Why David Laws should NOT return to government

There are many who like to think that the ills the Lib Dems are suffering will, in some way, be fixed by a returning David Laws being thrust back in to the political front line. They are wrong.

Firstly, we should examine what David Laws is like.

I know people who know David, and they tell me he is extremely quit witted, he "gets it" very quickly, and is a real talent. this any be true, but as a voter, and outsider, I view David as an intellectual and bright, but not charismatic or exciting in any way shape or form. Would his return excite the electorate ? Would it er-energise the Lib Dem vote ? I very much doubt it. I think Charles Kennedy might, but not David Laws. So lets kill the myth that David Laws will somehow revive our electoral fortunes overnight.

There is, of course, the argument that having David Laws in cabinet will somehow make the coalition more than what it is, and will then given the Lib Dems credit. The truth, as we've seen, is that the more successful the coalition is in any given area, the Conservatives get the credit, and the things that the public despise are blamed on the Lib Dems. To say "We need him back" is also to say that one of our cabinet members is not up to the job. I'm sure the Tories would love to see Vince or Huhne go, after all, they are providing the only credible opposition to the Tories whilst Nick Clegg has been utterly useless in providing any liberal vision or future for the party.

But for me, the most important reason for David Laws not to return is the simple fact that he showed a total lack of judgement in what he did over claiming for a second home owned by his partner. Last year in the general election we rightly claimed that we were the party who were the cleanest on expenses, how we had called for reform and more rigour in the system whilst Gordon Brown did nothing, and we mocked the Tories for continuing to back those friends of David Cameron who had been caught with their hands in the expenses till.

How could we face the electorate if David Laws returns to cabinet ? Forget that he did it for "personal reasons to protect his private life". He is a wealthy man, he didn't need to claim second home expenses, he didn't need to claim above the market rate, and he could have claimed on his Yeovil home, not his partner's London home. There were numerous ways he could have protected his private life without having to fiddle his expenses, but he chose none of those options, which stands in stark contrast with the perception the party hierarchy has that he is an intellectual who will find solutions to the problems we face a a party, as a partner in coalition and as a country.

The public will not thank us if we bring David Laws back, they'll probably hate as more and we'll get tarnished further as a party that cannot be trusted to keep its word. What do I think will happen ? I think Nick Clegg will bring him back next year because the Tories want him back. Of course they do, it will make us look silly and they will get the benefit of any successes he may achieve in government. but whatever the Tories want, Nick Clegg gives them.

Throw a stick. Go on Nick, fetch boy, fetch !

Wake up and smell the coffee

Yesterday, I made the point that I predicted the Lib Dem meltdown 12 months ago. So I'd like to summarise, without links, what my arguments were last year.

1) Junior coalition partners always get punished without PR
I made clear that we would be the Tories scapegoat, we'd take the flak , and the Tories would get off scot free. In that, I've been proved right. The argument people gave last year was that "Of you believe in PR, then you believe in coalition". Indeed I do believe in PR, and accept that this may lead to coalitions (but not in Scotland), but by having PR, the smaller party gets some protection, and a guarantee that they will not suffer electoral wipeout. That's a prospect we are facing more and more, and delaying the inevitable for four more years (at which point we'd be several thousands councillors down, and many activists long gone), merely delays our recovery.

2) We won't get AV
I said we wouldn't, and we didn't.

3) People will no longer trust us
Most of the things that made people want to vote for us, our concerns about raising VAT, our clear view that cuts shouldn't be too fast so as to damage the recovery, and our opposition to tuition fees, have all been trashed. Taken with our opposition to Trident and new nuclear power, the things that really made people want to vote for us, have largely been abandoned.
We need to forget all the spin about "75% of our manifesto pledges being in the coalition agreement", if those 75% were the bottom 25%, not the top 25%. People voted for us because of the big marquee headline policies, not the ending of child detention. However, noble that might be, nobody has ever told me they voted Lib Dem because of their party's pledge to do that.

