A party of government – and one that’s delivering
Bubble — By Amy Kitcher on June 18, 2010 7:00 am
The author with her party leader in 2010: she achieved the biggest swing to the Lib Dems anywhere in Wales
IN THE last few general elections, all the commentators and pollsters have forecast massive slumps for the Lib Dems and been surprised when we increased our seats. In 2010 this pattern was exactly reversed with an increase in votes failing to return even the same number of seats. The story was the same in Wales, with a slightly increased vote returning one fewer MP.
But it could have been a completely different narrative just over 3,000 votes was the combined majority in our three closets defeats. The general election showed large numbers of voters moving to the Welsh Liberal Democrats, the individual stories of key constituencies are well known, with huge swings in Ceredigion, Newport, Swansea, Pontypridd and my own seat of Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney. But the picture is wider than just that. This is the first General election where the Welsh Lib Dems have not lost a deposit – indeed not a single Lib Dem anywhere in the UK lost their deposit.
Opinion polling before the election campaign suggested that the biggest barrier to voting Lib Dem was that people didn’t see us as a party of government. The lasting result of this campaign will be to defeat that legacy. Canada voted for its first balanced parliament in 2004 and hasn’t voted for a single party majority in the three elections since. There is no doubt in my mind that balanced Parliaments are here to stay in the UK, especially if the electoral system changes to Alternative Vote. AV changes the whole ball-game. It may not be electoral reform in the style that I would have preferred, but the opportunity for people to express their preferences, rather than just first-past-the-post, makes politics more nuanced than it has been in many, many years. In a good number of seats, we are well placed to leapfrog the first-placed party by giving the voters a more powerful vote.
Particularly in Wales and Scotland, people are less astounded by coalitions than the politicians and the pundits. Across the world, they are the norm and in local government here in Wales, they are the norm too.
The fact remains that the Coalition government has already begun work overturning the worst legacies of the Labour government with an end to detention of children for immigration purposes, the cancelling of ID cards and the restoration of the pensions-earnings link, to name only three. We’ve only been in government a few weeks and these important changes are going to be followed by big, sweeping changes that are the result of the Lib Dems being in government. In the election, voters were told, at great length, what our four priorities were.
Labour seems to have suffered collective amnesia, having forgotten Gordon Brown’s alleged deficit reduction plan. Fortunately, the public are not quite so cynical in their attitude to politics and everyone I speak to knows that cuts would be coming whatever the colour of the government. The cynical change of attitude by otherwise astute Labour politicians is not playing well. Gordon Brown and the rest of the Labour government were more than happy to take credit for economic growth when it happened, but are running from their responsibility for the recession.
But it is not just the cuts in public spending that will define this government. Action on the environment, reforming the banking sector, abolition of ID cards, ending government snooping on your emails, empowering local government and communities, ending the detention of children of Asylum Seekers, restricting powers for councils to spy on residents, constitutional reform – all these solid Lib Dem policies are in the coalition agreement and will be delivered. They will make a real difference for people and they will remember them when elections come around.
For all the bluster from Labour politicians and members of the Labour commentariat, people are cautiously optimistic. They know the cuts have to come, but hope we can also change how we run our country, and make sure the mess Labour have left us in never happens again. Almost everyone I speak to is willing to give this government and the Lib Dems in it, a chance to prove themselves.
People are cleverer than they are often given credit for and understand that coalitions are the way that politics is going to be for the future. And they understand that the agreed programme of Government is not a Conservative Manifesto. They understand that the Liberal Democrats will now implement more of their policies than ever before. That is what we are in politics for and that is why people voted for us.
Tags: Alternative Vote, cuts, public spending, Welsh Liberal Democrats
Tweet This
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
19 Comments
I have not got the time to respond proerly to this PPB, but I just have to comment on the last line of this post
“People ………….. understand that the Liberal Democrats will now implement more of their policies than ever before. That is what we are in politics for and that is why people voted for us.”
The Lib Dems may have had some of their ideas included in the programme of government, as long as the ideas did not contradict the Conservatives. No early cuts anybody? In addition, for the first time in decades, the LibDem policies have come under real scruitiny, and they were less than watertight (to be kind)
You mention Ceredigion….they did not vote Lib Dem for them to become the lap dog of Cameron. They voted for Mark as he is a popular MP, and as a vote against Labour and the Conservatives. I would imagine that Elin Jones will benefit from the ConDem government.
Do you really think that the people of Merthyr, Wrexham……will ever be happy that you put the Conservatives in power? I cant wait for the next election to find out….
Amy, an enthusiastic presentation for coalitions – however, looking forward to 2011, are there any parties with which you would advocate not being coalition partners in Wales, in view of the LibDems leaving the last proposed Rainbow Coalition?.
