I have noted Nick Clegg's comments today on who his party might support in the forthcoming hung parliament. According to the BBC he has said:
Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg says his party will not prop up any government "held hostage" by the SNP or UKIP, should there be a hung Parliament.
He also said that the party with the "greatest mandate", even if they have not won a majority, should be given the first chance to form a government.
This is a man who has been deputy prime minister. He must know UKIP will have little or no influence in the next parliament. What is he talking about?
Surely he also realises the most fiercely and dangerously nationalists party in the UK right now, who are set to have 97% of their eats in England after the election and who long ago ceased to have chance of any serious representation any where else.
And doesn't he know that no party can hold another to ransom at Westminster? It's ability is based solely on whether or not its members will obey the whip to go through a particular lobby, and all MPs have the right not to do so?
As for the 'greatest mandate', what is what? Most votes, seats, election funding, or what? I'd suggest that this should be a matter of political judgement as to who offers the best hope for the country: Nick Clegg simply seems to see it as a matter of sums.
As for the logic regarding the SNP, this is just bizarre. With a maximum of 50 or so seats the SNP cannot break up the UK from Westminster. That is impossible. Unless, of course, all the Westminster parties want it to happen. It is, of course, quite possible in a hung parliament for alliances to be made on different issues. Around 600 seats are likely to align on Scottish independence.
Am I in that case allowed to say that I find the logic Clegg and many politicians present to the electorate mildly depressing, at best?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Mr Clegg does not seem to understand how parliament works. I seem to remember he made a firm promise to vote against increases in student tuition fees, and so did every single one of the Lib Dem MP’s, before the last election. Then he and most of the rest of them broke that promise.
They did not promise to win the vote on the issue: only that they would vote against. Then he tried to tell us that promise should not have been made, since it couldn’t be kept. But it could. Some of the lib dems did keep it. Nothing to stop them keeping it
Mr Clegg doesn’t understand that. Or he is a lying toerag. Or he thinks your heid buttons up the back. You decide.
The message from Nick Clegg is clear vote Lib Dem get a Conservative Government. He’s already making his excuses for doing so. Although I get the sneaking suspicion Clegg maybe trying to attract Conservative voters in his constituency of Sheffield Hallam to help save his Seat.
sounds like he’s preparing the ground for a situation where the tories finish a slim first place in the election but his party snubs them anyway (and so preparing himself for tory/right-wing press attacks pointing to his previous view that only a coalition formed with the party that finished first would have credibility with the public).
the ‘greatest mandate’ i can only guess would be an effort to draw attention to the fact that whilst the tories might finish first, the vast majority of seats will be held by MP’s pursuing a left-wing agenda.
as for the line about SNP/UKIP, perhaps he’s trying to remind the electorate that Labour aren’t the only ones being held to ransom by single issue nationalists.
whatever his intentions i think your disillusionment is widely shared. despite clear daylight between the tories and Labour and the Greens offering a genuine alternate public opinion still seems to be that they’re all the same, by which i think they mean that they’re all lying bastards so whats the point? (not a view i share but totally understandable).
having read all Cleggs comments, i does appear they are getting ready to get into bed with the tories again. and now Miliband has ruled out doing any deal with the SNP (even confidence and supply) i’m even more confused by Labour’s strategy.
the latest news about Clegg is that he is on course to lose his seat, anyway. If so, it won’t be his call whom the Lib Dem MPs, if any, give their backing to.
I’m disappointed by some of our interviewers. Andrew Marr today asking Miliband to apologise ‘for excessive government borrowing in the last labour government’ and ‘not running a surplus for a rainy day’. I’ve heard of Holocaust denial and climate change denial, now we have global financial crisis denial.
We’d have had to run an unprecedented surplus to cope with the crisis-such a large percentage of the Govt. spending would have driven us into depression.
Why no demand for an apology from the Conservatives for not seeing what was going on? Or the City of London for their part in it?
Indeed
Oh goodness me…………..on that basis Richard you’ve got every right to be depressed.
Again, Andrew Marr is someone who may not now be at the top of his game and has fallen into using the same ‘cognitive map’ of the financial crisis as the neo-libs.
We know that if a lie is repeated enough it becomes received wisdom.
As for Clegg he has reportedly no interests or knowledge of economics whatsoever.
A strange position, methinks, for a politician who claims to be in favour of PR that he should challenge the legitimacy of a power bloc that represents the largest concensus of opinion in the Country.
But then, Mr Clegg elected to ignore the concensus of half of his Party’s voters in forming a formal coalition with the Conservatives, in the process betraying pretty much every core value held dear by the rank and file.
His current attempts to influence post-election events look increasingly more grubby by the day.
Interesting summary here that concurs with you views:
https://paulspicker.wordpress.com/2015/04/27/the-seven-habits-of-dangerous-politicians/