Liberal democrats

Monday

David Blackburn

Boles beats his old drum

To accompany Fraser’s suggestion that Cameron and Clegg are planning a merger, it is notable that the ubiquitous Nick Boles has renewed his calls for a formal pact. Previously, Boles averred that Liberal Democrat ministers should be protected in three-way or Conservative-Liberal marginals. This time round, his argument is more philosophical. He told Radio 4’s PM: ‘The Coalition has enabled the Conservative party to be more radical than it would have been able to had it formed a government on its own with a small majority… Jacob Rees Mogg who’s a fellow MP who’s certainly not a sort of liberal Tory like I am in the sort of modernizing sense. In five

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Miliband on the trail

If you talk to Tory MPs privately and ask them which of the coalition’s budgetary decisions they are most uncomfortable with, they’ll generally indentify the VAT rise and the police cuts (the reductions in the defence and prisons budget are also often mentioned). So it is clever politics for Ed MIliband to be emphasising the VAT rise and the police cuts so heavily in Oldham East and Saddleworth. It enables him to oppose key bits of the deficit reduction programme without sounding like an out of touch left-winger. If Labour do hold the seat, it will be a boost to Ed Miliband. It will add to the sense that he

David Blackburn

Miliband swings into action by warning of inflation

The seasonal interlude has ended and Ed Miliband is sallying north to Oldham East. He will resuscitate old favourites from 2010: progressive cuts, fairness and a government bent of an ideological mission: but he will illustrate his point with reference to tomorrow’s VAT rise. Miliband will say: ‘Today we start to see the Tory-led agenda move from Downing Street to your street. At midnight VAT goes up, hitting people’s living standards, small businesses and jobs. The VAT rise is the most visible example of what we mean when we say the government is going too far and too fast, because it’s clear that it will slow growth and hit jobs.’

Sunday

Fraser Nelson

Is it a merger?

When a Conservative leader wishes the LibDems well in a three-way marginal by-election, then what is going on? Andrew Gilligan’s piece today shows that the Conservative campaign there is muted, and my colleague Melissa Kite reported earlier that Cameron personally called off  the hunt supporters, Vote OK, who were planning to boost the Tory campaign. Little wonder that Conservative MPs are beginning to smell a rat. They are being told this is the cohabitation of rival parties; in the Daily Telegraph tomorrow, I ask if this is actually a merger.   From the start of this coalition, I’ve been struck by the differences between the coalition in Westminster, and that

David Blackburn

Control Orders: a pyrrhic victory for the Lib Dems?

Coalition is a tricky business, full of compromise and connivance. Emblazoned across the front page of the Sunday Times (£) is the news that Control Orders are to be scrapped. A victory for Nick Clegg, we are told, won to nurture wounded Liberal Democrats and preserve the coalition. The Liberal Democrat 2010 manifesto maintained that Control Orders would be abolished and many senior Liberal Democrats have been volubly opposed to Lord Carlisle’s report into Control Orders, which was understood to propose their retention. Certainly, Nick Clegg needs an outright victory on policy. The Oldham East by-election draws near, whilst the tuition fees debacle remains clear in the memory, harsh austerity

Thursday

James Forsyth

An 80 percent elected Lords would not be a Lib Dem triumph

The Lib Dem manifesto committed the party to a fully elected House of Lords. The Tory manifesto talked about a ‘mainly-elected’ second chamber and in 2007 David Cameron voted for ‘the other place’ to be 80 percent elected (interestingly, George Osborne voted for a fully elected Lords). The coalition agreement committed the government to a ‘wholly or mainly elected upper chamber’. So it is hard to see how a Lords that retained a twenty percent appointed element could be portrayed as a major Lib Dem triumph as, according to today’s Guardian, the coalition wants. There has been talk in Westminster that Clegg’s consolation prize if the AV referendum is defeated

Dan Hodges

The momentum shifts

Yesterday’s announcement that 114 Labour MPs, including 5 shadow cabinet ministers, will be voting ‘No’ in next year’s Alternative Vote referendum isn’t exactly a ‘game changer’. But it has certainly shifted the terms of debate within the Labour party. Over the past few weeks a perception had been developing that adoption of the AV system, whilst not generating unparalleled excitement and passion within Labour ranks, was at least becoming the line to take. That perception has now changed. Labour’s internal stance on the issue is important. Labour supporters effectively represent the referendum’s ‘floating voters’. Successive polls have indicated a clear majority of Conservative voters opposing AV, with an even greater

