The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

"I agree with Nick." Why Ed brought it back

The old pre-election refrain gets an airing.

By Richard Morris Published 12 December 2011 14:14

It appears to be May 2010 all over again.

A Labour leader is throwing come hither looks at Nick Clegg. And after celebrating what looked like a victory in the small hours of a Friday morning, one long weekend later and Tory MPs are realising that there may be an orange obstacle preventing them doing anything and everything they want.

Meanwhile, a quirk in the coalition agreement -- that everyone bar Ed Miliband seems to have missed -- is about to take effect.

Let's deal with the Tories first. A certain amount of self-indulgent giggling on Friday at Cameron's "coup" has turned into sorrowful headshaking now that the Lib Dems have (belatedly) called foul.

"Do they understand the concept of collective responsibility?" was the question 18 months ago and is being asked again now. To which the answer is yes, it's a two way street, it applies to governments who have won an outright majority (the Tories didn't), and anyway withdrawing to the margins of Europe isn't in the coalition agreement. This last point gives the Lib Dems carte blanche on the issue of Europe.

For any Tory Eurosceptics reading this, "carte blanche" is a French phrase, which roughly translates as "stuff you".

So what does Cameron do about this? Tories keen to push on from Friday's, ahem, "victory", think he should dissolve the coalition, ditch us pesky coalition non-partners (how quickly they forget) and start repatriating powers from Brussels pronto. They are happy for Cameron to call a general election if he needs to -- no British politician has ever lost out by sticking up two fingers to the French, have they?

Unfortunately for those Eurosceptics, David Cameron can't do that. And what's stopping him? Well, amusingly, it's the Queen. For on 15 September 2011, Her Majesty graciously gave royal assent to the Parliament Act (sponsor: N. Clegg).

This means there can only be a General Election before May 2015 under two circumstances. Either at least two thirds of the entire House of Commons have to agree that it's a jolly good idea, which is unlikely. Or the government has to lose a vote of no confidence.

Now, that could happen. I'm not sure David Cameron would want to call such a vote and end up having to vote against himself in order to bring down his own government, but the option is there for him. Or for Labour.

But that doesn't trigger an election. First Parliament must examine if an alternative government can be formed from the existing make up of the House...

Hence we hear the clarion call of "I agree with Nick".

There will be plenty who say that won't happen. That it would make the Lib Dems look duplicitous to turn on their Tory partners and the electorate would never forgive them. Ah well, Plus ca change (translation - see above).

Ed Miliband knows that a vote of no confidence from Labour, Lib Dems, Green SNP and Alliance would end with him being Prime Minister without the need for a general election. Support of Plaid and others would make him more secure. The maths couldn't be made to work 18 months ago. But now the Tories have had time to annoy everyone - suddenly it looks a little more likely.

Like I said. It feels like May 2010 all over again...

Richard Morris blogs at A View From Ham Common which was named Best New Blog at the 2011 Lib Dem Conference

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

Tags: Ed Miliband Eurozone Nick Clegg

More from Richard Morris

14 comments

Mon, 2011-12-12 23:32 — Scotty

Yup that sounds like a MilliE thing to do - stand up and mock the lib dems in opposition and turn face and lick their boots at the first opportunist moment.
I think Clegg will have seen how MilliE deals with his brothers- the public have.

Mon, 2011-12-12 14:40 — M. Wenzl (not verified)

Fascinating article. Actually, this brings to mind something I saw in the Sun once, which went a little like this: "The Tories should push aside their feeble Lib Dem partners and start acting like Conservatives again".

To the impossibility of this, I say c'est la vis (translation above).

Mon, 2011-12-12 15:11 — Hugh Markey (not verified)

Is this David Cameron's Gordon Brown moment? Will the Tory leader vault over the ropes into the electoral ring ready for battle.
Let's see how hard Cameron is! No excuses! No backing down and slinking away. Gordon Brown had plenty of advice from the opposition and the media and when he didn't make use of the opportunity to do battle all the ire and accusations Tory politicians and their auxiliaries in the media could muster hit him like a fussilade.
As a past luminary of the Bullington Club surely David is up for a challenge. He wont get a second chance - not with 'He Who Dares Wins' David Davis and Young Turk Boris(not Abdul?) Johnson snarling at the edge of the political jungle.

