Tim Montgomerie makes a prediction:
Call it Montgomerie's Law of the Coalition (launched in The Times (£)). This Coalition is heading for breakdown or it's heading Leftwards. The Left of the Liberal Democrats will demand an end to the Coalition if Nick Clegg doesn't get more and more concessions from David Cameron.
Well, maybe. And, sure, the government is not likely to tilt to the right. But that doesn't mean it can't maintain its current, moderate course. Yes, that means there will be moments when the Tory leadership seems to be doing more than it absolutely must to protect the Liberal Democrats. But that's what big brothers are supposed to do. It's when the junior partner feels ignored or taken for granted that it begins to think about walking away from the deal. In those circumstances, however, the senior partner shoulders at least some of the responsibility for the breakdown. Usually it takes more than one party to end a marriage.If the Coalition fails it will be broken by Liberal Democrats in left-leaning constituencies. Think Scotland, Wales, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Sheffield, Liverpool. Think Ming Campbell, Charles Kennedy, Simon Hughes.
However, the Lib Dems have no incentive for walking away. None at all. Even if next year's elections in Scotland and Wales prove bloody that reinforces the need to hang together with the Tories until 2015 and, everyone hopes, happier economic times. The alternatives seem still more likely to result in political disaster.
Even so, I wonder if conventional wisdom is overstating the threat to Lib Dem fortunes. After all, the ib Dem vote is a pretty resilient thing and something that's stuck with the party through the years when it had little to no prospect of sitting in government. It would be perverse for voters to abandon a party that is, at long last, actually getting the chance to implement some of its policies.
Indeed, that's been the case in Scotland. The Labour-Lib Dem coalition at Holyrood was not especially popular (nor, though this is a different matter, especially successful) but this didn't produce any significant drop in Lib Dem support. Now it may be that coalition government at Westminster with the Scary Tories might change everything but this is far from certain.
Not least because even though many Scottish Liberal Democrat MPs come from the old SDP-wing of the party they do not represent left-leaning constituencies. A Liberal Democrat vote in Scotland is not a proxy vote for Labour, it is an anti-Labour vote (and, often, an anti-West of Scotland vote which is nearly, but not quite, the same thing) as well as an anti-SNP vote and and anti-Conservative vote. Among their Westminster MPs, only Edinburgh West and East Dunbartonshire are Lib Dem vs Labour contests. More often, when you find a Lib Dem MP you'll find Labour polling less than 15%.
Which means, actually, there's ample room for an electoral pact in 2015. Why shouldn't Lib Dem voters in, say, Perth or Angus vote Tory in return for Tory voters in Edinburgh West or East Dunbartonshire or Edinburgh South voting Liberal Democrat? Between them, the coalition parties won 35% of the vote in Scotland this year but just 20% of the seats. Distributing this support more efficiently could, theoretically at least, benefit both parties.
If that's the case in Scotland it seems likely to be the case in northern England too. Why shouldn't Tories in Lib Dem held seats in Liverpool or Sheffield support their government partners in 2015? This can be done - surely! - even if the voting system remains FPTP. It might require some boldness and imagination but Cameron and Clegg have shown that they lack little in those departments.
This might, I suppose, dismay the Tory right some of whom might not be too upset if the coalition were to fall apart. They should be careful what they wish for. Given the prevailing economic conditions it is far from obvious that the electorate would think that swinging to the right is the proper response to the collapse of a moderate Conservative/Liberal government. The Tories are supposed to be a pragmatic party: that means they need to take care of the Lib Dems because in helping them they're also helping their own medium and long-term prospects.
