The Lib Dems hit another poll low

How support for the Lib Dems fell from 34 per cent to 7 per cent in just ten months.

Chris Huhne's prediction that Liberal Democrat support would fall to 5 per cent as a result of the government's austerity measures looks ever more accurate. The latest YouGov survey puts Nick Clegg's party on just 7 per cent, their lowest rating since 1990. If repeated at a general election on a uniform swing, the latest figures would reduce the Lib Dems to a rump of just nine MPs.

As the graph below shows, in less than ten months, Lib Dem support has fallen from a peak of 34 per cent during the height of Cleggmania to 7 per cent.


(All figures from YouGov)

The party's new poll low coincides with an approval rating of -20 for the coalition, the lowest yet recorded. But with the Conservatives on 39 per cent (3 points higher than at the general election), it's Nick Clegg's party that is suffering the greatest damage.

The Lib Dems' decision to abandon three of their key election pledges – opposition to a VAT increase, higher tuition fees and early spending cuts – has, unsurprisingly, alienated millions of those who voted for them at the election.

Simon Hughes's argument in this week's NS that the Lib Dems are now the "constructive progressives" of British politics is not without merit. His party can take much of the credit for measures such as the pupil premium, the abolition of child detention and the repeal of identity cards. Today's announcement by Nick Clegg on libel reform is another example of a progressive policy that the Lib Dems' presence in government is allowing them to introduce.

Clegg's ultimate hope is that his party will share credit with the Conservatives for restoring the British economy to health. But should support for the Lib Dems continue to plummet, an increasingly restive party may decide that's not a gamble worth taking.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

When will the government take action to tackle the plight of circus animals?

Britain is lagging behind the rest of the world - and innocent animals are paying the price. 

It has been more than a year since the Prime Minister reiterated his commitment to passing legislation to impose a ban on the suffering of circus animals in England and Wales. How long does it take to get something done in Parliament?

I was an MP for more than two decades, so that’s a rhetorical question. I’m well aware that important issues like this one can drag on, but the continued lack of action to help stop the suffering of animals in circuses is indefensible.

Although the vast majority of the British public doesn’t want wild animals used in circuses (a public consultation on the issue found that more than 94 per cent of the public wanted to see a ban implemented and the Prime Minister promised to prohibit the practice by January 2015, no government bill on this issue was introduced during the last parliament.

A private member’s bill, introduced in 2013, was repeatedly blocked in the House of Commons by three MPs, so it needs a government bill to be laid if we are to have any hope of seeing this practice banned.

This colossal waste of time shames Britain, while all around the world, governments have been taking decisive action to stop the abuse of wild animals in circuses. Just last month, Catalonia’s Parliament overwhelmingly voted to ban it. While our own lawmakers dragged their feet, the Netherlands approved a ban that comes into effect later this year, as did Malta and Mexico. Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus, North America’s longest-running circus, has pledged to retire all the elephants it uses by 2018. Even in Iran, a country with precious few animal-welfare laws, 14 states have banned this archaic form of entertainment. Are we really lagging behind Iran?

The writing has long been on the wall. Only two English circuses are still clinging to this antiquated tradition of using wild animals, so implementing a ban would have very little bearing on businesses operating in England and Wales. But it would have a very positive impact on the animals still being exploited.

Every day that this legislation is delayed is another one of misery for the large wild animals, including tigers, being hauled around the country in circus wagons. Existing in cramped cages and denied everything that gives their lives meaning, animals become lethargic and depressed. Their spirits broken, many develop neurotic and abnormal behaviour, such as biting the bars of their cages and constantly pacing. It’s little wonder that such tormented creatures die far short of their natural life spans.

Watching a tiger jump through a fiery hoop may be entertaining to some, but we should all be aware of what it entails for the animal. UK laws require that animals be provided with a good quality of life, but the cruelty inherent in confining big, wild animals, who would roam miles in the wild, to small, cramped spaces and forcing them to engage in unnatural and confusing spectacles makes that impossible in circuses.

Those who agree with me can join PETA’s campaign to urge government to listen to the public and give such animals a chance to live as nature intended.


The Right Honourable Ann Widdecombe was an MP for 23 years and served as Shadow Home Secretary. She is a novelist, documentary maker and newspaper columnist.