Guardian: “Lib Dems’ illusions are gone. Now they need imagination.”

Whilst I mostly agree with what this Guardian article says, the suggested practice – if it can be called that – of leaving the Coalition and calling another election will help no-one. Labour are by a long shot not ready for another election, the Lib Dems would be in too deep to fight another election (unable to clearly differentiate between us and ‘them’ – may be the unpopular opinion, but that’s how I see it) and the cuts are too fresh in everybody’s minds and still on going for the Tories to gain all that many votes.

We’ve proved that Coalitions work, that we can work in government, and we’ve tackled the deficit head on – but just as the article says we need to push Lib Dem values, speak out for Lib Dem accomplishments, respond to reports on inflation, unemployment, and rising prison levels. Silence helps no one.

“But at present neither Labour nor the Lib Dems show enough signs of grasping how much the future of British politics depends on their both having the imagination to rise above their current divisions.” – However, if we’d wanted to work with Labour, we’d have gone into Coalition with Labour in May, rather than the Tories.

Conservatism has been ‘diluted’ by the Lib Dems.

What was everyone saying about the Lib Dems being the Conservative’s ‘lap-dogs’?

First the a report is published which says that 75% of the Liberal Democrat manifesto is being implemented in government. Then we had the whole ‘Yellow Bastards’ nickname flying around, and now the Daily Mail and the Right are saying, or reinforcing, the notion that the Liberal Democrats (with only five cabinet members) have ‘diluted Conservatism’.

“MPs complain Deputy Prime Minister Mr Clegg has forced Mr Cameron to water down policies on Europe, free schools, tax cuts, human rights, NHS reforms, elected police commissioners and abortion.”

A book is being published – The Future of Conservatism -, including 26 essays by MPs and Advisers, reflecting the unease that the Conservative benches at the influence of Nick Clegg and the Lib Dem coalition-partners.

Some of the comments on the article are…. funny to say the least? – and representative of the Mail’s readership.

“If they feel that way then call a leadership vote and get rid of that pathetic europhile now in charge. Nadine Morris had a good point. He cant even stand up to that pathetic Clegg and the party of lunatics he leads.”

“Considering that the Liberal vote wennt down at the election and that they lost seats rather than gaining them, it is absurd and disgusting that they have been allowed to have such influence. Our so-called coalition is dominated by the minor (very minor) partner. The Conservatives must have the guts to stand by their policies, which gained them the majority of votes and the majority of seats.”

Should we really be cutting rioter’s benefits?

“An e-petition calling for rioters to lose their benefits has hit 100,000 signatures and become the first to be considered for a Commons debate.”

At risk of sounding like a broken record or a parrot, I’ll just say it how it is or how I see it. These riots (again, if they can be called riots) are unjustifiable and unfair on the remaining, majority, law abiding citizens – they are completely void of any reason, far removed from the original protest last week, and is purely law breaking and criminality. However, I don’t agree with the 100,000 (plus) people who would see the rioters who receive state benefits lose their benefits. Society has a social responsibility to ensure that the people who need help, the people receiving state benefits, have all the help and, more importantly, guidance to help themselves to ensure a standard of living for them and their family.

Cutting their benefits will not only affect them directly – as they’re likely to serve a prison sentence and lose their benefits anyway. It will indirectly affect their family, their children, and the elderly mother they could possibly be taking care of. Who looks after their immediate family, who can’t get work, can’t support their family once their lose the only income they receive? Those who commit the crime should bare the consequences, not those around them.

Yes, those who have caused complete chaos across some parts of England over the past few days, disturbing people’s day-to-day lives and terrifying others need to be brought to justice (the only thing that prison sentences really do), but those around them should not suffer for other’s transgression.

From a party political stance, the Liberal Democrats should not stop talking about social justice and social liberty. As opportunistic as it may seem we need to show to the public that we do stand aside from the Conservatives who would just lock them up, from Labour who blame the government’s cuts and would just aimlessly throw more money at these ‘pockets’ of people who have been directly or indirectly involved with the rioting over the past few days.

This is an opportunity for the Liberal Democrats, but more importantly for government and the police to re-establish law and order, to re-establish policing powers and demonstrate the full ability of the law.

We just can’t win.

Vince Cable has ‘revisited’ Mansion Tax, which has been coined the ‘Lib Dem price’ for the party to remain a ‘willing coalition partner’ by the media.

The policy would mean that those who own properties worth £2 milion would have to pay tax on that property, which would also go hand in hand with a reform of the Tax System altogether. The content of the article rather than the context is why I am writing this post.

In relation to the Mansion Tax policy the article discusses the reasoning behind pressing for a policy which was not in the Coalition Agreement following the 2010 General Election. The ‘Lib Dem price’ is, apparently, the party’s terms on which they would apparently remain as Coalition partners for the duration of Parliament. As Cable reinforces a strong party and party supporter argument;

“No, I’m not threatening to walk out, I don’t think that’s the approach we should adopt. We have got a massive task and we have got to work on it and as Liberal Democrats we’ve got to fight our corner in the arguments, but that’s a national problem that we’ve got to deal with as a team.”

The word ‘price’ implies that the party leadership is bargaining with the Conservatives in order to gain power and selfishly implement policy – which is a common rhetoric of the media and opposition. It’s important that the Liberal Democrats do implement long-standing Liberal Democrat policies – such as the tax cut for those on lower incomes (which we have already implemented and intend on furthering) and the mansion tax. When the economic situation is stable, it’s vital that the party presses ahead with alternative Liberal policies (not just acting as a buffer to Tory policy) to demonstrate what the party stands for and that we are able to form a credible, accountable and reliable party in government.

“We are where we are – we’ve learned lessons from this campaign, and we’ve got to stay where we are within the Coalition, make it work, get the economy moving, promote the Lib Dem policies and values within the Coalition Agreement – we shouldn’t be embarrassed about that. We’ve achieved a lot, we’ve got a lot still to achieve.”

We entered government with the Conservatives on the basis that we would ensure that the country’s economic situation was addressed and stability was re-established, and many will see the stabilising of the economy as a sign for the Liberal Democrats to leave government, but we also have a duty to ensure that Tory policy is progressive – not ‘revolutionary’; as Nick Clegg put it over NHS Reform – and to demonstrate what the Liberal Democrats could achieve in government. Our chance to prove that we can be an accountable, responsible and credible part in government and in opposition.

The Independent View: Coalition Works!

Many thought that coalition government couldn’t work, but twelve months later an independent review of the coalition proves that coalition government does work. Better than the Blair/Brown years according to the 90 ministers, special advisers, officials, parliamentarians, and external interest groups interviewed.

However, although the coalition works, it isn’t doing much for us as a Party – the report does say that we can do better in government, but also recognises our difficulties in terms of people’s view of the party and the restrictions in Cowley Street.

Here’s an excerpt from the blog post by Robert Hazell over on Lib Dem Voice.

“The coalition is working well, but the Lib Dems could do better, is the overall message from the Constitution Unit’s first report on how the coalition works in Whitehall and Westminster. We are conducting a 12 month study, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, with a research team of five, including two former senior civil servants, and one senior broadcaster. David Cameron and Nick Clegg have authorised access to all the key figures in Whitehall, and so far we have interviewed 90 ministers, special advisers, officials, parliamentarians, and external interest groups.”

You can read the full article on the Lib Dem Voice along with a link to the original review here.