In common with lots of LibDems fumbling around to try to grasp hold of some self-justification like a drunk in a dark room reaching out for the whisky, you almost convince yourself.
Your attempts to claim some kind of progressive mantle for your right-wing coalition would be funny if it was not for the damage it will inflict on the most vulnerable in our society. Axing the Child Trust Fund. Bottling out of your higher education funding policies. Scything through our public services whilst Osbourne sits back in his chair watching you do his dirty work. Which of these LibDem policies is it you look forward to implementing exactly?! It’s certainly not what most LibDem voters around here voted for.
And Enid is damn right – on the outstanding issue of these times, whether to cut now or wait until the recovery is safe – your party has done a 180 degree about face from what your candidates were saying before the election and is now cutting like there was no tomorrow.
Either you were wrong all along, or you’ve sold us down the river to get into Government. Voters round here won’t forget that in a hurry – I just hope we don’t all pay too high a price for your lack of core values in terms of job losses and public service cuts.
The Lib Dems are the joke that just got very unfunny.
Enid’s response pretty much sums up my thoughts on Amy’s piece.
Just picking up on a couple of Amy’s points, though – she rehashes the FibDems’ notion of “balanced parliament” rather than the more accurate “hung” parliament. What we have at Westminster now isn’t a “balanced” Parliament at all – we have a ConDem government with Tories propped up by ambitious FibDems (to use the Spitting Image analogy, we have a little Cleggy sitting on Cam’s shoulder, slavishly agreeing to every Tory cut).
As for Amy’s claim that “Gordon Brown and the rest of the Labour government were more than happy to take credit for economic growth when it happened, but are running from their responsibility for the recession” – it’s tosh, of course. It was bankers that created the recession, and it was thanks to the leadership of Gordon Brown (like him or loathe him) that international Government action was taken to tackle the recession.
And who, or what, are “the Labour commentariat”? The news media have been consistently anti-Labour for the last 18 months at least, crying out for a new “narrative”, be it ever so Tory. So what might “the Labour commentariat” be?
I’d just like to pick up on the Labour commentariat point. It may be in evidence elsewhere, but online in Wales, it is almost non-existent. We have attempted quite heavily to get Labour to engage with the site but, with a few exceptions (Gez and Anthony are two of them), the party has proved much slower than the others – and Plaid, in particular – in engaging with us and the wider online community.
Why is this? A paucity of ideas to share? Control freakery? An unwillingness or inability to adapt? Not sure. But now the party is in opposition across the UK, none of those factors should apply anymore.
(I’m sorry – I’ve just done what I pick other posts up for and have rambled right off the point…)
The Liberal Democrats (outside of the traditional rural Liberal vote) have relied heavily on the support of
1. Students (and recent graduates)
2. Civil Servants and state employees
3. Recent immigrants
The Lib Dems have agreed to let the rise in the Cap on tuition fees pass. They will abstain theefore giving the Tories a majority.
Nick Clegg has actually volunteered to front up the attack on civil servant pensions.
In the last few weeks they have committed a complete U-turn on immigration and now support harsher limits which will be very hard for people who want to bring relatives over.
Basically the people who are struggling most under this coalition are the Lib Dem core support. I think Amy should really have a think about where her party is going.
Pursuing Duncan’s thread drift – he said “We have attempted quite heavily to get Labour to engage with the site but, with a few exceptions (Gez and Anthony are two of them), the party has proved much slower than the others – and Plaid, in particular – in engaging with us and the wider online community … Why is this? A paucity of ideas to share? Control freakery? An unwillingness or inability to adapt? Not sure. But now the party is in opposition across the UK, none of those factors should apply anymore.”
While Anthony and I are Labour people and happy to promote our Party here and elsewhere, we need to clarify that we don’t constitute Labour engaging with WalesHome – just individuals expressing our views.
Why doesn’t Welsh Labour – as a party or as a membership – engage more in online discussion? I share Duncan’s disappointment that there’s less of a Labour presence online than there might be. Duncan will know that many Labour MPs, AMs, councillors and local parties are active on Twitter, Facebook and blogs. Raising Welsh Labour’s profile here and elsewhere would clearly be a Good Thing.
It’s not for the want of ideas to share. And so far as I know, no control-freaky edict has gone out discouraging greater engagement. I hope that as the campaigns for a Yes vote in the forthcoming referendum and for the next Assembly elections get underway, we may see more Welsh Labour people wanting to get stuck in.
Sorry, Gez, I am happy to clarify my comments to point out that you and Anthony speak for yourselves rather than the party. I shuold have said party members.
Why don’t they engage? Maybe they just don’t like us. It’s been that sort of week.
