Continual Lib Dem bashing by certain people is beginning to get me down.

[miss_s_b]

NB: this post is in response to a person I consider a friend. I hope I can still say that after she's read it...

I can understand people who hate the Tories. I'm from Yorkshire. I can understand the disquiet of lots of members of my party at being in coalition with the Tories; I share it. What I don't understand is what people who claim not to be Labour supporters hope to achieve by continually bashing the Lib Dems when what they are actually objecting to is Conservative party policy which we are actively trying to restrain. What do they hope to achieve by attacking the people who are doing what they want done?

I can understand why Labour supporters are doing it: they are conferring an electoral advantage onto the Labour party by denigrating the option their supporters are likely to choose of the two governing parties. The fact that it's all tribalist nonsense, and when you dig beneath rhetoric you still couldn't slip a rizla between what the reds and blues would actually do in sole power is neither here nor there.

I can understand why some segments of the mainstream media are doing it: the red-blue pendulum suits them very well indeed.

What I don't get is people who claim not to support Labour yet who still trumpet the Labour party's lines; or who claim to be independent journalists but who parrot the memes of the mainstream media.

What would they have us do?

Leave the coalition? 6 months of Tory minority government, followed by an election which the Tories would win outright*? that would be better, would it, for a person who claims to detest the Tories?

Assert ourselves more? Well, I hate to break this to you people, but we're outnumbered 6 to 1. I genuinely think that in terms of actual legislation, we're punching a long way above our weight in government.

The thing that annoys me more than anything else is the continual trotting out of the line that the Lib Dems have betrayed their voters. Exactly how have we betrayed our voters? By doing our level best to get Lib Dem policy enacted into legislation? By preventing the Tories from riding roughshod over as many things as humanly possible? Perhaps it's by getting Lynne Featherstone into a position where equalities legislation is being meaningfully enacted, or by having Julian Huppert on the Home Affairs select committee, making sure that a sensible evidence-based approach to things is actually represented? Or is it, and I suspect this is closer to the truth, that we have betrayed our voters by actually getting somewhere, when a certain segment of our voters would prefer us to just sit on the sidelines and carp, rather than doing something useful?

I'm with Andrew on this one: it would have been a betrayal of our voters to let the Tories govern alone when we had the opportunity to stop that from happening. And we didn't do it.

By all means insult the party's media handling; it's been rubbish, and I've said so myself. By all means tell us that our priorities need to change; I've said this myself too. But when you start throwing round emotive words like betrayal, and "yellow Tories" and all the other gutter sniping we're getting used to now, just be aware that we're going to bristle.

* anyone who doubts this is naive in the extreme: not only are the Tories the only ones with any money left to fight an election, but all they would have to say is "do you really want this incompetent shower back in?" and "they criticise our policies: let them tell us what they would do differently" to scupper Labour. And if an election were held tomorrow, under FPTP, Labour would be the only other party in contention.

---

Comments

[ggreig.livejournal.com]

Hmm. I think we'll have to agree to differ on most of those points, especially since they're about perceptions that'll only be shown to be true or false by history.

I recognise your point about the extent of what you've achieved by coalition, and apologise if I inadvertently sold you short but I think you may be underestimating how much of your popularity hinged on the pledge, unofficial or no. Time will tell.

It seems likely a referendum on independence would fail, but not necessarily by a large margin. The headlines don't tend to compare poll figures for "yes" against the poll figures for "no", as a real referendum would; they compare "yes" against everything else, including don't knows. Even then, I'm pretty sure a "no" vote wouldn't kill the SNP; even by many of their opponents' estimation they've done a good job over the last four years, and the proposed referndum was always going to be toward the end of the Holyrood term. A "no" vote would only mean no practical prospect of another referendum for a few terms.

[matgb]

Oh, it's absolutely perception. Part of the reason I wrote the lengthy reply was to make things clearer in my head and try to put the arguments down well as I need to get used to making them over the next few years, especially in 2014/2015 where it'll really actually matter again.

It's also a matter of priorities--for me, a top priority is voting reform, and I want STV, but I've always thought we'd never get that in one go, so wanted AV early as it's easy to implement. STV for the reformed Lords is also very near the top of my priority list, as was, for example, scrapping ID cards, the issue that got me back involved in frontline politics again back in 2006. They're dead and gone now, no longer an issue, but they would've been a contentious one if any form of Labour coalition had formed,possibly even a deal breaker on their own.

may be underestimating how much of your popularity hinged on the pledge

I'm not, I assure you. Whichis why it's essential we try to get the defence of that decision right--I truly belive without LDs in Govt Fees would be set at 12K+, possibly completely uncapped, and I'm not sure we'd be getting maintenance grantsback or the rise in the repayment threshold through.

It was a big issue for me, and I'm pissed off, but I'm mostly pissed off at the way the leadership, especially Vince, handled it in the early stages--they could so easily have sold £6K/£9K as a major concession from the Tories instead of making it look like a sellout, but that's spilt milk.

And yes, agree with your last para--I think it would have failed, it might have come closer, but get it out of the way and it stops being an issue for a few elections, so you can concentrate on the actual issues. But, again, spilt milk, both leaders are gone, and lessons are learnt.

(locally in Calderdale we're in coalition with LAbour, the leader of the group defected from us acrimonoiously over a decade ago, but many local members have still not forgiven him--but it's understood as a business arrangement and the best option available, which is good, I thought we'd get more problems than we did over it TBH)

[ggreig.livejournal.com]

I appreciate the full reply, even if it wasn't entirely for my benefit ;-) and my reply was short.

Good luck with STV; the only reason AV is going to get my vote is in the hope it keeps the debate open. I've never been so tempted to spoil a paper in my puff.

PR seems pretty successful up here, whether it's the additional member system for Holyrood or STV for the councils; but I'm not sure much of England's ready to hear that.