Let's stop trying to kid ourselves about what the Lib Dems have achieved as part of the coaltion

If you are reading a Lib Dem press release, Lib Dem Voice or any number of Lib Dem MPs writing articles for the press this week ahead of the party conference, you could easily be fooled in to believing that the Lib Dems are responsible for the majority of what the new government has pledged to introduce. But the truth of the matter is that the Lib Dem influence is limited and strictly confined to areas of the government that do not affect the ordinary person on a day to day level.

Let's get one of the lies out of the way straight away. The "Pupil Premium" is not a "Real Lib Dem achievement", as Sarah Teather claims in this week's edition of Local Government First. It is a coalition achievement, but it is just as much a Tory achievement as it is well known and was widely published that the Tories supported the Pupil Premium. This policy would have happened with or without the Lib Dems being involved. It undermines the Lib Dems whole argument about the coalition to imply that the Pupil Premium wouldn't have happened without the Lib Dems.

I was interested to see a policy diagram that the Daily Telegraph produced before the General Election.

If you break it down in to what the Lib Dems have actually achieved from the yellow part of the diagram, the party has achieved just one of its policies. This being a partial move to a £10,000 income tax threshold.

If you look at the Orange area, the Lib Dems have achieved just one of these goals, with a fixed term for the next parliament. But in a major reversal, one of these goals, to continue spending until 2011, has seen a total about turn and this policy being abandoned. Nick Clegg likes to tell us that he knew that spending had to be cut earlier 10 days before the General Election, but it didn't stop the party putting out leaflets from Cowley Street warning that early cuts would lead to a double dip recession. This was the issue that made me feel back in May that we had been turned in to liars and fools by the way Nick Clegg had acted.

So in terms of what we have "added" to the coalition, it seems clear that we've achieved two things of note.

Some would argue that we've achieved much more because we are going to have a referendum on AV. Of course anyone with a modicum of intelligence knows AV is usually less proportional and was derided by Nick Clegg before the General Election. In AV the Lib Dems got a system them neither liked, supported or wanted. Much like the last prize in a raffle, its better than nothing, but only just.

The other policy trumpeted by Lib Dem bloggers as a Lib Dem success and reason to put out the flags and party is the ending of the detention of the children of Asylum seekers. However, the Lib Dems influence over this decisions was called in to question just a week ago with the announcement from Tory Minister Damien Green that the government would "minimise" child detention, not end it. Clearly when even our successes are reversed by the Tories, our influence on this government has been minimal.

We were told by the Lib Dem leadership that the Lib Dems would be a moderating influence on the Tory party, but a closer look at the Telegraph diagram of Tory policies shows very much the opposite.

In the blue and Purple areas of policy, those areas highlighted as being Tory policy not supported by the Lib Dems, the Tories have managed to introduce or announce
- A cap on non EU migrants
- Deep cuts in the first year
- Elected police commissioners
- Free schools
- Local referendums
- Toughen teaching qualifications
- Keep voting at 18
- National Youth Volunteer Service to be rolled out
- No cancellation of Trident.


What is galling for Lib Dems is that these policies are bitterly opposed by Lib Dems, but they are the sorts of policies affecting the police, schools and employment that affect people on a daily basis. They are to do with social policy and are visible policy areas, yet the Lib Dems are the ones saddled with voting and taxation. Where is the Lib Dems "voice of reason" toning down the Tories in coalition ?

The truth of the matter is that the Lib Dems have achieved very VERY little in government so far. A referendum on a voting system we don't really want and our one saving grace, a move towards a fairer tax system. But with the likes of Vince Cable already this week highlighting that the Tories policies are not working, where can the party go accept further down in the polls except down.

If people are to be convinced that the Lib Dems are making a difference as part of the coalition then the party and its leadership need to stop claiming credit for things the Tories would have done anyway and show what is happening that would never have happened under a Tory government. If it transpires that we are having no influence, then we should all ask the question, why are we in coalition at all !

Party Theme Songs For Conference

Details of a survey conducted by PRS for Music have been sent to me by email revealing the UK’s vote for party conference songs.

Last year the Gordon Brown walked on stage with Jackie Wilson’s Your Love Keeps Lifting Me Higher and Higher. However, in the survey of over 1,000 people, Elton John’s Sorry seems to be the hardest word was voted as most popular suggestion for the entrance of the Prime Minister this year.

Labour Party – most voted songs:
Sorry seems to be the hardest word – Elton John
Tragedy – Steps
So Sad – George Harrison
Die Another Day – Madonna

Conservative Party – most voted songs:
Money, Money, Money – ABBA
I could be so good for you – Dennis Waterman
We are the champions – Queen
The future’s so bright, I gotta wear shades – Timbuk3

Liberal Democrat Party – most voted songs:
When will I be famous – Bros
Moving on up – M People
For once in my life – Stevie Wonder
Working 9 to 5 – Dolly Parton

Ellis Rich, chairman of PRS for Music comments: “Politics and music have a long-standing reputation of going hand in hand. Many famous artists have expressed their political voice through the medium of music, whilst many politicians have used music as a platform to address their audience. The song which each party leader ultimately decides to use could have a significant impact on the outcome of the upcoming elections”.