Indeed we should engage more, and I’d encourage people to do just that. There’s been a worrying tendency here and elsewhere with people moaning about articles they disagree with and claiming conspiracy and bias at every turn. Get a grip – if you don’t like what you read, write something yourself, see if it gets published – or get a blog and publish it yourself. That’s the joy of t’internet. This article is a classic example – I profoundly disagree with it, but welcome WalesHome publishing it so that others can respond with views in opposition and enter into the debate. Long may it continue.
Indeed Anthony.
You should see the Valleysman blog after the piece on Lynne Neagle. Bunch of anon whingers saying smaller blogs were being crowded out by Wales Home. what’s to stop them starting their own blogs? Nothing at all.
The other thing that made me laugh was WM saying Wales Home had it in for her – as if she has copyright on the name. What a joke.
What I think does not matter, what most of people think who have commented on this thread does not either, (most I are political hacks with too much time on their hands). What really mattered is what people voted on May 6th, and they said no to Gordon Brown, and yes you are now living in with US style politics. And yes you will say no Wales did not say yes to the Tories.
However the People are more realistic (or cynical) than that. The only thing that really changes is the face (and even begin to look the same!). Of course I hear you cry what about tax credits! Yes you are right, they were great until you got those demand letters from the the Inland Revenue telling you that you had been overpaid by umpteen thousand quid, and then the increasing child poverty. Wages just did not increase with the cost of living (which why people took out loans that they could not afford to repay just like the US a failure of regulation
To show I am balanced I will take a shot at both the Liberals and Tories. The Liberals perchance for negative campagning was made clear to me in the last when living in Llandaff during last election I honestly thought that Labour would keep it because their sitting councillors were popular, or at least the Tories would regain that which was formerly theirs. No way! The Lib Dems put out a leaflet with Russell Goodway’s face on it, and voting Conservative would let “Russell Goodway’s Labour Party” in. Dirty pool! said I to the leaflett deliverer (who I had been in school with). Lost my vote
As for the New Conservatism, to paraphrase SNL General Franco skit. The One Nation Toryism of Harold MacMillan is still dead! This Cameronian Conservatism seems just like the old Thatcherism with its talk of School choice. I dont know what the Tories did for SMEs during the 1980s except I recall a bias towards big businesss like Tesco over small shops, I think when South Glamorgan responding to the concerns of small retailers in Ely refused Tesco permission to build a superstore was overruled by the Welsh Office. And when I hear Cameron singing the praises of Terry Leahy I think nothing has really changed except the dress and handbag.
And with Brutal cuts Cameron’s Britain could turn out like the Cameroon!
Plaid Cymru’s blaming English born voters for not winning Ceredigion sounds just like those right wingers in the US saying that Obama won because all the minorities voted for him. shame!
I hope I was balanced, sorry to be long and boring!
I think Amy Kitcher, and other members of the Tory and Lib Dem parties do tend to mis-represent Labour’s view on cutting the deficiet. What Labour is saying is that the reduction of the deficiet, firstly shouldn’t be done so soon as it would risk the recovery and a double dip recession (something which the Lib Dems use to support, until they entered the Con-Lib Dem coalition). Moreover Labour is also pointing out that the balance between cutting spending and raising taxes is all wrong. The Conservative-Liberal Democrat government wants 80% through cutting spending, and a mere 20% from higher taxes.
This is wrong. It will hurt the poorest in society the most and cost more job, and damage the economy, and society, more in the long run. How is this a “fairer economy” and a “fairer tax system”? How can scrapping the Child Trust Fund, which many children from the poorest families rely on, giving children a fair chance? The Lib Dems can no longer play both sides of the fence now that they are in government, they can’t carry on being everything to everyone, as the public will no longer be fooled by it.
This is not a coalition of equals. The main offices of state are held by Conservatives and the direction of economic policy is one which is driven by the Conservative aim to permanantly reduce the size of the state. Orange Book Liberals who are in most cases indistinguishable from Whig Conservatives are more than happy to sign up to this agenda. I don’t believe, however, that those Liberal Democrats who either come from the Lloyd George New Liberalism tradition or are former members of the SDP are.
It is true that if Labour had been elected on May 6th there would have been cuts. But as the FT pointed out this week those cuts would have totalled by 2014 £51 billion compared to the Coalition’s proposed £82 billion. It really is nonsense for Liberal Democrats to argue that the cuts have to be introduced quickly in order for the UK not to become another Greece. The private sector in the UK, for example, according to the IMF is heading in 2010 to be running an excess of income over spending of 9.7%. This is greater than either the USA or the Eurozone figures. In contrast to Greece at least two thirds of UK government borrowing is financed internally. No sensible economist believes that the UK economy is going to hell in a handcart. Instead many of them are worried that there is a real danger of macho cuts for the sake of it leading the UK into a double dip recession or a rerun of the mistakes made by Japanese policy makers in the 1990s. Only today the leading Conservative economic commentator Sam Brittan described David Cameron and George Osborne as ‘behaving like owners of a whelk stall rather than economic managers of a nation with its own currency.’ If they are the owners of the whelk stall then Danny Alexander is the little boy who is responsible for putting the ice on the shellfish. His performance this week at the Despatch Box was frankly pathetic and we haven’t even started the main cuts yet.
