Showing posts with label coalition talks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label coalition talks. Show all posts

Friday, 25 June 2010

Simon Fires First Warning Shot 'Cross Coalition Bows


Yesterday the newly elected deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats Simon Hughes fired the first major warning shot across the coalition's ship bows.

It's all coming down to the matter of fairness. Having been canvassing members for the past three weeks there was a noticeable shift in their line of questioning come Tuesday. The reason of course that instead of the speculation of what the budget would bring we had the detail. Simon highlighted one of the concerns the welfare system in this case the pensioners. It's bad enough that many may have to wait longer for a state pension without other benefits being hacked into as well. As he said:

"The coalition deal is a deal. There cannot be any unpicking of items in that deal, otherwise the whole thing risks falling apart."


One key element of that as far as Lib Dems are concerned is that yes we need to tackle the deficit and we need to do it fairly. Impinging VAT increases (although noted bringing us in line or behind most of Europe) , benefits getting frozen while inflation continues and not properly tackling the tax loopholes as we promised are some of the areas of concern. The raise in the personal income allowance and the aviation taxes does offset some of that. Making it a less regressive budget than the Tories had promised during the campaign, but does it really make it a progressive budget?

Of course it is hard to be fully progressive when you have not one but both hands tied behind your back by the level of debt left by Labour. I've heard the Labour arguments that their investments were required to bail out the banks and to secure jobs. Securing jobs is fine but they could have and should have looked at the whole mentality of public sector expenditure before now. At the end of each spending round there are always inventive ways to use up to budget so as not to lose any for the next year. Yet Labour and the SNP are both saying there is no more room for efficiencies. There always has been, and unless something is done always will, the mentality of the public sector is to spend money rather than to save it.

You only have to look at the attitude of many of the MPs caught out over expenses. Some did use the defence it was needed, but the majority claimed it was within the rules as if it was an entitlement rather than a provision if required.

So yes Simon is right to sound a warning shot, and that is all it is, we Lib Dems are prepared to make tough calls on expenditure just as long as you are fair to the poorest in our society when you are doing so. Don't exacerbate their problems for the sake of expediency.

Thursday, 13 May 2010

Standing Up For Students

Looking at the fine detail of the coalition agreement one thing that did strike me was the omission of any agreement to increase tuition fees. Indeed what there was is a rather woolly statement.

Higher education

We await Lord Browne’s final report into higher education funding, and will judge its proposals against the need to:
  • increase social mobility;

  • take into account the impact on student debt;

  • ensure a properly funded university sector;

  • improve the quality of teaching;

  • advance scholarship; and,

  • attract a higher proportion of students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
If the response of the Government to Lord Browne’s report is one that Liberal Democrats cannot accept, then arrangements will be made to enable Liberal Democrat MPs to abstain in any vote.


Therefore it was with relieve that I saw the following amendment to our special conference debating the coalition deal from Liberal Youth.

Conference expresses its concern that Liberal Democrat MPs who signed the 'vote for students' pledge may be unable to uphold this pledge under the abstention agreement on the Lord Browne report in the 'Higher Education' section of the agreement for a coalition government and expresses its hope that Liberal Democrat MPs can vote against any rise in the cap on tuition fees which isn't index linked.

Conference calls upon Liberal Democrat MPs to ensure that on any decision made on the Lord Browne report, they above all else take into account the impact on student debt.

Conference affirms our aspiration to scrap tuition fees.

Conference also affirms that any vote on tuition fees should not be held as a vote of confidence in the government.

Liberal Youth are incredibly worried that a whole generation of young people from lower-income backgrounds will be shut out of university education all-together if we see even higher tuition fees. Therefore, Liberal Youth are asking you to support this amendment, to reaffirm our stance on tuition fees, and force our ministers to fight for lower fees in the cabinet and allow our MPs to oppose such measures in the commons.


I fully support it, not only does it respect the idea of the new politics and the coalition that we have entered into, but it also allows our parliamentary party who along with myself and many more of our candidates all signed the 'vote for students' pledge.

I have signed their petition in support of this motion and would encourage you to do likewise and if you are attending on Sunday to speak in support and vote for it.

Wednesday, 12 May 2010

A Few Words of Experience About Coalitions

I've seen some of my own party up in arms, whil the opportunistic Greens are offering a switch and the SNP ranting as usual about being left out of a rainbow alliance. So I think I have to tell you a little story about my own political journey.

Once upon a time I lived in a Lib Dem controlled council, but I left and since then (in 1997) it returned Liberal Democrat MPs.

