Browse > Home / Archive: December 2011

| Subcribe via RSS



Lib Dem members back post-2015 cuts to eliminate deficit

By Angela Harbutt
December 19th, 2011 at 8:03 pm | Comments Off on Lib Dem members back post-2015 cuts to eliminate deficit | Posted in Liberal Democrats

I have been away for a few days – but catching up with some reading this afternoon I came across the Lib Dem Voice poll of members. posted last week.

LDV asked: As a result of reduced growth forecasts, it now seems unlikely the Coalition Government will achieve its aim of eliminating the deficit over the lifetime of this parliament. Danny Alexander has indicated that the Liberal Democrats will probably need to go into the next election in 2015 promising nearly £30bn more austerity for a future government to balance the books. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Eliminating the deficit must remain a top priority, even if that means the Liberal Democrats have to commit to post-2015 cuts at the next general election.”

  • 60% – I agree
  • 32% – I disagree
  • 8% – Don’t know / No opinion

By a 2:1 margin, then, Lib Dem members believe it is important that the party holds steadfast to the Coalition’s stated priority for the next government to balance the books.

Other survey results show that a similar level (62%) of Lib Dem members back the coalition’s deficit policy.

That should bring some Christmas cheer to the leadership!

For further analysis visit the LDV website.

Tags: , ,
'

Vaclav Havel’s Obituary…Guardian Style.

By Leslie Clark
December 19th, 2011 at 5:17 pm | 4 Comments | Posted in Weird and Wonderful

I’m sure many bloggers and journalists feel self-conscious about writing in a public forum but this article on the passing of playwright and statesman Vaclav Havel from the Guardian’s Comment is Free (but facts are absent?) section shows that literally any old tripe can get published. I can assure you that it isn’t a parody and is one-hundred percent genuine. Here’s a snippet:

Havel’s anti-communist critique contained little if any acknowledgement of the positive achievements of the regimes of eastern Europe in the fields of employment, welfare provision, education and women’s rights. Or the fact that communism, for all its faults, was still a system which put the economic needs of the majority first.” (Neil Clark 19.12.11)

Just take a minute to savour the undiluted Marxism.

Don’t know about you but I’m already looking forward to reading his take on the death of Kim Jung-il and his impressive record of reducing income inequalities.

Tags: , ,

Government confirms time travel has been cracked!

By Editor
December 16th, 2011 at 7:33 am | 3 Comments | Posted in Uncategorized

In a written statement issued issued yesterday the Secretary of State for Health, Andrew Lansley, announced that he will “publish a consultation on tobacco products in Spring 2012”. He also says that the Government has commissioned an “independent academic review of the existing evidence relevant to the effects of tobacco packaging” that will be made available at the same time.

We can’t help but scratch our heads over here and wonder if the government has not only discovered time travel – but has a Time Lord doing this evidence review. FANTASTIC!

After all, the UK review of the evidence will be completed by Spring 2012…. and the first country in the world to experiment nationally with plain packaging, Australia, is not set to see plain packaged tobacco products reach the shelves until ….December 2012. What “evidence” can there be right now to review? If they have not mastered time travel it must mean…….oh…..  they are looking at lots of focus groups and lab tests, modelling and hypothecations that various organisations  have made up. Yes we can hear one huge collective groan out there at the very thought.

How very odd really, given that genuine evidence will start coming on stream from Australia  just six months or so after this Government review on plain packs is done – why do a trawl of all the made up stuff now?  What a monumental waste of money and – given the wider problems facing the NHS right now, what a waste of time and effort.We thought they were trying to save money ????

Still, it is nearly Christmas – and with the Dr Who Christmas special just round the corner- we’re hanging on to the hope that it’s the time travel explanation after all.

Tags: , ,

Europe: Clegg got it right..and then completely wrong…

By Angela Harbutt
December 12th, 2011 at 3:55 pm | 9 Comments | Posted in EU Politics, Europe, Liberal Democrats

Stephen Tall has a really good article over on LDV today on the subject of Europe and Cameron’s decision to reject the proposed ‘Merkozy’ EU treaty. In summary his view is that whilst he is not  going to shed any tears that the UK refused to sign-up to the deal, he says “it’s a crying shame that the UK isn’t trying to lead from within”.

Like Stephen, I consider myself an internationalist first and foremost and whilst I broadly support of the concept of the EU –  but I am not so blind that I can’t see just how fat, corrupt, protectionist and, frankly, undemocratic the EU has become.   Within that, the Euro-zone has become something of a joke – singularly inept at solving problems of its own making – flailing around coming up with one bad idea after another. The latest, (frankly laughable) idea was to introduce a Tobin tax (a tax on financial transactions) . This sought to raise many billions of euros, of which well over half would come from the Britain. Given how important the financial sector is to this country – and the likely outcome of any such move – it  was never going to be acceptable.

