The Lib Dems celebrate their achievements

Axstane

Just to point out that the "fringe interest" of Conservative Eurosceptic MPs is double the size of the number of LibDem MPs.

By any method of measure it is the LibDems who qualify for that category.

whatawaste

Liberal Democrat fingerprints” are all over flagship coalition policies....

So the electorate will know who to blame for the coalition meeses at the next general election then.

Noa.

We can at least take comfort that the invidious combination of delusion and treachery they have practiced in government will so repel a disillusioned electorate as to ensure their eternal consignment to the outer darkness.

2trueblue

the expression 'Be careful what you wish for ' comes to mind.

Rhoda Klapp

Is there any reason why the tories should continue any deal into a second phase? What exactly do the LDs bring to the table other than being a drag anchor and a general PITA? And after the putative election, depending on the numbers, the LDs would jump ship in a new malden minute and join up with the Labour party they are far more comfortable with.

They need to address the contradictions. Never mind policy, or tactics, they need to work out just what the bloody hell they are for. And when they can do that, come back and try to sell that to a disillusioned electorate.

Austin Barry

Deadmen talking.

Rhoda Klapp

What I took two paragraphs over, Austin Barry put in two words. Kudos.

Nicholas

"Mr Clegg said that cutting rates for the wealthy while millions were struggling to make ends meet could "destroy" public support for the entire tax system. Mr Clegg made clear that as far as the Lib Dems were concerned, the priority had to be reducing the burden of taxation on lower and middle income earners.

"We are not there to rush to the aid of the top 1% of very, very rich people who are not in straitened circumstances," he said.
"It would be utterly incomprehensible for millions of people who work hard, do their best for their families, and play by the rules, if suddenly the priority is to give 300,000 people at the very, very top a tax break. It is not going to happen - certainly not until there is significant progress on giving tax breaks to those on lower and middle incomes.""

So says the fatuous idiot who supports and encourages fathead "Let Them Eat Carbon" Huhne, whose fantasy green policies will add immeasurably to the financial burden of lower income families for no visible benefit to this country.

Nothing like a bit of double standards. Twats.

Occasional Ostrich

Quiet night in Birmingham, then?

Verity

Has there ever been two less savvy, more divorced-from-their-countrymen politicians than this pair of greedy, scheming, privileged buffoons?

A blancmange-faced prime minister with a hen's arse mouth who couldn't get a majority after 11 horrendous years of Bliar and Brown, and his little equally rich and privileged sidekick.

Where is our Marine le Pen?

Verity

David, is the headline that construct they call "irony"? If so, very good!

RCE

Nicholas and Verity - bravo to you both.

startledcod

@Austin Barry, spot one, I agree with Rhoda Klapp, Nicholas well done. Verity what a pointless chippy post, privilege doesn't matter a jot, it is competence that matters above all. What would you prefer, a 'man of the people', someone you can 'relate' to who has come up the hard way but is unfortunately (especially economically) incompetent (think Trade Union leaders) or would you like someone who was privileged by birth, unquestionably a 'toff' and a snob but has what it takes to do the job whatever the challenge (think Winston Churchill)? What do you want,to go to Hell in a handcart with Vicky Pollard at the helm.

The LibDems chippy posturing about the 50p tax rate is managing to slew the discussion from what it should be: what would the effect on tax revenues of lowering the top rate of tax to 45%, 40% or 38% (my belief of the optimum).

Mansion Tax - dream on. Tell my post stroke 86 year old father and 84 year old mother who happen to live in a high value house because THEY BOUGHT IT A VERY LONG TIME AGO AND ITS VALUE HAS GONE UP BECAUSE OF INFLATION why they should be paying a Mansion Tax. The tax would probably overtake their income.

It is particularly that a general anger about a few stupid bankers, and it is a few, has turned into a general 'beat up the rich' meme of political rhetoric. We should be loving and admiring the rich, we need and should want as many of them as possible. Vince , Nick and Chris are doing their level best to scare them away.

I will post (again) a great parable written by one of Daniel Hannan's constituents - its on the money!

startledcod

Suppose that every day, ten men went to the pub, and drank exactly £100 worth of ale among them. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, the breakdown would be roughly as follows:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay £1. The sixth would pay £3. The seventh would pay £7. The eighth would pay £12. The ninth would pay £18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59. So, that’s what they decided to do.
The ten men drank contentedly together in the saloon bar until the landlord, meaning to be helpful, presented them with a dilemma. “Gentlemen,” he said, “you’re my best customers. To show you how much I appreciate your trade, I’d like to give you a discount. From now on, I’ll knock £20 of the total bill for your drinks”. Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.
The group wanted to carry on splitting their bill in the way that we pay our taxes. So, obviously, the first four men, those least well off, would continue to enjoy free beer. What, though, of the other six? How could they divide the £20 discount in such a way that everyone got his fair share of the windfall? They realised that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, following the principle of the tax system they had been using. This is how the bill now looked.
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100 per cent saving). The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33 per cent saving). The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28 per cent saving). The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25 per cent saving). The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22 per cent saving). The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16 per cent saving). Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to enjoy free booze. But, as they left the pub, the men began to compare their savings.
“I only got a pound out of the £20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He jabbed an accusing finger at the tenth man,”Why should he get £10?” “Too right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a pound too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!” “That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get £10 back, when I got two measly quid? The system is rigged in favour of the toffs!” “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. It’s always the worst off who get neglected by the politicians!”
The nine men dragged the tenth into the car park and gave him a thorough kicking.
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beer without him. But when the bill came, they found that their money didn’t even cover half of it.

Capn Flint

Clegg's achievement seems to be a jolly good and well-ingrained suntan, from a protracted summer holiday abroad.
We're all in this together, not.