Monday

James Forsyth

Oldham East will determine whether Clegg or Miliband is the leader under pressure

A few weeks ago Ed Miliband was the leader under pressure. There was, absurdly, talk of leadership challenges if things did not improve. But now all the pressure is on Nick Clegg, he’s the one facing stories about whether he can cope. Whether the unforgiving media spotlight stays on Clegg or not will be determined by the re-run of the election in Oldham East and Saddleworth. The result of this contest will frame the first quarter of the political year. If the Lib Dems take the seat from Labour, then Miliband will again be the leader under pressure. Clegg will have won the time and the space that he needs.

Friday

Peter Hoskin

The final sting

It’s Christmas Eve, and the Daily Telegraph have wrapped up their sting operation in time for tomorrow. The final victims are the Foreign Office minister Jeremy Browne and the children’s minister Sarah Teather. As it happens, Teather gets off without blemishing her copybook: her greatest indiscretion is to claim that Michael Gove is “deeply relieved” to be in coalition, as it means more funding for schools. Browne, though, is a touch more forthright: he says that Tory immigration policy is “harsh” and “uncharitable,” but that Lib Dem involvement will provoke a “more enlightened” outcome. He adds that the Tories’ EU grouping contains parties that “are quite nutty and that’s an

Thursday

James Forsyth

Nick Clegg’s balancing act

Today’s Lib Dem revelations are of the embarrassing, but not explosive, variety. David Heath, the deputy leader of the House, and Norman Baker, the transport minister, hypocritically say they are against tuition fees, despite having voted to let universities charge fees of up to £9,000. Baker also, crassly, compares himself to Helen Suzman, the anti-apartheid campaigner, working from within to change the system. But, beyond that, the remarks are what you’d expect a Lib Dem MP to say to a party supporter complaining about various Tory members of the government. I suspect Nick Clegg will be slightly more worried about Adrian Sanders, the MP for Torbay, issuing a broadside against

Wednesday

Alex Massie

The Liberal Democrats and the Fallacy of Sunk Costs

John McTernan makes the case: Paradoxically, it is the increaing unpopularity of the Liberal Democrats that will bind them closer to the Tories. It’s illogical, I know. Being in the Coalition has halved their support, so really they should leave as soon as possible. But they won’t, they’ll cling on for dear life. Economists know this as the “sunk cost fallacy” – ordinary people use the phrase “good money after bad”. Essentially, most of us have an aversion to loss, so we tell ourselves any stories we can think of rather than do the logical thing and cut our losses. For sure, some Lib Dems think that there will be an upside.

Peter Hoskin

Labour step onto the front foot

Talk about a Christmas miracle: Ed Miliband has set about the task of Opposition with ruthless efficiency today. As both Guido and Nicholas Watt have noted, the Labour leader is all across the broadcast news this afternoon, after upping the heat on Vince Cable and the coalition. His party’s attack comes in the form of a letter sent by the shadow business secretary, John Denham, to the Cabinet Secretary, Gus O’Donnell. It asks, mischieveously, whether Vince Cable has broken the ministerial code by promising to wage war against Rupert Murdoch, and whether Jeremy Hunt is impartial enough to step into the breach. And while nothing is likely to come of

Alex Massie Alex Massie

A Real Coalition, Not a Sham One

Mind you, Ed Miliband doesn’t understand coalition either. Fair enough. It’s not what he’s paid to understand. Still, according to Miliband (whom I keep forgetting is actually leader of the Labour party): Secretly recorded comments by Liberal Democrat ministers show the coalition government is “a sham,” Labour leader Ed Miliband has said. He described Vince Cable as “a useful prop for David Cameron as he seeks to pretend this is something other than a Conservative government”. “These are decisions of a Conservative-led government propped up by Liberal Democrat passengers. Passengers not in the front seat, not even in the back seat of the car, passengers who have got themselves locked

