So what should Nick Clegg expect from the polls?
March 10th, 2008
Will the week’s media spotlight have produced a higher LD share?
Here’s a ballsy prediction that could fall flat on its face - the Populus poll for March that should be due out this evening will not show a reduction for the Lib Dems but will have the party holding its own or moving forward.
On the face of it this would appear counter-intuitive given some of the savagings Nick Clegg has had to endure over the past few days following the revolt by a sizeable proportion of his MPs over his EU referendum vote strategy in the Commons. Because the party had the chance to seriously embarrass the government but didn’t it was inevitable that spotlight was on them.
My guess is that the level of media coverage that Clegg’s party commanded rather than what they actually did or didn’t do will be reflected in the survey.
The reason, of course, is that in normal times Britain’s third party finds it difficult getting its voice heard and can go for long periods receiving only the most minimal media attention. So when voters are called at random by the polling companies the party is at the back of their minds when they are asked how they would vote. This weekend’s Populus survey could have been different.
This is the same thinking behind my theory that Tory poll shares are directly correlated to the amount of coverage the party, and particularly the leader, have commanded in the days leading up to the fieldwork. This is irrespective of whether the stories are good or bad.
This last weekend - Populus fieldwork usually start on Friday and runs through till Sunday - things will have been different. Although much of the coverage for Clegg’s party has not been flattering at least voters will have been reminded of their existence and that what their MPs do in parliament can be important.
The issue of Europe, as discussed earlier in the week, is of almost no significance except to very minor groups of Euroloons on both sides of the argument who feel very passionately.
A month ago Populus had CON 40%: LAB 31%: LD 17%.
MessageSpace Advertising
You could be right. I have now had one Lib Dem express concern about Nick whilst cnvassing but I agree the vast majority are not interested.
I agree with you Mike. I’m not the sort of poster who likes to trumpet another party making a mess of things, but Clegg’s ridiculous position over the Lisbon Treaty has really made him look amateurish. However, I don’t think the bulk of the population will understand all the political history, procedures of having a three-line whip, motions and amendments etc. The damage to Clegg this week has been to his integrity with journalists, it won’t affect the polls.
Btw Mike, did you get the spreadsheet I sent over?
re 3. Yes - it is in my inbox.
Euroloons? Who are you calling a euroloon?! You are a… Lib Dem!
You guys are so loony about Europe you split your party in two, embarrassed your leader, made yourselves look ridiculous, betrayed a solemn manifesto promise, lied through your teeth to the people, and then enforced a three line whip to ABSTAIN which was ignored by a quarter of your MPs, all this turmoil over… Europe.
Moreover all of this Libbo lunacy was on an issue where, if you’d just kept your word about Europe rather than lying, you could have scotched the government, pleased the media, fulfilled your pledge, united the party done, your souls a world of good - and, not least, looked like you were actually listening to the British people, rather than ignoring them.
Euroloons. Heh.
Talking of Europe - and you started it, Mrs Smithson - I have actually followed the Nick Palmer link from last night’s thread.
Someone asked him for evidence of the mighty differences between the Treaty and the Constitition, making it unnecessary for us to have the promised referendum on the latter.
Nick linked to a Federal Union paper to give his answer.
Now, the Federal Union, as the name suggests, is an avowedly Federalist agency: they are about as pro EU as you can get, and you’d imagine they would try and put as convincing a case as possible for not having a referendum, as they are desperate to see the Treaty ratified (wonder why?).
So here are the main differences, as per the Federal Union, twixt the treaty and the Constitution.
1. The Foreign Minister’s job as proposed in the Constitution has indeed been changed, in this way:
“CHANGE: The merger of the two posts is retained,
but the job title “Foreign Minister” is sensibly
changed to “High Representative of the Union for
Foreign Affairs and Security Policy” to make clearer
what is actually involved in the position.”
So they… changed the name. “Sensibly”. Yup. But otherwise it is exactly the same job. But they changed the name! Sensibly! So that’s alright then.
What else? The Constitution had a proposal enabling national parliaments to review EU legislation (not stop it, but review it): this has indeed CHANGED, and how!
“CHANGE. National parliaments will be given more time to review legislative proposals – 8 weeks rather than 6″
Crikey. Yes. That’s pretty radical. A whole fortnight more, for national parliaments to not be able to do much about EU legislation.
And what else?
They CHANGED the name of the Treaty, from a “Constitution”, to a “Treaty”.
Yes. The name has CHANGED. The name. Just the name, mind you. But the new name has a whole two syllables FEWER than the old one.
And finally: Britain got an opt-out on the Charter of Fundamental Rights (the validity of which has been questioned by several legal experts), but as the Federal Union itself implies, in the very same document, this opt-out was already being sought by the UK in the Constitution, they have merely tightened the wording in the Treaty.
And… er… ahem…. that’s it. Those are the major changes according to the Federal Union. If you don’t believe me, go and look at the site linked, somewhat foolishly, by Nick.
To sum up one more time, the big changes between the enormous Constitution, which demanded a referendum, and the piffling little Treaty, which is so tiny we should not worry our little heads about it, are:
They CHANGED the name of the document. But kept the document.
They CHANGED the name of the Foreign Minister’s job. But it’s the same job.
They CHANGED the wording of the UK opt-out on the Charter, but it’s still the same worryingly leaky opt-out.
And… big breath… they have national parliaments an EXTRA FORTNIGHT to review but not halt EU Legislation.
Apart from this, all the other 300 odd pages of the Constitution are exactly the same: the same 50 new areas of majority voting, the same legal identity for the Union, the same transfer of competence, the same new diplomatic service for the Union, the same new EU powers over sport, energy, health, transport etc etc, the same new powers for the European parliament, the same self amending passerelle clause bypassing future referendums, etc etc etc etc etc
I imagine many of you are exhausted after reading of these radical alterations to the Constitution, which are almost bewildering in their intensity. Nothing will ever be the same again. All is changed, changed utterly.
The only constant we can hang on to in this world of flux, is the eternal truth that EUROPHILES ARE A BUNCH OF FECKING LIARS.
At least that hasn’t changed.