Any views on which songs might be better ?

What do party conferences achieve outside of political circles ?

With conference season approaching, it does leave me to wonder what they achieve beyond being a get together for the party delegates. In particular though, with Labour and Tory conferences being about talking from the leadership and listening for the delegates, are they a shop window for the public on the way parties operate and are they part of the problem with politics today ?

Taking the conferences in order, the Liberal Democrat conference is always the first to be held, but it is also the most democratic and open of all the party conferences. The Lib Dems do actually debate and decide on policy with members and delegates having a real choice and real involvement. The real fly in the ointment is that fact that you can be guaranteed to have a Lib Dem conference spoilt each year by some nutty motion which might attract the headlines, but puts the party in the dock with the public.

Whilst it might have been necessary when the Lib Dems had 18 MPs to get the press to pay attention, this really is no longer the case. So what is it with the need to have the motions on abortion (1993) , euthanasia (1997) , banning goldfish from fairground stalls (1992), hard porn for 16-year-olds (2001), or controversial policies such as abolishing the monarchy (2003), and liberalising dope laws (2002). Hopefully those days are gone, but it doesn't stop people suggesting some daft motion or other like privatising the NHS or other such craziness. I remember virtually every year having to placate a member or dealing with an unhappy deliverer who was upset at something debated at Lib Dem conference. One would hope that this year will see a real focus on the economy, on civil liberties and on dealing with the problems resulting from the depression.

Labour conferences have gone from one extreme to another in recent years. gone is the socialism, the mass block votes and the real debate. Instead Labour conferences are just incredibly bring. party of this is in part because ruling parties do not have the freedom to allow party conferences to dictate policy willy nilly, but in great part it is more to do with Labour's control freakery. the clearest example of this was the throwing out of a delegate a few years ago by a bunch of heavies.

Last year's conference was credited with giving Gordon Brown the mandate to carry on, but in truth the fact that nobody stuck their head above the parapet to challenge him had more to do with it than the conference.

As for the Tory conference, to describe it as anything other than a drinks party where party bigwigs gives speeches would be wrong. For that is what it is. Policy is never decided, a real debate is not allowed, disagreement is not encouraged and it is in no way democratic.

So what is the point ? Perhaps the biggest thing a conference does it to confirm the general view a party has towards it leader. Remember IDS and his "Quiet man" speech ? Then there was Tony Blair's "Education, education, education" speech. powerful at the time (even if it were a lie). Kinnock taking on the Militant left was also a mile stone. But in recent years the most notably party conference may perhaps have been the Tory party conference when David Davis speech went down like a lead balloon and David Cameron won over the Tory faithful with a rousing speech that nobody expected.

Perhaps though the best reason for a party conference was written some years ago in The Independent when they said

"It is also the one week in the year the party workers - the "poor bloody infantry" who stick leaflets through letter boxes - can let their hair down and have a week-long gang-bang with like-minded people."

More lazy journalism from the BBC politics team

I am a fan of the BBC, but I also feel there is a large amount of laziness amongst journalists which is endemic within the BBC. Locally the BBC news team in East Anglia, and I am sure in other regions too, miss real political news stories and instead only print what is sent to them in press releases by the councils. This means we get a half baked version of the news, and this is true beyond the politics arena too. Too many journalists wait for a press release rather than finding a story themselves. So what does a BBC journalist do when sent to a Lib Dem conference if they want to be seen as a "go getter" or "investigative" ?

They revert to one of two stories that have been used over and over again. Either they report about what delegates are saying "off record" about the party leader or they ask people who the Lib Dems should work with in a coalition government. Interestingly they never ask the second question to Tories or Labour members at their conferences ?

So why should I be surprised that BBC journalist Brian Wheeler went for the coalition question this year ? The party are united behind Nick Clegg, so there is no party leader story to make up this year, so Mr Wheeler went for the other option.

It's just another example of very lazy journalism from the BBC. How about something original ? How about some proper in depth political analysis ? I won't hold my breath.

Party Conference policing - You don't have to be a brain surgeon to work this out

Iain Dale raises a story brought up by David Ruffley MP asking why the Labour Party conference costs £2million more to police than the Tory conference.

Let's put it another way and see if David Ruffley can work it out.

Why does it cost £2million more to police the conference of the governing party ? Why does it cost more to protect cabinet ministers ? Why are there more protesters, marches and campaigners at a the governing party's conference ?

Come on Mr Ruffley. Do you really need help doing the maths ?

I mentioned yesterday that David Cameron appears to have got together a good "top team" who consistently hit the mark in attacking Labour for the things they do wrong. I guess Mr Ruffley shows that underneath the top level MP's the Tories have there remain the "niec but dim" brigage and the back bench incompetents who ask banal questions that a child could work out the answer to.

Iain dale does make a god point though in questioning the role of the party conferences in their current format, particular for Labour and the Tories who treat them as a talking shop and don#t allow their members to actually set policy at the conferences.