Which private EU poll should LibDem MPs trust?
March 4th, 2008
Was the LD survey designed to give the result the leadership wanted?
My general suspicion of ALL privately commissioned polls has been reinforced by two surveys in the past 24 hours which relate to the big vote in the Commons tomorrow over whether there should be a referendum on the Lisbon treaty.
This is an issue where the Lib Dem group of MPs could be decisive and the polls relate directly to them. One commissioned by the party from MORI was of voters as a whole - the other from a pro-referendum group was restricted to Lib Dem voters from 2005. The outcomes are remarkably different and this comes down to the way the questions were put. The LD paid for MORI poll asked two questions:-
The second sentence of Question 2 makes me very uneasy. Franky it stinks because it’s formatted as a forced choice - a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty OR on Britain’s membership of the EU altogether. The answer “both” was not put as an option although the pollster recorded the views of those who said this.
So amongst Lib Dem voters alone 30% wanted a referendum on the treaty, 37% wanted one on membership and just 7% said both - findings that are being trumpeted by the party to claim that there is widespread public support for its position of just wanting the “in or out” referendum.
That would have been fine except that within an hour or so the pro-referendum group Iwantareferendum produced an ICM poll giving a completely different picture. To the question “Do you think that voters in Britain should decide, in a referendum, whether or not to ratify the EU treaty, or should MPs in Parliament decide?” 67% of LD voters said “voters should decide in a referendum” against 30% who said “MPs should decide in Parliament”.
On the type of referendum 25% agreed with the Nick Clegg view that “We should have a one question referendum on simply being in or out of the European Union” while 70% agreed that “We should have a two question referendum: one question on simply being in or out of the European Union and then another question on whether or not to sign up to the new treaty”.
The difference between the two polls is that the LibDem funded one did not give the express option of both possible referendums - the ICM one did. For my money the latter gives a better representation of opinion.
The division between the two polls could be crucial today ahead of tomorrow’s vote. There are reports that Clegg is facing a rebellion amongst part of his parliamentary party who want to vote with the Tories. The polls discussed here could play a part in that debate.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Not sure why the Lib Dems would be trumpeting their poll as showing that there is widespread support for their policy.
Surely what their poll says, despite the shortcomings that you identify, is that as many Lib Dem voters want a referendum on the Treaty as support the official Lib Dem position.
Mike, bless you, and sawadee - a whole thread on Europe!??!
*takes big breath and prepares to rant for England….*
But no! Happily for pb readers I’m a touch busy today. Just three chapters from the end of my thriller. The home straight. May even finish tomorrow; certainly by the end of the week. Oo-er.
So for now I’ll restrict myself to just a couple of EU observations.
1. The Lib Dems - lying about Europe? Whatever next? File this story next to “Cockroaches Deemed Unpleasant”.
2. Gordon Brown is taking a pasting on his own Euro-fibs.
Here’s Simon Carr in the Indy:
“The Lisbon Treaty is in its last week in the Commons. “Eight full days of debate,” said the minister. Yes, “and only one in six” of his constituents voted for a referendum on the treaty. It was pointed out that “eight full days” was actually 19 hours, and that 85 per cent of his constituents who voted in the poll voted for a referendum.
It’s been a shabby affair. Low, dishonest and shabby. Never mind all that dare-to-dream Obama bollocks we heard from the PM at Labour’s spring conference. This treaty strategy is Gordon Brown’s personal creation, this is his specified treatment of Parliament, and visible to all is his definition of politics as cynicism in action.”
Ouch.
Seeing as people saying that
1) they want a referendum on the EU
2) they want a referendum on the Treaty
means
1) they want to withdraw from the EU
2) they want to stay in EU but reject the Treaty
then surely LibDem policy should be
1) to withdraw from the EU?
When I was sent this poll by the LD communications unit my first thought was “Oh god, what question did they have to ask to get that answer?”. I assumed it was push-polling until I saw it was a proper pollster and for a moment I was genuinely impressed until I realised all it meant was the electorate was even more EU-sceptic than I thought.
Now I know what the real question was. BTW they were claiming it was 2 to 1 in favour of the LibDem position overall… that must imply a pretty savage breakdown amongst non-LibDem voters?
PS I always said the sensible liberal position on this would be to ask for a referendum on both.
The public are being driven to a hard eurosceptic position by the duplicity of politicians. it will all end in tears.
Alex, surely the point is - for all the “simplisticness” of your contention - that there is a real and proper discussion to be had on our membership of the EU. The leadership of the Lib Dems believe that is the way round what Clegg (I think) has described as “europoison”. The tabloids could be beaten on it. Whereas, with the Lisbon Treaty, the tabloids would remain supreme, the arguments are too obscure, so any turnout likely in such a referendum would almost undoubtedly be of those keen on the referendum, and keen on the position you describe. Which means, rejection of the treaty, and as I have ranted before many times, more stasis, and the likelihood of being able to present the EU continuingly as “ineffectual, a gravy train” etc, which is what the phobes and the tabloids want.
And, btw, Alex, less of the cynicism, please - there can be referenda which can actually produce a different result to views as held before such referenda!
5 “Clegg is facing a rebellion amongst part of his parliamentary party who want to vote with the Tories”
I hope Cameron has been on the phone, inviting them to do the job properly - and defect to the Conservative Party. Otherwise their electoral prospects look grim, in a future GE campaign that will be a straight fight between Brown and Cameron. The Boy Clegg has shown himself to be useless in record time, even by LibDem standards. I suppose that next he will be doing Gordon’s bidding and support Labour’s glorious achievement of spending billions extra on the NHS - even though the BBC has discovered that under this Labour Government, average NHS waiting times are actually up:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7271772.stm
So what has my tax been spent on, Gordon?
Hi Jon, perhaps Lib Dem supporters actually are not so far away from everyone else on this issue (now there is a heretical statement!)