4) The Tories can't be trusted
I was told I was too tribal for suggesting it. Not even Vince Cable agrees.

5) We didn't need to go in to a coalition
I made the point that a minority Tory government was viable and could work. See Scotland for evidence of this where the SNP obviously made a good fist of things.
If it was an imperative to get the markets to see there was some stability, now we have avoided a Greece style meltdown, we can surely withdraw from the coalition ?

In truth, the coalition is killing our party. We are going to lose activists, lose thousands more councillor, and will by the time we are thrown in to oblivion in 2015,  lack any ability to rebuild in many constituencies.

Nick Clegg is a total liability. For every person I canvassed when I stood for election on Thursday who liked the coalition (usually Tories), I found 10 who didn't, and Nick Clegg's name is mud and he has no credibility with the public.

For the sake of our party, we MUST end the coalition and Nick Clegg must go.

At least Nick Clegg has been exposed for what he is

A few months ago, in the wake of the capitulation coalition agreement with the Tories, I said in an interview with Gavin Esler on the the Today programme on Radio 4 that "Nick Clegg has made us look like liars and fools".

At that time I felt it to be true, and I still do because within days of telling people that the Tories would be a disaster, how only the Lib Dems would oppose a rise in VAT, how only the Lib Dems would oppose further nuclear power, how only the Lib Dems would oppose a rise in tuition fees, we sold out on these policies for the chance of a voting system our leader publicly criticised, and a few other scraps from the Tories table.

So for the last few months I have been an embarrassed and ashamed Lib Dem given the way Nick Clegg and his cronies have hailed every Tory policy as a Lib Dem triumph (an example of this was seen again in the weekly email Nick Clegg sends out), whilst ignoring the fact that policies claimed as Lib Dem successes are peripheral to most people (voting reform), do not reflect party policy (privatisation of the Royal Mail) or were in fact policies in the Tory manifesto anyway (the pupil premium).

I have felt personally to blame for misleading people in my area when I delivered so many leaflets hailing what the Liberal Democrats would do in parliament. I felt the policies were good. I was told they were costed. In short, and call me deluded, I believed what Nick Clegg told me. But today, I have some hope of redemption. Nick Clegg told ITV regarding his broken pledge to students that

"You need to be careful. I should have been more careful perhaps in signing that pledge at the time. At the time I thought we could do it."

If I am putting my own spin on this statement, it appears to me that he is saying he was foolish to sign it. Or in hindsight perhaps he was an idiot to sign it ?

Either way, it's not me who was the liar and fool.

Don't criticise Tory policies you don't agree with ? Oh do shut up !

Apparently we should show "responsibility" and not criticise Tory policies we do not agree with. Presumably turning the party in to liars who say nothing on issues they fundamentally disagree with and campaigned against just months ago is the price Nick Clegg is willing to pay in order for him to be David Cameron's best mate.

The preamble to the Lib Dem party constitution states

The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no-one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity.

Obviously conformity is not an issue any more ?

If the party leadership's advice is to be followed the Lib Dems are consigned to political stagnancy, left only to trumpet policies our MPs and our leadership abandoned (STV, reforming prisons, mansion tax, etc) whilst being left impotent to attack the Tories in Tory seats. Ridiculous.

The Clegg Bounce - An early opinion

People are already summising that the Clegg bounce did not help the party make a breakthrough, it failed to see the party progress, and it disappeared all too quickly. To justify this they point to the number of seats the Lib Dems lost. But is that true. I don't think so.

For myself, I have found people on the door to have been impressed by the Lib Dems, they have taken us seriously and they know more about us. But more important than anything else, consider where the Lib Dems would have been without the bounce.

How many more seats might the Lib Dems have lost if the Tory/Labour fight had been more intense with the Lib Dems totally squeezed out ? I could see, in these circumstances the Lib Dems not only losing a handful of seats, but the party have been reduced to 35 MP's and two elections of hardwork would have been undone overnight.

