Commentators

Showers (AM and PM) 5° London Hi 10°C / Lo 5°C

Michael Brown: Lib-Dems can try and turn themselves into Tories, but I fear they'll still be squeezed out

Friday, 18 July 2008

If Vote Blue, Go Green was the new Tory slogan introduced by David Cameron, is Nick Clegg's Liberal Democrat party now inviting us to "Vote Lib-Dem, Go Blue"? Yesterday's tax-cutting announcement by Mr Clegg was either a thoroughly irresponsible ploy by a third party – with no chance of winning the next election – to garner cheap votes by making promises it will never be called upon to redeem, or a serious attempt to outflank the Tories as the real party of tax and spending cuts.

But with the prospect of a hung parliament now receding, and in the wake of Mr Cameron's consistent 20 per cent poll lead over Labour, the Lib-Dems may secretly feel the luxury of populism without a price tag is the best way of staving off the Tory threat to their own seats in Middle England.

Political cross-dressing has become infuriatingly confusing for voters since the advent of Tony Blair. By 2005 it was commonly perceived that left-inclined voters were more likely to be attracted by Charles Kennedy's anti-Iraq war stance. The general perception, recorded by opinion polls at the time, was that under his leadership the Lib-Dems – pledged to increase the top rates of tax – were seen as a party well to the left of New Labour. With the country still in an anti-Tory mood, the Lib-Dems became an attractive alternative for Labour voters who did not want a change of government but who wanted to register their dislike of Blair and the Iraq war.

Mr Clegg's repositioning of his party has also to pass the test of credibility among his own activist members who, from my observations after attending a decade of Lib-Dem conferences, certainly appear to have been even more wedded to the concept of higher public expenditure and progressive taxation than even Labour activists.

The forthcoming party conference will now be a test to see whether Mr Clegg has the authority to change his party's mindset. Lib-Dem conferences remain the formal policy making forum that must approve the leadership policy programme. They are notoriously difficult platforms on which the party leader can perform political somersaults of this audacity.

In 1997 there was no doubt that the Lib-Dems, under the leadership of Paddy Ashdown, were part of the informal national anti-Tory political consensus. The Lib-Dems were central to the "get the Tories out" movement led by Tony Blair. Ashdown never sought to disguise his view that the Major government should be thrown out of office. And, while deals were denied, there is no doubt that the "tactical vote" strategy was operated on an informal basis between Ashdown's and Blair's respective party machines across dozens of constituencies.

The question that is now explicitly raised for Mr Clegg, as he poses as more Tory than the Tories so far as tax-cutting is concerned, is whether he is willing to be seen as part of the wider Tory campaign to get Gordon Brown and Labour out of office. I have the privilege, from time to time, of interviewing Mr Clegg, as a Sheffield MP on the Yorkshire TV regional politics programme which I present. So far, he has successfully evaded all my attempts to pin him down as to whether he would prefer to see Mr Cameron replace Mr Brown as prime minister at the next election.

Of course, when his party was securing poll ratings above 20 per cent (and with the evidence initially pointing to a hung parliament at the next election) he could, with good reason, evade this question by using the well-rehearsed formula of supporting, in the division lobbies, either main party on a case-by-case political issue.

That answer is progressively unlikely to satisfy voters, who seem to have decided that they want to throw Mr Brown out. Maybe yesterday's Lib-Dem announcement to reduce the standard rate of income tax to 16p in the pound to be paid for by £20bn of public expenditure is a recognition that even this once high-spending party has glimpsed the new mood of voters who, while tightening their own budgets, are in the mood for similar economies by government and who don't appreciate Mr Cameron's apparent, but understandable, caution.

The battle lines between Mr Clegg – who stands to lose dozens of seats, won since 1997, back to the Tories – will come down to one of credibility. The Tories are still scarred by their own lack of credibility in 2001 and 2005 when tax cuts at the expense of public expenditure savings caused them so much difficulty.