Sean 5. within the term “Euroloon” I include those fanatics for the EU within the Lib Dems who Clegg has allowed to influence him far too much. They are in the one percent who care passionately as well people like you.
I think Clegg made a mistake last week which will come to haunt him - not for the issue itself but what it says about trust. It was dumb. Last week the Lib Dems had a chance to seriously embarrass Brown’s government which they didn’t take for reasons that are not readily understood. That could cost seats.
I have never been able to understand why so many people so often denounce seanT as a deranged ranter on the subject of the EU, when all he does is tell the truth about the EU in a moderate, measured, restrained and considered way.
Hopefully the horrid unpatriotic undemocratic corrupt careerist traitors who ratified the Treatitution and didn’t allow us to have a referendum will all be ruthlessly exterminated at the next general election, and replaced en masse by a variety of pro-democracy pro-European anti-EU democratic people’s representatives.
Are we democra-loons included? Even those of us who are pro-EU?
6. Fairy nuff!
I actually agree with the thesis of your article. I don’t think the Great Lib Dem EU Farce will immediately impact on your pollratings. Indeed I think the extra coverage might just add a point or two, for the reasons you state.
However the Great Nick Clegg EU Calamity-fest has done serious damage to your party below the waterline. It’s made everyone question Clegg’s leadership skills, its made pundits and commenters regard the Lib Dems with amused contempt, its made a few voters hate you (and they could be important in marginals), and, most important of all, it has seriously damaged your brand.
This is vital for a party like yours. Your brand is all you have: you are the “Liberal Democrats”, the party you can trust, the guys who tell the truth.
Ahem.
That image is now shattered, and I suspect will be hard to get back. All the credit you so carefully accrued on Iraq has been blown away in a week. We can already see the effect of this - when Clegg stood up in your conference at the weekend and called Brown “gutless”, everyone sniggered.
Clegg, the big girl’s euroblouse, the man so scared of Shirley Williams he broke a solemn manifesto promise, the man who forced his MPs to.. er… abstain… and saw a third of them disobey him anyway. Who’s gutless now?
Oh dear.
That is the real damage to your party. It won’t show up in polls for a while - but it will. Like a slow puncture.
6 - I think Clegg was in an impossible situation but he alighted on the least worse solution but then he handled it poorly. If he’d have given a free vote there was a chance up to 50 libdem MPs would have voted for a referendum, which would have been lost, so leaving the UK sidelined in the EU and the liberalising trend in the EU rudderless. So he risked his reputation by three-line whipping an absention to defend a policy he believes in - that’s admirable. Where he cocked up was with the stupid stunts which just drew attention to this apparently illogical stance and his shrill attacks on the other parties.
5 - Yes, take it from a europhile, Lisbon is the same substance as the constitutional treaty - and both are as unsubstantial and irrelevant as each other. But legalistically, they are different, so the argument that “we haven’t broken our promise” holds water.
I wont rehearse the pro-UK-in-the-EU arguments again, again, again - they are at the end of the thread that Mike links to in his article.
10 - “leaving the UK sidelined in the EU”. Like the French and Dutch?
11 “But legalistically, they are different”
How so? “Legalistically”, they would be deemed to be “materially the same document” - which is a concept the courts would uphold. There are enough lawyers within the ranks of the LibDems (and Labour) to know this.
Arguing that the “Constitution” and the “Treaty” were materially different documents is one of the shabbiest and most mendacious pieces of political posturing imposed on the British people in a very long time. The poll tax was iniquitous and its imposition was pig-headed - but at least those imposing it believed the merits of their case.
With the Constitution, though, the LibDems and Labour knew full-well that they had no support on a legal, moral or political basis - they just had to press forward with, essentially, a lie. A monstrous deceit on the people. Now, the vast bulk of the voters may not have read a single word of either document. But they instinctively know when they have been fed a line, when a politician has a weak case. Their reaction on Question Time and Any Questions has universally been to mock those who claim there is a difference in the two documents.
The LibDems and Labour have not “got away with it”. It may not show up in these early polls - but it will be an issue when both parties try to sell their wares in the next general election. Because only the Conservatives will have the moral right to say that they stood behind their manifesto in this Parliament. The Tories needed to demonstrate to a still-skeptical public that they are fit to govern again. Standing by their commitment to a referendum will go a long way towards that rehabilitation. It’s all about trust - and the Conservatives have just earned it again.
Nick Clegg has shown he is a Euro-poodle, bobbing and weaving to the best interests of Brussels, not Britain. And in foisting this Constituition-in-all-but-name on Britain, Gordon Brown has given people ample cause to feel they were right to dislike him all along.
I agree Mike - I didn’t vote for Clegg, but I do thin he’s working to a plan here about keeping the LibDems visible when they otherwise might be forgotten; it’s a risky one, but I think it will work.
And 5 - lol. I only read the 1st line, and thought - this must be from seanT. Keep up the good work, sean! Brightens up my morning to read your stream of unconsciousness!
Nick Clegg made two excellent and inspirational speeches at the Lib Dem Conference this weekend - both of them without notes by the way, not just one.
Catching up with PBC postings, I see that the usual Tory denigrators have been very hard at work, even before the closing speech was delivered! And of course there were the usual misrepresentations of what was said….
In fact Clegg set out a very clear vision of where he wants to position the Liberal Democrats, so those Tory denigrators who have been coming up with phrases like “University debating society” are wide of the mark.
Incidentally, it was interesting to note who are emerging as the new generation of jokes in the other two parties: Ed Balls is the prime chump on the Labour side - which surely says something about his lack of leadship prospects - and Gordon Brown himself; and on the Tory side it is George Osborne, followed by Cameron.
I was wondering the same about the Lib Dems polling. Will be interesting to see if the law about Cameron’s coverage vereus poll rating extends to the Lib Dems
Oh goody - another EU thread. Joy of joys.
JamesD - thats funny - I saw the first line and thought “SeanT rant - skip to the next entry”
The more they rant the more europhile I become, and I wasn’t particularly europhile in the first place. Talk about counter-productive campaigning
11 - the French and Dutch have built up goodwill over the years but the “no” vote in 2005 did cost them bargaining power. The UK starts from a lower base and can’t afford to exclude itself like this. It’s the way the politics works.