So don't blame the Clegg bounce for the Lib Dems doing less well than we hoped. Instead we should be grateful that the Clegg bounce stopped as doing as badly as we might have done.

No outright winner from tonight's debate.

Tonight's Prime Ministerial debate appears to have given no leader an outright win like last week.

YouGov had the results as Cameron 36%, Clegg 32% and Brown 28%.

ComRes had Clegg: 33%,  Brown: 30% and Cameron: 30%

Whilst Angus Reid have (in what is still a live poll) Clegg 35%, Cameron 32% and Brown 23%

So given the fact that there are three polls, guess which one the Rupert Murdoch owned Sky News are reporting ?

Yes, the YouGov poll paid for by The Sun.

I felt the debate was nowhere near as well run as last week. Sky seemed to abandon the remit which was that this debate was on foreign policy and Europe (why there was a question about The Pope was in this section is a mystery).

Adam Boulton kept interrupting Nick Clegg and started asking his own questions about The Telegraph headline today, which was outrageous.

The Telegraph reveals that Nick Clegg ...

... properly registered donations of £250 a month from three seperate businessmen to pay for a member of staff.

Sorry. Have I missed something here ? But it seems to be that the right wing pro Tory Telegraph is trying to say that something NIck Clegg offiicially declared back in 2006, was registered correctly, and went towards paying for a member of staff, is somehow wrong.

The adage of throwing enough mud at a wall and hoping some of it will stick seems to be the Tory press and Tory bloggers only weapons at the moment.

Opportunity wasted

It struck me yesterday morning that Nick Clegg could really have stolen the thunder of Cameron by making an early statement to the effect that any Lib Dem MP not willing to pay back money owed would be deselected and have the whip withdrawn.

I note this morning that Cameron has said words to this effect.

A missed opportunity by Clegg.

Why Nick Clegg is right about the Tory con trick

Nick Clegg will open the Lib Dem conference with a stinging attack on David Cameron and the Tories for trying to con the electorate in thinking that Tories offer a change that will be break from the politics of the last 30 years. He also will also say the Tories arrogantly believe it is "their turn".

The questions is, was it ever any different ?

In 1997 I remember friends of mine who were not interested in politics get swept along in the religious fervour of New Labour and that things were going to change. Aide from the fact that I was a Lib Dem back then, I felt rather down the day Labour were elected because I knew a massive opportunity to deliver real change had been missed by Tony Blair in an attempt to appear safe to Middle England voters. As a result reforms were small, change was merely window dressing and we kept most of the same old systems and institutions that needed radical reform. Unless you lived in Scotland or Wales, change passed you by.

Now what is different ? What are the Tories planning to do which they think earns them the title to be called progressive ? As I see it the only thing that people expect the Tories to do is make cuts. Now I know the Lib Dems (and Labour belatedly) pledge this too, but I hear nothing else which involves reform other than bland and rather idiotic statements about allowing people with no educational background to run schools. Where is the Tory big idea ?

The answer is that there is no big idea. The Tory plan is to play it safe, follow the Basic Fawlty line of "Don't mention the war" but change it to "Don't mention a policy". I have visions of Tory shadow ministers returning to Cameron's office saying "I mentioned a policy once but I think I got away with it !"

The truth is this country needs more than a rearranging of the deckchairs. We do need policy that will dramatically alter the directing we take if not we risk returning back to where we are now in 10 years time because nobody genuinely believes the Tories will properly regulate the City (after all, their fundraising efforts are co-ordinated by hedge fund managers) whilst genuine policy breakthroughs like those outlined by IDS the other day on welfare do not seem to have been welcomed with open arms.

So whilst the Tories might be better than Labour (come off it, anyone would be better than Labour), what we really want is a something that is more than "a bit better", because this country deserves so much more.