Coming on the back of the ten Constituency referendums, this all makes the Lib Dem position look extremely difficult. I can actually see the government winning through unfortunately but the repercussions for the Lib Dems if they are the factor that swings it against a referendum are severe. The trust issue will be exploited to the absolute limit in future elections and I can see them suffering extremely badly in the Locals in May.
Those of us campaigning from a Eurosceptic position will use every possible means to ensure people remember that the Lib Dems broke their promise.
More interestingly, if it is the 5 Tory pro EU MPs who swing it then I see their days in the Tory party as numbered. Certainly I would expect deselections against a couple of them.
9 Sorry, I can’t be bothered nor have the time to spend to give more detailed answers to you. Suffice it to say that you “we are back to 2 party politics types” despite all the evidence to the contrary, still keep banging on. This is more about your Tory propaganda than about any real situation. You may want it that way, but it is certainly not so!
I’d like Obama to be the nominee, but I want to see a brokered convention more.
11 My - a refugee from Planet Hague, 2001 style!
10 Morning Tim hope all is good with you and your. It’s always been my belief (as you know!) that the views of LibDem voters and indeed most members are very different to those of the party leadership.
I have never yet been able to understand why anyone who professes to be a liberal and a democrat would be keen on an institution that wants centralisation of everything on the flimsiest of excuses, hates diversity and has total contempt for the views of the people. It cheers me to know most of our voters agree with me!
[9] Average waiting times up; maximum waiting times down. I’m not defending the government’s record, MM, just giving the full story. You’ll also be delighted to hear that it is now government policy for managers, not clinicians, to decide who goes to which hospital when.
As to where your taxes have gone, they’ve been spent on management consultants, lawyers and other leeches associated with the Private Finance Initiative. To say nothing of shareholder profits. Surely a better home for them than the pay packets of public sector workers.
There’s something that doesn’t add up about the I Want A Referndum poll - a key result they claim in their news release isn’t anywhere to be found in the poll tables published by ICM:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/iwantareferendum-are-they-censoring-their-own-poll-or-have-they-made-up-the-results-2267.html
14 - Not at all. I just happen to believe the MPs should abide by their promises at elections. If you believe that MPs should be free to lie about their intentions and get away with it then you have a strange set of values.
And Hague was a fool. The ‘In Europe not governed by Europe’ idea showed a fundamental misunderstanding of how the EU works.
The Lib Dems and most of the labour party have shown themselves to be liars. My hope (but not necessarily my expectation) is that they will be punished for it by the electorate. Certainly there are many of us who will actively campaign on the doorstep to ensure this happens and who will extend that to any Tory MPs who also broke their promises on the referendum.
Mark,
the first repsonse on the blog is from someone who says the question was definately asked.
So assuming that person is telling the truth then since the ICM data doesn’t show it I assume the error lies with ICM?
16 “Average waiting times up; maximum waiting times down.”
So for all those extra billions, the few get a reduced waiting time at the expense of the many. Er, is that Labour policy then?
18. Worth noting on all sides who is actually ‘breaking their promise’. MPs who themselves opted out of party policy on their personal manifestos at the last election can’t be said to support a referendum (in this case), any more than those Labour MPs who were and remain anti-Iraq War are now committed to it because of the Labour Party policy in 2005.
I understand that this only applies to Clarke and Curry on the Tory side although I am not sure that either made it explicit in their election literature and if not then they were campaigning under the general Tory banner of a referendum.
The attemted get out that some are using of saying “I didn’t think it was a good promise to make” doesn’t wash since in the end they did stand under their party’s commitment - and that applies to all three main parties.
12. The lib dems have gradually managed to make themselves look both irrelevant and disorganised. Cleggs stance on europe has dented him so far and could go even further if his party rebels. Surprising, seeing as the tactic of stretching the treaty debates over numerous days was meant to split the tories, instead its split the lib dems and made the tories look even more solid.
Setting aside the morality of all this lying, the politics is plain weird.
Clegg has totally cocked this up, and guaranteed his party and his MPs a lot of pain in future elections - and they’ve also given the Tories enormous ammunition - “the lying Lib Dems, the so called democrats, the traitors on Europe, never believe their manifestos cause they don’t mean it” etc etc.
And for what? What have the Libs gained from this? There are plenty of Lib Dems on this site, some of them honest, not all of them stupid, but I have yet to hear a convincing argument as to why Clegg has handled this so ineptly. i.e. why he has opposed a referendum, when he could so easily have fulfilled his manifesto pledge and reaped all the electoral rewards.
The only explanation I have heard is that: “he didn’t want to upset Lib Dem grandees in the Lords”.
Duh? Is Shirley Williams really that powerful she can order the Lib Dems to self destruct to help Brussels? Can someone, anyone, please explain Clegg’s behaviour?
Yours
Clueless in Bangkok.
Richard: when this was queried with I Want A Referendum yesterday, they weren’t able to point out to any question missing from what ICM has published. So no, I don’t think it’s an ICM error. Either their press release misrepresented their own poll or something is being kept secret.
I agree, I would be surprised if the error was ICM. I just wonder what that Lib Dem respondent is referring to when he says that he was asked that specific question.
IWAR gain nothing from misquoting, since the questions as stated on the ICM polling report already effectively counter Clegg’s argument.
24. I can’t tell either, Clegg’s managed to manouvre himself with all the deftness of an elephant on roller skates. He’s managed to make himself look daft with his constant poor performances at PMQ’s, make his party look daft and arrogant with the walkout last week, and now managed to tie them in knots and split them at the same time over europe. I can’t see the advantage over his stance, all its done is confuse the public and make his party look increasingly isolated and out of touch.
Sean,
Clegg is one of those who puts commitment to the EU before anything else including his own party or country’s fortunes.
He knows that the Constitution is a fundamental part of the development of the EU as he wishes it to be and I believe he would rather take the short term hit on his party for the long term ambition of a single political entity of Europe.
