Clegg's dilemma
James Forsyth 6:03pm
Nick Clegg’s few days in charge have summed up his current political problem. If
he says he agrees with what the government is doing, the media ask what’s the point of the Lib Dems? That’s what happened to him on the Today Programme this morning. But if he talks about where he disagrees with the coalition programme as he did on Monday when discussing
Trident, he’s lambasted for exacerbating coalition tensions.
It is all far cry from the early days of the coalition when there was some concern in Conservative circles that Clegg was a thinner, better version of David Cameron. But if Clegg went back and like
a sportsman watched footage of himself from when he was in form, he’d notice that back then he was much more comfortable talking about how the Liberal Democrat’s limited number of seats
meant that they were never going to get everything they wanted. Indeed, Clegg’s willingness to point out this political reality gave him protection against precisely the line of questioning
that Evan Davis was using this morning.
Previous
Richard of York
August 18th, 2010 6:36pm Report this commentThe lip trems should have gone for the confidence and supply route.
At least they could hold their heads up but now they are the front for the nasty party and suffering by association.
Just goes to prove if you sleep with pigs some of the smell will rub off.
John Bracewell
August 18th, 2010 8:32pm Report this commentAwful stink coming from the direction of the nasty Richard of York. As usual.
davidk
August 18th, 2010 8:55pm Report this commentBoo Hoo. Clegg's "dilemma". Let the Quisling lead an independent party instead of clinging onto the coat tails of another. Problem solved.
Tony Makara
August 18th, 2010 11:00pm Report this commentNick Clegg has been swallowed up by what is a Conservative government.
The Liberal Democrats no doubt felt they would have enough muscle to impact on Government policy, but in fact, the opposite has taken place. We have witnessed dithering Danny Alexander, flushed and clearly agitated, making poor apology for what is undiluted Conservative policy.
Bodly language alone tells us the man is clearly acting against conscience.
Then there is Simon Hughes, already building his power base, ready to cash-in from the grass roots disaffection that will surface when the LibDems start to lose their grip on local governments, and turn en masse against Clegg.
Harriet Harman hasn't always been right, but her analysis of the LibDem's subservient lap-dog role within the coalition was exact.
As LibDem support melts away it will be forced to cling to the coalition agreement with even more tenacity. However once the Minsterial joyride is over, Clegg, Alexander, and even Mr Cable will perhaps wonder whether a place in the history books was worth it?
The real winner will be Simon Hughes, the contrived voice of vexation, the artful voice of ambition.
TrevorsDen
August 18th, 2010 11:23pm Report this commentWhy should Clegg worry about the media liking for some inane hook to hang its stories on and justify their existence?
Clegg agrees with what the government are doing because HE IS PART OF the government. Geddit?
Left wing LDs are unhappy about some of what the govt are doing and right wing conservative are unhappy about some of what the govt are doing.
But I would hope that BOTH sets of parties are more than happy that Gordon Brown is no longer in power.
I wonder - in all their thoughts about negotiations with the LDs did Labour ever contemplate making Clegg Deputy PM? Does anybody really think they did? Most Labour big wigs hate the sight of each other never mind Clegg Laws and Cable.
Salopian
August 19th, 2010 12:21am Report this commentWHichever way one looks at the LIbDems it's difficult to see them walking away from 'power" probably for ever. OI course Hughes will try to muster support for Conference Vetoes of one or more coalition policies and he might even get them.
And then what?
Imagine Clegg going into the next Cabinet meeting and say "sorry guys, I know we've worked on all these policies and agreed them - but the Party's vetoed them. SO no we can't cut this and sorry but we've got to tax that"
Would he dare unravel 3 months of Spending Review work which he has pronounced was absolutely essential?
Of course not - so he'll have to tell his Party one single fact of life.
A Party Conference can veto a policy whilst it's being developed or placed into a manifesto - but once it's in power then conferences cannot tie its Government's hands with running vetos on policy.
WHy not? Because the only sanction it has to enforce the Veto is to sack its leader - with the ultimate risk of a General Election.
Which brings us to the LibDems worst nightmare. There is no way on earth that they will ever (well certanily not for a long time) be the largest single party. Therefore the best they can hope for is a minority share in a coalition.
Coalitions mean stitchups of policies. Now who would go into a Coalition with the LibDems if they thought that jointly developed policies could be unstitched at the first LibDem Paety conference.
CONCUSION - if the LibDems are serious about coalition government then they have to dump rules which force their parliamentary colleagues into ntenable positions.
Sorry chaps - its either the rules or a share in power
Neil Staton
August 19th, 2010 9:37am Report this commentThis article is on about what the media might say.
No one gives a flying fig about the medias opinion they are mostly a bunch of self serving liars anyway.
Journalists are so low they make estate agents seem thoroughly decent people.
Back to top