Nick clegg

On Monday, I wrote that the question of whether the Budget is fair or not will “pursue the coalition more doggedly than any other”. Yesterday, we saw just how dogged that pursuit will be. But there’s no need for the coalition to panic as Mark Hoban did on the Today Programme yesterday. Instead, with policies from welfare reform to low taxes for low-income earners, they have built a firm redoubt from which to stage a counterattack. They can put the chase to their opponents. It is encouraging to see Nick Clegg do just that with an effective article in the FT today. He was bluntly dismissive of the IFS report

Nick Clegg is eviscerated by this morning’s press. The Independent, The FT and The Guardian gleefully report that the influential IFS has decreed the Budget (supposedly a model of fairness according to Clegg) to be regressive, that there is discontent fomenting on the Lib Dem benches and that the latest polls place Lib Dem support at 12 percent. None of this is news. The IFS is reiterating what it argued on Budget day: Osborne’s measures will hit the poorest in 2014-15. That is still some way off and action can be taken to lessen their impact. Besides, the coalition should have delivered its promise to raise the income tax threshold

The birth of the Cameron’s baby daughter is, obviously, wonderful news for the Cameron family. All the political chatter around it is, frankly, irrelevant compared to the happiness that they must be feeling.   But I do hope that David Cameron does take paternity leave. The Tories have talked a lot about making Britain the ‘most family friendly country in Europe’ and the PM taking paternity leave would be a good ‘nudge’ to employers and prospective fathers alike. One other timing issue worth noting is whether Cameron now goes to the UN summit in New York on the millennium development goals. The summit overlaps with Lib Dem conference but Clegg

A week ago, I wrote that Nick Clegg had an important couple of weeks ahead of him. Now, the next couple of months are looking even more significant for the Lib Dem leader. An article in today’s Independent captures the tone of what faces him: in the aftermath of the Charles Kennedy defection talk, Lib Dems have been shocked into demanding more from their leader. As the paper puts it, senior Lib Dems are calling for “more policy ‘wins’ … to demonstrate to doubters in his party that he was delivering on Liberal Decocrat priorities.”  Clegg probably hasn’t faced such sustained internal pressure since he defeated Chris Huhne to the

The Sunday Times (£) has news that Nick Clegg will not front his party’s ‘Yes to AV’ campaign next May. This makes sense. The deluge of abuse he received in Bristol yesterday was another indication that many have fallen out love with Clegg. The Lib Dem leadership fear that if Clegg heads the campaign it will descend into a referendum on Clegg and his decision to form a coalition with the Tories. That will probably transpire in any event, especially if Labour opposes the introduction of AV, which it looks set to do. It makes sense to protect the embattled Lib Dem leader from as much collateral damage as possible.

Nick Clegg faced a stormy Q&A session this afternoon and he isn’t in David Cameron’s league as a performer. He struggled through tough questions on VAT, DfID, a transaction tax, AV and the appointment of Philip Green. His answers were garbled, though he did stick to the government’s script. There was, however, one particularly damaging exchange. Clegg was heckled by a man who thought the coalition ‘lacked a mandate for its rather brutal social policies’, and added that Clegg should get out of the coalition before it was ‘too late.’ Clegg’s response was limply pugilistic. ‘You’ve obviously got an axe to grind.” He went onto say “it’s not in my

The quotes emerging, in advance, from Nick Clegg’s Westminster Hour interview are a mix of the unsurprising and the intriguing. To the first category belongs his claim that “parties in government tend to get a dip in their popularity” – I mean, he’s hardly going to say that the Lib Dems’ decline in the polls is a disaster, is he? But this, for instance, belongs firmly in the second category: “If we weren’t in a coalition now I don’t think people would take any notice of the Liberal Democrats ….  If we were in a coalition with Labour, arguably our identity crisis would be even worse.” In other words, the

As Channel 4 reminds us, there have been two major trends in recent opinion polls. First, the precipitous decline in the Lib Dem vote share. And, second, a solidification of the Labour position, such that some polls even have them as the biggest party in a hung parliament. Predictably, this has stirred the omnipresent Simon Hughes, and some other folk around Westminster, into talking about a LibLab coalition. Which is why Ed Miliband’s comments in the New Statesman today are so eyecatching. He tells Jason Cowley and Mehdi Hasan that he couldn’t go into the coalition with the Lib Dems if they were led by Nick Clegg. He’s got problems

The Liberal-Conservative administration deserves to pass its 100 day probation. It hasn’t done much yet, but it has said some of the right things and sounds like it might even get round to doing a few of these things at some point in the not-too-distant future. I’d pretty much accept that from a new staff member, so I guess I should be half-pleased that I seem to be getting this level of performance from my government. The coalition partners were right to shelve their timid pre-election rhetoric about the size of the hole in the public finances. The Liberal Democrats’ implausible insistence that cuts shouldn’t start until next year was

As Pete notes, Nick Clegg is moderating the debate over the spending review in David Cameron’s absence. It’s an unenviable task. IDS and Liam Fox have been the most cussed opponents of George Osborne, but all ministers are fighting for their budgets behind the scenes. This morning, reports suggest that Chris Huhne could break from the ranks of the silent. The Times gives details of ‘intense discussions’ over the future of nuclear clean-up and renewable energy funding, worth more than £2bn of the Energy department’s £3.4bn budget. Obviously, any reductions in environmentally friendly initiatives carry a political cost for the Liberal Democrats. Chris Huhne has already overcome the habit of

My, what a busy character Simon Hughes is at the moment. Seems like hardly a day goes by without some fresh observations from the Lib Dem deputy leader – and he doesn’t even rest on a Sunday. Today, there are two Hughesbites worth noting down, both from an interview with Sky. The first: “We should have no preference at the next election between the Tories and Labour and other parties. We are going to stand on our own.” And the second: “Our party is committed constitutionally to standing in every seat. We will be standing in every seat at the next election. There will be no deals, there will be

It’s only gesture politics, but sometimes gestures matter – which is why the Tories are thinking seriously about dispatching a party envoy to the Lib Dem conference in September. The idea, naturally, is to cement the bonds of friendship between the two sides, as well as to suggest that the Tories are happy to mix it with the wider Lib Dem party. But there’s a problem: that wider party doesn’t seem eager to play along. As soon as there were rumblings that Cameron might speak at their conference, they slapped the idea down with the unswerving efficiency of an executioner. And they’ve done similar today in response to reports that

A thoughtful and thought-provoking column from Danny Finkelstein (£) in the Times this morning, which is well worth a trip beyond the paywall to read. In it, he makes a persuasive point: that, despite their plunging poll ratings, the Lib Dems aren’t doing too shabbily at all. After all, who, looking back at the party’s recent history, would have thought they would be in power in 2010? That they are suggests, in Danny’s words, that “this is not not the bottom for the Lib Dems, it is the top.” From there, an important point is made against those who still contend that the Lib Dems would have been better off