The Passion of Nick Clegg
Fraser Nelson 10:44am
You almost feel sorry for Nick Clegg this week, with the tuition fees vote in prospect.
Being hated is difficult for LibDems because they didn’t expect it. Not so with the Tories. As a conservative, you usually realise early on that you're going to be a small fish swimming
against the current of fashionable received wisdom – and that will involve various tribulations. Like having to persuade your non-political friends that you do not advocate slaughter of the
firstborn, and that there is a difference between believing in empowering people, and wanting to let the devil take the hindmost. If you turn up to the Islington Conservative Carol Concert (as Eric
Pickles is doing), then you brace yourself for protesters outside it (as there will be). By the time someone stands for office as a Tory, they’re usually not only hardened to this opposition
– and even quite like it. For some, they enter politics to satisfy this masochistic itch: they want to feel the stilettos of the electorate walking up their back.
The Lib Dems usually go into politics to swim with the tide, to advocate motherhood, apple pie and free tuition fees and squeezing the rich until the pips squeak. As I say in the News of the World (£) today, if Nick Clegg had wanted to burned in effigy and have excrement pushed through the letterbox, he’d have joined the Tory party. So all this hatred is having a hardening effect on him: steel is entering his spin. But how he responds to this is worth examining.
He signed a pledge promising to abolish tuition fees, and will next week end up signing to almost treble the top limit. It’s not so much a U-Turn as a hit-and-run, with the dazed Lib Dem voter asking if they can ever trust Clegg again. Clegg argues it’s the price for government: compromises have to be made, sacred cows slaughtered. And he asks: are the Lib Dems serious about power? Because if they are, they need to reconcile themselves to such compromises. Unless they think they’re going to command a majority, the party is in politics to change the voting system and enter coalitions as its counterparts do in Europe. So, of course there have to be U-Turns. And Clegg wonders if his purist colleagues, who will vote against the government over this and resent the concessions, were ever interested in government – or whether they wanted to stay forever a protest party of opposition. Suffice to say there’s a Lib Dem split on the need for such fundamental compromises, and Clegg is on the right side of it.
But, crucially, Clegg wants to take this kicking. He understands Lib Dem voters will be angry, and that plenty students will be fuming. From what I understand, he was not even angry about the attack on his home – he believes they have a right to burn him in effigy. He sees it as cathartic. Just as Tony Blair adopted a “masochism strategy” in 2005, where he wanted to be beaten up by audiences across the country, so Clegg has adopted a masochism strategy for next week. Danny Alexander the same: something tells me he was not looking forward to Question Time last week. But he is there to confront his critics, and take the earache.
Interestingly, I understand that David Cameron offered to make some huge announcement before the tuition fees vote - to take the heat off Clegg. No, the Deputy PM replied, let’s not try any pyrotechnics. It’s a kicking I have to take.
He can console himself with the fact that students tend not to vote (most under-30s don’t) and that he’s taking this stick one year in to what he hopes is a five-year plan. And of the happy few who remain Lib Dem supporters, one in three didn’t vote Lib Dem at the last election. So coalition is winning them converts, although it’s not yet clear if this extends beyond new staff members and blood relatives. And yes, a continental shelf has fallen away from the Lib Dem vote – but Clegg believes that any ex-Labour voter who came to the party in protest at Iraq was never going to stay long anyway. As he told his party before the last conference, there’s no future for them as a leftist protest party.
I have yet to speak to a Tory minister that dislikes Clegg, or their Lib Dem colleagues. But most reckon that Clegg is doomed, that he won’t rebuild his support as he hopes. That he can kiss goodbye to Cambridge, Cardiff, Bristol, all these student-y constituencies – and maybe, even, his own. For his part, Clegg argues that no one knows: British politics is in flux, that the wheel’s still in spin and there’s no telling who that it’s naming. Who knows what constituencies might be in play in 2015? So his path now is to make his arguments as clearly and honestly as he can, make the case for liberalism (a word not often used in British politics) and see if he can rally people around that cause over the next five years. But this protest starts with taking a kicking. And that is what he intends to do next week.
