Donald Macintyre's Sketch: Would sir like a waffa-thin reform?

Sometimes Nick Clegg  is so forthright that – endearingly – he  frightens even himself

Donald Macintyre
Monday 16 December 2013 23:37
Comments

For a supposedly moderating force among politicians of left and right, Nick Clegg is jolly forthright. Having already said in the past that to leave the EU would be “economic suicide”, he on Monday laid into Theresa May’s plans for a cap on immigrant numbers with equal ferocity. (He was uninhibited by Theresa May’s prim observation earlier that she did not “comment on leaks” – before going on to do exactly that – since as Clegg pointed out, the Home Office had done the leaking, presumably on Ms May’s orders.)

Then he said it would be “completely unacceptable” to strip child benefit from parents of three children or more, as the Tory MP Nadhim Zahawi has suggested. A much better welfare reform would be not to “ask ordinary taxpayers on low pay to pay for the universal benefits for Alan Sugar’s entitlement to his free television licence or winter fuel payment.”

But sometimes he is so forthright that – endearingly – he frightens even himself. Having singled out the unfortunate Lord Sugar, he hastened to add: “He always gets upset when I say that. I’m not saying he is taking it.” It also became clear that he was not quite ruling out ever restricting benefit to two children, being adamant that it mustn’t be done for parents who “presently” have more than two. He said, rightly, that there was something “a bit arbitrary” about governments deciding how many children they would support. But he didn’t want to “get into” ruling things in or out at the moment. Just as he said of George Osborne’s plan to make the welfare cap lower than £26,000: “It’s not something we’re advocating at the moment.” Like all the best politicians Clegg can do vague as well as forthright.

And inconsistent. He didn’t explain – and to be fair, he wasn’t asked – why if he was so keen on making benefits less universal he was also boasting of spending £600m to extend free school meals for first and second-year primary schoolchildren to better-off families as well as the poor.

Instead, rehearsing Lib Dem achievements, he argued those who had called for an economic Plan B had now been “wrong-footed”. Which will be news to those super-eminent economists who had called for just that. And he lamented that Labour and the Tories had sabotaged even “wafer thin” reforms to the Lords. Which he mysteriously pronounced “waffa-thin” – as in Laffer curve. Why, wasn’t clear. Was he thinking of the French restaurant sketch from Monty Python in which the maître d’, John Cleese, offers the super-obese projectile-vomiting gourmand Mr Creosote a “waffa thin” mint? He clearly had chocolate on his mind because to show how reform-minded he was about the EU, he complained it had taken 15 years to agree a directive on the stuff.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in