to be 'progressive'. So what exactly does it mean?
  • Clodd & Co. deserve all they get for selling out and jumping into bed with the Cons
  • gritpype
    Did you see Clegg in the Newsnight documentary? I've never seen someone as uneasy, guilty-looking and anxious as that since Gummer ate that beefburger.
  • Streetfighter
    If the lib-dems can hold their fire, stay in shared power, and emerge after five years with a healthy economy; they will have a proven track record in Government, with some big beasts well known to the public. Many voters, including myself, will admire this and will vote for them. This could well be the breakthrough they have been waiting for 60 years to happen.
  • 49niner
    All parties are coalitions and two parties serving in government together makes the job of balancing all the various groups and ideas that much more complex. For the Lib Dems it provides both opportunity and peril. The opportunity is to show that they can leave the safety of political "purity" on the opposition benches and participate in the messy world of government successfully. Being responsible for taking real decisions risks upsetting people and making you unpopular. The peril is to get sucked in to the agenda of the larger party. Given the hard-headed way the Lib Dem negotiating team conducted itself when coming to the coalition agreement, I'm sure they are aware of this. And David Cameron appears to be enough of a pragmatist and realist to know that he needs the votes of Lib Dem MPs in parliament to stay in government until the next election in 2015. This government inherited a huge in-tray of problems of a financial nature and it will test their ability and commonsense to cut through the ideology and posturing and come up with practical measures to put the country back on track. That will take the full 5 years. I don't put much store in political ideology. Those who propound it tend to wear their hearts on their chests, and have their heads in the sand. Government is a messy business that needs flexibility and commonsense. It will be several years before we see whether this coalition of interests will succeed or fail in practice. For now I will reserve judgement.
  • People are in danger of forgetting that the government that caused these cuts to happen was Labour with its grossly over the top spendthrift & borrowing policy. The Conservatives may well be bringing in the cuts but all these cuts are due to Labour.
  • gritpype
    Come on now, you spoilsports! Gideon Osborne has waited all this time to ruin other people's lives, you can't just take his toys away NOW! What will the neighbours think if you keep on sitting with your blinds drawn, criticising this smashing government?? Tut tut...
  • ozwaldo
    Because we've been needing them for the last 5 years, just because the leftists kept spending and bloating the public and welfare sectors to buy themselves another term in office doesn't mean they weren't needed that long ago. I guess you can say the cuts are ideologically driven if you think fiscal responsibility is an ideology. That responsible financial management is the preserve of the right. I guess. It'd more realistic to say that opposition to welfare cuts no matter how desperate and obvious the need is more of an ideologically based view. Physician heal thyself.
  • drg40
    "a financial earthquake occurred in on our European doorstep." A very convenient financial earthquake that diverted attention away from the hopelessly inadequate management of the financial interests of our nation. Note that during this "financial earthquake" the international estimate of the Pound's worth hardly moved. After the crash to parity during the banking scandal (European variety: made in England) it rose back up to a paltry ?1.20 which it has struggled and failed to retain ever since. In the past Chancellor's have felt the need to resign after this sort of disaster. Now we blame Greece, or is it Ireland this week? And since the mess continues under both Labour and Tory/Lib, where should we look to place some responsibiity for this shambles?
  • davdos
    It's a bit too late for the Libs to worry about guilt by association!
  • Niebuhr
    You only need to look at what is and what isn't being cut to see that the cuts are ideological.
  • timspooner
    First, all the UK political parties are the same, underneath the red,blue and yellow. You would be foolish to expect them to actually differ. Second, Clegg and his LD mates could only ever ally with the Tories, it would have been impossible to prop up a discredited Labour party. Third: You KNOW they are all self-serving liars, why are you disappointed or disillusioned. You KNOW what they are all like. Fourth: A prediction. At the next election, the LD's will have been virtually subsumed into the Tories, they will have less than 5% support and Clegg will have become a card-carrying Tory in order to hang on to his own position and perks of office. (This is not such a difficult prediction as it is exactly what happened with the New Zealand Party in NZ over the past 10 years)
  • Any party with half a brain cell would be imbecilic to visibly relishing the cuts. Can't see the problem, myself. But I suppose its 'something to say', isn't it?. Sort of ministerial flatulence. Let rip a 'pocket frog' as a way of saying "Hey, I'm here!".