UPDATE: Frank P has asked if the Tories have basically given up, and don't hate Lib Dems as they should. Opinion on the coalition varies widely within the party, but I'd say that Cameron's position - that the coalition is better than governing with only Tory MPs - is a minority. Most Tories are hoping for a pure Tory government after the next election, and people like Liam Fox say so in terms. Although a significant number (represented by modernisers like Nick Boles) prefer coalition (for the reasons stated in Boles' significant book). But what surprises me is that even Tory ministers who say they "hate" the coalition (a nd there are more than you'd think) do not bitch about their LibDem colleagues. Both sides are still surprised at how well they get on, and how much they agree on. The Tories think the Lib Dems are closet Tories, and are happy to be liberated. The Lib Dems think, in turn, that they have brought out the liberal in the Tory Party and that it's a kind of reverse takeover.
Previous
Noa
December 5th, 2010 11:26am Report this comment"You almost feel sorry for Nick Clegg this week, with the tuition fees vote in prospect. Being hated is difficult for LibDems because they didn’t expect it..."
Bu it seems to me, Fraser, that Nick has adapted himself well and now comfortably runs with the hare whilst hunting with the hounds.
The latest news that tuition fees for the "poorest" are to be fully subsidised for two years effectively drives a coach and horses through a key principle. No doubt it's been introduced as a result of pressure from the Flip-Flops.
Of course it creates another social and financial black hole through which the crooked, canny and corrupt will pour, at the undeserved expense of the hard pressed middle class Tory core. The very people who will sacrifice the homes and savings to ensure their children do not have an unfair debt burden in comparison with those of the client staters.
A class of voters which Cameron is as guilty of taking for granted as is the Labour Party the 'working class'.
This will not be an issue for either the silver spooned Nick and Dave. The knocking he will take next week will pass, without any serious personal consequence for him.
For the lower middle classes and , now facing the unrelieved prospect of progressive institutionalised destitution as they are required to fund an 'Animal Farm' educational system, it's a complete disaster.
Frank P
December 5th, 2010 11:38am Report this commentFraser
"I have yet to speak to a Tory minister that dislikes Clegg, or their Lib Dem colleagues."
That is the most revealing line in your essay. It makes one wonder whether the species "Tory MP" is now extinct. But perhaps it could just be that you avoid
them?
TrevorsDen
December 5th, 2010 11:46am Report this commentI do not feel sorry for Clegg but I will admire him if he makes the right choice and makes the right arguments.
The Lib Dems will certainly struggle to hold on to their current seats - though incumbency might help (if the economy revives). But that is because quite a parcel of their recent support came from disillusioned protesting anti war socialists. LibDems were opposed to the war, but so were many right wing Tories. The point is the 'liberal' tendency in the country is probably reflected in their current poll share.
The LDs are not going to break through and take over the Socialist vote, its too well entrenched and self serving. But if the LDs appeal to the genuine 'intelligent' liberal tendency, a tendency that I think is reflected in the ideals of the original founders of 'The Guardian', then it can possibly do enough to stay in power.
David Ossitt
December 5th, 2010 11:50am Report this comment“Like having to persuade your non-political friends that you do not advocate slaughter of the firstborn,”
Um?
I suppose that it depends on whose.
justathought
December 5th, 2010 11:53am Report this comment"most reckon that Clegg is doomed, that he won’t rebuild his support as he hopes"
I am skipping the graphic bit as its Sunday morning but my take on the best scenario for the Clegg and co is that by the time of the next election the recovery will be well established. He will then be able to say that the policies of the coalition means students will have much greater employment prospects because of the improved economic situation.
Jaz
December 5th, 2010 12:13pm Report this commentI like the fact you comment that most students don't vote, I think the last election saw the most amount of student voters.
Even if students don't vote as much, their parents do, and when parents see what it is doing to students they wont be voting, like my parents and numerous of my friends parents.
They should be very afraid.
dearieme
December 5th, 2010 12:18pm Report this commentIf Clegg toughs it out and his party backs him I might vote Lib next time, which I've not done in decades.
Silent Hunter
December 5th, 2010 12:42pm Report this commentBut the inconvenient truth that we all loath to confront, is that Labour left us a financial debt of ONE TRILLION POUNDS.
Everyone & everything will have to contract to clear that sort of debt.