Since that time I have worked for the ultimate coalition assembly of all powers in Northern Ireland. I have voted in 2003 on entering a coalition with Labour in the Scottish Parliament. I have been courted by both the SNP and Labour ahead of the 2007 council election with the aim of making deals for a coalition after the outcome and I have now agreed that the Conservative coalition is the best way forward for our country at this time.

Of those last three the first is a mix of First Past the Post and addional member top up, the second was by single transferable vote, the last of course was First Past the Post.

Here's the thing I would love to be back in the situation that Kingston council would have offered and even stronger after Thursday of allowing all the Lib Dem pledges to be inacted. Howvever, in 2003 when I entered the special conference to decide to enter a second partnership agreement I went in with questions. When the main two parties in West Lothian approached me, I had questions that would have needed to be answered. Again over the last few days I have had questions and many of them have been expressed on this blog.

I don't sit comfortably with the Conservatives, I cut my political teeth fighting them. I know many of my Lib Dem friends feel the same. I lean to the left of our party, I backed Simon Hughes to replace Charles Kennedy for example. I'm very much a social liberal with some economic liberal tendancies.

However, I do believe in electoral reform. I've seen it work in Northern Ireland and in Scotland, where people have to work together to get things done. People who do not always agree with each other all the time on all things. I have seen some combinations in a room to discuss real politics in Northern Ireland that you wouldn't believe if you look at the TV coverage of the time.

If my fellow Lib Dems agree that we need electoral reform to make a truly fair Britain they should know that there will probably never be an opportunity to hold absolute control by any party, including ourselves in some Scottish councils, ever again. In those circumstances it is a matter of who can step up to the plate and agree to get things done.

For those who felt that we should have gone in with Labour and the rest look at how much lack of control Labour had over its own MPs while those discussions were going on. I note that the Guardian and some other commentators have said that the Lib Dems lack discipline, but that has not been seen in the last week, it is Labour who showed they lacked that common purpose.

Look at what I posted earlier of what the Lib Dems have actually acheived. Look also at the things the regressive Conservatives have dropped to enable us to get these things in there. Look at all that Labour only were prepared to do "in principle" they didn't even send the man responsible for the costs to talks, it was all dependent on Darling. Osborne and Laws who are not working together both knew the costs of making deals in the Liberal Conservative talks, the Conservatives were prepared to move towards us and our stand point something that Labour seemed to not want to do in the negotiation team and more tellingly in the wider PLP.

So here it is, the new politics is about working together after the results are in. It doesn't mean that I don't campaign hard against either Labour, the SNP, Tories or others. You don't believe me ask them. They know that I will hold them to task.

But whether in Northern Ireland, West Lothian, Scotland or the UK if you have to work together to get things moving, advancing and rolling along you best do that, or else the people, the banks and whomever will crucify you for merely fiddling while things burn all around you.

Voting Liberal Democrat Brings Change in 2010

If you voted for me or any of my Liberal Democrat colleagues I'd like to say thank you and ask you to look at all the pledges from our manifesto that are now going to be enacted over the next 5 years of Government.


A Fair Start for Children


  • Introduce a Pupil Premium to give all children a fair start.

Fairer taxes and Economic Reform


  • A substantial increase in the personal allowance from April 2011 with a longer term policy objective of further increasing the personal allowance to £10,000, making further real terms steps each year towards this objective
  • Reform of the banking system, ensuring a flow of lending to businesses and a Banking Levy. An independent commission on separating retail and investment banking.
  • Capital Gains Tax reform

Fair Politics


  • Fixed-term parliaments and a referendum on electoral reform for the House of Commons.
  • A power of recall, allowing voters to force a by-election where an MP was found to have engaged in serious wrongdoing.
  • A wholly or mainly elected House of Lords on the basis of proportional representation.
  • Giving Parliament control of its own agenda so that all bills are properly debated.
  • Enacting the Calman Commission proposals and a referendum on further Welsh devolution.
  • A statutory register of lobbyists.
  • A limit on political donations and reform of party funding in order to remove big money from politics.
  • Radical devolution of power and greater financial autonomy to local government and community groups.

A fair and sustainable future

  • Establish a smart electricity grid and the roll-out of smart meters.
  • Establish feed-in tariff systems in electricity
  • A huge increase in energy from waste through anaerobic digestion.
  • The creation of a green investment bank.
  • The provision of home energy improvement paid for by the savings from lower energy bills.
  • Retention of energy performance certificates when HIPs are scrapped.
  • Measures to encourage marine energy.
  • The establishment of an emissions performance standard that will prevent coal-fired power stations being built unless they are equipped with sufficient CCS to meet the emissions performance standard.
  • Establish a high-speed rail network.
  • Cancel the third runway at Heathrow and refuse additional runways at Gatwick and Stansted.
  • Replace the Air Passenger Duty with a ‘per plane’ duty.
  • The provision of a floor price for carbon, as well as efforts to persuade the EU to move towards full auctioning of ETS permits.
  • Make the import or possession of illegal timber a criminal offence.
  • Promote green spaces and wildlife corridors in order to halt the loss of habitats and restore biodiversity.
  • Reduce central government carbon emissions by 10 per cent within 12 months.
  • Increase the target for energy from renewable sources.