Accepting this treaty is part of the give and take of politics - the French get this treaty, the UK got enlargement. I think this white lie was worth it as the 2005/7 enlargements change the whole dynamic of the way the EU works. Why do europhobes refuse to see this?
12 - I think legally you could argue that the 2005 treaty was not a constitution. Bill Clinton did not legally have relations with ML remember. Whatever, I always believed that the name “constition” was just the kind of euro-egoism from the French that gives the EU a bad name.
10. So now you have got it through the Commons, you europhiles suddenly admit what we have been saying all along: that the Constitution and the Treaty are the same.
What a grotesque bunch of oily and noisome shysters you europhiles are. Your morals would be rejected by sewer pigs as unsavoury.
And let’s just go over what remains of your pathetic arguments. You (now) admit the documents are the same, but you (now) say they are not substantial enough to merit a referendum.
And yet on the other hand this document - identical to the Treaty - was so important it was once called a “Constitution”. Hold on: when did a Constitution suddenly become “insubstantial”?
And if this Constitution is so unimportant, so “insubstantial”, why not let us vote on it, because surely nothing will happen if we vote either yes or no. Right? But then, hold on, your argument is that if we vote no, to this “insubstantial” document, we will be “sidelined in Europe”?
How can a document simultaneously be so insubstantial, and yet so massively important we might get kicked out of Europe if we don’t sign it?
And if this document is so unimportant, why is it necessary to actually ignore the referendum results in France and Holland and ram it through, trampling the peoples’ verdicts? Why are you all so desperate to ram the thing through, you will ignore and debauch democracy?
All for a piffling little “insubstantial” document? WTF?
You haven’t got a fecking clue have you? You just lie and lie and lie again.
TRY TELLING THE TRUTH.
Here Is The Truth.
The European Constitution, aka the Treaty, which you now admit are the same, are an important and vital chapter in the story of European integration which has only one end: a quasi-Federal Europe. We are now close to that end.
In giving the EU its own foreign minister, diplomatic corps, majority vote foreign policy, legal identity, streamlined decision making, 50 new powers, self amending clauses, UN Security council spokesman, etc etc etc, the Treaty is, as the Belgian Prime Minister said, “the capstone on a Federal State”.
I have some meagre respect for the European Federalists who are happy to admit this brazenly obvious truth. People like Peter the Punter.
The rest of you europhiles are a very stark contrast. You are so eaten up with lies and deceptions you have lost contact with morality. You are venomous slimeballs. You are a disgrace.
Q: Does slightly bad publicity benefit the Lib Dems?
A: Yes with the polling but not with the newspapers regard for the LDs.
However some of this euromania has eroded the enthusiasm of some of its activists and members. It is unusual for LD bloggers (unlike the Conservatives) to criticise their Leader’s actions. Last week they did and some are clearly peeling away from the party.
A loss of just 10% of the effort at this coming local elections will have an effect.
The UKIP voters who in wards that lacked a UKIP candidate would previously vote LD out of spite and welcomed every Conservative defeat, will no longer vote LD. These people do pay attention to European activity.
Sean, will your next book be a set of short stories? No, I thought not.
What on earth are you on about, HF? Liberal Democrats like nothing better then to criticise their own leaders! It is a long-held tradition. We also like criticising anybody else in a position of power. We are also highly critical of both Cameron and Brown, or hadn’t you noticed?
Have to agree with Tressage - LibDems, and Liberals before them have always enjoyed giving the leader a hard time - it’s part of the territory when you have a party committed to individual liberty!
21. Yes, I have been unusually terse and moderate today.
The Lib Dem line on this has been mystifying. They could’ve backed the referendum, then thrown their mythical campaigning machine behind a yes vote. It shouldn’t be beyond the realms of possibility for the Europhiles to actually convince enough of the British people that the Constitution/Treaty is a good idea. Goodwill from the voters, the press, and they’d be seen to be the good honest Lib Dems of 2005.
What is depressing about the Euro=loons is that they don’t even take the trouble to rephrase their arguments. Can’t they save the rest of us the trouble of reading them by just saying ‘I would like to refer you to my last three hundred identical posts on this subject and warn you that this is yet another cut and paste’
The snippets I saw of Clegg on the news yesterday made him look like some swotty sixth former doing a pale rip-off of Cameron’s act. Whether that will endear him to many floating voters, or cause those who’ve switched to Cameron to switch back to the LDs remains to be seen. Assuming many past LD voters have been the bearded, sandal-wearing lefties that make up the bulk of the LD activist base, I can’t see why a poor imitation of Cameron is going to resonate with them.
If there’s any justice, the LDs will be down around 14-15%.
I agree with your assessment, Mike. How many times have we seen the polls rise for a party on the basis of media coverage alone, yet stutter on the release of an excellent but quiet policy initiative?
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
Back to American politics: some pretty interesting projections for the general in November.
19 - Sean, thanks for using the royal plural when you talk about me, but I’ve always said that the 2005 and 2007 treaties were virtually identical. The French wanted a full blown constitution but this was watered down by the euro-realists that now dominate “Brussels”. This shell of a treaty is all that’s left, but we have to pass it as it’s part of the bargain. You’re a clever bloke Sean, don’t you get it? It’s politics.
As for the details you list:
“In giving the EU its own foreign minister, diplomatic corps, majority vote foreign policy, legal identity, streamlined decision making, 50 new powers, self amending clauses, UN Security council spokesman, etc etc etc, the Treaty is, as the Belgian Prime Minister said, “the capstone on a Federal State”.”
*The EU has had a foreign policy “minister” since 1993. Have you noticed?
*The European Commission has around 100 “delegations” across the world - since the 1980s - have you noticed?
*There will only be QMV on a specific foreign policy area IF the 27 agree unanimously to allow it
*Legal identity - so what?