On the general point, the biggest problem for Lib Dems, and indeed for Labour, is that they seem to have leaders with no courage and no vision. From a party point of view, it is better to lose an argument after fighting vigorously for it and making the case even if you don’t get the votes, than to win in a downbeat, somewhat technical manner.
The Lib Dems need a distinctive position to make themselves relevant; offering an in-or-out option (which many people don’t really believe they would offer anyway), doesn’t do that as it’s the UKIP position - and they at least are sincere in it, if a little bit loopy.
Arguing FOR the treaty, wholeheartedly and from a Pro-European view WOULD be a distinctive position and would guarentee them airtime every time the subject got covered in the media. The main problem for them would be those seats in the South-West which are a hotbed of both Euroscepticism and LibDemmary. Even so, for a minority party (which the Lib Dems are), taking a minority point of view is not too damaging providing that that point of view coincides with the views of their core, or is at least sufficiently close to their core beliefs that any new recruits won on the back of the campaign will not cause too much friction on other matters. As the Libs / Lib Dems have been pro-EEC/EC/EU for decades, there should be no difficulty.
But at the moment, Clegg just looks to be a me-too version of Brown. A better-looking and nicer-sounding one perhaps, but with no mind of his own. Even the in/out option sounds to have been crafted to please the government, in the way that East European Communist leaders used to pursue ‘independent’ lines that were only ever acceptable to the Kremlin. Unless he can move out of his comfort zone - and for goodness sake, being criticised by The Mail and The Telegraph is surely not THAT far outside his comfort zone? - he will find himself leading his party to irrelevance.
Thanks Mike for pointing this out. The original PR spin from Clegg had a 2:1 claim and a 2 out of 3 claim added.
It was really 4 out of 10 (38%) preferred just the inout option.
Things must be really desperate for the LD party. One wonders why Clegg and Ming devised this “policy” without understanding where their MPs stood. Is it too much to ask them to consult 60 people?
Instead we have about 1/4 of the LD mps looking at their conscience or their majority and then deciding to call for a Treaty referendum.
I’d like to see a third question put in a putative referendum. “If we stay in the EU, would you like Turkey to join?” It would be a logical extension to the argument, and would not be difficult to understand. The answer would be emotional (like capital punishment) rather than arcane. It would be sensible to vote no to the Lisbon treaty/constitution, no to staying in the EU, but yes to Turkey joining if we were to stay in (which would be my choices).
28 “I believe he would rather take the short term hit on his party for the long term ambition of a single political entity of Europe”
Then Clegg must be taking a calculated risk that his Party can’t afford to throw him out. Did nobody ask him what his position was going to be on the referendum during his leadership campaign? If at any point he said he would uphold the manifesto, then the Party have a right to be very angry with his subsequent performance - and I would suggest could ask him to resign. If he wasn’t asked at any point, then the LibDems don’t deserve to have a role in overseeing legislation - their ensuing rapid destruction as a Parliamentary party will be most welcome.
28 “I believe he would rather take the short term hit on his party for the long term ambition of a single political entity of Europe”
Even Clegg can’t be so stupid as to think the LibDems can actually achieve anything?
After this debacle, their chances of achieving anything post the next GE have imo fallen a lot. Clegg is living up well to my estimates of him: another LibDem failed leader.
29 Surely the problem was that the Liberal democrat policy of an In/Out Referendum was cobbled together before the last Conference when main concern was the rumblings about Ming Cambell’s leadership. It wasn’t developed with any intellectual rigour but as a tactic to reconcile those supporting the manifesto and those against so that the Conference, widely expected to be last one before a GE, presented a united party.
The Lib Dems are now casting around to try to underpin this policy and present the arguments after the event, which is difficult. It exposes Clegg’s inexperience in leadership and unless he handles it well could undermine that ongoing. The Ed Davey stunt was quite unnecessary and damaging.
He was of course asked and his position was the same and Huhne and indeed the same as it is now. It’s probably not a good idea for fanatical Tories to try to understand the workings of other parties based on the nonsense spouted so far today.
28. That is certainly one way of looking at it: and it does explain Clegg’s bizarre behaviour. We know for a fact that the LDs have a traitor for a leader in Europe: Andrew Duff, who openly yearns for the “defeat of the English”.
Do they also have a traitor for a leader in London?
I’m not sure it’s a great political slogan: Vote for the Lib Dems, we will always betray you.
Hm.
However, before we tar Mister Clegg with the same quisling brush as the noisome Andrew Duff, I’d like to hear from some Lib Dems. There are some nice sensible ones on this site.
Can they explain Clegg’s self-destructive stance? Is there some deep, clever, underlying plan that I’m missing?
The public are fully aware that no lib dem govt would ever abide by a no vote so the entire policy is laughable.
35. I understand what the position is, just not why they’ve taken it. It’s confusing, has partially split the party, and is fairly unpopular.
35 So in the Leadership campaign, Clegg (and Huhne?) both said that they would disavow their Manifesto commitment - and impose a three-line whip on LibDem MP’s voting against a referendum? Is that what you are saying?
36. And of course a former leader - Kennedy - who openly proclaims he considers himself to be ‘European’ (whatever that means) rather than British.
35 - So both Huhne and Clegg were happy to break their promises. Not surprising the Lib Dems are losing support across the board.
It seems that it is not only the Tories (of which by the way I am not one) but also the rest of the country that doesn’t understand the workings of the Lib Dem party.
40 But that was so that Kennedy could avoid answering the question “Are you Scottish or are you British?” “I’m a European….”
Typical LibDem response - give an answer to a question not asked…
Clegg’s played a blinder. I bet Ming’s wishing he stayed on. This fiasco makes “he’s too old” look like a bit of a playground taunt when compared to Calamity’s yoga-like array of bizarre positions.
Mocking the idiot leader of the Lib Dems aside, (fun though it is), there are serious implications here. If Clegg had balls (the manly sort, not the sort that blinks a lot and no-one likes) and a brain he’d be able to put the government in a tight spot, keep his election promise and hold his party together. It would also be very popular with the electorate.