BBC East show blantant Tory bias

On Monday the BBC Look Est programme had a special report on David Cameron's visit to Norwich, interviews with local Tories, a reporter at the venue of his visit, and it was one of the main headlines.

I twittered yesterday wondering what sort of coverage the press would give Nick Clegg for his visit today. Surprise surprise, in line with the BBC's constant reporting of David Cameron opening an envelope and giving him headlines for it and their inability to report anyone in the Lib Dems except Vince Cable, BBC Look East totally failed to mention Nick Clegg's visit to Norwich today, failing even to mention it in passing.

The next time the Tories go on about the bias in the BBC, we can all remind them which way the BBC is leaning in their bias.

Clegg in Total Politics

Total Politics this month has a rather upbeat interview that tells us much about the calm but assured way Nick Clegg leads our party.

It's well worth a read.

Being phoned by Nick Clegg

This teatime my wife answered the phone only to hear a recorded message from Nick Clegg. Having not seen or heard about the fuss over this "marketing" exercise, she listened for all of seven seconds before putting the phone down.

Turning to me she asked me if I supported this kind tactic as she was deeply unimpressed.

I had to say that I agreed with her. This kind of phone polling seems to me to be counter productive and will anger people. Sadly it detracts from what I thought was an excellent conference speech by Nick. Shame.

Nick Clegg puts his foot in it over private schooling

Nick Clegg has told The Times that he might send his children to private schools. Moreover, he came up with the same boring old chestnut that "he would not play politics with his children's education".

The question is, if you were an opposition activist in Sheffield, what would you be saying right now ?

Sheffield, where Nick Clegg has his constituency, is a Lib Dem run council, it is, therefore, a Lib Dem run education authority. If the schools are not good enough there, technically, the Lib Dems will be at fault.

So is he saying he does not trust the Lib Dems to run Sheffield schools properly ? Of course he isn't. But this is an absolute gift for the opposition in Sheffield.

Why didn't Nick use this as an opportunity to praise Sheffield Council ? Why didn't he answer by saying that the schools in Sheffield are getting better all the time and there are any number of schools he would be happy to send his children to in the city ? By saying he might send his children to a private school he is damning each and every school in the city.

Very silly and a poor answer from Nick Clegg. I knew I should have supported Chris Huhne !

Does Nick Clegg read my blog ?

Last week I wrote THIS about how the Lib Dems urgently needed to shift resources to attack and win Labour seats. I also added that this should have been done much sooner.

I was assured by some people commenting to my story that I was apparently "behind the times" and "out of touch", and that this was already being done.

Then lo and behold, Nick Clegg today announces a shift of resources to attack and win Labour seats.

Some might say about time too, but it does make me wonder if he reads my blog.

The Lembit problem

I listened today to Nick Clegg being interviewed on Radio Five Live at lunchtime and was really rather depressed at the amount of time he had to speak about Lembit Opik.

Now I know it was probably only two or three minutes, but this was a few minutes wasted when instead of taling about policies, the good things the Lib Dems are doing in local government or even reminding peopled how awful the government is, Nick has to answer questions about Lembit Opik's obsession with headlines and his celebrity lifelstyle.

It would be easy to blame the interviewer, but she made a good point when highlighting that Lemibit is not afraid to sell a story, pose for cameras or appear on TV, and with the good stories, he has to take the bad. But what does it say about Lembit Opik that he is best known as a "serial celebrity shagger", as tabloids might put it, rather than as a serious politician.

Poor old Nick Clegg sounded genuinely exasperated, offered sympathy to Lembit, but indicated that a period out of the headlines would serve Lembit very well.

For Lembit Opik's sake and for Nick Clegg and the party's sakes, lets hope that is what we get.

Ireland's "No" - A disaster for Nick Clegg and Gordon Brown

Today's result from Ireland and a clear rejection of the Euro Constitution immersed in what was name a "Reform Treaty", is disastrous for the EU, but is the very last thing either Gordon Brown or Nick Clegg wanted right now.