Peter Hoskin

The political year in ten videos

With Westminster winding down for Christmas, and Coffee House with it, it’s probably time to start looking back on the year in politics. In which case, here’s an opener: a chronological selection of ten videos that capture the some of the glories, iniquities and embarrassments of 2010. If CoffeeHousers have any alternative suggestions, then just shout out in the comments section, and we can add them to the bottom of this post. Here goes: 1.Terror on Downing St: The Movie A Taiwanese news report about the bullying allegations made against Brown in Andrew Rawnsley’s book. The computer animations are astonishing, to say the least: 2. Gordon Brown calls the election

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Cable’s Survival is a Sign of Cameron’s Strength

James understands the dynamics of coalition government rather better than Simon Heffer. This may not surprise you. Mr Heffer complains that by letting Vince Cable survive – albeit in gelded form – while dumping the likes of Lord Young for other more trivial indiscretions, the Prime Minister is guilty of setting double standards. One would be appalled if this were not the case. And the double standard – for such there certainly is since Lib Dems may, indeed must, be opposed to at least some parts of coalition policy – reminds us that this is a Tory government leavened by the Liberal Democrats, not a Liberal Democrat government with added

Daniel Korski

Grim parallels with Germany for Nick Clegg?

Germany is one of the few countries that Nick Clegg has been able to look to for tips on how to be a successful Liberal party in coalition with a larger Conservative party. In 2006, Guido Westerwelle even took a delegation of Free Democrats to a Lib Dem frontbench meeting. Coffee House once predicted that, if the AV referendum was won, Clegg could one day become Britain’s Hans-Dietrich Genscher, a permanent powerbroker. The parties are of course different in many ways. The Free Democrats are decidedly more pro-market and pro-business than the Liberal Democrats. They also have a lot more experience of government. Before the last election, the Free Democrats

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Minor indiscretions

The Telegraph’s latest Lib Dem revelations are embarrassing for the ministers concerned, but won’t cause the coalition much trouble. Ed Davey is caught being critical of the announcement to take child benefit away from higher-rate taxpayers and expressing concerns about the changes to housing benefit. Michael Moore, the Scottish Secretary, is captured expressing regret about the Lib Dem u-turn on tuition fees and saying he couldn’t work with Tories like Liam Fox “for very long.” Steve Webb, the highly numerate pensions minister, was trapped into revealing that he had written to the Chancellor about the child benefit changes because “the details aren’t right.” There are, the Telegraph tells us, more

Tuesday

James Forsyth

Broken Cable

To understand why Vince Cable survived today one has to understand the dynamics of the coalition. The Liberal Democrat rank and file have had to swallow a lot recently, but the idea that one of their Cabinet ministers was going to be moved for being rude about Rupert Murdoch would have been too much to bear. The backlash to shunting Cable sideways would have destabilised the coalition, so he stayed in place. But Cable tonight is a much diminished figure. He has been shown to be eager to be indiscrete, to be overly keen to air the coalition’s dirty laundry in public. His comments about being at ‘war’ with Rupert

Peter Hoskin

The poison has not yet been sucked from the Cable story

There we have it. After all the frenzy in Westminster this afternoon, Vince Cable is simply staying put as Business Secretary. But he does not stand unchastised. All his responsibilities for media competition – and that includes telecoms and digital, as well as television and print – will be transferred over to Jeremy Hunt. Which means that Cable’s war against Rupert Murdoch has ended before Christmas. At least he still has his nuclear option, I suppose. Many will say that Cable got off lightly – and they’d be right. Putting aside the Business Secretary’s suitability to arbitrate over the Murdoch case, his judgement has been stripped and revealed as faulty

Peter Hoskin

Cable to remain as Business Secretary, but with diminished responsibilities

1750: Here’s the Downing Street statement: “Following comments made by Vince Cable to the Daily Telegraph, the prime minister has decided that he will play no further part in the decision over News Corporation’s proposed takeover of BSkyB. In addition, all responsibility for competition and policy issues relating to media, broadcasting, digital and telecoms sectors will be transferred immediately to the secretary of state for culture, media and sport. This includes full responsibility for OFCOM’s activities in these areas. The prime minister is clear that Mr Cable’s comments were totally unacceptable and inappropriate.”