Clegg responds - Part II

Aidan

Note that he doesn't actually answer any of these questions

Matthew Turnbull

Nick,

You did not answer my question!

We all know that your hysterical bleating about an in/out referendum was designed to cover up your shameful reneging on your manifesto commitment on a referendum. I remember you said in the Commons that voting on Lisbon was like voting on whether to stay in the EU yet now you admit that the EU would carry on without Lisbon! I take it that now you have got the Treaty passed this policy has been ditched, you will not try it in the Lords, in fact I bet you have junked your abstention policy and will vote against every referendum in the Lords as well.

This shameful cynical underhand manoeuvring discredits our democracy – your party is neither liberal or democratic it is a disgrace.

Regards

Matt.

Alex R

Why did he bother even answering. Does he not understand quite how offensive these answers are?

He is asked a direct question about whether his refusal to vote for a referendum has further devalued politics and answers with whaffle.

He looks like he's auditioning as an extra in Yes Minister.

Slim Jim

I agree with all the posters that the questions weren't particularly well answered, especially Matthew's. I wonder if the Liberals will include an in/out referendum in their next manifesto? If so, will they renege on that too? Oh, if we could only call their bluff!

Richard Jenkins

So asking Clegg questions was a really worthwhile exercise. Not. And people are surprised that he didn't answer the questions. At least we have confirmation that Nick Clegg's relationship with intellectual integrity is the same as his relationship with chastity.

Blue Porcupine

Sigh.

I'm happy to be critical of Clegg's answers as I would be of any politician's, but you people are just ludicrously unreasonable. Froth, froth, froth. You never intended to listen to a word he said, did you?

Some actual analysis with no frothing might run as follows:

Q1 - the weakest answer. Yes, he means it, and yes, he thinks he's answering, but while he genuinely does sympathise with the disenchantment with politicians, that doesn't come across here at all. It's too platitudinous. I could have done with more referencing of the specific policies which will help effect this transfer of power - e.g. devolution of tax to local level.

Q2 - "I'm not interested in signing away the Liberal Democrats... to any other political party"

Straight answer. Not interested. I'm sorry if that upsets some of you who think the Lib Dems only exist to make the two-party narrative more interesting (and by god, it needs it) but we're not, so tough buns.

Q3 - Matthew, I thought your question was very fair. It's a pity your assessment of the answer wasn't. You said, Is the in-out referendum just a gimmick? Nick said, No, it isn't, I've been arguing for it for years, and these are the reasons why, and I'll continue to argue for it. You said, I don't believe you, therefore you must be lying, so ner! Next.

Q4 - "I think it's absolutely vital to keep politics and faith separate". Straight answer. I could have done with an explicit reference to antidisestablishmentarianism, but in essence, how could this BE any clearer?? He doesn't think religion or lack of it should have any bearing on politics.

Q5 - no-one ever wants to be Darth, do they?

Honestly, grow up, the lot of you.

Matthew Turnbull

Blue Porcupine,

You say I don't believe Nick Clegg. Well I don't but, look at what he said:

Q3 - “I argued for an In-Out Referendum – and have done so for years - because I’m convinced it’s the right thing for Britain. We’ve got to put the big question to the people of this country about our future in Europe,”

Very shifty words, firstly it is in past tense and then he mentions “the big question” rather than a referendum. But actions speak louder than words, I bet you he will not table this referendum in the Lords and that we will not hear about it again. The “in/out” was only to get out of Lisbon, but I have a big hat here waiting to be eaten if I am wrong.

P.S Will the Liberal lords abstain like the Commons? Shirley not.

Matt.

Max Kaye

'Nick Clegg, Lib-dem politician' says it all really. His evasive answers just confirm what we already knew.

Blue Porcupine

@Matt

"We've got to put the big question to the people..."

Hmm. I'm afraid I can't see this as anything other than a determination to, well, ask the big question. The only thing he could have said more definitely was "Yes, we will put it in our manifesto" - but no political party would reveal their hand on any aspect of their manifesto up to two years before any election is due - it would be folly.

The "big question" thing I have more sympathy with, because it's a groupthink problem. The "big question" has been Lib Dem speak for a full in-out referendum in press releases, internal docs, blogging etc for so long that it probably never occurred to Clegg that it could be misinterpreted. I am 100% confident on this one that the in-or-out referendum is what he meant, but it's up to you.

