Nick clegg

We’re used to AV platform-sharing by now — so it’s not the fact that Chris Huhne has written an article for the Observer alongside Labour’s John Denhan and the Green’s Caroline Lucas that shocks. It’s the words he then puts his name to. “Britain consistently votes as a centre-left country and yet the the Conservatives have dominated our politics for two-thirds of the time since 1900,” begins the article. “No wonder David Cameron says the current system ‘has served us well’,” it continues. Although subsequent paragraphs are more conciliatory — claiming, for instance, that Tory voters in the north also suffer thanks to our electoral calculus — this is nonetheless

There are, as James pointed out earlier, only five days to go until the AV referendum  — and that means both campaigns are priming their final appeals for our hearts, minds and votes. So just what will those appeals look like? Today has brought some indication. As Paul Waugh reveals over at PoliticsHome, the Yes campaign is planning to wheel Eddie Izzard — of course! — in front of the microphones. The comedian is going to take part in 16 events across the country this week. And as for the No campaign, ConservativeHome have pictures of their new poster campaign and promotional leaflet. It’s the latter that really tugs at

The Royal wedding and gossip about super injunctions is rather dominating conversation at Westminster today. But there is still some politics going on. Patrick Wintour in The Guardian has the beginnings of the recriminations that will follow a No vote in the referendum. Relations between the Lib Dems and the Yes campaign are pretty bad at the moment. Clegg’s camp is happy to tell journalists about what they see as the myriad failings of the Yes campaign. They complain that the Yes campaign has been too slow on the draw, let the No side define the debate and failed to get any message across. The Yes campaign’s response to this

Aside from the “Calm down, dear” drama, there was something else worth noting from today’s PMQs: David Cameron trying for a calmer debate on the deficit. He admitted that his government is not really being that much more aggressive than Gordon Brown would have been. They’re cutting £8 for every £7 that Brown and Darling proposed for 2011-12, he said. It’s a line that Nick Clegg road-tested in his speech to the IPPR last week, and it represents a new and welcome strategy. To date, the rhetorical differences have been stark. The Tories have said: we’re the big bold cutters, Labour are deficit deniers. Labour has replied: your cuts are

Something has undoubtedly changed in the coalition in the past fortnight. Even those at the centre, who have been most loyal to the concept of coalition, are now happy to complain about the other side and its behaviour. But I’m still sceptical of all the early election speculation which has been sparked by Jackie Ashley’s very clever Guardian column. The main reason why I don’t think it will happen is the Cameron brand. Ever since David Cameron became leader of the Conservative party, the top of the party has believed that the protection of the Cameron brand is essential to electoral success. Cameron has too much personally invested in showing

Politics has never really settled down since last year’s general election — but it still seems especially convulsive at the moment. Only a few weeks ago, Clegg was caught on camera joking about his and Cameron’s similarities. Only a few days ago, he was standing up, vigorously, for the coalition. Yet, now, both his rhetoric — and that of his party — has been dipped in acid and wielded against the Tories. And while there is some speculation about how much of the hostility is staged, and about which ministers actually mean it, the basic fact remains: the coalition is no longer a happy band, but increasingly a collection of

The Liberal Democrats are mad as hell at their coalition partners—and don’t seem to care who knows it. Their fury has been caused by what they see as the roughhouse tactics of the No campaign and the Tories’ complicity in them. Chris Huhne’s letter to George Osborne has been written to make clear just how betrayed the Liberal Democrats’ feel by the actions of their coalition partners. Huhne writes, “I explicitly warned you that the manner of the AV campaign would be as important as the result, in terms of the effect on the coalition.” Then, he moves onto a particular Lib Dem bugbear—the claim that AV would cost £250

Judging from the front page of tomorrow’s Independent on Sunday, the coalition’s relationship troubles are escalating. The paper’s front page blares, “Clegg rages against Cameron ‘lies’”. Even accounting for the license headline writers takes, this shows just how fraught things are inside the coalition at the moment. The Liberal Democrats feel that the Tories have let the No campaign go too far in its’ attack on Clegg and so feel they are no longer bound to be respectful about their coalition partners. Vince Cable’s message in today’s Guardian sums up the sense of many Lib Dems that they’d rather be in coalition with Labour than the Tories. There is a

As you’ve no doubt deduced from the cover image on the left-hand side of this page, the latest Spectator is out today — and it’s a soaraway double issue for Easter. By way of peddling it to CoffeeHousers (buy it here, etc.), I thought I’d mention one article among many. It’s a celebratory list of some of the country’s “most inspiring and influential over-80s,” and it includes tributes to them from some rather notable under-80-year-olds. So we have Matt Ridley on David Attenborough, Alex Salmond on Sean Connery, Ian Rankin on P.D James, and plenty more besides. Anyway, there are two entries that CoffeeHousers might care to see in particular,

This morning on BBC Breakfast Nick Clegg made his key argument for AV: it will make politicians work harder for the vote, he said. The point is that politicians will have to court the votes not only of their natural supporters, but reach out to people who would not traditionally back them. This, however, is an argument for a poorer kind of politics. It will force politicians not to take principled positions but try to triangulate, Blair-style, in order to get as many different kind of factions to vote for them. What should I give the Lib Dem voters? How can I get the BNP voter’s second, or even third,

As the chances of AV passing diminish, the Lib Dems are complaining with increasing volume about just how directly Nick Clegg is being targeted. Up to now, they have kept their concerns about what, they are calling, the swift boating of Nick Clegg relatively private. Last night, Chris Huhne said that he was “shocked that coalition partners can stoop to a level of campaign that we have not seen in this country before”. This morning, Paddy Ashdown has follow up on his phone call to Nick Robinson with a demand that David Cameron disassociate himself from the No campaign’s attacks on Clegg. This isn’t going to happen. Indeed, I suspect

This morning’s battle of the political odd couples shows the dangerous direction in which the AV referendum is going for the coalition. The Yes campaign are becoming ever closer to making explicit the argument that a yes vote is the best way to keep the Tories out. For their part, the No side are continuing to hammer the compromises of coalition and the unfairness of the party in third place determining the result. In other words, no more Lib Dems in government. These campaign strategies mean that the result of the referendum will be seen as a decisive rejection of one side or other of the coalition. This is precisely

The row sparked by Vince Cable’s attack on David Cameron’s speech on immigration is still rumbling on. The Sunday Times reports that Cable’s opposition to the coalition’s immigration policies has even extended to advising a college to take out an injunction against the government’s policies limiting non-EU student numbers. Cable’s actions are undoubtedly straining the coalition; Nick Clegg was visibly uncomfortable on the politics show as he attempted to square Cable’s actions with Cabinet collective responsibility. So, why is Cable doing this? I don’t think the reasons are particularly Machiavellian. Months ago, one Lib Dem Cabinet minister said to me that ‘Vince comes from the place and generation where any criticism of