Politics : Award Winning Viewpoints from Liberal Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory

Tuesday, 15 February 2011

Nick Clegg in Bath - "I am a human being"



The real thing: David Frost (right) interrogates Richard Nixon in 1977
Frost Vs Nixon



What sort of man is Nick Clegg? First, you had Frost Vs Nixon, then came Chris Evans and Sean Ryder and now: the rumble in the World Heritage Site, the thriller in a small city in Somerset. Yes, Clegg Vs Me. Using all the influence at the disposal of Things Can Only Get Better?, a tip off from my local Lib Dem MP, Don Foster - hasn't he read the blog? And, the remarkable power of waiting outside for quite a long time, I was able gain access to the Deputy Prime Minister for a whole hour of Q&A. Well, me and 200 largely tame Lib Dems. 

Given the 20,000 or so students who live in Bath and the anger across the country at the rise in tuition fees, it was not unreasonable to expect a show of force from the local NUS. But Friday night in Bath, clearly has greater attractions for students than political demonstrations. Any sense of tension was dissipated early on when it became apparent that the demonstrators were outnumbered by the police, roughly eight to one. They were probably outnumbered by the BBC news crew as well. Inside was a similar story, with at least two thirds of the audience made up of loyal Lib Dems. 

Clegg looked tired after a whole day criss-crossing the Southwest, and he introduced himself by reminding the audience "I am a human being". Yes, Nick Clegg has feelings too. He was met with a few boos as he entered the room but it all felt more pantomime rather than gladiatorial. Only the issue of student fees provoked any strong dissent from the floor. Clegg argued that the reforms, "will prove to be a fairer system. The new structure is more progressive. More people will pay nothing back at all and a large proportion will never have to pay the fees off." "Liar" was the response from a small pocket of students. Clegg was not impressed. 

Is he a liar? Did he lie about tuition fees during the election campaign? Clegg argues the Lib Dems proposed to scrap fees if they won the election - but, unfortunately, they didn't win - and as far as he is concerned that means that all bets were off when it came to student fees. They were in the business of forming a coalition and so something had to give. But how serious were they about the student fee issue?


The Liberal Democrats say that scrapping student fees was never a priority. They point to their four key aims which appeared on the front of their election manifesto: 'Fair taxes, A Fair Chance, a Fair Deal and A Fair Future,' and argue that all of these were agreed in the coalition agreement. I would have thought student fees could have fitted neatly into any of those categories. 'A Fair Future' promised 'honesty about the tough choices needed to cut the deficit'. How hard did they press the Tories on student fees? Given the likelihood of a hung parliament how 'honest' was their manifesto promise? 

In November 2010 on ITV1's Daybreak programme, Clegg admitted that:

"I should have been more careful perhaps in signing that pledge at the time. At the time I thought we could do it." 

Did he really think he could do it? Back in September 2009 there was already speculation that Clegg wanted to scrap the party’s policy of abolishing tuition fees. He told the Party Conference that he had to be “realistic” about whether it is affordable given the country’s mountain of debt. 

"Ending tuition fees would cost billions of pounds every year. We need to be certain we can afford it before we make any promises. But I can make this pledge – at the next election we will have the best, most progressive package for students of any mainstream party.” 

With two million student votes waiting to be won and both Labour and Conservatives indicating that fees would rise, all doubts about costs were resolved. It was certainly the most progressive policy because Clegg retained his promise to scrap tuition fees and they subsequently won 15 of their 57 seats in university cities. So it is fair to say that the pledge won a lot of student votes.
However, back in March, before the election, they were already recommending that the policy should be jettisoned. The Liberals had no chance of winning the election outright, but there was a very strong possibility of there being a hung parliament. A leaked memo preparing the party for future coalition discussions by Danny Alexander, Clegg's Chief of Staff, suggested that student fees were not a high priority:

"On tuition fees, we should seek agreement on part-time students and leave the rest. We will have clear yellow water with the other [parties] on raising the tuition fee cap, so let us not cause ourselves more headaches."