Instead, he opts for snuggling up to Big Gordon, breaking his manifesto pledge, leaving his party disunited despite a three-line whip and annoys the electorate into the bargain.
Lib Dem kamikaze tactics aside, that leaves Brown’s plain old-fashioned approach of just reneging on electoral promises looking almost honest by comparison, and is almost certain going to allow this treacherous government to get their way.
Calamity is certainly going to pay a heavy electoral price for his behaviouir starting with the Euros next year.
At least this will stop the Lib Dem MP’s in southern England pretending they are anti Europe at the next GE.
Not the expected surge in Hilarys price that I expected overnight on betfair - still around 3`s -anyone else thinks this still represents excellent value -perhaps with a view to laying off later in the day ?
43 “is almost certain going to allow this treacherous government to get their way.”
And for this he will be remembered. Long after he is gone from the political sphere, the name “Clegg” will still be carved large in the rock of the Pillar of Infamy…
Though my political predictions haven’t always been good this time I think I’m on to a winner. I predict that this thread-which with one or two exceptions has started well-will soon spiral downhill to the level of the one or two exceptions?
44 - well, one would think. Does anyone have any take on how this is playing in the traditionally anti-EU LD strongholds in the South West?
On the suggestion that Clegg/Ming were “fearful of Lib Dem Lords”, we could see some clarity on that very soon in Ming’s autobiography.
He has already had his publishers asking him to revise it to by being more open on what went on.
Did Shirley Williams really threaten to re-join Labour if the LDs backed a Treaty referendum? That is what Nigel Lawson said happened and to date neither Ming nor Shirley have denied it.
47. havent always been good is an understatement, like saying gladstone and disaraeli had the occasional tiff.
I just cannot understand the Lib Dem’s position on this, there isn’t a deep abiding principle being tested here and the politics are frankly awful. I think the only plausible justification is that they are trying to shore up their support in the south west, which is their English heartland. A few weeks ago Clegg accused Brown of running scared of Cameron and the Conservatives, if the Lib Dems really are shoring up their South West vote then Clegg is running scared of Farage and UKIP. It looks even more bizarre.
39 I think it is pretty obvious what I am saying.
48 Well I have reason to believe there are LD MPs who have been surprised by their postbag on this issue. I suggest we wait for the vote tomorrow to see how they perceive it. A lot could happen in the next 40 hours or whatever.
Its perfectly simple. The Lib-Dem’s and Labour both promised the country a referendum in their 2005 election manifesto’s and they should both honour that promise. Really, whats so difficult for people to understand about this? The contortions from the Liberals over this issue is stunning, even for them.
52. In reality I have no problem with the ld’s (Up until this issue). I like to see them doing well to try and pressure labour, instead they’ve taken a route which helps the government, harms themselves, and splits the party. I just don’t understand why they’ve done it!
7 - “The public are being driven to a hard eurosceptic position by the duplicity of politicians. it will all end in tears.”
Yes! Spot on.
I definitely agree with that.
I know there are maybe a couple of MPS reading, all of whom went into politics to do The Right Thing - well, here’s your chance. Trust us. You may just be pleasantly surprised at how sensible and intelligent we are, if you’ll let us.
Incidentally the ICM poll was taken from a 1000 voters who voted Lib Dem at the last election. My maths isn’t brilliant but in normal ICM polls the number saying they will or have voted Lib Dem out of the 1000 questioned is usually about 100. Does that mean this poll is ten times the size of their normal one?
52 - Do you think, even if the MPs vote for the amendment, they will entirely escape being tarred with the official LD whipped position? I mainly ask because re: betting on the next GE, I just couldn’t see how the LD seat numbers could collapse to the point where a Tory majority was plausible; this might be just the catalyst to induce that, however.
re 36. I think that Clegg has strong emotional links to the EU because of his early career. His first main job was in Brussels and for several years was a top aide to Leon Brittan then Vice-president and trade commissioner. His first elected position was as an MEP.
Trying to understand LibDem Euro-policy - the Eternal Sunshine of the Clueless Mind - without even having had the benefit of a bacon butty is beyond barking.
Anyway - about these primaries….
56. I should have said does this mean ICM had to contact ten times the number they usually contact? If so it must have been expensive.
58 “a top aide to Leon Brittan….”
I’m sure we here can all agree on one thing - having that on your CV should disbar you from politics for life…
re 56. Roger - my guess is that ICM will have chosen a randown sample of people previously polled who had said they had voted Lib Dem in 2005.
Roger @ 56: Nope (or at least, not necessarily), one of the questions ICM normally ask is whether people would mind being rung up again, so I expect what happened is they rang up 1000 people who had told them in past polls that they had voted LD in 2005.
“a randown sample of people previously polled who had said they had voted Lib Dem in 2005.”
Peeling them off the bumper of a MORI vehicle to ask them their views does seem a rather harsh new approach to polling….
Saying endlessly that Clegg has messed it up doesn’t make it so. His position is actually popular. It has produced no sign of a slide in the polls and given the Lib Dems a strong alternative position to Labour and the Tories.
Posts on this thread speak more clearly of anguish and anger amongst Tories who won’t get their own way, but frankly it will just not resonate with the public if they plan to campaign in the local elections against the Lib Dems on the issue.
Except in Euro elections, eurosceptic campaigning by the Tories just hasn’t worked for them. Remember 2001?
Richard Church
58. Interesting, Mike, thanks. So you seem to be saying Nick Clegg has split his party, embarrassed himself, betrayed his voters, destroyed his reputation, and broken a solemn manifesto pledge - because he has an “emotional commitment to Europe as he worked for Leon Brittan”.
I think I’d like to paraphrase Robert Bolt’s A Man For All Seasons at this point:
“Why Nick, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world… but for LEON BRITTAN?”