Paradoxically, the darkening economic storm clouds make it easier for Mr Cameron to resist the Tory activists' calls for early tax cuts. Even the revered Geoffrey Howe has recently reminded us that in 1979 the Labour legacy required the early Thatcher government to restore the public finances with substantial tax increases. With declining revenues from VAT, stamp duty and corporation tax, the U-turns over fuel duty and the 10p tax debacle, the fiscal deficit likely to be bequeathed to the Tories will probably now prohibit any overall tax cuts in George Osborne's first budgets.

If Labour resort to allowing the borrowing requirement to burgeon in response to backbench calls for a further U-turn over vehicle excise duty, the question of tax rises, rather than cuts, will overshadow the new Tory chancellor's room for manoeuvre.

Where, however, Mr Clegg may have overtaken the Tories is in reading the new mood of voters for public-sector austerity. The Tories – trapped by their past unhappy experiences – are determined not to be painted into a corner as a party of "cuts". But new circumstances suggest that the public may believe that austerity measures should not be confined to their own personal expenditure as they face a reduction in their living standards.

If we are being forced to cut our individual household cloth accordingly, why should governments be exempt? Mr Osborne continues to restate the Tory commitment to stick with Labour spending plans, although hopefully a window exists – when the current plans expire in 2010 – for the shadow Chancellor to find the courage to face the demons that blighted the Tories during the last two general election campaigns.

The notion that Mr Clegg will be the party leader most likely to appeal to Tory voters yearning for tax cuts is, nevertheless, still hard to grasp. The Lib-Dems are in serious danger of facing the traditional two-party squeeze. They are a crucial vehicle for Labour in denying the Tories office. But they are an impediment to the Tories when the political pendulum swings in the opposite direction. Their usefulness to the Tories is only if they make inroads in Labour constituencies at a general election. So far, Lib-Dem advances at Labour's expense only occurs in by-elections.

So notwithstanding the Tory caution on economic policy, the prospects of Mr Clegg successfully posing as the leader more likely to out-Tory the Tories seems unlikely to carry credibility. The danger is that the more votes the Lib-Dems retain in what were previously Tory seats, the more chance Labour has of mitigating electoral defeat. Mr Cameron will be determined to prevent Mr Clegg from spoiling the (Tory) party.

mrbrown@talktalk.net

Interesting? Click here to explore further

Comments

16 Comments

"I can’t vote LibDem because I am unconvinced they have any core beliefs that survive the passing years.." What, as opposed to the other parties then? Which la-la land are you living in?

Posted by Robert C | 18.07.08, 22:34 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Oh dear, it appears Mr Brown cannot understand the difference between tax cuts for the lower paid and middle earners, and tax cuts for only the rich. Perhaps he should discover who actually paid for the tory tax cuts givn to the rich and famous,during the Thathcher years. Perhaps he will also stop harping on about the Liberals not winning a general election. We dont want to hear these old Tory views. If you cannot be impartial working for the independant, GO WORK FOR THE DAILY MAIL.

Posted by mikeashall | 18.07.08, 20:28 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

The challenge for the Liberal Dems is so simple that they seem to overlook it. What the British people want is the same as most of us Americans: a government that "knows how to get the trains on the tracks, and run them on time". No fanfare; not Winnie Churchill or Hitler amusements; just simple government that tells the truth and copes with problems in a practical way. Ideology emphasis is misplaced; and doesn't make for votes.
Can the Liberal Dems run the government better than the other tried and proven parties.
The Liberal Dems have a great tradition in British politics and history. It's time they lived up to their history.

Posted by ware ada,s | 18.07.08, 17:54 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Oh come on Mr Brown, you are stuck in the past. Look, the Tories do not own seats, nor do Labour. You talk about LD seats as Tory seats, some impertinently sat on by an LD person. No, they are LD seats, and have a good record of remaining so once won. And LD's are winning Labour seats too I note. You are stuck in the Westminster arrogant machine which assumes a seat is God given to Labour or Tory. They are not thank you. It remains a gigantic con that Blair won in 2005, on 22%, three times as many LD votes needed to win a seat.
The arrogance and lack of diffence between Labour/Tory is sickening. They will perpetuate their right wing agendas to kingdom come if nothing seriously changes. We must have serious 3 or more party politics, now, so don't vote for Labour or Tory!!