Bear in mind also that we start from two different positions - I have read the text of the treaty, similar texts, the testimony of various for-and-against opinions, and I am satisfied that the Lib Dem leadership is taking a very reasonable position in saying that the Lisbon treaty does not, in itself, amount to the constitution. I'm sure you have seventeen thousand reasons why it does, but the fact is from a legal perspective it's a perfectly reasonable position.

Whether one starts from this position or not fundamentally affects one's view of the Lib Dem position, which is doubtless why Clegg spent a lot of his answer explaining his position.

On the Lords, the political calculation in terms of numbers of votes will be totally different, and I've got no idea what the best way of voting will be, but the basic view of the party on Lisbon, as outlined by Lord McNally during the second reading this week, remains the same.

"His evasive answers just confirm what we already knew."

Max rather proving my initial point there...

BP

Nick Kaplan

Blue Porcupine; I am utterly stunned that you could be so deluded as to believe Mr. Clegg answered my question. I did not ask whether or not he wanted to form a collation, which is the question he seems to have made up and then answered with a resounding, if unsurprising no. I asked him whether, given the likelihood of a hung parliament, he would prefer to join a Conservative government than a Labour one, a question he failed to answer if you bother to read his response. Of course Clegg would ‘prefer’ not to go into coalition with either party, just like the Conservatives would ‘prefer’ not to be in opposition, and Labour would ‘prefer’ that they had a double digit poll lead, but the fact is that if Clegg wants to be in government, barring some miracle whereby the majority of the electorate somehow come to vote Lib Dem at the next election, he will have to do so as part of a coalition. So without indulging in political fantasy (i.e. by claiming he thinks he can win outright), which is of course a favorite Lib Dem tactic, it seems perfectly reasonable for Clegg to say that, at the moment he would be more inclined to join a government of either Labour or Conservative, thereby answering rather than avoiding my question. Clegg’s refusal to answer this question is particularly pathetic given that his party is so intent on introducing PR as our electoral system, with the result that the outcome of every election would be a hung-parliament with the Lib Dems holding the balance of power and therefore needing to decide who they’d share it with. If you think Mr.Clegg’s answer of “not-interested” is in fact an answer, rather than a lie to cover-up the fact that he hasn’t answered the question at all, then 2 more questions follow; (1) If at the next election there is a hung parliament will you carry on refusing to join a coalition because you believe doing so would involve “signing away Liberal Democrats – and the six million people who voted for us at the last election”, or would you put power over principle and join a coalition? (2) If you answer to (1) is to maintain that, on principle, you would not join a coalition because doing so let’s down voters, how can you possibly maintain support for PR which would result in an endless cycle of coalition government? I fail to see how Clegg could resolve this inconsistency, but I suppose I should hardly be surprised to hear a Lib Dem spouting inconsistent nonsense. And there I was with high hopes for Clegg due to his Orange Book credentials… how foolish of me.

Cousin Octavia

@ Nick:

The crucial bit of Nick's answer is this: "we will use the power and influence granted us by the voters at the next election to deliver on those objectives, in whatever way necessary."

This is a pretty clear indication that he would go into coalition in the event of a hung parliament.

The point is, it's not just about being in coalition and therefore in government, it's about getting the maximum Lib Dem policy put into action - that's what it's all about for any political party.

In the event that the Lib Dems hold the balance of power in a hung parliament, the way to do that is to negotiate robustly with both other parties. It is essential to this process that both parties believe he could work with the other party (as he probably could); if he expresses any kind of preference before hand, he's blown the negotiations before he starts.

Of course, the other point is that as soon as he mentions a preference for party X, party Y will go into the next election shrieking "vote Lib Dem, get X". So it would be a really stupid thing to do from that point of view, too. That's what he means by "signing away Liberal Democrats – and the six million people who voted for us at the last election."

I can't see a single way it helps Clegg get Lib Dem policy made government policy (the ultimate goal for any party leader) to answer questions like the one you asked in anything other than the way he answered it.

And you know that as well as I do.