Pensions


  • Restoration of the earnings link for the basic state pension from April 2011 with a “triple guarantee” that pensions are raised by the higher of earnings, prices or 2.5%.
  • Phase out the default retirement age and end the rules requiring compulsory annuitisation at 75.
  • Implement the Parliamentary and Health Ombudsman’s recommendation to make fair and transparent payments to Equitable Life policyholders.


Civil Liberties

  • Scrap the ID card scheme, the National Identity register, the next generation of biometric passports and the ContactPoint Database.
  • Outlaw the finger-printing of children at school without parental permission.
  • Extend the scope of the Freedom of Information Act to provide greater transparency.
  • Adopt the Scottish approach to stopping retention of innocent people’s DNA on the DNA database.
  • Defend trial by jury.
  • Restore rights to non-violent protest.
  • A review of libel laws to protect freedom of speech.
  • Safeguards against the misuse of anti-terrorism legislation.
  • Further regulation of CCTV.
  • Ending of storage of internet and email records without good reason.
  • A new mechanism to prevent the proliferation of unnecessary new criminal offences.
  • End the detention of children for immigration purposes.

I'm sure you'll agree that is a great deal there to be proud of. I'm somewhat upset that more of our fair start for children proposals don't appear on this list especially the things that many young families were so enthused about like shared parental leave. Maybe we'll just have to lobby Iain Duncan Smith about going further.

Thank you for voting for a fairer Britain, I'm sure my colleagues in cabinet or parliament will carry on making sure we built upon the trust that you have put in the Lib Dems on May 6th.

How Gay Friendly is the Home Office?

A gay couple may be able to spend the night at the Home Office as Chris Grayling has not ended up taking the Shadow Post he held when he uttered the word that B&B owners had the right to deny a service to same sex couples. However, just how gay friendly is his replacement Theresa May.

In 1998 she voted against equalising the age of consent and in 2000, she voted against the repeal of Section 28, legislation that banned the 'promotion' of homosexuality by local government and schools.

In 2001 and 2002 she voted against gay couples jointly adopting children.

In 2004, like much of the Conservative front bench, Mrs May did vote in favour of civil partnerships. But in the same year, Mrs May didn't attend Parliament for any of the four votes that led to the Gender Recognition Act.

In 2008 she voted in favour of a defeated bill which said that IVF rights should require a male role model- effectively discriminating against lesbian fertility rights.

So while none of the great offices of state have gone to the Lib Dems (Osborne at Treasury, Hague at Foreign Office, Fox at Defence, along with Cameron and May) we have ended up with someone whose record on gay rights does not bode well at the Home Office. Someone whose approach to Europe does not bode well at the Foreign Office and someone whose grasp of Economics leads to despair at the Treasury (thankfully David Laws is there to back him up). Look I know the policy concessions were good, but what happened in dealing with the great offices.

Polly Toynbee Ain't No Rocket Scientist


I was going to let Polly Toynbee's comment yesterday about Lab-Lib being the only legitimate coalition go until I saw her quote on the front of today's paper*.

"Shimmering on the horizon was the chance for a progressive alliance, a rocket about to take off. Then it crashed to earth."


Now I'll admit I'm no rocket scientist but over 30 years of reading sci-fi and sci-fact gives me a basic understanding of many of the key principles. So lets look at that above statement piece by piece.

On the horizon

You know I'll give her that, this is accurate. The Labour negotiating team remained on the horizon. Their aim was to defend their manifesto. It was like Custer's last stand. They were entrenching trying to defend the indefensible and not give ground. Hence they were on the horizon.

Chance for a progressive alliance

Yeah was a chance for an alliance, yes it would have been widely of progressive thought, but here's the crux. How much of that progressiveness would have been allowed to progress? It was a minority at worst or rainbow mash up at best. There would have been many conflicting agendas to try and get anything done. Yeah while there may have been a possibility of a progressive alliance how much chance did it really have to manoeuvre?

Rocket about to take off

As I said before there was no give from the Labour. The first docking of American and USSR vehicles in space came across a problem, they had different shaped airlocks. There was a solution they worked together to make it compatible. If they didn't then 5 space travellers would have been killed by the vacuum created by the incorrectly linked vessels.

