miss_s_b: So, it's Official

miss_s_b (

miss_s_b) wrote,
@ 2010-05-11 08:45 pm UTC

Current mood:	hopeful
Entry tags:	omg! we're in coalition!, politics

So, it's Official

Cameron has announced full coalition. While we wait for the details of the agreement, I shall just list a few things that will and won't happen.

Things that will happen:

The media will continue to speculate furiously, and will probably not read the agreement properly and will need to have their mistakes pointed out by bloggers.

Tories shackled in government by a coalition with the Lib Dems will be orders of magnitude better than Tories in government unfettered and running amok.

Nick Robinson will continue frotting Dave until Dave can stand it no more.

We will lose members, supporters and voters who don't understand how we can coalesce with the Tories and put tribalism over making things work.

The Murdochised press are not going to be fair to us - but we're used to that.

Things that will not happen:

Lib Dems will not suddenly start being lovely to Tories; we will be keeping a close eye on what they do because it now affects us too.

I am not not going to start paying attention to any Tory blogs that I am not already reading. Unreasonable people do not suddenly become reasonable just because our parties are in coalition.

The world will not end just because that smug twat is occupying #10 Downing Street.

This is not ideal. Not by any means. But it's better than it could have been. Lets wait for the details to emerge, and then we can do what we Lib Dems do best: disect them and point out the flaws :D

(22 comments) - (Post a new comment)
(Flat) (Top-level comments only)

	no subject bagfish 2010-05-11 08:11 pm UTC (link)
	Thankyou, this is all very well put and stopping me running screaming round the kitchen for a few minutes..... (Reply to this)

	no subject francescaelston.wordpress.com 2010-05-11 08:16 pm UTC (link)
	What is your take on the likelihood of this getting past the triple lock? I know that not much is known about the details of the agreement, but it seems that Osborne has been confirmed as Chancellor. (Reply to this) (Thread) (Hide 6 comments) (Show 6 comments)

	no subject miss_s_b 2010-05-11 08:21 pm UTC (link)
	I think it is fully dependent on the contents of the agreement. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 2 comments) (Show 2 comments)

	no subject francescaelston.wordpress.com 2010-05-11 08:21 pm UTC (link)
	AKA no one thing would be a make-or-break factor? (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 1 comment) (Show 1 comment)

	no subject miss_s_b 2010-05-11 08:24 pm UTC (link)
	Well, if they've promised a constitutional convention with a view to installing STV in all elections, I would be grabbing it with both hands. I don't think they will have, though. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

	no subject gominokouhai 2010-05-11 09:07 pm UTC (link)
	Forgive me, please. What is `the triple lock'? (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 2 comments) (Show 2 comments)

no subject

lizw
2010-05-12 08:21 am UTC (link)

It is a Lib Dem policy which requires that, before signing any deal that would significantly compromise our independence, the leader must get the approval of one of the following:

*3/4 of each of the Parliamentary Party and Federal Executive
*2/3 of Federal Conference delegates (who are elected by members to represent their constituency parties)
*a simple majority of the whole membership.

Since this deal has the support of the Parliamentary Party and FE, it doesn't technically need the formal approval of the other bodies, but we have been told there will be a special consultative meeting of Federal Conference in Birmingham on Sunday anyway. This was apparently agreed by FE on Monday, before the coalition deal was finalised. No more details than that yet, but I am presuming FE's reasoning o this is that democratically and pragmatically, it would be best to meet any significant dissent head-on at the start. I am a Conference delegate for my constituency and will be attending.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 1 comment) (Show 1 comment)

	no subject gominokouhai 2010-05-12 01:12 pm UTC (link)
	Ahah, thank you. I did know about that, but I didn't know that that's what it was called. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

no subject

burkesworks
2010-05-11 08:18 pm UTC (link)

I'll be posting more about this in the morning; whatever way we slice and dice it, it was apparent that this was the only realistic outcome other than a Cameron minority government, especially after Miss Hoolie stabbed Wee Eck in the back over possible SNP involvement. Notice which of the Labourites were keenest to torpedo any chance of the "progressive" god I hate that word when not referring to Rick Wakeman coalition; many of them were the worst of the illiberal, authoritarian, statist ratbags who have reinforced my antipathy towards Labour over the last 13 years.