‘I just cannot understand the Lib Dem’s position on this, there isn’t a deep abiding principle being tested here’
Have a look at Mike’s post at 58. Clegg is a servant of the EU, and he will do whatever he can to try to support the institution to which he has pledged his primary allegiance.
Rather than be open about this, however, he is trying to confuse the issue by holding up the idea of an in-out referendum - apparently in a cynical attempt to attract anti-EU supporters.
Disloyal. Untrustworthy. Inarticulate. And a bad tactician too.
Bring back Ming?
66 - perhaps, to paraphrase Henry of Navarre, he feels “Brussels is worth a mess”.
65. but the lib dems claim no-ones that interested, so how can it be popular?
69. That spin line was from last week I think.
70. I’m confused. Clegg may have not managed to make the party unpopular (give it time) however he’s managed to split his party and tie them in knots. This has given the tories tons of ammunition to use against them.
71. Understandable. I think a lot of Lib Dems are confused too, though I must say they have shown admirable determination in coming on here day after day with the latest cobbled together spin lines.
Having to defend the indefensible day in, day out, frequently contradicting things you said just 24 hours earlier is a great test of resolve.
It’s very tricky to have a referendum on a treaty. People will agree with some parts and disagree with others. The Lib Dem position seems to be the only honest one.
A referendum can’t list all the provisions of the treaty and ask which ones the public like or dislike. If the EU is to function it’s got to have rules which are regularly updated. Those who would vote ‘NO’to the treaty obviously don’t want the EU to function so must want out. So ‘IN’ or ‘OUT’ is the honest question.
73. people will have agreed or dissagreed on the various parts of the constitution, however the lib dems were quite happy to have a referendum on that. why is this any different?
65, Richard
“His (Clegg) position is actually popular”
With whom, do you have any evidence to support this claim?
“It has produced no sign of a slide in the polls”
The events are far too recent to have registered with anyone outside the Westminster village, nor was I aware any polls had be carried out to substantiate your comment.
“speak more clearly of anguish and anger amongst Tories”
A quarter of LibDem MPs are threatening to rebel, or had you forgotten.
If you have nothing to add other than partisan rhetoric you are simply adding to the general EUrosceptic feelings of dishonesty and mistrust.
73. Does that warped reasoning apply to France and Holland as well?
I think there is no doubt the Lib Dem MPs will trust their own poll, published under MRS rules and there for all to see.
Why on earth should they trust a poll that apparently doesn’t exist, that has been made up by an organisation funded by the Tory Party, that is campaigning to unseat them at the next election.
It’s a no-brainer - a bit like the majority of the Tory posters who have posted on this thread so far…
77. If in doubt, insult. What poll doesnt exist?
77. Oh dear, now resorting to childish abuse. And after being so brave in supporting one untenable position after another, as I mentioned earlier…
Roger: “The Lib Dem position seems to be the only honest one.”
Yes, the only honest position is to call for a referendum on a Constitution in your manifesto, then completely go back on that promise when it is politically inconvenient, then try and cover up your lies by calling for a vote which no one had requested, and which everyone knows you would never hold anyway if you ever got to power - just in case you got the wrong answer.
So, yes, the Lib Dem position “seems to be the only honest one”, IF you are a decadent old ad man like Roger, whose entire life has been spent in the moral vacuum of the advertising industry.
80. If only the Lib Dems had hired Roger to do their PR, it would have been OK. They could have been supporting the re-introduction of burning at the stake and Roger would have guaranteed overwhelming public support.
77
So telling the truth about the LibDems makes me a Conservative?
Interesting logic. Typical of a LibDem supporter?
If so, heaven help the party.
77: I’ve seen Lib Dem polling at work, admittedly at a local level, and it is designed to produce the answer they want.
re 77 . Absolute rubbish Dan and I am appalled that you should try to defend it. The Lib Dem poll was defective and brings disrepute on your party and mine. It did not give the proper options and as I suggested in an email correspondence with party HQ yesterday afternoon appears to have been designed to show that the leadership was right.
Who does Nick Clegg think he is - Ken Livingsone?
80. Just a point of interest. Rules concerning ‘truthfullness’ in (TV) advertising are unmatched in just about any other sphere I can think of.
PS. Pleased to see you are a fan of writings of the keen socialist Robert Bolt the late English teacher at Millfield.
7 /55 No, some of the public are being driven there by the misrepresentation from the tabloids.
In answer to Sean T’s question about why the Lib Dem leadership has taken the line it has. First, a disclaimer, I have no special line to the leadership. I am not sure whether I qualify in Sean’s book as a “nice, sensible” Lib Dem - probably not, after some of the comments I have made to him! First point, the Giscard devised Constitution was an attempt to put the EU on a Europe - wide accepted footing, but obviously tripped up when the voters of France and Netherlands said no. However, incorporated within the Constitution were the various measures trying to enable the now larger EU to function more effectively. Europhobes in this country generally felt that those proposals had been overthrown. However, unless many in Europe were prepared to just lie down and say they were prepared to accept that kind of veto on effectiveness, that was clearly not going to be the end of the story. So, the measuures, or similar ones were put forward to Lisbon, having been shorn of the constitutional stuff.
Lib Dem leadership, being generally sympathetic for the need for an effective EU (and Clegg and Huhne having personal experience of working against minority blocking positions as former MEPs), felt there was a need to discuss fully with the British people what it means to be in the EU, why it COULD be so useful etc. And, as I said at post 8 and previously, a low turnout referendum on what a lot of people would see as a technical issue would not be a reasonable proposition to turn around the small number of europhobes (”sceptics”) who would wish to vote no in such a referendum. This “no” vote would then build up pressure for the future on any further issues where people are trying to develop EU effectiveness. Hence a wide and we would hope, deep, debate on the EU and our membership of it.
Yes, it’s a sort of nuclear option, but those in favour of democracy at an international level cannot see any other way forward. This increasingly small world has enough problems without arguing interminably over dots and commas.