Perhaps Amy can explain, for example, the logic in deciding not to provide Sheffield Forgemasters with a loan of £80 million to match the money they have already raised from private sources. Would she have supported the decision if the firm had been based in Merthyr Tydfil? This is just the sort of company that any sensible government should be supporting. As a result of this short termism 180 families will continue to rely on unemployment benefit. The UK’s rivals in this industry who are based in Japan will have a monopoly of the skills needed to produce new reactors. It will also probably mean that the new nuclear power stations needed to replace the old ones will be delayed by three years increasing the chances of power shortages in the future. This is the economics of the mad house.
It will be fascinating to see how Amy and other Liberal Democrats defend to voters the consequences of this ideological dash by Orange Book Liberals to reduce the state in places such as Merthyr. In The Guardian on Monday, Larry Elliott posed the following questions with regard to the cuts: “Why are they doing it? Is it,for all Nick Clegg’s guff about ‘progressive cuts’, that the real agenda is to complete the demolition job on welfare states that started in the 1980s? Or is it that the deficit hawks are simply crackers?” I look forward with interest to answers from Liberal Democrats to these two questions..
Finally I hope that in next year’s Assembly election we will not have any nonsense from Liberal Democrat focus teams that the cuts in Wales are all the responsiblity of the Labour/Plaid coalition. If public services are devastated in Merthyr, then the responsibility lies squarely at the feet of George Osborne and his little helper Danny Alexander.
Jeff, what is a “Whig Conservative”? Why dont just call them Classical Liberals? why reinvent the wheel.
As far as Iam concerned Labour, LibDems and the Tories are the bankers little helpers.
That public school toff Clegg has ensured that the Libs wil be wiped out at the next general election. He is backing his public school toff chums in the Tory Party make things a lot worse for ordinary people in order to look after the fat cats in the City of London.
The Tory’s have are shafting the Libs good and proper. No chance of real election reform but all the unpopularity that goes with backing masssive cuts.
The Libs will go back to having 6 MPs like they did in the 1970s
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jun/18/school-plan-takes-money-from-poor
Yet more evidence debunking that the Lib Dems are the party of “fairness”
Geraint.
As much as I supported the CTF, to say families rely on it is rubbish. I am a young working class father, and a CTF in 18 years’ time is not something we rely on.
Labour’s folly was being paralysed by short termism and plotting. This crisis represents a chance to rebalance our economy, but crucially bring far more equality. They never made that argument, and ducked out on people by never offering the alternative cuts.
This morning Amy Kitcher should go down to the local newsagents and buy the Observer for Will Hutton’s article and the Independent for John Rentoul’s article on the fate of the Australia Democrats who also supported a Conservative government. Lloyd George once argued that the House of Lords was ‘Balfour’s Poodle’. The present day Liberal Democrats look as if they will go down in history as ‘Mr Cameron’s Chihuahuas’!
Here’s another piece of reading for Amy Kitcher and other Welsh Liberal Democrats. Have a look at today’s FT and the story with the heading “Poorer Areas are to be hardest hit”. The maps which show the effect on income and growth on various parts of the UK of cuts are also interesting. Look in particular at the effect on West Wales and the Valleys compared to areas in the South East of England. So much for the ‘Progressive Cuts ‘ ( what an absurd phrase) and’ Fairness’ agenda which the Liberal Democrats claim they are bringing to the coalition. What’s fair about a 3.3 % fall in the size of the economy in West and the Valleys when prosperous Cheshire will only have 1.5 % knocked off its economy from a far higher base? The thousands in Merthyr who voted Liberal Democrat on May 6th didn’t vote for this attack on their living standards. Whilst Clegg gained a massive pay rise from the election result those that Amy Kitcher wanted to represent face the prospect of increased poverty and with very little chance of any economic revival in the near future. Jo Grimond must be spinning in his grave at this complete betrayal of the principles that Liberal Democrats and before them Liberals have held for over a century. I wonder what Liberals such as J.M Keynes and Beveridge would think of a party that had completely surrendered to the ideas that caused so much damage to the economy in the 1930s? Have a look at Keynes’s argument regarding the ‘paradox of thrift’ Amy to see where Clegg and the rest of the right wing Liberal Democrat leadership have got it completely wrong.