*Streamlined decision making - about the only useful thing in the treaty
*50 new QMVs - most irrelevant, some useful
*Self amending clauses - only if all 27 parliaments agree
*UN spokesman - OK I give in, this is a huge power which will lead to an Orwellian nightmare of Eurasia…
*’as the Belgian Prime Minister said’ - er, he’s a politician Sean and prone to exaggeration
Mike - when you kick off with a possible EU slant I assume you want the day off, because you know the usual suspects will just fill up space with verbiage. If you lead with a story that may have a betting focus, you need to be there in case there are any hot tips
As grand father responsibilities kick in will we see more EU lead stories?
James D I do think he(Clegg)’s working to a plan here about keeping the LibDems visible when they otherwise might be forgotten; it’s a risky one, but I think it will work.
But the point raised repeatedly in the LibDem leadership campaign was that people didn’t get what the LibDems nationally stood for. For Clegg to have his first real piece of coverage being a three line whip to force his MPs to abstain is ludicrous, even if he’d been able to carry it off.
I am more depressed than usual after reading this
Spanish Socialists claim victory
Despite a faltering economy a housing bust and rising immigration, inflation and unemployment
the governing Socialist party looks like it has been re-elected.
It could happen in the UK!!
Have you tried listening to what he was saying, Bob Sykes (27)? Cameron could not have said any of it?
And speaking without a script is fairly normal among politicians, I would have thought. You Tories seem to think it was invented by Cameron….. You must all be VERY young….
Completely O/T, but I remember a while ago someone saying they had a free bet on West Brom for the FA Cup at some ridiculous odds… bet they are feeling pretty good at the moment. Could probably lay that off now for a decent profit, I’d make West Brom second favourites now.
“The issue of Europe, as discussed earlier in the week, is of almost no significance except to very minor groups of Euroloons on both sides of the argument who feel very passionately.”
Mike, I think that this skates over a very deep subject.
The most important issue to most voters is immigration - and that is completely controlled by “Europe”.
At present, no Party has made the linkage, largely because they are all terrified of splits. However, if a minor Party campaigned on it, and gained some traction, then they could scoop up a lot of votes. (I hope the BNP aren’t sharp enough to pick this up!)
If this happened, then the swings away from major Parties would be easily enough to change the result of the next election.
I’d be most surprised if the Populus poll showed anything like 9% Tory lead. I think 4% or so is much more likely, and I think the Lib Dems will go up slightly for the reason Mike outlined. In the longer term, Clegg’s authority as leader is plainly weakened.
31. A heath warning wouldn’t be a bad idea. How about
BORING ALERT….BORING ALERT…….BORING ALERT…..BORING ALERT
(Apologies to Jennifer Saunders)
14. …..I don’t think thats worth replying too, just one long brown nosing of Clegg followed by a couple of bad insults thrown at Cameron and Osborne without any actual reasons behind it.
Anyhoo, Clegg’s speech reminded me of a (much smaller) version of Cameron’s from last year. Apart from the shrill attacks on the tories and labour they’ve basically wedded themselves to a policy of not being the establishment, and wanting change. The only problem is after abstaining from the EU vote has made them look part of the establishment, and not trusting or listening to the people. Clegg’s performances in the HOC so far have been, at best, mediocre to poor.
Yup, over 1,000,000 Brits now live in Spain - thanks to us both being in the EU.
Bloody immigrants….the Spanish housing market turmoil, its all due to the immigrants.
40 I doubt if 1 million British do live in Spain, as opposed to making use of holiday homes there.
And I’ve never actually understood why the point is at all relevant to arguments about levels of immigration *into* the UK.
26. OK then, point taken, let’s try and move the argument forward.
We’ve had a start from piechucker, who has finally admitted that the Treaty is exactly the same as the Constitution. At least that’s one europhile lie thoroughly squashed - hopefully we won’t hear that canard ever again.
Now let’s all fess up. Here’s my proposal to end this tedious argument.
We eurosceptics will admit that, yes, even though we are completely right, and morally superior, we are a little frothing and obsessive, and sometimes we verge on the offputtingly vitriolic.
OK?
In return, you europhiles must admit that you are lying, devious and patronising, and that your behaviour over the Treaty has been a disgrace, and that you don’t care about the people cause you just want to shove your stupid Federal European project down our throats, and f*** democracy.
How about it? We’ll admit the first, if you admit the second. And then we can all move on? Deal?
30. I’ll just pick you up on one point. You say there are 50 moves to QMV? “Some irrelevant, some useful”.
What are they? What are these 50 areas where we’ve moved to QMV? Can you name them all? Seeing as you apparently know that “some are irrelevant, some useful”, and seeing as the British people are about to sign away their veto rights in these areas - I’d just like to know? What are these 50 areas? How are “some irrelevant, and some useful”?
I’ve heard others say there are 63 areas. Anyway. What are they? Please tell me. You seem expert.
38. You might better apologise to the rest of us for your childish postings Roger.
I think the damage done to Clegg will be in the Parliamentary Press Lobby. The political journalists will in future see him as flaky, vulnerable and with bad judgement, whereas Vince Cable will always be regarded by them as an exceptional visionary, wit, philosopher and all round bon oeuf. Both positions are wrong, of course, but the press hostility will do considerable damage at the General Election. Yes, the Lib Dem share in the next opinion poll might be unchanged or slightly better, but from now on it will get worse.
Wasn’t it Lynton Crosby’s rule that event take two weeks to be genuinely reflected in the polls? One week to set in to people’s consciousnesses properly and another to be picked up in the polls. Which implies that we’ve got a good week or so yet before we see the repercussions.
On the Lisbon Treaty/Constitution issue - did they give up on the push to reform it and settle on the idea to simply reformat?
On the possibility of winning the referendum - it was palpably winnable. Mike flagged it up when the question was on a referendum for the Constitution about three years back: after the clever wording on the question, the Noes lead in an ICM poll which used the exact wording of the question by a rather fragile 41:39 (I’m posting from my phone at the moment so further details hard to enter, but I linked to it a few days ago). That’s definitely within striking distance for the Yes side.