Posted by Andy Taylor | 18.07.08, 17:15 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

In my view this move by Nick Clegg (and the one-man thinktank, Vince Cable) is spot on and very welcome. LibDems do what is right and fair. This move is progressive, redistributing the tax burden to where it should be, making lives easier for the vast majority of people. It's a no brainer.

"The danger is that the more votes the Lib-Dems retain in what were previously Tory seats, the more chance Labour has of mitigating electoral defeat." What trot. Labour has imploded round here. It is just the LibDems or the Tories. If either win here both results give G Brown a kicking.

Posted by David Walker | 18.07.08, 15:07 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

The Lib Dems stance on tac cut is strongly liberal, and will appeal to both progressive tories and Labour supporters. I believe Clegg can drive his party in to a more credible position, but he must rely heavily on the Lib Dems greatest virtue of organised electioneering, and can its great vice of running out of steam within a year.
The Lib Dems must realise that the time has come for them to step up to the plate - and this alternative view to tax hiking is an interesting one. I respect the Labour cause of providing excellent services - but in their zeal these have become over-inflated.
The Lib Dems can also take the belief in the individual away from the right to the centre.
As long as the Lib Dems continue to be progressive and stick with Clegg, they can get in to the mid twenties by 2010.

Posted by Charlie Peters | 18.07.08, 14:55 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Lib Dems are wedded to the idea of progressive taxation. That is why they will support these proposals and so will much of the public. The current system is not progressive.

It will appeal to everyone who wishes to support incentives for all, not just the rich.

Posted by Tim | 18.07.08, 13:04 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

This is one of Michael Brown's more disappointing articles. I used to respect his articles, but he's now hitched his star to Cameron's wagon and we can forget about criticism. Brown has completely misunderstood the current mood of the Lib Dems and its recent history. Yes under Ashdown and Kennedy the party leaned towards higher levels of tax and public spending but not in a left socialist way in which public spending can be endlessly expanded. Ashdown/Kennedy were also trying to lead the party towards pro-privatisation free market economic views, with mixed results. But the party still made some moves in those directions, and had an anti-monopoly, limit regulation, free trade position. The party base was changing in the 80s/90s as disillusioned Tories including business people joined. The poor results of New Labour public spending have convinced the party left of the limits of tax and spend. Clegg is going with the existing direction of party thinking as well as shaping it.

Posted by barry | 18.07.08, 11:16 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Michael - what are you on about that the lib dems only make inroads into labour in by-elections? Where were you in 2005. most of the gains were from labour! the lib dems are a centrist party and can offer appeal to all sides of the political spectrum. Liberalism has never been about left and right but about what is fair and what works

Posted by Richard | 18.07.08, 10:51 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Julian 09:14

I cannot say what Mr Clegg is about, but I think your comment emphasized my point.

Perhaps Mr Clegg can influence his party members enough to take them back to Gladstone and Victorian Britain. Some might find such thoughts re-assuring, as they would know what to expect; Laissez-faire attitudes to economics (i.e. haven’t a clue about it except what’s in my account), and not knowing when the state should intervene in the affairs of the population. Why not votes for children too?

Liberal policies have changed over the years, going from one form of liberal philosophy to the next. However I cannot help thinking everyone with common sense can see the promotion of laissez-faire attitudes is an outrageous self-contradiction. Thus, the Liberals never had a sound foundation to start with, and consequently, for decades they have searched for a peg on which to hang their hat.

Not that the other parties have what Britain needs either. Heaven help the coming generations.

Posted by Alan Robinson | 18.07.08, 10:50 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

16 Comments