It may well be that people who do not accept one another’s assumptions or priorities will continue to argue over this. But this is an explanation which fits with current Lib Dem policy. It is one which is neither dishonest, as many here are saying, or, unless you think the people of the UK are just totally and incorrigibly nationalist of a Little Englander type, which I don’t accept, one that is necessarily politically naive. It is trying to raise the debate above the trees, better to see the wood.
As an observation the Lib Dem blogosphere has very little discussion on this issue.
As a rule they are generally more “on message” than the Conservative blogs but this time the silence is deafening.
Both Labour and the LDs are going against what 9 out of 10 voters want.
If only 2% get very angry about this, the Conservatives will gain a lot of recruits from this. People prepared to deliver, become members and stand as candidates.
85 - “plurissima leges, corruptissima republica”.
84 - Ouch!!
Clegg really hasn’t got a grasp of this situation. He was forced into pushing for an in-or-out referendum when faced with a front bench rebellion and now he is trying to use flawed statistics to back up his case!
Huhne must be gutted watching this circus.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
86. Another brave effort, but really just long-winded rubbish.
If the Lib Dems were being ‘honest’ they would announce their wholehearted support for a federal European state and campaign positively for that - not resort to subterfuge, smokescreens, rigged polls and the breaking of manifesto pledges.
86 So the system underpinning the identity of our democracy is viewed by the LibDems as just “dots and commas”….
86. Piffle. Just give us the vote you promised. And stop pretending you would actually call a vote on EU membership. We all know you wouldn’t - cause of the huge instability it would produce, and the very real fear of an Out vote. It’s student politics. It’s a gimmick. It’s why everyone laughs at your party.
Are we really to believe Nick Clegg’s first objective on assuming office is to threaten the UK’s position in Europe? And what would he do if we got an Out vote? Do you expect us to believe the Lib Dems would actually lead Britain out of Europe? Where? Would we join the scouts?
Your post is prolix gibberish, yet another failed attempt to hide the basic objective of the europhiles: which is to smuggle Britain into a quasi-Federal Europe, by fair means or foul.
I think Peter the Punter got it right yesterday. He is an open Federalist, and he accepts that’s where the EU is heading, and he is pleased cause that’s what he wants. That’s fair enough - because he also wants to ask the people first, and he will abide by their decision.
He says is is embarrassed by europhiles, like you, who try to pretend this isn’t where the EU is heading. I’m not surprised. You are embarrassing.
It’s this kinda crap which is turning people right off politics. Stop it, please. This endless series of lies on Europe may not damage the Lib Dems fatally in the short term, but it is doing terrible damage to British politics overall.
We are all suffering because of europhile lies.
91 Thanks Harry - sorry I am not the most concise person on earth!
92 No.
94. I could have lived with the long-windedness had the content had any merit.
In the past I really had a lot of affection and respect for Shirley Williams. It was diminished somewhat when she jointly endorsed Nick Clegg along with Paddy Ashdown early on in the LD leadership contest which I believe strongly influenced early voters in the contest and thus won it for their chosen one. If she and some other LD peers are truly the ones that have influenced Nick Clegg to adopt the Party’s current illiberal and bizarre EU referendum position I really think it might be better she returned to the Labour Party. I am actually pro Europe but it is not acceptable that parts of our national sovereignty should continue to be given up without the assent of the majority of the British people. If the federalists’ goal of a United States of Europe is stalled for a while so what!
77 this site is these polluted with the inane ramblings of the LD trolls - it used to be a civillised place where proper lefties like Roger and Tyson could chew the fat with completely impartial experts such as Ave It.
this site’s definitely gone downhill since the LD trolls took over.
97 - At various times there are accusations of Tory Trolls, Labour Trolls and now LD Trolls. I think what these people mean is there are lots of people who are disagreeing with me.
93 Frankly it’s hyped-up melodrama like yours which causes people to lose touch and confidence in politics. Perhaps better to stick to the fiction!
99 - see 84. If even our mild-mannered host is moved to this kind of comment, I’d suggest there’s a serious problem.
OFF THREAD ……. Yippee !!!!!!!!!!!
Meanwhile …. Michael Tomasky in the “Gruntfutock” analyses the ‘Yeldarb Effect’ at play in the Democrat primaries. A good summary with useful links.
Will the Yeldarb tip Ohio and Texas for Obama ???
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/michael_tomasky/2008/03/the_yeldarb_effect.html
99. Clegg is surely the main producer of fiction in UK politics just now. How output is certainly prolific - at least one new piece per day recently.
99 Tim13 - The LDs had a perfectly reasonable position in their Manifesto; that the Constitution was acceptable and advantageous to UK and Europe and they would campaign for it to be ratified but that it should be subject to a referendum. They could have said and argued as Labour has that the Lisbon Treaty was an entirely different document and having regard to its scope and changes they now believed ratification through Parliament was the right course.
Sceptics may well have disagreed on their judgement of Treaty v Constitution but that course would be a straightforward one.
Why on earth choose an entirely different course and then try to back it up with a not very good Poll?
99
No,it’s just politicians blatantly renegeing on promises,nothing more complicated than that,however much you would like it to be.
And if you think my 86 was “prolix”, what do you think would happen if we had a “debate” on the Lisbon Treaty - yes more of the same. And, yes, you believe your side would “win” with that kind of referendum, and I am inclined to agree. You mention PtP’s views on this - I am sure my views are rather similar. And again, I agree, people must then be given an option. Sorry, to resort to lies about “smuggling”, and to try to misrepresent a genuine attempt by me to answer your question as “student politics” etc is nonsense, and frankly, more than a bit insulting. If you don’t want to hear answers that may have truth embedded in them, I don’t know why you bother with a discussion site.
97 quite right - my comment was specifically aimed at ‘Dan’ a stunningly ill informed commentator who yesterday was droning on about ‘tory trolls’.