38. That’s a good idea Roger. You could preface all your comments with the phrase
POMPOUS BORING OLD LEFTY ABOUT TO COMMENT POINTLESSLY
Thus saving us the several nanoseconds it takes to read your actual “comments”, and realise you have come up with another inert and tedious remark entirely devoid of humour, wit or insight.
On topic: I think there’ll be no change or perhaps a very marginal one. It seems to take a few weeks for an event’s implications to sink in and affect the polls. I imagine in a few weeks the Lib Dems will lose a few points over the debacle.
Generally, I agree with the principle for opposition leaders that more coverage = good, but when the coverage shows you managing to split your party and firing/accepting resignations from three frontbenchers it can’t have a good effect.
I predict the Tory share falling to 38% and the Libdems rising to about 18%. I agree with Mike’s theory.
35 - At 1.98 I think my team Portsmouth are a decent lay bet for the cup. In the recent two months we have really struggled to score and only got through the 5th round against Preston after scoring in the 92nd minute - a game we probably should have lost. We don’t have any decent goal scorers as Defoe is cup-tied. The pressure’s on and the cup’s the cup.
31 - I agree the euro-row is going on a bit. But it’s important that the swivel-eyed brigade don’t set the agenda or appear mainstream.
46. Sean. From a professional point of view don’t you think posting on here is likely to have a detrimental effect on your new book’s chances of sales? If you can’t be interesting over four or five paragraphs what chance have you got in a whole book?
22 Tressage
If you regularly look at this site, there used to be very few LD negative articles. Ming also had very few, yet was still pushed out.
http://www.libdemblogs.co.uk/
50. Roger, I thought you agreed to preface your comments with the phrase
POMPOUS BORING OLD LEFTY ABOUT TO COMMENT POINTLESSLY
Thus saving us all all the hassle of wading through one of your life-denying paragraphs. I thought that was the agreement.
Tsk. Shape up old fella!
45 Just think what a victory for them it would have been, had they secured a Yes vote.
53, Indeed. Imagine Clegg’s position if he’d held the Government’s feet to the fire over an issue of trust, forced a referndum … and then won it.
CK’s Iraq bounce would be the only precedent. On the issue of trust - which is growing - the Lib Dems would have their USP. And they’d have won the EU debate for good, possibly splitting both of the other parties.
Never mind, eh?
The decline of the British press is terminal. Every day for months, if not decades, Sean T has written elegant and unfailingly courteous comments here on the total devastation the Constitreaty will wreak on every aspect of our lives, from our ability to keep cats of whatever colour we like to our soon-to-be-denied right to settle the FA Cup and the Six Nations tournament on the field of play - and yet not one broadsheet newspaper is prepared to hire him as their European correspondent.
This is clearly an outrage. I blame Gordon Brown. And Nick Clegg. And Roger. And Peter the Punter. And myself. Not one of us has lifted a finger to promote the career of the greatest living Cornishman. Something should be done.
42 - Sean - The main reason I support the EU is that it has shored up the democracies of Greece, Spain, Portugal, Poland, Bulgaria etc and is having a similarly beneficial effect in the western Balkans. Blind europhobes risk damaging this.
Through the miracle of Google here is the link regarding the QMVs:
http://www.robert-schuman.org/doc/divers/lisbonne/en/annexe3.pdf
You will note that QMV can only happen in foreign policy if the European Council agrees - i.e. unanimously. Otherwise, I defy you to get worked up by these. You will of course.
52. I read ‘White hotel’ in New York in the late 80’s. It was recommended to me by someone who worked at Leo Burnett. It’s interesting that someone who could write so imaginatively could produce a son who can’t.
53, 54.
Yes, very good points. And to be honest - I was never wholly convinced the No’s would win: I thought it likely - but the government had a lot of ammo - they would have chosen the question, they could have wheeled in lots of bigwigs to threaten the UK’s “exclusion” etc etc.
And the Tories would have been split. The Conservatives were much more split on the EU then than they are now.
A Yes vote would have been a huge boost for the EU movement in the UK - it might have led to us joining the euro, too. But the philes didn’t call a vote because they lack selfconfidence, and that’s because they are morally rotted at the core. In some strange way europhiles don’t believe, deep down, in the force and validity of their own argument.
Curious.
Now any referendum held over the next ten years will surely be lost by the europhiles, as they have revealed themselves as such lying, sinister and anti-democratic weirdoes. And such is the anger in the Tory party the next Conservative government will be forced to detach us further from Brussels than might otherwise have been the case.
The EUphiles have won the battle, but by doing it in this devious and undemocratic way, at what cost to the project longterm?
OK now I gotta go to work. I’m all warmed up and ready to write.
Sawadee KAP!
When people debate Europe the one element which nobody ever mentions is the people who live in Europe, Most Italians curse Prodi every day when out shopping for having introduced the Euro and when the country everybody assumed would be the most pro-European - France - was given the chance to vote, they rejected the proposed Constitution. Le Pen’s amazing electoral performance a few years back can also be linked to the introduction of the Euro and other Euro-changes. Sadly, Brits usually assume that just because you sign up to something that you are either legally or honour-bound to respect what you signed up to. Italian politicians and institutions will willingly sign anything which is pro-european and then happily ignore implementing the boring practical bits. If this is happening in other parts of the EU (and I can’t see too many leopards changing their spots) then how long before our favourite white elephant becomes a white dinosaur?
48 - Yes, the increase in poll support due to higher visibility does sound plausible. But I think there has to be a caveat - we can’t assume the same effect will occur during the GE. Essentially, it looks like we’re seeing a zero sum game for the Cons/LDs, with polling responses based on short term memory. During a GE campaign, they’ll be going directly head to head, and I think that errors like this spat over the Treaty will have damaged Clegg for such a contest.
Is there another London Mayor poll in the offering?
59. You really want our political system, flawed though it may be, to emulate Italy?
And Cameron would have had to have campaigned against the European Union, of course (54). Just imagine that! So lucky from the Tory point of view that there is not going to be a referendum….
The problem is, HF (51), that both PBC and the open part of Lib Dem Voice have been largely taken over by Tory denigrators. Liberal Democrats would not wish to show any agreement with the likes of them! So I’m afraid all you can do is speculate idly.
