Vince Cable’s assertion that the Liberal Democrats are not guilty of reneging on their pre-election promises as they are simply honouring their commitment to the coalition agreement, will leave many wondering whether it is worth believing anything that the Lib Dems say - while in a revealing interview in the Total Politics December magazine, former Chief Secretary David Laws exposes just how much Nick Clegg's focus was, pre-election, on a hung parliament.
Vince Cable’s assertion that the Liberal Democrats are not guilty of reneging on their pre-election promises as they are simply honouring their commitment to the coalition agreement, will leave many wondering whether it is worth believing anything that the Lib Dems say – while in a revealing interview in the Total Politics December magazine, former Chief Secretary David Laws exposes just how much Nick Clegg’s focus was, pre-election, on a hung parliament.
Laws says:
“Nick Clegg had prepared very effectively, but very discreetly, for a hung Parliament scenario.
“We had a clear view about our policy negotiating strategy and priorities, a team established in readiness to negotiate, which had worked closely together for months, and a carefully co-ordinated process for internal party consultations.”
This puts Cable’s weekend comments into an interesting context. If they were planning to enter into some form of coalition agreement all along, the level of commitment the party had to these pre-election pledges appears questionable.
This also sheds more light on another of the Lib Dems’ broken promises, their deficit reduction plan. As Left Foot Forward has previously reported, pre-election it was made clear the Liberal Democrat plan was more closely aligned with Labour than the Conservatives. Just five days before the country went to the polls, Mr Clegg – when asked by Reuters about the Conservative party’s plans – said:
“My eight-year-old ought to be able to work this out – you shouldn’t start slamming on the brakes when the economy is barely growing. If you do that you create more joblessness, you create heavier costs on the state, the deficit goes up even further and the pain with dealing with it is even greater. So it is completely irrational.”
In light of what we have learnt from Laws, that Mr Clegg was, at the same time as he made all his promises, preparing for negotiations in a hung parliament scenario, it makes the deputy prime minister appear even more disingenuous and exposes a leader whose words are less than dependable. Cable’s eagerness to get out on a technicality, meanwhile, will only serve to anger, not repair the damage to the party’s prospects that has resulted from them breaking so many of their promises.
24 Responses to “Laws: Clegg was preparing “very discreetly” for a hung parliament”
blogs of the world
David Laws has revealed that Nick Clegg was discreetly preparing for a hung parliament, wh… http://reduce.li/fqwz2k #foot
Tracy
This just shows how prepared the Lib Dems were. They had to be prepared of a hung parliament scenarios, especially since the polls were pointing very strongly to that particular outcome.
I don’t think this shows them to be “even more disingenuous”, but merely prepared. Which is more than Labour were. That was one of Labours problems – they didn’t prepare for hung parliament talks – they thought naively that they could just walk another election. Even the Conservatives were prepared with compromises for a coalition situation – I don’t see you calling them disingenuous for their compromises.
This Illustrates how prepared and professional the Lib Dems could be.
But just look at Labour. 6 months down the line and they still have no alternative policies to the government. What a sorry state we would be in if we had a coalition with them!
Mr. Sensible
William and Mr Mouse, for Brown to resign and let a Tory minority government collapse might have been very politically expedient, but not the best thing to do in my view.
The convention is that the current prime minister has the first go at forming a government, and stays until an alternative government can be found.
With a bit of luck Lib Dems might soon recognize the price they are paying for being in this coalition.
The waters are getting more muddied with regard to what happened on the Lib Dem side in those 5 days.
And Tracy, Labour have no policies? Not sure about that one. It would seem their message is beginning to get through.
Hugh
As an intelligent man (if a flawed leader) Gordon Brown could no doubt see the danger of the Conservatives seizing their own Commons majority by the autumn if they started off as a minority government. So, he tried to bring the Lib Dems on board. It’s not his fault this failed but rather that of the strange collection of individuals (supposedly) on the centre-left led by John Reid, David Blunkett and Andy Burnham who, seemingly for a variety of different reasons, decided that the country was best left to Cameron and Osborne.
Chris
@mousey & william MA(Cantab)
Your hindsight is 20:20 but at the time things weren’t so clear cut. Firstly, the were the constitutional niceties of not leaving the country without a government or putting the queen in the position of choosing. Secondly, who predicted what a bunch of unprincipled sell-outs the liberals would turn out to be? Even beaker thought that the liberals wouldn’t be able to enter a full coalition with the tories but the social liberals have just rolled over and let the barbarians through the gates. Clegg went from Keynes to Hayek over a weekend.