As far as I know my comment is the first there has ever been about “LD trolls” but that’s because the Joseph Rowntree Trust party doesn’t have the money for real astroturfers.
Trying to get off the EU-rabid ranting (from both sides) - which seems to exemplify all the worst aspects of poltical discussion forums - (I’ll shout at you and you can shout back at me and we wont listen or change our mind about anything so whats the point).
Can I introduce a betting angle to this to at least try and bring some sanity back to the discussion - spread bet, Number of Tory MP’s that don’t follow Cameron; Number of Lib Dem MP’s that don’t follow Clegg, and Number of Labour MP’s that don’t follow Brown through the Lobbys.
104. You really are getting very confused, aren’t you?
106 A bit of clarification, please, Lennon - is that the number who vote against their leader, or are you including abstentions, pressing constituency engagements etc?
Ted 102
Yes, I would agree with that representation. And I am not sure what to make of the “polls” situation that Mike presents today. At 86, I was merely trying to give a personal answer to Sean’s question.
102. I pretty much agree with this. I dissagree with labours stance, however at least they have one. The lib dem strategy of changing the question then backing it up with dodgy polls or derision of the subject itself (no-ones interested) makes little or no sense.
108 - I was thinking of including all who were present and actively voted, but assumes that all abstentions are active (ie vote twice, once in each lobby) which might not be very realistic.
106 Lennon a good idea on the referendum
Number of Tory MP’s that don’t follow Cameron;
Number of Lib Dem MP’s that don’t follow Clegg,
Number of Labour MP’s that don’t follow Brown
109. But in your rambling post earlier on you claimed to be outlining the Lib Dem leadership’s position, not a personal one.
[106] Yes indeed. This is quite the most tiresome thread we’ve had since - oh, the last time everyone banged on about the subject.
As to Clegg’s antics, it’s hard to disagree with Ted at [102].
And if the Tories think it’s that important, why not make an electoral pact with UKIP in Cornwall to rid the county of those pesky LibDems? Answer: because they don’t so they won’t.
Plenty of signs at the Scottish Lib Dem conference in Aviemore that Clegg has ordered a change in strategy for his dwindling Caledonian troops: no more “Labour’s lap-dogs”; but more cosying up to the Scottish National Party government. The vitriol being poured on Scottish Labour has been quite impressive.
Has Mr Clegg been reading pb.com?
86 An In/Out referendum makes little sense until you have negotiated the terms of withdrawal, and can put them to the electorate, or at the very least, can explain in some detail, what terms of withdrawal you would be seeking.
And that’s even before we start discussing whether the Lib Dems are sincere in this proposal, and would actually abide by the result.
Leaving the principle aside, though, you can’t really dispute that this is just bad politics. who ever heard of a party leader trying to impose a three line whip on his MPs to make them *abstain*, and with the real prospect that a significant number of them will defy him.
And while we may treat the I Want a Referendum vote as a big petition, rather than an actual survey of public opinion, the fact that 133,000 people in 10 constituencies did support a referendum on the Treaty has to indicate that some people will vote on this issue, and it wouldn’t take very many of them to do so to unseat some Lib Dem MPs in marginal seats.
114. cosying up to UKIP would be suicide, as they want to leave europe, whereas the tories don’t. It would prove the lib dems and labour right, that the tories are in fact anti-european reactionaries, when in reality they arent. That plus UKIP are smug basket cases.
114, they don’t need to. Farage has said he won’t put up candidates to stand against eurosceptic opponents to avoid splitting the sceptic vote.
I’ve made what probably will be my final projections for Ohio and Texas. On the Democratic side I see Hillary walking away with Ohio and winning Texas by a small amount. On the Republican side I see McCain crushing Huckabee.
http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/hillary-leads-in-both-ohio-and-texas/
I think that Hillary’s chances should be 30-35% now although I think that if she wins McCain will still beat her (though it won’t be quite the landslide that he’d get if Obama was his opponent).
117. 188. Also pointless as UKIP is practically moribund anyway and will struggle to field candidates in many constituencies at the next GE.
[118] But we’re being told that all the Tories under 55 are eurosceptics, so it doesn’t look like Nigel and the Farragoes will be fighting many seats. And was the Tory candidate in that by-election he fought a Euro-nutter?
O/T According to Guido, Tom Watson is about to take over from Derek Conway as the biggest porker at Westminster,fabulous cartoon of Watson with snout in trough.
Overall, I’d expect Labour to win this by about 320 to 250 in the Commons. It could go either way in the Lords, IMHO.
123…where the Lib Dem peers will surely play an even more pivotal role given the closer party arithmetic?
So the Lib Dems will get a double exposure as the defenders of the interests of the EU against the democratic rights of the British people.
124. yep, and could rebel against clegg in either. could be interesting
UKIP are weaker than 2004 but still have a presence in many areas. Huhne’s Eastleigh is one key example where they already have selected a candidate.
UKIP do offer “non-compete” deals to BOO supporters. What if they extended it to “post ratification Treaty referendum” supporters?
It might get the backing of 30 to 50 Conservative PPCs in marginals and lower the chances of a hung parliament.
UKIP was largely setup to bring pressure on the Conservative policy on the EC. Could the next GE be the one where its influence is greater than at any other GE?
126. Personally, I think the hardcore UKIP supporters won’t forgive Cameron for his “loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists” remarks. And the hardcore is pretty much all they have left these days.
There’s one stark fact at the heart of this debate that should make all sincere Lib Dems stop and think: the political establishment in Europe has gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid any further referendums during the ratification process because it knows there is no longer sufficient public support for the project.
Rather than setting out the arguments for Lisbon and winning over their electorates the hard way (the democratic route), politicians have redesigned the Constitutional Treaty for the specific purpose of dodging the need to obtain popular consent (the bureaucratic route).