59 - I’m still to be convinced by the euro but some of the criticisms are wide of the mark. Most people believe that the euro has caused prices to rise - the is absolutely no evidence for this but the point is people don’t trust pols not the fiddle the numbers.
And Le Pen came second in 2002 because the French left was split - often between the Europhiles and those who think the Europe is a liberal plot. The latter are right btw.
[57] Roger, many thanks. All is explained. Look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._M._Thomas
You don’t need to know that much about Freud to fill in the gaps…
60, animal
” Essentially, it looks like we’re seeing a zero sum game for the Cons/LDs ”
This is true - and a sea change from before the last GE. Mike’s rule of thumb then was that the Labour share and the LD share summed to a pretty much constant value - a boost to the LDs pulled support from Labour and vice versa. Now it seems to be LD and Tories instead.
67. Exactly!!
56 It’s such an inconsequential treaty that the governments of 27 countries have spent their time in European summits, preparation for these and a great deal of effort for most of the 21st Century on trying to get it through. The EU ran perfectly well throughout the period without a Constitution so why did they bother?
Quite agree with you on the beneficial effect of the EU and while I think the direction of travel is wrong and the governance model stinks am pleased on balance we are members, but I can’t see why every thing requires a treaty which then sets in concrete positions that become outdated. Maastricht’s pillars allowed much more flexibility between member states and the move away from that flexibility will be the most damaging outcome of this treaty as will the removal of competition from the core values of the EU.
(Sorry should be 65)
@Tressage/63:
You know, Tressage. There’s a name for that disease where you see Tory wreckers everywhere you look.
I think it’s called a “guilty conscience”.
52. lol!
I shall pass on the compliments to my old man. I’m not sure he’ll be that fussed though. Does anyone really want praise from a sad, bitter, dwindling old advertising executive, who spent his pointless life selling Kit-e-Kat?
But it’s always nice to have fans, I guess! You should read my dad’s biography if you want to know more. It’s called Memories, Dreams, Hallucinations.
I get a few, ahem, mentions.
Don’t need a health warning with SeanT’s posts - The rule is if as you scroll down and see a post that you cant see the address at the end, then it is from Sean and may be safely ignored.
However in short(er) post 58 Sean may just have a point. The Conservative party in opposition is as Eurosceptic as Sean (though perhaps not so vocal about it). Cameron knows that if he gets into government he will have no alternative but to work as part, and an important part, of the EU.
What he hasn’t yet managed to work out is how he will manage to sell this (AKA, betray a solemn manifesto promise, lie through his teeth to the people - copyright SeanT) to his supporters.
When it happens, the minor ructions we have had in the Lib Dems will be as nothing!
I did suggest “The Blue Hotel”, and also “Tertullian’s Sermon”, as titles of The Book. “The White Hotel” was on my shelves until quite recently.
71. Ironically I was there to do an ad for Rice Crispies!
Just listening to the Clegg speech. I was expecting it to be really bad but it is actually much better than I had thought. I had always though of him as Cameron-lite but his speech is acres better than Dave’s last conference speech. It is a shame for the lib dems that only a handful of people will have heard it However, if he can translate this into a long-term message then they are almost certain to pick up a bigger share of the vote.
It is still stretching credibility for him to pose as the anti-establishment candidate, but he pulls it off
better than Cameron did. The best bits were his story about the letters from Gordon and Dave and his comparison between Osborne and Cable. All of which makes the negative reviews in the papers sound like they were written before Clegg even got on the stage.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7285814.stm
56. Thanks for that list. Fascinating
Here are just two areas where, under Lisbon, Britain no longer has a veto:
Measures concerning a common immigration policy
Measures concerning a common asylum policy
You may consider these changes “irrelevant”, or “useful”. I would say that, handing over to Brussels ultimate control for who comes into our own country, from inside and outside the EU, is quite a significant step.
And by itself demands a referendum.
Now I really am off to work. Kapkap.
Hang on he’s talking about semi-privatisation of the NHS. You’re losing me Clegg…
Is this thread turning into one of the EU PAINT DRYING variety ??
78 You hold the ladder, Jack, and I will pop up and put on another coat. Will an exciting shade of beige be OK for you?
Anyway its the budget tomorrow - the death of Alistair Darling by 1000 cuts continues apace.
Hang on, we already have agreed that people can come and go within the EU (signed by various Conservative premiers). It just makes obvious sense to stop one country being more open to non EU immigrants/asylum seekers than an other.
Clegg seems to have gone for acid-house yellow.
75,
No, it just meant you listened to the speach through yellow tinted glasses. It was a bad speach, it wasn’t a great speach.
SeanT why are you so animated - aren’t you moving to Sydney or California…
This will all be so irrelevant there.
EU yawn yawn….I’m off to do some work…
[77] I doubt it. The NHS has always bought in specialist services - e.g. drug rehab - from the private sector. And we have charges for dental treatment and prescriptions.
Although I agree Clegg may be bolstered by a short boost to the LD poll ratings in the long run he has confirmed his party critics worst fears.
His ‘publicity is everything’ approach simply serves to suggest that the Lib Dems are becoming desperate.
The Lib Dems forget that their USP always used to be being able to promote policies that, while probably impractical if ever actually introduced, signposted issues that were important to people.
PR is a good example of this, as was the LIT.
It was the publicity *for the policies* that boosted Lib dems in the polls - now it’s just publicity stunts for their own sake.
76 - Sean - What a moderate post that was. Appreciated. So work prevents you from conceeding you’re getting steamed up over nothing. Not surprised.
Btw, the UK is one of the most liberal countries on immigration in the EU. I doubt the floodgates are set to open any time soon.
83. I can assure you I do not own such a pair of glasses. I am not a supporter of the lib Dems nor a fan of Clegg. I just thought I would give the speech a fair listen. It isn’t brilliant, but it is better than Cameron and Brown’s recent speeches. You can choose to ignore that but if he carries on with these messages he is bound to pick up support. The other parties have tried to laugh him down in the commons and succeeded but they can’t keep that up forever.