Filed under: Britain (737 more articles) , ConLib (132 more articles) , Lib Dems (101 more articles) , Scotland (499 more articles) , Tories (273 more articles)
Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based
Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (6)
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
1 The unions versus the Department for Education — continued - Peter Hoskin
2 Cameron can no longer laugh off Ed - James Forsyth
3 Why reason doesn’t apply to the Eurozone - Fraser Nelson
4 The unions' lazy opposition to schools reform - Peter Hoskin
1 Cameron can no longer laugh off Ed - James Forsyth (65)
2 Let's get real about the fiscal situation - John Platts-Mills (51)
3 Gatwick competes in the disgrace Olympics - Fraser Nelson (42)
4 The need for a coalition attitude to growth - James Forsyth (42)
5 The 301 Group purge the 1922 committee - James Forsyth (41)
Andrew Sullivan
Ben Smith
Charles Crawford
Chris Dillow
Claudia Massie
Dan Drezner
Daniel Larison
Dave Weigel
Ezra Klein
French Politics
Global Guerrilas (John Robb)
Henry Porter
James Fallows
Julian Sanchez
Kerry Howley
Kevin Drum
League of Ordinary Gentlemen
Marc Ambinder
Matt Zeitlin
Matthew Yglesias
Megan McArdle
More than Mind Games
Mr Eugenides
Norm Geras
Our Kingdom
Outside the Beltway
Radley Balko
Reason: Hit&Run
Rod Dreher
Samizdata
Scottish Unionist
SNP Tactical Voting
The American Scene
The Plank
Tim Worstall
Toby Harnden
Will Wilkinson
Charlotte Gore
Iain Martin
Hopi Sen
Liberal Vision
Left Back in the Changing Room
1,700 Unusual Christmas Presents Request Catalogue 01935 815 195 Quote SPEC10 for 10% discount www.presentfinder.co.uk
Pimilco based Florist with online ordering Web: www.olivebranch.net Tel: 020 7630 1868 Fax: 020 7233 8844
62 Shore Road, Warsash, Southampton, SO31 9FT Telephone: 01489 578867 Web site: www.ruffs.co.uk
Apollo Magazine | Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2012 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
DavidDP
July 9th, 2010 4:24pm Report this commentHe's just sore that the coalition means he lost all chance of being an influence on the government. He was desperately hoping for a small majority to help his wing of the party gain more influence. The only outcome worse for him would have been a large comfortable majority which would similarly have sidelined him, but deprived him of the chance to come up with rubbish like this.
Saltirethinking
July 9th, 2010 6:00pm Report this commentAt long last we have a chance of Adult Government and all Montgomerie can do is whinge.
If the Ashcroft money had been well spent by some of the useless Tory candidates in Scotland, Cameron would have had a majority.
Who employs Montgomerie?.
tommyt
July 9th, 2010 11:14pm Report this commentNot for the first time a quasi-beltway blogger gets things horrendously wrong. That's Tim not Alex BTW.
It may be true to say that Liberals in Scotland are more left leaning than on the south bank or in Devon however most of Scottish seats resemble the killing fields for the Libs. In the Scottish parliament where there is a proportional system they have come 4th in every election. They propser because of FPTP in terms of Scottish seats at Westminster and they have an annoying/nuggety habit of holding what they have. Even the Lib/Lab marginals that Alex talks about are affluent suburban seats that, transposed to south of the wash, would be safe Tory.
So if left leaning Liberals choose to bite their Tory friends the wound will have to be inflicted by the dogs that didnt bark in May. That is the candidiates in Northern English constituencies who fancied their chances against a very unpopular Labour government but didn't win. The chances of the deputy PM being deposed by a bunch a scouse, geordie and yorkie runners up appears slim to me.
NoetiCat
July 10th, 2010 1:13am Report this comment@tommyt - Our local LD group is in an old (former) Liberal ward in Yorkhire and firmly behind the party. We aren't happy with everything but then who is, we understand that coalitions mean compromise and have found that since the government was formed, reactions have generally been positive, possibly because our local ward has 3 Tory councillors who suddenly look old and tired compared to these "new" dynamic, economically pragmatic Lib Dems. And also a new Tory MP who was a Lib Dem before Cameron tried to tug the Tories into more centrist grounds.
tommyt
July 10th, 2010 10:59am Report this commentso i guess we are in violent agreement. In the south of england there is no reason for the Libs to rock the boat with the Tories, in the North, Scotland and Wales there is no imperative. This isnt going to change any time soon, if Labour can re-invent its brand then come 2015 things might be different but I cannot see any serious pressure on the coalition coming from the Liberal side in the meantime. Meantime is an accidentally appropriate word !
frances
July 10th, 2010 1:33pm Report this commentlets stop for a second here and look at the meaning of the word moderate. we have in the budget a measure to reduce to 90% the housing benefit of people on jobseekers allowance for more than a year, from april 2013, in a time of high unemployment, regardless of whether they have looked for a job or not. thats not moderate, thats nazism. attacking the weakest and most vulnerable people in society, which though your nasty conservative minds might not like, is in reality what large numbers of unemployed people are. its enough to make a woman rejoin the labour party!
Back to top