Gordon Brown's problems seem to double by the day and have been well documented, but having only got the 42 vote through by a wafer thin margin, Gordon Brown must be dreading that the Euro Constitution might resurface in another amended form shortly before a general election and require another re ratification by parliament.

Nick Clegg too must be worried. The decision to put a three line whip to tell Lib Dem MP's to abstain, thent Lib Dem Lords were told to oppose, all while many voters lived under the preoccupation that the Lib Dems actually supported the idea of a referendum in the 2005 manifesto, left deep divisions, made the party seem untrustworthy and lacking direction, and brought Nick Clegg's leadership in to question very early on in his leadership. Since then Nick has done well to reunify the party and bring people back on board, and many of the electorate have forgotten what the Lib Dems did, but the idea that this might become an issue again must be a worry for Lib Dem strategists.

This leaves, of course, the Tories, who must be laughing their socks off right now. But lets face it, we could all see this coming, and it was exactly the reason why some were so opposed to a referendum on the EU constitution in the first place. Quite simply, people are sick of the EU and want to vent their anger at it.

Nick Clegg most secure party leader ... according to Betfair

I was having a look through Betfair earlier and was interested to see that of all the party leaders, Nick Clegg appeared to be the most secure.

How did I measure this ? Well not one person has made a bet on Nick Clegg stepping down as lib Dem Party leader. A small amount has been bet on David Cameron and as you might guess, a much larger amount had been bet on Gordon Brown going.

The Newspaper that cried "Wolf"

The Telegraph is reporting that Nick Clegg came under fire in Afghanistan.

Yet 24 hours earlier they reported the completely made up story that Nick Clegg would support a minority Tory government. This Telegraph story has been denied by Nick Clegg's team and consisted of quotes like "The Telegraph has learned " and "sources say", but with no direct quotes from anyone. Most people are under the impression that the "Torygraph" was living up to its name and printed the story as a favour to their Tory friends in order to help the Conservatives squeeze the Lib Dem vote in Crewe and Nantwich.

The problem though for The Telegraph is why should we believe anything they have to say if they lie so willingly about people. it makes me wonder if Nick Clegg did come under rocket fire or whether its a Hillary Clinton story and actually he was given flowers by a child instead.

Confusion and contradiction over the EU constitution

News that Lib Dem peers will vote against plans for a referendum on the EU Constitution should come as no surprise to anyone since the whole messed up Lib Dem policy to the referendum seems to have come as a result of some pressure from Lib Dem lords in the first place.

What I do find odd though is Shirley Williams response that

" never in Britain has there been an objective attempt to explain the European Union to our people and they have been subjected to the most astonishing propaganda, not least from major influences in the printed press."

The obvious question is then why are Lib Dem lords opposing a referendum when it is the ideal opportunity for the pro EU lobby to make its case. If the EU Constitution/Reform Treaty really does limit the EU's powers and draw lines in the sand it should be easy to sell this to the British public and at the same time educate the country about the benefits of the EU.

You might have imagined, given that Lib Dem MP's were told to abstain that Lib Dem peers would have been given the same advice. But oddly the Lib Dem line in the House of Lords is to back Labour. Isn't this another contradiction ? Surely if Nick Clegg's policy was right for the Commons, why isn't it right in the Lords ?

More importantly isn't this change of tack a sign that actually Nick Clegg got things very wrong when ordering Lib Dem MP's to abstain ? The whole thing is compounding a bad decision in the first place by now making the party inconsistent.

What about recall elections for party leaders Nick ?

Nick Clegg apparently supports the idea of recall elections for discredited MPs.

At first I thought this as some kind of joke, given the discredit his actions have heaped on a number of Lib Dems who followed the party's three line whip on abstaining yesterday, but apparently he is actually serious.

I wonder if the Liberal Democrats could introduce it also for discredited party leaders ?