The problem was the same with the Labour and Lib Dem negotiations, however, there was no give from one side. Without compromise to move into brave new politics things would have been wiped out into the vacuum of political space. The Lib Dems had brought down their Scottish coalition negotiating team, it appears that Labour had not. In 1999 and 2003 Labour did know how to work together with others to come to a satisfactory settlement this time they didn't.

They were sticking to their manifesto. It was like turning up at the NASA assembly building with Galilleo's plans for flight and being scoffed at by the NASA engineers when they refused to change things. It wasn't the commander of the mission alone that was the problem, it was his engineers and indeed his crew who had started to debate how to avoid allowing AV from their own manifesto as well.

Crashed to the Earth

Sorry Polly to crash to the earth you have to first take off.

That requires the right fuel, it also requires enough fuel to break gravity and eventually the atmosphere. There wasn't the right fuel it was a volatile mix but not enough to power anything. Also there wasn't enough of it to allow lift-off. Yeah there would have been 313 MPs in Alliance with SDLP and Alliance party 317 but that still isn't enough to provide a stable flight into the future. NASA would have been worried about tiles falling off effecting re-entry with disastrous effects at every step of the journey.

As for Shimmering I think it was lukewarm at best way off getting to the simmering stage whatsoever.

If you want to play the blame game as your article says Polly, you'll have to admit that Labour spent 13 years becoming less progressive by the day and that is what cost them a chance to form a fully progressive alliance. The Lib Dems increased their share of the vote but because of the vagaries of our electoral system ended up with less representation, and Cameron won over most of those who turned up to vote. Simples!

* Yes Murdoch has truly lost my pound a day.

Tuesday, 11 May 2010

Tory or Labour: Why the Right Decision Was Tory?

I have been getting a lot of email from constituents from both sides of the divide over the argument of which coalition, and indeed none, the Liberal Democrats should have entered into. So I'd like to make the following comment on the goings on of the last five days and especially the last 24 hours or so.

I now am watching scenes of Gordon Brown resigning while we do not yet now if the Liberal Democrats or the Conservatives have agreed upon the decision as William Hague only left the discussions after Brown entered the Palace.

One phrase that grated with me when it first came out what the Labour negotiating team saying they were defending their manifesto. That crated not of coalition but of hanging on indeed attempting to take over. It appears that the Conservatives have understood the new politics better, they have made concessions, indeed this evening some of their MPs have said that some of their policies which they didn't like could be got rid of to be replaced with Lib Dem ones.

One key thing is the sustainability of either alliance. The Labour one was tenuous and that was clear, there was no way that Labour could guarantee any vote on any major legislation, Labour MPs in Scotland were even ruining any chance of a fall back with the SNP by mocking them at every turn, which was just wrong. The Labour deal and every step they appear to have made, even the resignation f Gordon before agreement is formally met by the others appears to be doing everything to undermine the governance of our country.

As I blogged earlier my own Labour MP have even been taking it out on constituents. Labour appear to be trying to get the people to make up their minds again as soon as possible rather than achieve any sense of stability towards the national interest.

Anyone who will know me will attest that one thing I am not is a right wing member of the Liberal Democrats. For me to earlier today to say that a deal with the Conservatives was the right, proper and only thing to do was a big step. But it is the thing to do but the best for Linlithgow and East Falkirk, for Scotland and the United Kingdom. It will undoubtedly be hard for many of you to understand or to take, I'd welcome you to email me if you disagree and I will answer your enquires personally.

Decision Time

I'll have to admit a referendum on AV which one part of a coalition is free to campaign against is the not the ideal way to bring about new politics, however I doubt that this is the only concession that the Conservative team have given away. I suspect that there are also retractions on just how must they are going to cut in the first year as well.

You also have to look at some of the things that we have agreed upon.

Education

There is plenty of scope for agreement, the Tories are also looking at a pupil premium and freeing up schools to do what they want. One contentious issue will be over homophobic bullying and teaching of same sex education as part of the curriculum, even in faith schools.

Taxation

The Conservatives had intimated that they will look at the lifting of the personal tax allowance to see how this can be afforded. This is an encouraging sign for the lowest paid in our society. This may allow room for manoeuvre to get rid of the inheritance tax cuts for the super rich possibly to tax them instead on their properties. We shall wait and see but the Tories have intimated movement to make taxation fairer.

Civil Liberties

The Tories are with us on cutting the surveillance state, scrapping the ID card scheme that has been the Labour puppy for so long. Also part of this is loosening up red tape for businesses.