Fergus Pickering

Nick Clegg has tremendous respect for people with faith but he thinks that what they believe is nonsense. So what exactly does he respect them for? For being nice? But plenty of people with faith are demonstrably not nice (like those eight chaps on our front pages this week). Or does he mean he respects some people with faith but does not respect others? But of course he doesn't really mean anything at all. If you are a Liberal Democrat you are just nice and you like other nice people, in other words you have no political beliefs at all. Cleggy is just the man you need, though perhaps he doesn't respect women quite enough. On the other hand, perhaps he is being extra nice by sleeping with so many of them.

Nick Kaplan

Cousin Octavia; The point you make is true, Clegg hasn’t answered my question because it doesn’t suit him politically to do so, if he had been honest and admitted this that would have been fine. The fact is, like over his charade about wanting an in out referendum on the EU, Clegg is quite clearly pretending that his answer is one that is about principle rather than opportunism. But it has nothing to do with principle and this is what I particularly hate about the Lib Dems; they act as if they are the morally superior party when they are quite clearly as opportunist as either of the other two. For all his talk about changing Politics Clegg knows as well as anyone that nothing will change because he’s the same as the rest, it’s just easy to pretend you’re different when you don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting into power.

Matthew Turnbull

Blue Porcupine - "On the Lords, the political calculation in terms of numbers of votes will be totally different, and I've got no idea what the best way of voting will be,"

Stunning and so Lib Dem, no consistency or honesty at all just political calculation! Abstain in the Commons, yet wish to see the referendum fail, and then ? vote against a referendum in the Lords! Say you want an in/out referendum in the Commons but then ? fail to push for one in the Lords. I am sorry I stay by my opinion that Clegg is a slippery calculating politian who made up this in/out policy to get him out of a manifesto commitment. I fear for any coalitian partner how could they trust Clegg!!

I bet you £50 the Liberals do not table an in/out referendum in the Lords and £1000 they do not abstain on a referendum as they did in the Commons!

U N Own

Nick, this is what you said about your policies: "We alone have the liberal policies needed to make Britain a better place to live: for example, crime policies aimed at reducing the rate of reoffending; health policies that put peoples’ individual needs at the heart of their treatment; and green policies that protect the environment by taxing the polluter, while rewarding hard work."

These are all Conservative policies, yet you are trying to push the LibDems as far left as possible, without losing your central position.

Isn't it true you are just a failed version of David Cameron and your party is just a failed verison of New Labour?

The last Liberal PM left office in 1922, I think it'll be closer to 3022 before the LibDems get anywhere near Downing Street!

Blue Porcupine

"Stunning and so Lib Dem, no consistency or honesty at all just political calculation!"

Look, I genuinely don't have any idea what they're planning to do in the Lords! Am I supposed to say I do? Why does my ignorance of inner circle party strategy suddenly stand for the overall failure of the party to meet your standards? Oh, hang on, it's because you're unflinchingly prejudiced, isn't it. Grow up. The Tories vote tactically, reverse positions, nick policies (mostly ours) and within the last week they've suddenly started shouting about the 10p band after a year of not giving a damn. There's a massive difference between tactical voting to get the best outcome possible and the opportunism you're talking about.

A "political calculation" on the Lib Dems' part, if you like, would have been to not walk out of the Commons in the first place, and I for one am rather pleased they did, because it demonstrated just the sort of passion and conviction that you affect not to find.

"I am sorry I stay by my opinion..."

Then I can only stay by mine; why in hades did you bother asking the question if you were going to clap your hands over your ears and not listen to the answer with an open mind?

"These are all Conservative policies"

U N Own - they're policies the Lib Dems have IN COMMON WITH the Conservatives. Nobody owns them. People of various political stripes simply agree with them.

London Calling

What did you expect, Cleggs a Politician and politician's never answer direct questions. I never had 'Faith' in the Lib Dems anyway, someone needs to remind him that 'Faith' is not just for religions, its what gives us hope that someone with half a Brain will lead this country out of the pit of despair it now finds itself and restore the British peoples faith in Politics.

U N Own

Blue Porcupine, as is usual with your comments here, you've missed the point. Clegg stresses 'we alone have' these policies. The Conservatives have them too, that was my point. If Tories and Lib Dems have key policies IN COMMON WITH each other, perhaps they should merge...

The fact is, the Conservatives had the policies first, Nick Clegg realised they were going to win David Cameron an election and became Little Sir Echo and said "me too".