Welcome to the New Statesman website. Please sign in or register to participate in the conversation.

The hard reality of power

The Liberal Democrats are now the constructive party of progressive politics, writes Simon Hughes, and we are bringing about real change. This is our coming of age.

For liberals, there are good reasons to be cheerful. For the first time in more than 60 years, a new year breaks with the proud and progressive Liberal Democrat successors to William Beveridge and Jo Grimond in the government of the United Kingdom. Although the electorate (and, to a lesser extent, senior people in the Labour Party) did not give us the chance to form a coalition of the centre left, which many of us had hoped for, we rose to last year's challenge and did not run away either from practising what we preach about pluralist politics or from taking responsibility at one of the most challenging economic and political times for this country since the Second World War.

We start the year not just in government but ensuring every week that progressive policy is agreed upon and implemented. Not every policy that we would wish to implement - nor for which we have fought - can be delivered. Not getting your own way on everything is the inevitable consequence of coalition.

Opportunity knocks

There are battles to fight and hard concessions to make - on areas such as schools, immigration caps and, above all, tax and spend. These issues can lead to intellectual and political struggles of conscience. But this is the hard reality of power, not the easier world of opposition. And even when we are not able to deliver the policies on which we campaigned, Liberal Democrats are perpetually striving to make new laws as progressive as possible.

The most recent example is higher education. The proposal put forward by the coalition government is a huge improvement on the recommendations made in Lord Browne's review, commissioned by Labour with support from the Conservatives. By our introducing a system in which both the total amount and the monthly contribution paid are entirely dependent on the level of earnings after graduation, university remains affordable. This is why, despite not being a supporter of tuition fees, I am happy to take a role in working to broaden access. Labour's reaction to a scheme that, in terms of repayment, is almost the same as the graduate tax it says it now supports is hypocritical and demonstrates why the responsibility of being the constructive party of progressive politics in Britain has moved from Labour to us.

In other areas, there are still huge opportunities to implement a liberal agenda in every year of this parliament. The opportunity will come this year to win the referendum for a fairer parliamentary voting system - a huge and important prize not delivered by Labour during its 13 years in power, despite manifesto pledges, and now resiled from by many Labour MPs who were elected on this very commitment only months ago. There is the referendum in March on further powers for devolved government in Wales, as well as the significant transfer of powers to local government in England contained in the recently published Localism Bill. Above all, there are the plans - never delivered by a Labour or Conservative administration in the past 100 years - for a predominantly elected second chamber of parliament. Liberals are delivering urgently on a progressive agenda where Labour has consistently failed.

Economic and social liberalism remains as important as constitutional and political reform. I believe in reversing the gap between the rich and the poor: economic fairness should not just be a mantra or an election slogan. In my constituency of "two cities" - which has a greater percentage of council property than any other in England and some of the most expensive riverside homes - restoring the earnings link between state pensions and average earnings matters (a link broken by Margaret Thatcher and not restored by Messrs Major, Blair or Brown). Taking people earning less than £10,000 a year out of tax altogether matters, as does ensuring that richer people pay higher capital gains tax. All three are now government policy. None would have happened without progressive Liberals in this government.

Coming of age

In education and health, there are undoubtedly changes proposed or under way that do not form part of a traditional Liberal Democratic prospectus but, as the chair of governors at an outstanding inner-city primary school with a new nursery class, I know the importance of investing in children under five and between five and 11 and we are doing that. I know, too, the importance of investing in further education and non-university training and apprenticeships and we are doing that. And as a civil liberties lawyer, I know the importance of abolishing identity cards, reducing detention without trial and having an independent inquiry into allegations of torture.

The huge Budget deficit means that we cannot do all that we would wish. But budget reductions nationally or locally are not ideological: they are a response to the legacy created by the international economic crisis, the greed of the banks and the decisions of the last government. So, ahead of the Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election and two referendums and elections in the spring, liberals and Liberal Democrats must never waiver in our commitment to a fairer and more liberal Britain - something not delivered by the Labour and Conservative governments of my lifetime.

It will be a five-year job. And we will be able to go to the next election proud of what we have achieved. The alternative to coalition was a single-party Conservative government. I have no doubt about which I prefer. And no progressive British voter should be in any doubt about which is preferable for Britain. This is the coming of age for Liberal Democrats. The coming of age has its challenges - but we will deliver.

Simon Hughes is deputy leader of the Liberal Democrat Party and MP for Bermondsey and Old Southwark

Tags: Liberal Democrats

44 comments

jose's picture

I know this would be breaking a habit of a lifetime, but it would help if LibDems stopped lying about their opponents positions. Labour were not committed to campaigning for a YES vote, the commitment was towards introducing a referendum.

Forlornehope's picture

Alex - exactly!

Eddy S's picture

given the spending constraints that even alistair darling agreed would be necessary - it would have been difficult for any party taking over.

Hans Castorp's picture

What a pitiful salad of soggy apologetic nonsense.