  • rob_rouge
    ?Ah, to be fair..." - Don't these words say it all?
  • "As someone who was recently made unempolyed, the cut in Housing Benefit will drive me from my home when it kicks in... and if no one is building new houses then the rental prices will increase" That doesn't follow. How are the rental prices going to go up if the supply of money going towards renting is decreasing. Either buildings must stand empty, or prices must come *down*. That is kind of the point. (Except they forgot to put something in place to penalise people if they leave buildings empty).
  • Niebuhr
    There's no 'by association' about it. Clegg gave us a tory government, not a coalition.
  • Adrianmidwales
    So why has Mr Duncan smith been planning his welfare changes for the last 5 years ?. Yes some cuts are required but if you can not see that that some of the changes are ideologically driven whether you agree with them or not is a shame and maybe you should read more.
  • This may be true but the Conservatives will suffer far more damage from the energy policies of their energy minister when our industry collapses from supply failure at the same time we are paying double the real price for it because of wind farm subsidies. This after Climategate proved even with a biased jury that they were more likely inept than dishonest. When only one hour is ten is spent on useful work in some state sector departments cuts in costs do not have to be cuts in services. I read one report that said that with just five rules the tax system could be altered so no one in a range up to five times the average wage paid more than 1% more or less than they do now. As for the police efficiency the less said the better.
  • commonsenseofletchworth
    Even the Liberals realise that cutting public spending is a necessary evil to make it more profitable for people to get work and top be able to target those that really need it, like the disabled and the old. It would also be more benficial if they also cut rather than just capped council tax, which has become an increasing burden on all households.
  • That would be why there are rules in place or will be, to ensure a fixed term Parliament. It is no longer possible for the Prime Minister to call an election.
  • takeoman
    If the cuts have the same result as in Ireland both members of the coalition will be dead in the water, if they succeed the tories will reap the benefit. It looks very much like a lose,lose situation for the lib dems.
  • I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for the Lib Dems. They knew the price of going in to government with the Conservatives, and they did it anyway. They conned a lot of people - including myself - in to believing that a vote for them WOULD be a vote for change, and so they deserve to lose support.
  • voxpop2012
    I've voted Lib dem for a long time and was really excited this time at thinking they had a real shot at getting in. I really liked Clegg's message and thought he was the man for us.. he seemed the only one to talk any common sense and came across as fair minded so when they formed a coalition i still felt optimistic and though they would get a chance to show what the could do and temper the effect of having conservatives in.. I felt this would for sure make it even more likely to get them in -all by themselves- in the next election but.. O.M.G. doesn't the saying "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutleyv" ring true on this!! Clegg and the lib dems have sold us out.. they have become conservatives overnight, with all the unfair mentality that goes along with that party... After years of struggle to get anywhere near downing street, they have blown it at the last hurdle. I don't think Lib Dem voters are going to forgive this one in a hurry and i don't think they will ever get the chance to get into office ever again. I will never, ever vote for them ever again. I feel betrayed. Is Clegg, the man who gave it a bit of wellie on the TV debates still in the coalition? He's sort of become a Conservative by osmosis.
  • dumbganda
    Liam Byrne, Labour?s shadow Chief Secretary, said: ?This shows Nick Clegg simply misled voters. Misled how? That he knew there was no money left in the Treasury, even though Liam Byrne concealed that fact from the country by repeatedly lying to the public? May be he will tell us where he has stashed all the money?
  • ozwaldo
    Ideological? Did we find some money in the treasury while I went to the toilet? Here was me thinking that the country was broke and these cuts a painful necessity but thanks to adrianmidwales I know know the truth and that there's plenty of money and they're just doing it to spite us.