Craps

Mon, 2011-12-12 15:17 — Indu Pendent (not verified)

Picture caption "Jump on the coat tails of the Milibandwagon".

The Lib Dems are busted and will be decimated at the next election. They are having their once in 2 generations time right now.

- They cant keep promises
- They are weak and cant mediate the Tories (or Labour - they would eat the Libdems for breakfast) in a coalition
- unlike 60% of the population, they the Libdems dont support Cameron saying 'No'. Even Labour has gone quiet about it.

The LibDems use to be Labour's right wing but no one will vote for them now in case there is another Tory coalition.

Clegg openly disagreeing with Cameron is suicide:
- only one of them is right: the opinion poles are showing most people strongly support Cameron.
- Votes see it as Clegg not being able to get on with the Tories. It will put people off who want a coalition voting for the Libdems
- The LibDems are finished electorially. Clegg will increasingly be seen as a wet leader of a tiny party, neither being one thing or another. Whatever he says, people will automatically take it to be pointless and brush it aside.

Its interesting politics because it means the vote is going to be strongly polarised.

We know what the Tories stand for. What actually does Labour stand for again apart from spin?

Mon, 2011-12-12 16:00 — peter hack (not verified)

I agree with Ed !

We need accurate figures on EU costs to throw into the right wing myth machine! I saw figures the other day at 0.3 % of GDP. can someone commission some research please ?

Also the environmental alliance needs to come forward with all the good law that the EU engenders from action on climate change, to biodiversity protection under the Habitats Directive to clean seas from sewage, to nitrates , recycling all alrgely driven by Brussels.

Step up here please ED.

Mon, 2011-12-12 16:09 — M. Wenzl (not verified)

@Indu Pendent

If there were an election, you are right, the results would be polarised and the Lib Dems would probably take a hammering, but they would likely retain a sufficient number of seats in order to call the shots as to which party they give a majority.

Although to Clegg et al it seemed like a better idea to go into coalition with the Tories (since they could define themselves as a party etc), I think it would be in their long-term interests to join forces with Labour for the reason that they are unlikely to lose out in any major way. The reason for this is:

1) If the Lib-Lab coalition were successful the Lib Dems would be able to say that they were a major reforming force that helped to clean up the politics of a party with which many people had become disillusioned. In other words, they could play the modernising left card that appeals to a great deal of swing voters.

2) Even if they weren't able to say this (and the coalition was successful), they probably wouldn't lose many votes on account of the fact that they did no harm during their tenure (even if the party members themselves were frustrated by their lack of impact).

3) If the Lib-Lab coalition didn't work and there was another election, the Tories wouldn't pick up many disaffected Lib-Lab votes -- right now they're at their peak in terms of votes.

Mon, 2011-12-12 16:12 — M. Wenzl (not verified)

NB: (3) is on the condition that the Tories remain a predominantly Eurosceptic party geared towards radical fiscal austerity (rather than discipline), among other things.

Mon, 2011-12-12 18:38 — Eddy S (not verified)

don't focus on the irrelevant, try to focus on what matters. look at the bigger picture we got serious things to think about as a country as a people and this is not it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHmwZ96_Gos

Mon, 2011-12-12 18:40 — super huey (not verified)

Libdems better off with Labour?... you have to ask first... Who wants to be in a coalition with the Libdems? they're a bloody liability!

Even if it came down to it Labour would have to think really hard whether they would endure 5 years of sulky libdem hell.

Besides you can't trust Labour on anything, look at the legacy they left behind even clegg would agree and Danny having looked in the books would probably defect to the Tories if he wasn't half way there already.

Be realistic, lib dems are not electable, just like Labour.

Wed, 2011-12-21 12:55 — Marxist Nutter (not verified)

Wishful thinking....However I think that Hope is being abolished in April along with public audit, social housing and the NHS - so let's hope while we still can!

Tue, 2011-12-13 16:40 — M. Wenzl (not verified)

@super huey

Maybe neither the Lib Dems or Labour are electable, but it's not as if their lost votes would ever go to the Tories, who have veered to the centre far less than David Cameron would have had us believe before the election. What would happen? Would centre/left-of-centre voters simply not vote at all?