"The alternative to coalition was a single-party Conservative government. I have no doubt about which I prefer. "

Me too: a Conservative minority. Because they would then have had to compromise in response to all parties in the house outside government - improving ministerial accountability and the standing of Parliament - instead of hashing out deals inside it and pretending that their agreement is important, enforcable or gives rise to any accountability.

We might also have enjoyed a US Senatorial-style brake on the Tory program, no bad thing given how radical and unproven it is. Instead, we have an arrangement whereby the Tories get what they want on all major programs, with a few sops for the whipping boys.

All through growing up, my parents told me the Lib Dems were a sclerotic mix of oddball handwringers and ukewarm Tories. How right they were.

What a sad figure you now cut Mr Hughes. Nobody buys what you are selling, and you know it.

Hans Castorp's picture

Ha! That should be "lukewarm" - not sure if and Lib Dems play the ukelele.

Keith McBurney's picture

Simon,

Having been too long inattentive to the damaging effects of the exclusive British political system on our societies since WW Part 2's coalition broke up to engage in party political tribalism's further centralisation and accretion of power from the people in seeking to impose what it ‘s self-selected opinion of the best thought was best for the rest of us (1), it is high time we all "came of age" and accepted the legacy of the Norman Conquest is long past its sold to crown in parliament's faux sovereignty use by date to deliver the true debt we owe each other: our just and so strong societies and communities of mutual interdependent interest emanating from families, friends and fellows bent on doing as we should wish to be done by.

In its political guise this means nothing less than the full recognition and acknowledgement of and provision for our nations' people's individual, joint and several sovereignty being supreme above all bar our judicial and legislative authorities throughout the self-determined forms of governance best suited to our mutual interdependent needs for optimal autonomy.

Only then will we all be ruled in what supposedly we are all in together and should be our realms. If "Big Society" as the aggregate of our societies is to have legs, they are ours to stand on and deliver from bottom-up, not top-down. In that coming of age we will all need to grow up. So best make sure you enable our self-governance for, of and by each other in exercising our personal and plural free wills - our sovereignty - so that we do.

Regards,
Keith

Notes:

(1) Inter alia whilst hollowing out any semblance of participative democracy, buying leveraged FPTP votes with cashback in reverse subsidy to deliver gifts brought first by the IMF and ERM, then leveraged Big Bang and Big Bust in plundering competition and credit into the unethical and unsustainable UK national debt now mortgaging our futures and those of our children and their children in rising from 100% soon to between 300-500% of said income by 2040 (2) depending on how the well being of our ageing populations is funded and assuming tight financial and fiscal control throughout.

(2) In comparison with the last and recently paid off high being 238% in 1946.

Monitor: The foregoing replaces my original unedited comment at 03:44 which you are requested to delete.

Mulligrubs's picture

"The Liberals (sic) are delivering on a progressive agenda where Labour has consistently failed"

Actually - the Liberals (if you insist) are delivering on a Tory agenda where even New Labour feared to tread. Yes, you have blindly and boldly gone etc - and you will boldly and unceremoniously be booted out at the next election by way of just reward. Progressive? That aint what 20% VAT is Mr Hughes - and I suspect you know it - just as the electorate do. Start rearranging the deck chairs on the Lib Dem decks of SS Torytanic!

Paul Hillyard's picture

Anyone who has read the Orange Book would be able to confirm that the Libdem leadership, Clegg, Alexander, Cable and Laws are as nearer to the Tories than Cameron himself.

The Party has been the subject of a right wing coup, no left minded Liberal or Social Democrat is in the government.

elrob's picture

Re Paul:
Anyone who has read the Orange Book would be able to confirm that the Libdem leadership, Clegg, Alexander, Cable and Laws are as nearer to the Tories than Cameron himself.

The Party has been the subject of a right wing coup, no left minded Liberal or Social Democrat is in the government.
--------
I agree Paul. But Lib Dems voted for Clegg as their leader. It surprised me, and still does. It is also the reason I decided not tow switch to the Lib Dems. I did not vote in 2005, and voted for a small party in protest to the neoliberalism of Labour in 2001. I returned to Labour in 2010, because the Lib Dems voted for the Orange Book, and understood that Labour was the only party that could ever be radical or progressive despite all the horrors of New Labour: the party of the the landlord FFS.

But Mike: on education, and leading to larger class sizes???
That was not the norm under Labour. As anyone who was brought up under the Tories in the 80s can avow to.
Labour massively raised investment in schools. The difference between the Labour years and previously is striking. Watch that return!

elrob's picture

Octopusok
"Simon Hughes - the STRAIGHT choice for Bermondsey" Bermondsey by-election, 1983 (my emphasis).

Shame on you Simon.
-------
Well said. I remember that and I was 12. Never forgot how the dirty Liberal machine could work. To think i nearly switched to Lib Dems. I do not know if it is just a London thing, but I lost count of how many people were voting Lib Dem "because they wwere more left wing than Labour". What a joke!

Post new comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Latest tweets