Nick has become the victim of reality politics - you can promise what you like when you either think you stand no chance of getting into power, or maybe end up with a full deck of cards to play, but when you have to compromise - something has to give.
Whilst it's right to hold the coalition to answer for their 'combined' policies - it's also right to remind ourselves which party put us into the financial swamp in the first place . . . The LABOUR Party!
Fergus Pickering
December 5th, 2010 12:51pm Report this commentWho are the lower middle class? It USED to be Lupin Pooters (who?), clerks, pen-pushers, shop assistants in the better shops. Is it now teachers of all kinds, NHS workers like nurses rather than porters, local government employees who sit down to work? I only asked. Who, then, are the middle, middle class? Is it just money? No, it can't be that. Or is a lorry driver middle class? What about a Serheant Major in the army? If you vote Labour are you then, by definition, working class, even if you are a television news reader or a journalist? What kind of class is our Rod Liddle? I am middle class. Is it just because I sday so, or because I am educated. Or because I vote Tory? Or a mixture of all these things. Do I belong to the same class as George Osborne?
Stephen Slominski
December 5th, 2010 12:59pm Report this commentYou suggest that the student vote is small and would have little impact on Lib Dem electoral fortunes - if this is an accurate reflection of Clegg's thinking then it's a miscalculation. Tuition fees are not just a 'youth issue'. I accompanied a small group of students who marched on Chris Huhne's constituency office (http://j.mp/fKwaR9) while canvassing support en route and I noticed those who stopped to sign their petition were almost exclusively over 30 and were parents and grandparents who had previously enjoyed free higher education. Even one of the escorting policemen confided concerns for his children.
Still, not much Cleggy can do really; he has painted himself into a corner.
Chris Huhne has insisted Lib Dems are not ‘lashed to the mast' on policy.
Not much!
Publius
December 5th, 2010 12:59pm Report this commentJaz writes: "...the **most amount** of student voters"
-- ?
TGF UKIP
December 5th, 2010 1:18pm Report this commentOf course the root of the problem both for the LibDems and the Cameron Tories is that they are both only too happy to foster the left wing notion that education,and even a university education, is a "right" and not a service or good to be purchased. As both are essentially left wing parties, though, small wonder that they should happily accept this erroneous nostrum.
Incidentally, one excellent point which I saw made this weekend is that by pricing a university education higher, it will encourage putative students to consider their self-investment more carefully with an increased concentration on the output. Much less likely, therefore, that they will be blowing money on courses in popular music, football or that classic of all classics, Northampton University's Waste Management with Dance.
oldtimer
December 5th, 2010 1:27pm Report this comment" So all this hatred is having a hardening effect on him: steel is entering his spin."
Did you mean "spin" or should it be "spine"? Either would do.
Steve
December 5th, 2010 1:36pm Report this commentWonderful wordplay in this post Fraser, thank you.
Simon Stephenson
December 5th, 2010 1:45pm Report this commentTrevorsDen : 11.46am
"I do not feel sorry for Clegg but I will admire him if he makes the right choice and makes the right arguments."
What, even though if he does this, he will quite clearly have made the wrong choice and the wrong arguments less than 12 months ago, during which time the cases for and against tuition fees haven't changed?
How can you possibly admire someone who seeks to grab votes by advocating populist policy that he knows is balderdash, but which he's calculated he won't actually have to defend, since he'll never be in the position to have to make the decision?
He sounds to me more like someone not to be trusted further than you could kick him.
Simon Stephenson
December 5th, 2010 1:54pm Report this commentTGF UKIP : 1.18pm
I think the Northampton course is mis-spelt, and should read Waist Management with Dance.
Victor Southern
December 5th, 2010 1:56pm Report this commentIt doesn't help that Cable, already famous for espousing diametrically opposite views at different times, is acting like a niddering fool.
Robert Eve
December 5th, 2010 2:02pm Report this commentAs long as Labour are not in power ........!!
adrian harper
December 5th, 2010 2:11pm Report this commentAre you serious? Most media commentators and editors are right wing tories. Tories are only criticized because they're not right wing enough !
yank
December 5th, 2010 2:26pm Report this comment"Frank P has asked if the Tories have basically given up, and don't hate Lib Dems as they should."