88. the tories havent attempted anything, they’ve clegg do it all himself. and it’s labour making all the jobes, Brown takes a swipe at him every week, Cameron doesnt mention him. During the treaty debate Hague ripped them a new one admittedly, but they were such an easy target he couldnt resist.
“His ‘publicity is everything’ approach simply serves to suggest that the Lib Dems are becoming desperate”
Obviously not been watching the last two years of Dave C’s antics. (or were you being ironic?).
88 “The other parties have tried to laugh him down in the commons and succeeded but they can’t keep that up forever.”
Unfortunately, they can, especialy as the press will aid and abet them.
12.”The Tories needed to demonstrate to a still-skeptical public that they are fit to govern again. Standing by their commitment to a referendum will go a long way towards that rehabilitation. It’s all about trust - and the Conservatives have just earned it again.”
Back up your words with actions, that’s what makes your campaign promises effective come a GE campaign. Cameron talked about not opposing for oppositions sake, he then caused a severe bout of indigestion and angst early on in his leadership when he took his party through the lobby in support of the governments education bill. The Conservatives stood out again last week as the party doing the right thing. Its all about trust and credibility in the long term.
Now just imagine the much more powerful impact Clegg’s words might have had during his speech yesterday if he had taken a leading role in voting for a referendum last week? He has let the Conservatives steal the Libdems major selling point in recent years, would the big story have been the fact that Clegg jettisoned Ming Campbell’s ludicrous In/Out argument if the Libdems had supported the referendum amendment or would it have been the government taking a hit in the headlines. As it was with the Labour rebels amendment he could have had his cake and eaten it, I am sure that the Labour whips raised a glass of champagne and toasted Nick Clegg following the vote.
89. His performances in the commons have not been great so far + plus the tragi-comedy of their walkouts and abstentions. However, how much is that noticed outside of Westminster? I think once we get closer to an election more people will start listening to him and he may well pick up a share approaching the 20% mark. The real question is how that support will be drawn from the other parties.
Hmmmm looks like they’ve been digging up seant’s ancestry!!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article3517036.ece
93. any kind of reason why people or listen, or why his poll rating will go up? saying they will doesnt count as a reason. So far clegg has proven to be excellent at taking pot shots at both the tories and labour outside of parliament, dreadful inside, and more interested in proving a point than doing anything meaningful during the treaty debate. His view that he was doing what the people wanted had and still has no legs, it was just an excuse for the dire way in which he handled the entire treaty debate and the vote.
‘The issue of Europe is of almost no significance’
That may be true but still higher than electoral reform that dosen’t even register on voters radar.
What’s of greater significance is that people thought that by voting Lib Dem they were voting for something differnt from the two main parties,only to find out that you don’t have to wait to elect the Lib Dems for them to break their election promises.
The electorate don’t like divided parties and so the LibDems might take a short-term hit because of the front bench resignations. However, I can’t see this as being significant.
I see longer-term problems for the party. Having for years trumpeted the virtues of raising taxes they now want to be seen as the party of lower taxes. Going from left of Labour to right of the Tories seems flip-floppy and unconvincing.
Then there is Clegg’s promise to go to gaol if we have compulsory ID cards. Is that really the correct response for a party leader faced with a democratically-taken decision, albeit one with which he disagrees.
90. The point about our Dave is that his publicity has been entirely to support the change in our policies and the shifting priorities the modern Conservative party have since he took over.
Surely, as a good advertising type, you understand that Roger?
Incidentally, have you been watching the rather good series on BBC4 about the history of the British advertising business?
Your lot have a lot to thank Mrs Thatcher for. Is it guilt for all the money you made that makes you a leftie?
79 Augustus. Waiting to do the second coat is worst …. it’s like watching paint dry !!
95. Mainly the same reason as Mike. As an election gets nearer the Lib Dems will be given more air time and people deciding which way to vote will pay more attention to him. Look, I’m not saying he is an amazing new politician. I’m just being realistic. All this stuff that people (including myself) have said over the last week about him being a disaster was completely overblown.
It was a bad week, but unlike Brown and Cameron, the media pressure won’t be on him for long.
100. yes, however the theory about the tories getting a higher share when cameron is on tv also kicks in, and he will be getting a great deal more coverage than clegg. he’s also managed to stear a much better course over the last few months and come up with some good policies which are popular, and he has a much stronger team behind him than clegg.
99 Yes, but Jack, you promised me a choice about whether to use a brush or a roller, and now you have reneged on your promise! A paint pad is just a different type of roller, it is not a brush (continus in same vein for next several months…….)
101. I think there was a survey this week that showed that most people couldn’t name any of the Tories policy announcements from this year.
103. yeah, thanks for that vague poll. how many could name lib dem policies?
5, 19, 42, 58 etc - Pls summarise. Ta.
104, everyone!
“We shall break all electoral pledges and vote to not have an opinion on anything, except for 1/4 of the party who shall ignore this policy.”
@96:
The EU may not innervate the electorate (although it does Tory voters, especially those in marginals), but the issue of politicians and their trustworthiness does.
Clegg and Brown demonstrated with their shenanigans over Lisbon that, once again, British politicians are lying, manipulative, deceitful, self-serving scum that treat their voters like imbeciles.
And if people think *that* won’t matter at the next election, they’ll be in for a rude awakening.
98. Indeed I have and an excellent series it was! It was rather too Saatchi centric which is why Thatcher and the Tory propagandists did so well out of it but it was still an excellent watch. It’s a pity it was on BBC.4 with so few watchers. I think it would have done well on BBC.2.
Shouldn’t you be listening to ‘Woman’s Hour’? I heard your publicity shy leader was going to be on this morning?
104. Yes sorry I can’t remember which paper it was in. Obviously even less would be able to name lib dem policies. All I’m saying is that the Lib Dems are likely to get more support nearer an election. The question is whether that support comes mainly from the Tories or from Labour.
99, 102 - You know if you two are serious, I do actually have a house that does need some painting… unfortuanatly the wife’s chosen an exciting off-white which may be a bit too much for you - but if you think you can cope, feel free to come round - I’m happy to provide paint & rollers & even tea & biscuits.
