Will the Lib Dems reach for the eject button?
As Cameron and Clegg relaunch the coalition, the Lib Dems plan an early exit.
By George Eaton Published 08 May 2012 9:15
Two years on from their famous love-in at the Downing Street rose garden, David Cameron and Nick Clegg have chosen the appropriately sober setting of an Essex factory for their post-election "relaunch". All the talk is of the pair "renewing their vows" but that's not quite right. Cameron's betrayal of Clegg during the AV campaign meant that the marriage was dissolved long ago. It's not personal, it's just business, is the coalition's new mantra.
Despite Cameron's fear of his government being seen as a "bunch of accountants", the pair will insist that the coalition's raison d'être remains deficit reduction. As the PM will say:
Two years ago our two parties came together to form a strong Coalition. We agreed that our number one priority was to keep Britain safe from the financial storm and to rescue our economy from the mess left by the last Labour Government. That was and remains our guiding task.
But if deficit reduction is the coalition's "guiding task", it's worth pointing out that it hasn't been very good at it. The government borrowed £126bn in 2011-12, £10bn more than Osborne predicted in his "emergency" Budget, and the national debt is set to reach £1.4 trillion by 2014-15. Of course, it's hard to borrow less when the economy is shrinking. In this respect, the government's biggest mistake was to prioritise defict reduction above all else. As Keynes once remarked, "look after unemployment and the Budget will look after itself".
There will be some token references to growth in the speech, with Clegg promising a "renewed sense of urgency" and a "redoubling of our efforts" on getting more credit into the economy and building infrastructure. Yet the refusal of Osborne's "fiscally neutral" Budget to endorse stimulus meant that the real chance to boost growth was missed. Cameron and Clegg will insist that the damage done by the financial crisis was "greater than anyone thought" but to the voters, who have seen their living standards plummet at the fastest rate since the 1920s, this will just sound like another excuse.
Osborne's toxic Budget means that the pair can't even fall back on the old saw that "we're all in this together". Spying a political opportunity, Ed Miliband will also be in Essex today, calling for the reintroduction of the 50p tax rate and the repeal of the "granny tax".
The next election may still be three years away (although it doesn't feel like it, we're not even halfway through the coalition's term) but both parties already have their eyes on 2015. Two years ago, there was talk of a Tory-Lib Dem pact at the next election. Now, figures on both sides suggest that the coalition may not even make it that far. Today's Times (£) reports that the Lib Dems are considering withdrawing from the coalition "well before" May 2015 to allow the party to "reassert its independence". Given the scale of their losses last week (the Lib Dems now have fewer than 3,000 councillors, the lowest number since the party was formed in 1988), that's no surprise. As Matthew Oakeshott, Vince Cable's representative on earth, has warned, if the Lib Dems suffer more defeats like that one, they will not be able to fight the next election as a national party.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















17 comments
http://www.roseshoesoutlet2012.com
No. They won't. They are just trying to encourage demoralised LibDem party workers. The story is just spin.
It's a pity really. Breaking the Coalition would alienate the remaining Toryish LibDem voters without bringing back the already entirely alienated Labourish ones. It could kill the party off in one election. And good riddance.
The only concern for the lib dems is letting fags bum at the altar, you would think there was more important things to worry about.
I note there is no article about the conviction of the racist Asian pedo gang, funny that.
This is a disgusting, shameful comment deserving no reply.
It should be removed.
Your disgust not mine.
I recall that it was the conservative government that deregulated the markets initially, then the newlabour government continued with that policy. Why hasn't any government sought to rebalance the economy in the past two decades? Short term decisions for complex problems is not the answer is it? The collectively powerful and individuals with big egos, have enabled these mammoth problems to fester for far too long. It's hardly surprising that seventy percent of the electorate don't vote any more. Perhaps they're too cynical and fed up of the real misery and distress watching the daily news. I like Nick Clegg, he said: " we are the party of economic responsability and in time will be seen as the party of justice". There is no justice in unemployment and the oppression of ones fellow man or in fact punishment for prudence and shrewd choices. In my oppinion it's better to be in the room and try to influence descisions. I do hope that at least he gains House of Lords reform. Good luck to all whom try to solve these problems in difficut times. Some people just want an easy life, but life is not easy for anyone in reality. I make use of my vote because I'm female and women died for it under the Kings horse (Emily). Shame to all those who don't use their right to vote to influence the outcome.
The Tories and the LibDems have no option other than to stick together. Or hang separately!
Of course, suicide is no longer against the criminal law but politics being what it is and providing the electorate remains gullible there's always hope.
Ancient Rome did not cut back on providing bread and circuses for the native population until this underclass was outnumbered by other Romans citizens from further afield .
Are the Tories and their body servants. the LibDems not being a little premature?
No Option
Looney Landsley has just told GP Commosioning Groups to commission services for older people based on the size of the local elderly poulation and not on things like pensioner poverty. This creep is Poverty Blind but not class blind - taking away from poorer pensioners (who generally have the worst health) to give more to posher pensioners! Welcome to THE TOXIC TORY TWO TIER NHS! Will the last Lib Dem MP/Councillor please switch off the lights when they leave the building!
"Today's Times (£) reports that the Lib Dems are considering withdrawing from the coalition "well before" May 2015 to allow the party to "reassert its independence"."
May 2010 is about the only time that strategy would do much for them. Charitably I'd say if they'd walked before they privatised the NHS they might have retained a glimmer of credibility. Those dates apart there's not a great deal the Lib Dems can do to get any of their progressive votes back. They're seen as more toxic than the Tories by most now.
If the Lib Dems withdrew from the Coalition, Labour could simply table a vote of no confidence. The Lib Dems could either vote with the Tories or abstain, thus propping up the Government they had just left. Or they could vote against the Tories and possibly force a General Election.
Whichever they did, they would be lambasted for going back on previous positions.
The point though is that there is different ways to handle a deficit. Nobody in their right mind could seriously say the coalition have handle it well.
If you create a bigger unemployment problem the deficit is harder to deal with.
The 'crowding out' argument is nonsense and only market fundementalists quote it in the current context.
The problem is a chronic lack of demand caused by a range of factors one of which is an unhealthy distrubution of wealth. The right seem to forget that in their pursuit of 'flexible labour markets' and downward pressure on real wages people can't afford the consumer goods that keeps the economy ticking over.
Keynes was pretty consistent on his position regarding unemployment and government's role in an economic downturn
I do wish people would stop going on about 'crowding out.' There's very little evidence that any such thing was happening before the recession, and still less that it is now. Low investment is a real problem, but it has little to do with public spending and a lot to do with investors' uncertainties about the future, uncertainties that public spending cuts and the resulting economic slowdown are only serving to exacerbate.
I do not care about your wish here to be honest, but when you can proove that a country with a big government deficit, a trade deficit and few private savings still has the resources to build some factories, you deserve a Nobel prize for Economics.
*prove
As Keynes once remarked, "look after unemployment and the Budget will look after itself".
This was said in a radio discussion in 1933. He never wrote this in his books. Correct me if I am wrong. So Keynes' remark was not important.
But anyway, it is just 1=1. A productive person is good for the Budget. An unproductive person is a burden for the budget. Nobody ever doubted this. What do you want to proove with the quote?
Government spending is up in the UK and the deficit is a problem. But what now? Austerity is always good, anytime. At least the government would stop crowding out private investments.
"So Keynes' remark was not important." - because it wasn't published in a book?
Oh dear.... you'll be telling us the working classes don't know anything important - Well, they don't have books do they!
*prove