The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

The Lib Dem rebels: who they are and what they want

Your guide to the four Lib Dem MPs planning to rebel against the increase in VAT.

By George Eaton Published 28 June 2010 11:49

Vince Cable may now claim that the Lib Dems only warned of the dangers of a VAT rise during the election in order to "score points" over the Conservatives, but there are others in his party who have always opposed this regressive move on principle.

One of them, Andrew George, has now tabled an amendment demanding an assessment of the impact the new 20 per cent rate will have on low-income groups. It has been signed by three others -- Bob Russell, Mark Williams and Roger Williams.

There is no evidence that Simon Hughes and Charles Kennedy have joined the rebellion, though it wouldn't be surprising if the Gang of Four (as they will undoubtedly soon be known) had their tacit support.

Meanwhile, Russell, who has previously threatened to vote against the Budget in its entirety, has dismissed an Independent on Sunday report that the rebels have secretly agreed to co-operate with Labour MPs as "poppycock" and "Labour mischief-making".

He said: "There is not a conspiracy involving Simon Hughes or Charles Kennedy, this is about backbencher unease from members. If Labour think there is some yawning chasm they are going to be sorely disillusioned."

It remains to be seen whether the amendment will be put to a vote on Tuesday, but the rebellion is an important reflection of the wider unease felt by Lib Dem activists over the Budget.

The MPs have no obvious ideological agenda, but Russell has a record as a Lib Dem maverick. He previously rebelled against the party whip to vote against equalising the age of consent and the sexual equality act.

Russell's name and those of his fellow conspirators are certainly worth noting for the future.

Andrew George

Age: 51

Constituency: St Ives (elected 1997)

Majority: 1,719 (3.7 per cent)

Significant moments: One of the first Lib Dem frontbenchers to threaten to resign if Charles Kennedy did not stand down as leader. Later sacked by Kennedy's successor, Menzies Campbell.

Bob Russell

Age: 64

Constituency: Colchester (elected 1997)

Majority: 6,982 (15.1 per cent)

Significant moments: Rebelled against the party whip to vote against equalising the age of consent and against the sexual equality act.

Mark Williams

Age: 44

Constituency: Ceredigion (elected 2005)

Majority: 8,324 (21.8 per cent)

Significant moments: Dramatically increased his majority at the last election from 219 to 8,324.

Roger Williams

Age: 62

Constituency: Brecon and Radnorshire (elected 2001)

Majority: 3,905 (10.2 per cent)

Significant moments: Served as shadow Welsh secretary for the Lib Dems from 2007-2008.

Special subscription offer: Get 12 issues for £12 plus a free copy of Andy Beckett's "When the Lights Went Out".

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

More from George Eaton

4 comments

Mon, 2010-06-28 17:25 — Huw Irranca-Davies MP (not verified)

Well done to these four for taking at least a small stand. They deserve credit for this partial front against the onslaught of a thoroughly regressive budget.

Yet however valiant and well-meaning (and I know they are wrestling with their conciences), this could be a classic Don Quixote moment of tilting at VAT windmills, as here are the most likely scenarios:-

a) The amendment is not selected, and the LibDem Four hold their noses and vote for the budget out of collective loyalty. Result: no change to the budget, and the poorest get hit hardest.
b) the amendment is selected, the LibDem Four vote against, but the rest of the LibDems ram the budget through anyway. Result: no change to the budget, and the poorest get hit hardest.

So a futile gesture perhaps, but I have no doubt done with real meaning and sincerity. Yet it is still tilting at a VAT windmill, thinking this is the terrifying giant. Why?

Because it is the sheer cumulative impact of this budget package - including but not exclusively the pernicious VAT increase - which will do the damage.

Regardless of the outcome of this well-intentioned and welcome intervention by the LibDem Four on VAT - and I hope they do vote for the amendment to achieve a moral victory against the Coalition Government at least - unless they vote against the budget itself, the poorest will be hit again and again and again.

Spending will be prematurely cut before we have real growth in the economy, so front-line public services immediately suffer; these precipitive cuts result in stagnating growth or slower growth than anticipated, so investment in public services is further restrained; unemployment will grow to the levels in the Red Book and beyond; in the guise of welfare reform, various benefits to some of the most vulnerable will be cut.

In short, a series of direct attacks on the poorest, on the services they rely on when in difficulty, and on prospects for employment.

So if maintaining the previous Labour government's focus on tackling poverty is important to these four LibDem MPs - and I believe it truly is - let them vote down the budget in it's entirety.

Otherwise the result, as with their reasoned and reasonable amendment, will inevitably be: no change to the budget, and the poorest get hit hardest.

Huw Irranca-Davies
MP for Ogmore

Mon, 2010-06-28 20:51 — clem the gem (not verified)

I believe that this article and Huws response show the way forward for Labour in opposition. It simply will nopt do to just shout "traitor" at LibDems who have done nothing but form a stable government. However, resistance to this Budget, and further cuts, will lead to those on the LDs leftwing having to re-evaluate just why it is that they are in politics.

Mon, 2010-07-05 11:52 — Steve Hicks (not verified)

Andrew George MP's VAT position can be seen at: http://stiveslibdems.com/category/andrew-george-mp/

Tue, 2010-06-29 16:28 — Charliechops1

The Lib Dems have a survival strategy. Nick Clegg is too close to Cameron to lay an active part; Vince Cable (the next Lib Dem leader?) spearheads opposition within Cabinet; Simon Hughes provides a safety valve in the Parliamentary Party. Which Coalition partner will tire of these games first.