.
No, Mr. Nelson, that isn't at all what Frank P asked, or even commented.
Your blogpost bemusedly speaks of spikes in spines and hindmost devils and firstborn slaughters, but then jerks its knee into a flagrant guilt-instilling word twist visited upon one of the evil kulak knuckledraggers... just as all your lefty soulmates.
I realize that this is a leftist publication, and you have your part to play in the path forward, but please, in respect to the past and what perhaps once was here, can you please be attentive to the strictures of language and argument, or at least pay the throwaway homage?
It all starts with the language and argument. We commenters can get away with the twists. You can't. Sorry, them's the rules.
There is a story to tell here, in the age old confluence of liberal and conservative views (although I believe that you all have neither a conservative or liberal party at hand, so no confluence could be forthcoming) but you seem blind to that story.
And personally, I like Clegg. Dave's a squish with appetite, and Milliband is just a lump, but Clegg appears somewhat clear eyed aware at least. And if he ever comes out and endorses and fights for free speech, and decries the sort of crude polemics you're engaging in here, I might even call him liberal.
Slim Jim
December 5th, 2010 2:29pm Report this commentIt's a shame he wasn't as passionate about his party's promise for a referendum on the EU. He and his pals in the political class will carry on taking us for fools because we haven't rioted hard enough on that issue!
Ron Todd
December 5th, 2010 2:30pm Report this commentLooking at the comentators that continualy pop up on the telly the Right Honerable Robert Preston son of a labout peer and Biographer of Brown.
Stephanie Flander serial shagger of labout high ups or Andrew Marr son in law of a labour peer. Then we have the Naughties Warks Dimbelbies and Snow. Few would consider then not right wing enough.
Naomi Muse
December 5th, 2010 3:34pm Report this commentThe ghastly situation that confronted honourable politicians at the last election meant that compromises had to be made by all. There is bound to be a large group of each of both the governing parties who would rather stick to the tracks assumed before making a coalition agreement.
Labour would prefer it stays that way so that it can hobble the likelihood of resolution of its own home-made disasters.
The coalition needs to make a difference very soon for the election will soon be 'last year' and the expectation for visible change and prospective benefit will rise.
TGF UKIP
December 5th, 2010 3:42pm Report this commentFraser's controller is of course delighted with all this furore over Clegg, the LibDems and tuition fees playing, as it does, to the notion that LibDem policies and beliefs have been subjugated to the Tories whereas precisely opposite is the case and it is more usually the LibDem tail wagging the Cameron Tory poodle.
The piece that cannot be featured in this Cameron house mag is of course "How 57 came to be greater than 307."
PS Thanks for that Simon Stephenson, that would certainly make more sense but a university course in such a subject says everything about 21st century higher "education." The report I had read, incidentally, had it spelt as "Waste" and the fact that it was the University of Northampton made it quite credible.
Fergus Pickering
December 5th, 2010 4:29pm Report this commentRon Todd, tell us all you know about Stephanie Flanders. Is serial shagging middle class? I would have thought not. It's either the titled or their servants who do that, isn't it?
Occasional Ostrich
December 5th, 2010 4:32pm Report this commentPublius
Jaz hasn't yet completed HIS studies.
Occasional Ostrich
December 5th, 2010 4:35pm Report this commentTGF UKIP
Northampton has a university?????
porkbelly
December 5th, 2010 4:44pm Report this commentNick and Dave have discovered a mutual contempt for the rank-and-file of their respective parties, for the misguided idiots who think a political party should be something more than a vehicle for the personal ambitions of its leaders. Upon this common bond I predict they will form NuTory, dedicated to steel spin and limp everything else.
Boudicca
December 5th, 2010 4:53pm Report this commentThe student vote may be small, but students grow up and become ex-students. However, the voting habits gained whilst in young adulthood generally stay ... so the LibDems WILL be punished by their change of heart over tuition fees. They may not get the full impact at the next General Election, although I think they will be seriously damaged, but the impact will continue for decades to come.