I have little time for the Tories, as well you know; but thinking about this outcome, far better it has panned out this way than an untrammelled Conservative government, or worse, one propped up by bible-bashing Orangemen. For the moment, the membership card remains in one piece and the standing order has not been cancelled.

Hmmm, Gideon confirmed as Chancellor. At least we know whose fault it will be if the economy does go mammaries perpendicular.

(Reply to this) (Thread) (Hide 6 comments) (Show 6 comments)

	no subject francescaelston.wordpress.com 2010-05-11 08:21 pm UTC (link)
	That's a very good point. Horrific as it is, given the economic outlook, it might be a better long-term option because the fault will be more apparent. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

	no subject miss_s_b 2010-05-11 08:22 pm UTC (link)
	I possibly have less time for them than you, but we're Lib Dems. We're used to being dealt a shitty hand by fate and turning it into something better than anyone expected. Lets see what happens. (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

no subject

gominokouhai
2010-05-11 09:06 pm UTC (link)

> Gideon confirmed as Chancellor. At least we know whose fault it will be if the economy does go mammaries perpendicular

This might actually be a very good thing. Let's see if Nick is playing the long game I hope he's playing.

> especially after Miss Hoolie stabbed Wee Eck in the back

I must have missed this bit---didn't know it was ever on the table. But speaking as a Scot, you do not want to let Eck play with the big boys. That way lies madness.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 3 comments) (Show 3 comments)

no subject

ggreig.livejournal.com
2010-05-12 12:30 am UTC (link)

As a Scot, I have to respectfully point out that some of us disagree; and the definition of "big boys" depends on your perspective. The SNP have come first or second in share of the vote in Scotland in the last three major elections (UK, European and Scottish Parliamentary elections). I'm not sure that cutting them out is a smart move.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 2 comments) (Show 2 comments)

no subject

gominokouhai
2010-05-12 12:46 am UTC (link)

At risk of derailing the discussion in this thread, I agree. I've no intention of cutting them out, not that I could. But my perspective is that of the UK, of which Scotland is a tiny part. I'm not sure where I stand on independence, but I know that Eck is not the man to deliver it: he knows damn-all about anything else, and if we ever get independence we're stuck with him in charge.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 1 comment) (Show 1 comment)

no subject

ggreig.livejournal.com
2010-05-12 08:40 am UTC (link)

Good point about not hijacking the thread and I won't respond further. However, there are a couple of things it's worth suggesting first.

An alternative UK perspective is that Scotland is one of four member nations, rather than one tenth of the population. These views aren't necessarily mutually exclusive; depending on the topic, one may be more appropriate than the other. Think federal UK.

Regarding Alex Salmond, he was a respected oil economist before entering Westminster, and he's run a successful minority government within a UK institution for the last three years, so I think perhaps your statement that "he knows damn-all about anything" but independence is a little unfair.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

	no subject leoniedelt 2010-05-11 08:31 pm UTC (link)
	well put, and thanks for the reassurance! (i was about to get the knife and have a go at several important veins in my appendages... metaphorically speaking) (Reply to this)

	no subject gominokouhai 2010-05-11 09:01 pm UTC (link)
	> Tories shackled in government by a coalition with the Lib Dems will be orders of magnitude better than Tories in government unfettered and running amok Yes indeed, but will it be better enough? > The world will not end just because that smug twat is occupying #10 Downing Street No, but it sticks in my craw all the same. (Reply to this)

no subject

ingo
2010-05-12 10:05 am UTC (link)

We will lose members, supporters and voters who don't understand how we can coalesce with the Tories and put tribalism over making things work.

I am very close to abandoning the Lib Dems, but I don't like the implication that this is purely because of tribalism. I don't dislike the Tories because of some tribal loyalty to another political party. I dislike them because time and time again they've shown me and people like me that we simply aren't equal and never will be. I think I have more than sufficient right as someone who IDs as both queer and disabled to be absolutely horrified by the thought of anyone willingly co-operating with the Conservatives, and I'm getting sick of being expected to be the better person here.