The Economy

There is a basic agreement in what needs to be done the real debate is over the time scale. There is a desire from both sides to get the banks lending, to cut the deficit over the term of this parliament and give Britain a greener and sustainable economic future.

Political Reform

Voting system aside there is movement to fixed term parliaments not set at the whim of the incumbent, the right to recall a corrupt MP and cutting the size of the House of Commons.

I know there will be people who said that they didn't vote Clegg to get a Conservative government, however more people in this country did vote for the Conservative MP than any other party and they returned more MPs. The Conservative government that would exist with a Liberal Democrat coalition partner would have a greenness to it, an inbuilt social conscious as well as a desire for new politics. Yesterday's Guardian cartoon showed Cameron crushing the cricket of wooden boy Clegg's conscience, however the Lib Dems in coalition with the Conservatives would act as a social conscience for the larger partner. Look at the promise to look at the poorest end of income tax above for a start.

If people voted Liberal Democrat to get electoral reform and their views to be expressed in Westminster more vocally then you have to realise that there is agreement between us and both the main parties in some areas and disagreement with both on others. I think Nick Clegg and the negotiating team will be looking at what offer is best to fulfil the nation's interests, that includes stability and economic recovery first and foremost. We have to show that coalition government can work here in the UK if we are to move for true proportionality. Only if it works and we can show we work with a party that is not the natural bedfellows will both the two main parties realise that there is hope of a future for them.

We were right to talk with the Tories as they had the best mandate from the people. We are still right to talk with them and try and come to some sort of agreement to best serve the people.

That Extra Mile

Last night William Hague described the upped offer to the Liberal Democrats as 'going the extra mile' so what must have been lacking before?

His statement said:

"In the interests of trying to create a stable, secure government, we will go the extra mile and we will offer the Liberal Democrats, in a coalition government, the holding of a referendum on the alternative vote system, so that the people of this country can decide the best electoral system."


It appears that before that statement the Tories may only have been seeking an 'confidence and supply' agreement, why else would Hague add the phrase in a coalition government after the word offer? If a coalition was already the default position surely this would have appeared in the phrase a stable, secure, coalition government at the top of the statement?

Then there is also the move from a conference on electoral reform to the Pauline conversion of the Damascus Road of offering a referendum on AV. Why is it that both of the two old parties are most fixated by AV*? The simple answer of course is that while it is electoral reform it is most like the current system and still offers them some hope of forming a majority government on less that 40% of the popular vote.

Both Labour and the Conservatives wish they were still in a two party system are are delusional about conceding any ground the multitude of other parties that have fought hard to make small inroads under FPTP. They still are thinking it is their right to govern are are willing to concede the littlest option but not the fairest.

So was it really an extra mile or merely a jump of panic?

* To be fair the latest wooing from Labour is a referendum later on STV after whipping through AV.

Monday, 10 May 2010

What Will the Next 24 Hours Bring?

As I resume post-election blogging I'd like to start by pointing out that even as a candidate in last Thursday's election I have no more access to the information of what is being discussed in London than any other party member. Therefore what I am about to type is based purely on the media reports of the last few days.

The statements last night from Danny Alexander and William Hague both focused on how the talks were working through the economic questions. This is the key stage of supporting any Government forward from this point. It is possible that the Liberal Democrats could agree to support a sound policy to deal with the deficit without entering a formal coalition. If this area can be resolved it would be possible that Cameron could lead a minority administration without the need for further support. It would also put the banks and markets at rest over what they see as uncertainty.

However that would then leave him requiring support on other issues and policy implementations when they come up. I'm sure that other areas of dispute, as Alex Wilcock put it the other day the other 3 key principles of our manifesto are up for discussion. All through the election Nick, myself and all our candidates emphasised that these four elements of fairness were the core of what we were standing for. Many of you have expressed to me your opinions on that going forward. These could well be the deciding points for how formal or informal the relationship between the Conservatives and the Lib Dems might be.

Somebody has raised the issue with me of have the Conservatives got the right to law down the law over Scotland. That may be one place where our 11 Scottish Lib Dem MPs may end up having a say. But we were voting in a UK wide election just the Conservatives have lost the trust of the Scots since the Thatcher years.

Whether there is a full blown coalition or a deal of "confidence and supply" one thing does appear clear a deal with Labour is off the table as Nick Clegg said last night that such a deal would be illegitimate in the public's eyes.

One possible scenario could be however, a confidence and supply agreement with the Tories and using the first opposition day to get a vote on proportional representation (if the Tories do not give on this) if Labour back that, Caroline Lucas, the Northern Irish parties and Scottish and Welsh Nationalists would also leading to a majority in the house on the issue.