  • 49niner
    There's more than a small dose of hypocrisy and denial on the Labour benches. Liam Byrne is rather like the proverbial person throwing stones in glasshouses.
  • markfour
    Of course the Tory ministers are enjoying the cut backs. Just watch them in parliament, grinning from ear to ear. It is too late now for the Libs. to get cold feet. I still believe that if it is a disaster the Libs. are finished , if it is a success then the Tories will dump them. Another hung parliament due to the A/V system being in place will be their only chance.
  • Adrianmidwales
    If all the cuts where being made out of necessity then I think the Libdems could survive. But as most are ideological there is no way that they can justify that to me.
  • ozwaldo
    Oh deary me, might not Johnny electorate like taking his medicine? We can't have that can we, the Lib Dems are nothing if they're not the party of unreasonable expectations and unrealistic dreams. Better distance yourselves from the people who're having to clean up the mess left by the so called 'progressive' parties immediately. Or you could all face up to facts. the Liberals are, were and always will be a right of centre party. If you can all stop the wailing and clothes tearing and stop demanding your 'vote back' you might think hard about who is at fault here. Not the Lib Dems that's for sure, if anyone is at fault it's YOU and all the other monkeys that voted for them with pie in the sky expectations about what they could achieve and what they represented. Next time you should try doing a little research into the people you give your oh so precious votes to and maybe you'll actually use them in a responsible manner. Or at least be clear in who you're casting them for. Better still you could stay home election day since now you know there are no parties willing or able to give you utopia today with no cost or consequences. I shudder to suggest that maybe you actually dry up and start seeing the world for what it really is but that might force you to side with the screaming socialists or raving Tories or the grey lieboxes of NuLabour. What will you do now your comfortable dream factory has turned out to be just another political party?
  • CharlottePetersRock
    "Gorgeous Georgie" Osborne, born with a gold walpaper spoon in his maw, never lived in the real world, expected us to pay for his gardening, decorating and 'not in the Constituency' second home: gave back the money when the s**t hit the fan (saying "It was all a mistake" or something similar) and as a reward has been given the purse for the country. Can I ask why? I believe that this bandwagon-jumper would not be likely to recognise 'a poor person' or a disabled child, anyone old and frail or anyone desperate to earn a living to support the family. So what is he doing with the purse?
  • Thunorson
    You are joking, surely? Of course you are...magnificent satire. Well done!
  • This is not a coalition of equals. The Lib-Dems are by far the junior partner and have got little out of it - at best a referendum that will be surely lost. They are being set up to be hammered at the next election since they have deserted their base supporters. But you have to feel a bit sorry for Nick sitting among all those Tories there on the front bench - looking like a nun who has just walked into a brothel.
  • Lipton2010
    The LibDems could have always remained on the opposition benches - never sacrificing their perfect principles - blaming but never being blamed. Assuming the mantle of power comes at a price - tough decisions compromise pristine ideals. But there are benefits too - they gain experience of governing and become a more credible alternative. Perhaps someday the austerity programme can be relaxed and they will regain the favour of their supporters. LibDems will emerge stronger from this experience, and if the strengthening pound is any indicator the policy is working for the nation.
  • Thunorson
    Lies, conceit, selfishness are plastic-pixie Clegg's tools of trade. There is nothing new about these facts. It is just that only now are the British people starting to notice it...in ever increasing numbers.
  • Is that Liam "There's no money" Byrne trying to pretend that Labour were interested in forming a Government? How stupid do they think we are?
  • Five years is a long time. As long as Clegg can cling on to power, there is every possibility that this parliament would survive. However, if we do see a weak Labour leader taking the helm and continued poor rating for the Liberals, I am sure Cameron might be tempted to call for a snap election. I do think this is unlikely as Cameron is an enviable position. He could easily blame the bad policies on the Liberals and take credit for the good ones.
  • SID_VICIOUS
    It was only a matter of time before it ended in tears!

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date