2trueblue
December 5th, 2010 5:55pm Report this comment'Almost feel sorry for...'. Not at all he was on the politics X Factor prog, and when the real figures came in things did not look as rosy as they thought. Then, they got to join in and run the country and the real thing is more difficult than posturing. The LibDmes have a great opportunity to help get the UK out of the mess left by Liebore and are finding that some of the stepping stones are slippy. Clegg is making a better fist of it that Cable.
Ron Todd
December 5th, 2010 6:31pm Report this commentSex is more to do with attitude than class. I don't know for certain what class she is but very few of labour's high ups or their propagandists embeded in the BBC are working class.
dg
December 5th, 2010 6:39pm Report this commentFormer SDP members representing the Conservative Party in government:
The Rt Hon. Dr. Greg Clark MP
Minister of State for Decentralisation
The Rt Hon. Chris Grayling MP
Minister of State for Employment
The Rt Hon. Andrew Lansley CBE MP
Secretary of State for Health
The Rt Hon. David Mundell MP
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland
The Rt Hon. Stephen O'Brien MP
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in the Department for International Development.
The Rt Hon. Rob Wilson MP
PPS to Jeremy Hunt MP (meaning he is on the government pay roll)
Former SDP members representing the Liberal Democrat party:
The Rt Hon. Dr Vince Cable MP
Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills
The Rt Hon. Chris Huhne MP
Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change
The Rt Hon. The Lord McNally PC
Minister of State for Justice (also Deputy Leader of the Lords)
Paul Burstow MP
Minister of State for Care Services
paulg
December 5th, 2010 6:49pm Report this commentLets be honest, six months ago we would have all kicked them to death, even if they were begging for chance, on Christmas Eve.
But if they are a stalwart help the deliver the changes, stabilise the economy, bring equity and justice, mindful of our laws, history and culture; there is no need for the conservative party to view them as out and out enemies to be destroyed, at all cost.
Thy have their own set of values and beliefs and they could become the viable and acceptable major party of the left.
They are not with out allies and they are not alone the Guardian is very supportive of them. The defunct statism , that is central to Labour ideology will be a thing of the past in five years time.
The prize is there to be won for the Lib- Dems, we’ll just have to wait and see if they have the steel to win it.
davidk
December 5th, 2010 6:56pm Report this commentHe's a Quisling.
John Bracewell
December 5th, 2010 7:05pm Report this commentIt would appear that normal Cabinet government has disappeared. Cable has put forward a bill, presumably it has been discussed in Cabinet. Once that discussion has taken place, all Cabinet ministers are duty bound to back the policy or resign. Other LibDem ministers, that are not in the Cabinet should also back the government they are part of or again resign. The LibDem backbenchers have agreed to the Coalition agreement that allows them to abstain or vote for the policy but not against it. If they vote against it, they should be disciplined by Clegg and Cameron. The position is about as crystal clear as anything can be, what LibDems said in the General Election campaign has nothing to do with what they agreed to in the Coalition agreement but should make them more wary in future not to agree or sign pledges they may not or cannot uphold.
Fergus Pickering
December 5th, 2010 7:23pm Report this commentHe's a Quisling because he's with the Tories. And Cameron is Hitler. Of course he is. What would he be if he were with your lot, davidk? I know! A bloody fool, that's what he would be.
Dimoto
December 5th, 2010 7:57pm Report this commentBoudicca: Of course voting intentions DON'T stay the same when students grow up, don't be daft.
And what makes you think the rioting mob of "protesters" represent the opinions of all students ?
Simon Stephenson
December 5th, 2010 8:03pm Report this comment2trueblue : 5.55pm
The problem is not what they are doing now, but what they did 7+ months ago. Is it really of any value to the country for a political party to pander to every one-dimensional "solution" pushed out by the red-top press in order to sell newspapers? Pander, in the apparent certainty that the party will never be called upon to deliver, because it'll never be in a position where it actually has to put decisions into practice?
Shouldn't national politics be about broadening popular understanding so that people begin to recognise that one-dimensionality is a ludicrous and destructive way to conduct affairs? How can it be correct instead for politicians to pat them on the back and pretend to bow to their superior judgement?