The trouble is, Marcus (98), that you Conservatives are so incredibly inconsistent. At one moment, your Cameron was putting a windmill on his roof, rushing off to the Arctic to hug a huskie and taking to a bycycle - three good stunts to provide photo opportunities to suggest that the Tories are aware of environmental problems.
But look at the antics of the Tory peers recently….. The only permanent change among Cameron’s Conservatives on environmental questions is the change of the party colour from blue to emerald and turquoise…
re 80. Err. The budget’s on Wednesday - last time I looked it was still Monday.
112. it should be entertaining, do the leaders of the opposition reply or is it the shadow chancellor and whatever the lib dems call theres?
@111:
So, what, you’re saying that Dave’s environmentalism is 100% sham?
101. Cameron will “get much more coverage” than Clegg at the general election, and has “a much stronger team behind him”.
I think not. The Lib Dems will benefit from impartiality rules. Cameron will have to share the airtime with Osborne, Davis and Dr. Fox if he wants to look like a government in waiting. And Clegg’s team is pretty good for an election campaign - Vince and Charlie Kennedy will get publicity wherever they go, Huhne can act as an attack dog from Eastleigh, and Steve Webb is pretty impressive IMHO.
What is key is that Clegg solidifies his position, so that the rest of his team can dare to shine without causing leadership speculation. Much as it grieves the Tories on here, I think he took a big step towards that yesterday.
113. Luckily for the Tories, it’s party leaders.
Wouldn’t want to see Vince savage the boy George again.
102 Augustus. I’ll need to hold a referendum to determine whether you meet the full Lisbon Treaty criteria for spontanious use of a roller or fevered use of a brush. However the measure will first have to be put before the Council of Ministers (Paint Drying Sub-Committee) and voted on by Qualified Majority Voting.
Notwithstanding the above Mrs T did negotiate an opt out under Clause IXB sub section 9 of the European Handbanging Act 1986 that specifically excludes Liberals, their heirs and successors, from utilizing yellow, magnolia and associated paint shades from interior decoration or bird like symbols.
Next …. Ladder rungs ….. measurement between ….
@115:
Impartiality rules are worthless.
102 But who decided it needed painting at all? You did! We were happy with the old taupe….
My heart can’t stand the excitement of painting.
Can we go back to Europe please, so I can get some shuteye?
116. when was the last time vince cable savaged osborne then? was it in the HOC? or did he manage to get some biting satire in on him in the papers, where he knew osborne couldnt respond?
The problem for the lib dems at the moment is that much of the media has already set in train a narrative about ‘Calamity Clegg’ based largely on last week. The same thing happened with Brown over the non-election and Cameron last summer. Once that narrative is set, most of the media tend to act as a pack for some time at least. They can’t say useless one day and amazing the next. It just makes them look clueless.
However, the thing is that Clegg’s speech does not fit in with that narrative. It remains to be seen whether he can do enough now to quickly turn it around, or whether he will have to suffer bad press for a long period.
98. PS. Talking about guilt over money. I did an ad in Dubai recently and someone who was prominent on the program had just finished finished working there when I arrived and his day rate was $27,000. So my guilt is limited!
It is only Party leaders if you follow old HoC traditions.
Clegg should let Cable do it, and really show what he thinks of such traditions.
“So, what, you’re saying that Dave’s environmentalism is 100% sham?” As little as 100%…
111 Lennon. Tempting as that kind offer is, I’d rather be locked in an off-white room with the Euroloons chewing the cud and discussing historical perspectives of the Mastrict Treaty in relation to John Major’s Y fronts and a plate of peas !!
Taupe, by the way, is the colour of Euro-fudge - which everyone has got along using for decades now.
63 Tressage
Why do the Lib Dems have a secret part for discussions on Lib Dem Voice whilst Con Home and Lab Home are open?
huhne as an attack dog? huhne vs david davis, david davis win via ko round 1. huhne has far too much baggage to be able to make much headway against davis, who’s managed to get rid of several home secretaries so far.
127 HF. Clearly not a secret anymore !!
Martin (114) - to your question: “what, you’re saying that Dave’s environmentalism is 100% sham?”
The short answer has to be yes. It is just another example of Cameron’s Conservatives saying anything at all in order to get elected.
122. The sensible thing for Clegg to do now would be to make some heavyweight speeches setting out Lib Dem policies - for instance, on foreign policy, green taxation and local income tax. He needs to stop taking on his party and start speaking for it.
For once the media is paying attention, and he needs to make the most of it. I don’t think it’s too hard to turn the media narrative around, especially since neither of the other parties is exactly shining at present.
@127:
They’re afraid we might steal their brilliant ideas, obviously.
Chortle.
122 “The problem for the lib dems at the moment is that much of the media has already set in train a narrative about ‘Calamity Clegg’ based largely on last week.”
Although to be fair, the “Calamity” narrative was started by that nice Mr Huhne… What journalist wouldn’t want to see that little miracle come to pass - a LibDem actually demonstrating insight into something (even if it is only the election of yet another duffer as leader).
126 - And isn’t the “Barnett formula” the precise mix for UK-fudge regarding economic and polical union?
127.Do they?
“Then there is Clegg’s promise to go to gaol if we have compulsory ID cards. Is that really the correct response for a party leader faced with a democratically-taken decision, albeit one with which he disagrees.”
YES!!!
@Tressage/130:
As a Liberal Democrat, I understand how it’s difficult for you to understand the concept of a person saying something because they mean it, rather than to get elected by telling the mark what they want to hear.
But in this case, do you not think there’s even a slight possibility that Dave really does care about the environment? Even a tiny, titchy possibility that there might be a germ of truth there?
128. In case you hadn’t noticed cuddles, Labour are in government. Davis doesn’t need attacking. He’s a two-time failed Tory leadership candidate whose staff find him impossible to work for. And there’s hardly a fig-leaf between Labour and the Tories on crime anyway (except on ID cards, which the Tories supported at the last election).
138. they do? proof please! davis has proved to be an excellent parliamentary and public performer (as proved by question time last week) what are the lib dem policies on crime then?
139 They are against it.