So we have to consider whether any other outcome was ever really likely? The truth of the matter (and there is so much that we don’t know about what actually happened during the discussions) is that David Cameron was out-manoeuvred by the French (mainly) and the Germans. The French wanted a policy that would treat the symptoms (debt) not the cause (overspending) and wanted Britain to pay for it. If they couldn’t get that then isolating Britain was the next best option. That’s bad news for the UK – but I suspect even worse news for Europe. And whilst the British Euro-sceptics may be crowing and the French and Germans basking in self-righteous glory – the truth is it’s  a crying shame for everyone.

So what of the Lib Dem’s role in all of this? It seems clear that in the run up to the discussions, Nick did all he could to help facilitate the best possible deal for the UK. Good . That’s what you want the deputy PM to be doing putting the country’s interest first (as he did when he led the party into coalition).

Nick has also shown himself to be “in tune” with the Lib Dem membership. Nick is a Euro-realist. Likewise the Lib Dem members. In a recent poll of members, 51% rejected a move towards an even closer union with Europe.  Yes, we like the concept . No we don’t like what it has become. Here are some of the quotes from that survey….

“refuse closer union UNTIL such time as the EU has been restructured into a less bureaucratic and more Liberal form”

“The right to decide what sovereignty is pooled remains an important one and should sometimes be reversed. We do not for example still need a coal and steel community or agricultural policy”

“Closer union must come with increased accountability and reform”

“We should work towards reform of CAP. We should push for more democracy in EU decision making. We should make every effort to avoid too much legislation coming from Brussels”

“It seems that the UK is not really playing a proper role therefore we should step back and re-negotiate the pressing points, like money, Common Agricultural Policy”

So the idea that we are a party blindly committed to Europe no matter how illiberal, protectionist, bureaucratic and corrupt it becomes is just plain nonsense. Nick and the majority of the party would rather be in Europe than out of it- but recognise that Europe desperately needs reform. We recognise that it isn’t Europe “at all costs”.

Where Nick has made an error – and here I will bang on again about his PR and the party’s PR – is how he has managed the post-veto situation. On Friday Nick is seemingly behind Cameron’s dramatic veto (saying that Cameron’s demands had been ‘modest and reasonable’), and a dreaded “spokesman” confirming that Nick was ‘fully signed-up’ to the veto). Given that William Hague has also stated on the record that “The negotiating position that David Cameron took on Thursday night and Friday morning was agreed in advance with the Lib Dems in the coalition” – it seems reasonable to believe that it is true.

24 hours later Nick is “ bitterly disappointed” with the outcome in Brussels, that the outcome is “bad for Britainand could leave itisolated and marginalised.

Of course the two positions are not mutually exclusive.

UK’s demands probably were “reasonable” and Nick almost certainly would have agreed that Cameron should/could use the veto if all else failed (I can’t imagine that it would have been very plausible to ask David Cameron to “pop out of the room” every five minutes during the negotiations to check if his actions were OK with Nick). It is also true that the outcome was pretty miserable for everyone. What is frustrating it that Nick couldn’t have said all that on Friday in one (somewhat long) breath rather than starting out sounding supportive and getting increasingly angst-ridden about the outcome. This speaks yet again of Nick needing much better media advice that he himself trusts. This did not require a PR guru to get this right. It just required a bit of forward planning and a half decent PR brain. Neither are really much in evidence on this one.

Of course Nick has not been helped by the party grandees – and may indeed explain his faltering media stance… Talk of Vince resigning, coalition splits, even questions regarding Nick’s future as leader are unhelpful and show that we still have an awful long way to go if we want to convince the electorate that we are “fit to govern”. We have enough on our plate with the hysterical right wing press having a pop at Nick without our own doing the same. It’s odd that some Lib Dems complain at the Tories being only “half-in” Europe when some of them are only “half-in” the Lib Dems.

UPDATE:  Nick’s absence from parliament this afternoon has created a furore across the media. He says its because he did not want to be a distraction.  But in actual fact his absence seems to have created a much larger distraction. Further evidence that he needs better media advice?

FURTHER UPDATE: Watch BBC News at Ten and tell me that Nick staying away was a “good idea”

Tags: , , , ,

Graham Watson and a liberal narrative

By Simon Goldie
December 1st, 2011 at 2:32 pm | Comments Off on Graham Watson and a liberal narrative | Posted in EU Politics, Liberal Democrats, Liberal Philosophy

In a recent post, I argued that the Lib Dems need to ensure that they have a clear identity.

In his piece congratulating Sir Graham Watson, Barry Stocker has drawn attention to a speech that Graham has given on liberalism.

The speech frames liberalism within a rich political tradition and shows why it is relevant today.

This is a welcome contribution to the ongoing discussion about where the party is going and where it should be going.

Tags: