Clegg Decapitates Brown And a Nightmare Looms

Ian Walker

In the spirit of the day, I'm going to blow up a Lib Dem!

Cuffleyburgers

Correction - they have overreached themselves. Clegg's blown it, and them.

General Zod

Even if the LibDems do now go with the Tories, Clegg has shown that he is weak and cannot be trusted, so Cameron will dump him the moment he feels he can win a majority.

TCN

Wow, thought Adam Boulton was going to bif Alasdair Campbell then (1745 on Sky) that would certainly have got me to renew my subscription! Awesome.

ndm

-- Constitutionally there's no problem with having another "unelected" Prime Minister but having two in a row brought to power in such a fashion seems, politically at least, a rather different matter.

I've never quite understood the complaints about "unelected" Prime Ministers since they are not exactly a novelty. Of the 11 Prime Minsters (counting Wilson as 2) since 1950, 6 were "unelected" when they first came into office.

ndm

-- This invites all kinds of trouble for the Lib Dems at the next election.

I think the Lib Dems are in the position where any choice they make invites all kind of trouble at the next election.

However, given his unpopularity Brown almost certainly had to go anyway so I don't think anyone should go overboard blaming the Lib Dems for it. A more interesting possibility is that having got rid of Brown the Lib Dems move onto taming the ultra-right of the Conservative Party and makes it fish or cut bait regarding Britain's place in the World and, in particular, Europe.

Tyranosaurus

ndm: but at least the others either went on to win an election or were replaced by someone who had - here we have a PM defeated in an election still hanging on and then trying to pass on the premiership to another unelected leader from his own party (who will still have lost the preceding general election) - this is not democracy but oligarchy

S Ferguson

Clegg is a political novice, and hes back in God mode. He will want to be PM to completely oust Brown. Labour are venal enough to give it to him :)

Clegg as PM locks them in and suits Labour because the Lib Dems will take the flak.

shorpe

I'm sorry, I think you're letting your ideological bias show here. The Lib Dems are acting entirely in rational self-interest and in the interest of the nation; if talks break down with one party, it's sensible to already be in talks with the other to be able to conclude a speedy deal and not keep the country waiting any longer.

I think you fell a little too much in love with your own hypothetical "Liberty coalition" scenario and are now throwing the toys out of the pram. Get back to proper journalism, please.

Ricky

Clegg's behaviour exemplifies the underlying "shabby chic" of his party and it's two-faced politics of envy.

ndm

-- but at least the others either went on to win an election or were replaced by someone who had

This is completely true but does not diminish the fact that complaints about his lack of election started long before this electoral failure. If memory serves, neither Callaghan nor Major faced similar criticism.

Personally, I think Britain is far poorer for allowing the trappings of a Presidential system to polute its Parliamentary system. They are very different beasts with, as Matthew Yglesias never tires of pointing out, the US President facing many more veto points regarding policy than does the British Prime Minister. It is a grave mistake to increase the power of the Prime Minister over the party he represents without the introduction of significant additional parliamentery veto points - which no one seems to be discussing. Unless, of course, you include the torrent of complaints about PR leading to the veto point of coalition government.

cooliehawk

"we now have the extraordinary sight of the Lib Dems negotiating with both parties at the same time. This is madness"

Madness?

THIS! IS! PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY!

Matthew

I agree that it is hard to see how a Lib-Lab coalition could be viable. But I am not convinced when you write:

"we now have the extraordinary sight of the Lib Dems negotiating with both parties at the same time. This is madness and invites the public to view the Lib Dems as a party of political hoors prepared to sell their services to the highest-bidder"

This is the perennial curse of the third party. They must show willingness to negotiate with both main parties - to do otherwise is to surrender what little leverage they have. Furthermore, the LibDems must demonstrate that they are not subordinate to either of the other parties; otherwise what is their raison d'etre?

TJA

"Except this: the Lib Dems are in danger of over-reaching themselves."

Sorry, but to paraphrase Jamie MacDonald in a way that you, yourself, did recently...

They're the Lib Dems!
Of course they're going to overreach.
Of course things will end badly for them. They're Lib Dems.

Neil Wilson

There is of course one person who was in the debates who could be Prime Minister of a Lab/Lib coalition - Clegg himself.

Perhaps he's after the top job.

Tyranosaurus

nmd: Both Callghan and Major were at least elected by their own parties, but I'm complaining about Brown now - he has lost, he should go and he should go now.

Rhoda Klapp

If a 75% majority in the party is required, can Clegg deliver the party in either direction? Is the Lib=Dem rulebook not up to the task? You can't always get 75% on an A or B choice.

Alex Massie

Shorpe/Cooliehawk: Sure, the Lib Dems can do what they want. And talking to Labour in formal talks at the same time as they continue formal talks with the Tories may be the way they think they can maximise their leverage.

And they may not be wrong about that.

But it is a high-risk manoevre which risks doing them enormous damage if they can't do a deal with the Tories or if the next election comes soon. That's where the madness lies. And for what?

Detlef

In a multi-party system a third (smaller) party should always be able to negotiate with both (larger) parties. That´s just a normal part of such a system.
(Unless of course their election campaign included a promise to form a coalition - if needed - only with one party.)

Especially if they want a promise to change the voting system somewhat as the Liberal Democrats apparently want.

What would be their leverage if they only negotiated with one party here? Cameron could say no and then blame Clegg for ruining the negotiations. For not helping to produce a stable government as fast as possible, endangering the pound etc.

And why should anyone make meaningful concessions to Clegg if he is seen as having no (timely) political alternative?

Jeremy

"Good faith" is clearly not a Liberal Democrat.

And I agree with you about Labour presenting us with a second unelected Prime Minister in a row. How much credibility can such a person actually have? Or such a party, for that matter. A coalition of losers led by somebody for whom the public has not voted. Whatever you may call that...it's not democracy.

I think the political mood of the country is already turning - and not for the better. It is not so much what the rapidly-diminishing Clegg and Labour do next that counts, so much as what David Cameron and the Conservative Party choose to do.

I would remind Mr Cameron of Wellington's "reverse slope" strategy - used so effectively at Waterloo. Hold your fire...until the absolutely crucial moment...

LittleEnglander

Is Cameron doing the right thing by keeping a low profile? Is he ready to emerge, fresh faced to take up the mantle?

merlinthepig

What are "hoors"? I know what "whores" are, in the sense that I recognise the word, but "hoors"? Are they Scottish whores? Or just Lib Dem ones?

cleggtostandon

The Lib Dems are auctioning themselves off the highest bidder. and will find themselves without ANY bids as a consequence in the next election in 6-9 months' time - which thankfully only the Conservatives will have the funds to fight.

Snowman

Apparently, Sir Peter Tapsell has told Cameron that abolishing the FPTP voting system 'will be the end of the Tory party'. The man clearly knows not what he’s talking about. Under the AV system the Tories would be more likely to win a Commons majority than under the FPTP provided they made sure their policies ring true conservative.