I would have thought that the Lib Dems, however enthusiastic they might be to see European integration, would have opposed such obviously dishonest, undemocratic manouevering. I honestly expected them to support a referendum on Lisbon under a slogan such as ‘We want a new Europe, but not like this’.
A transnational political entity created in this underhand way is built on sand. It has no legitimacy and commands little loyalty. When the EU collapses, I wonder if its creators will rue their impatience. Or do they still adhere to a high-handed, 19th century view of the populace as ignorant fools who need to be driven forward by wise, far-sighted rulers?
119 Poor Hillary. With your record of predictions Matthew…. that really dooms her. She’ll be beaten like a mule now.
128 - Great post Don. It wasn’t just politically stupid for Clegg to decide to get the Government out of a hole in the House of Commons vote tomorrow, it was immoral too.
128, Well said,
Will LibDems stop to think what is ‘Liberal’ or ‘Democratic’ about their party leaders actions.
127, UKIP has spent 10+ years of attacking the Conservatives calling them traitors and europhiles. There has been far more venom expended by UKIP than the reverse.
But pragmatically there is an opportunity to use the few % of votes driven by those who will be very very angry over being denied a referendum.
A Conservative Govt in 2010 with a working majority will be dominated by Eurosceptics. It will run a greater risk of clashing with the European federalists. Do UKIP recognise that they could help that situation occur or do they prefer a hung parliament where the europhiles will control the agenda?
I would have thought that the Lib Dems, however enthusiastic they might be to see European integration, would have opposed such obviously dishonest, undemocratic manouevering
Why? Anyone who has fought them at a local level would be surprised if they had been anything other than entirely dishonest.
[132] Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to what a Cameron government would actually do about Europe, and why its troops would all be contented with whatever it is that it does.
“Do UKIP recognise that they could help that situation occur or do they prefer a hung parliament where the europhiles will control the agenda?”
In my experience, some UKIP activists are pragmatic, and would like to see Conservative eurosceptics in charge. But a significant number regard hurting the Conservative party as their raison d’etre.
135. Agreed. Which makes their decline into irrelevance all the more heartening.
The case for EU disengagement is far more likely to be advanced by intelligent cross party groups such as the highly effective anti-euro campaigns of 1999-2001. Leaving it in the hands of assorted spoilers, nutters and obsessives guarantees failure.
128. Very well put. That is the great shame here. I had some residual respect for the Lib Dems before this: as a party that, when push came to shove, was prepared to say unpopular and controversial things: simply because they felt they were right.
Their stance on Iraq was a prime example.
They have now totally squandered all that hard-won reputation, to deviously and mendaciously force through an unwanted Treaty, which is only going to make the EU seem even more elitist and undemocratic.
The Lib Dems are not even internally consistent: as their astroturfers upthread desperately try to claim the Treaty is nothing like the Constitution, their leader in Europe is on record as saying it is, in fact, almost exactly the same (check the Andrew Duff EP report - if you can be arsed).
The end result? The Lib Dems now look just like all the other parties - a bunch of crooks, shysters, and liars; even worse - they look like IRRELEVANT crooks and liars.
Why bother voting for them?
136
Unfortunately for the sceptics, the nutters make the most noise: in public and on bbs..
And anyone listening to them - and who is unconvinced - will go away thinking that if these are the real opponents, do i want to be associated with nutters?
And the answer usually for most of the public is: zzzz. We’re fed up with politics.. and nutters .. and pigs at the trough…
137. The Iraq stance was good niche marketing. There was always a large chunk of the public opposed to the war, and moreover it was a chunk whose votes could be actively shifted by the issue.
Sharing a platform with the SWP and islamic radicals was risky, and may have lost a few votes in parts of the south, but overall the electoral calculus was clearly positive.
Had an anti-war stance appealed only to a tiny minority of voters I somehow doubt the Lib Dems would have gone for it though. After all, they had no problem supporting the NATO bombing of Serbian civilians - something also unauthorised by the UN.
137, all the more remarkable is when you compare how the Lib Dems were just 3 years ago. Kennedy got them more MPs than they’d had since Lloyd George, their Iraq stance portrayed them as both principled and wise and they had a longstanding reputation for being quite nice and honest.
Now they’ve knifed one leader in the back and allowed a second to hang himself, become totally divided over whether or not to break an electoral promise and have managed to make Labour’s “We just lied to you in the manifesto” position seem straightforward.
A while to go yet, but should Clegg remain in place it’ll be interesting to see what happens to the Lib Dems at the next General Election.
83 - I’m appalled Mike that you are giving equal prominence to a poll that we have no provinence for. It does your site no credit.
The IWAR question does not appear on the ICM website and Roger raises the point that it would have had to have been of 10,000 voters to get a sample of 1,000 previous Lib Dems.
The questions asked by the Lib Dems are perfectly reasonable - if they weren’t neither MORI or the MRS would have allowed them to be asked in the way they were.
Shadsy’s odds on a 3-1 result for Hillary have now been cut to 2/1.
141. After your performance in smearing Rik on here a while back you are lucky Mike still allows you to post. That really was a case of doing the site ‘no credit’.
142 Goupillon. Very poor odds !!
If I was Tom Watson i might seriously consider suing Guido. if you read his story it’s seriously misleading. That his cousin works for some Euro politician can hardly be lumped into TW’s expenses. Infact if you remove the bile all you are left with is that his wife works for him part time.
Why bother voting Lib Dem? Good question.
First, they are not Labour or Tory (do I have to list the reasons why I would never vote for either of them - briefly, as parties, they mean me no good). Then, who else?
I live in England, so it can’t be nationalist (well I don’t think there is a serious Wessex National party devoted to restoring the Heptarchy - pity). Then again I have a helpful Lib Dem MP, who will, I fear, soon be replaced by an unhelpful Tory - I’d like to delay that. I don’t relish the populist, right wing, celebrity led bunch that will no doubt emerge soon.
Well, once the Lib Dems lose here and the seat reverts to safe T