The Tory plans for welfare reform appear to be going ahead unchecked. I can only assume the Lib Dems didn't care enough to try and challenge this. I'm pretty used to feeling like a political afterthought, but damn.

Sorry, I am a random stranger who found this on latestthings. I didn't mean to sound quite as irate.

(Reply to this) (Thread) (Hide 3 comments) (Show 3 comments)

no subject

miss_s_b
2010-05-12 10:11 am UTC (link)

That's OK. I'm bi and poly and thus not really in the tories' group of favourite people either. Tories shackled by a Lib Dem conscience has to be better than tories unfettered, and yes, there's some stuff I am very unhappy with (immigration for one), but they have made huge rafts of concessions, and they can't stop the party campaigning to change anything, they can only whip the MPs.

We remain a democratic party, and I think this is going to be a lot harder on the Tories than it is on us.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

no subject

matgb
2010-05-12 01:44 pm UTC (link)

Some of the Tories, definitely, evil vicious gits that I don't trust at all. But others? Some of them are genuinely not luddite backwoods types, some of them are genuinely committed to social equality.

That they've kept, and allowed senior roles, to people that I don't think should be given any time whatsoever is something I find difficult, but they are a broad church party. The thing with this deal is that Cameron said his party had changed, and put forward a social position. Then idiots like Grayling showed it was, partially, a front that many weren't happy with.

But now he (and they) are forced to stick to the line they said they agreed with.

Yes, the welfare policies worry me, and I need to see them in detail, but when the details come out, they won't be able to be really vicious because LDs won't stand for it. There are a lot of concessions in the agreement, from both sides, and I'm not happy with some of them.

But overall, better this, with them tempered by us, than a minority govt and another election in a few months. Them in Govt isn't something I'm happy with. But them in Govt backed up by the DUP? Horrifying.

Also? If we get a preferential voting system of some kind, there's no excuse, at all, for other parties to not put up in every constituency (except, obviously, cash). Read your top current entry; the big reason Greens aren't everywhere is mostly that they a) can't afford it and b) lose deposits constantly, as they get squeezed out.

But preferential voting reduces that squeeze almost to nothing, and that's a very good thing.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent) (Thread) (Hide 1 comment) (Show 1 comment)

no subject

ingo
2010-05-12 11:12 pm UTC (link)

I didn't say the Tories were a group of backwards evil Luddites. But honestly? I'm past caring if there are a few nice Tories interested in social justice. Looking at the party's track record, they don't make a damn bit of difference. As I said, I'm sick of having to be the bigger person. I'm sick of having to be the minority person grateful for any scrap that gets thrown my way. No, they're not all 'like that' -- but more than enough of them are and the ones that are have hurt me quite badly.

BTW, I am aware of the reasons the Greens aren't everywhere, but when I wrote that post I had neither the spoons nor the inclination to go into much detail (in bed on painkillers, surprised it makes any sense at all actually). I'm still ashamed that my constituency had a UKIP candidate and a BNP candidate. Yes, PV would be fantastic, especially in the long run. But I'm still worried about welfare reform.

Yes, it's better than nothing. Yes, it's the first time there's someone in Parliament who actually had my vote, even if it isn't the whole party. But I'm still very far from happy about the circumstances and will need a hell of a lot of action from the Lib Dems over the next couple of years--not just words & promises--before I'm inclined to drop my guard.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

	no subject pmoodie 2010-05-12 10:16 am UTC (link)
	Tories shackled in government by a coalition with the Lib Dems will be orders of magnitude better than Tories in government unfettered and running amok Perhaps, but I'd really rather not have the Tories in government at all. Alas, we have to play the hand we're dealt. Democracy, thou art a cruel mistress. (Reply to this)

(22 comments) - (Post a new comment)
(Flat) (Top-level comments only)

Account name:	Log in with OpenID?
Password:	Forget your password?
	Remember me