PeeJay
December 6th, 2010 2:42am Report this commentThe thing is that if the Lib Dems were in opposition they'd be throwing even bigger stones than Labour are at this policy. It serves them right to be faced by the realities in government once in a while, maybe next time they'll look at the numbers and do some maths before they ask for our votes.
2trueblue
December 6th, 2010 7:34am Report this commentSimon Stephenson. I think it is all about how they handle it now and how the coalition matures and moves forward.
We had 13yrs of Liebore who with the help of our media (especially the BBC) got away with posturing and the most corrupt parliament in our time, so lets hope that we can move forward.
The red top press is only part of it and less dangerous that the box in the room that drones on all day, 24 hrs a day. What could be more one dimensional than the Bliar/Brown Broadcasting Corp that we actually are forced to pay for? It would have been convenient for me if Liebore had elected Balls. Then I could have named it the Balls B...... C...!!
GrahameP
December 6th, 2010 11:42am Report this commentI'm not too sure what's going on with the left.
If someone saves for their old age and goes into a care home, they have to fund their own residency by selling their house if they have one. If someone has saved for their own pension they don't get the top up available to those who never bothered to put a penny aside. Benefits claimants don't receive benefits if they scrimped and saved before losing their their jobs, but get their benefits paid in full if they blew all their wages on lottery tickets, fags and lager.
These policy examples are beloved by the left who label them 'protecting the most vulnerable'. To everyone else who doesn't still have a daft hankering for the hammer and sickle emblem, they're called punitive disincentives which discourage responsibility.
So what is one to make of a policy which funds student fees through loans which only have to be repaid if they actually earn a reasonable bit of money, while protecting those who never get a decent paying job from ever paying anything at all? You'd have thought, given their track record, this would suit the ideals of the left down to the ground. Nicely redistributive. From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs. And it protects the 'vulnerable'.
I think for those on the political left, the idea that there's a chasm between their own policies, and what's proposed for students, isn't a chasm at all. It's political opportunism. The students (those who aren't actually school children egged on by their teachers, or anarchists who just like to cause trouble), might like to wear the mantle of socialists, but their protests are really about protecting their own pockets from future damage. They have to be because the solution proposed is socialism writ large. As for the socialist activists themselves, from armchair commentators to liberal studies lecturers, well any class-action is better than none, so the opportunity to whip up a bit of anti-establishment fervour can't be allowed to slip.
Actually, I am sure what's going on with many on the 'left'. They haven't changed at all. They still resent anyone with anything better than them, think they have some sort of entitlement to it, and think by taking it they'll improve the society from which they all too often leech. Why let a little hypocrisy get in the way when they can tell themselves (and everyone else) this is all about protecting the vulnerable.
Nick Clegg might have been inclined, along with his party, to make an election promise he'd only have expected to deliver on had the Liberal Democrats actually won the election and formed the Government, but he should hold his nerve. The student funding proposal is more than fair. Those in his party who think otherwise should reflect on this... they didn't win so haven't broken any promises. Everything else is noise, hypocrisy and self-interest.
fifer
December 6th, 2010 5:45pm Report this commentAh, the "Tory as principled outsider" nonsense rears its ugly head again. Many Tories are disliked not because they're small-statists but because they seem to believe they have the God-given right to dictate what's moral & immoral for everyone else whilst ending their own time on earth hanging by the neck with an orange in their mouth. Or, for that matter, having adulterous relationships with Edwina Currie.
Clegg and many of his colleagues are eminently likeable in comparison because they get the point that people are flawed - hence no-one minds the odd Cheeky Girl because they weren't on TV the night before whining about how terrible the world's become and generally sounding like a Daily Mail editorial.
All of which said, I think the coalition's working rather well so far - it's keeping the clinically insane elements of both parties at bay, which can't be a bad thing for anyone. Were I Clegg, I wouldn't worry too much about next time around - Labour look like a catastrophically lost cause at the moment, so what are students going to do? Let the Conservatives have an overall majority? No chance - he'll come out of the fees issue being able to say that he was the one who doubled the number of low-income students going to university.
Lynn (USA)
December 12th, 2010 7:14pm Report this commentIsn't this the 33 year old guy, who speaks numerous languages, doesn't believe in God (Wikkipedia) and his father is in charge of a huge bank. Go figure.
Back to top