"More headaches". Oh, Danny, how wrong you were. I suppose, given the recent history of student lethargy in the political arena, it was a reasonable assumption that they could ride out any criticism. A reasonable assumption, yes, but a cynical one. While planning for a coalition they were selling a pipe dream. Isn't that what all parties do? Yes, but the trouble for Clegg is that their election strategy sold an image of a new kind of politics. 'Believe the Liberal Democrats because we are different to the other parties.'  Public pledges were signed by MPs and party political broadcasts sold the tagline: "No more broken promises."

Not surprisingly the whole thing has blown up in Clegg's face. During the meeting he seemed to be confused by the inability of the students to get to grips with the detail of the reforms. In fact, they simply aren't interested in the details. They feel they have been lied to and they are very angry. After the meeting I had a chat with some Liberal supporters who were very keen to point out that, in government,  Labour had also gone back on its own election promise not to introduce fees. Sadly true. But, it is pretty desperate when your defence is that you are as bad as the other guys.

Unfortunately, for Clegg, Facebook and Twitter have not just changed the political landscape in North Africa. Who would have expected 50,000 students on the streets, rioting and attacking Millbank? Clearly, the new social media has once again put political protest, anywhere but Bath, back in vogue. That may change if it actually is in Vogue. The truth is - sorry to use that word - I simply don't think the Lib Dems quite understand the indignation.

http://teachingalternativeartlessons.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/ndk_sad_kid.jpg

As anyone who has worked with Liberal Democrats in local government knows - they are just as ruthless as either of the other parties. No better or worse. Liberal Democrats know this themselves. During the meeting when Clegg exclaimed, "I am a democrat",  he was not alluding to the election broadcast image of gleaming right and darkest wrong, but a world of grubby compromise. Clegg's message to the students at the meeting was basically: grow-up, what do you expect from politics? Ah, the truth!

The problem for Clegg is that I don't think that is a lesson the Liberal Democrats could afford to teach.

7 comments:

  1. They have been a joke in the political arena ever since I came to Britain twenty odd years ago. I feel sorry for and angry with anyone who voted for them. Sorry because they are gullible and angry because they are gullible enough to affect who can rule over all of us. Party politics are a failed experiment in Democracy. All these people are trying to do is butter their own bread. It is embarassing to watch. You know that feeling of cringing on someone's behalf. Wish I had been there!

    ReplyDelete
  2. The big mistake was signing the pledge and making a big deal of it - if they hadn't done that they would have got way with it (well that and those pesky kids!)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I would be equally annoyed if they were keeping Labour in power. No self respecting politician would pursue a career with the Libdems in the first place, knowing they would never make it to power. They are even ill equipped to play second fiddle!
    They are the Jennifer Aniston of the political world. No oscars, juuuust making a living!

    ReplyDelete
  4. The problem is deeply-routed within our electoral system. Successive governments have promised to move beyond adversarial politics, thereby allowing real decision-making, unsullied by party divisions. However, so long as the main objective remains keeping power, the situation in which all politicians appear to be as bad as one another will remain.

    If the government as a whole - not just the party or parties that currently hold sway - was accountable for its decisions over the longer term, then perhaps it might be possible to move away from the political ping-pong in which funding for the likes of schools and hospitals is continually squeezed then magically replenished over a 4 to 5 year period.

    A debating chamber in which opposing views can be hammered out in order to achieve a consensus is, of course, a good thing but the decisions reached and actions taken as a consequence should be attributed to the entire government. In that way, we could move away from a situation in which present politicians constantly refer back to ‘the Tories did A’ or ‘Labour ruined B’. Rather, they could reasonably reflect on their collective failings and successes as a government and decide on a current course of action accordingly.

    How much time has been wasted by Nick Clegg either trying to justify or defend his position on the issue of student fees? Surely the focus of debate should be on whether or not it is a viable, fair and effective strategy, rather than on who has promised what. Having said that, if this one issue has served to awaken a new generation of political activism, then perhaps it’s not been a complete waste of time.

    ReplyDelete
  5. All politicians are liars
    Lib Dems say "we're not liars"
    Why is anyone surprised when they are caught lying?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well said Anonymous! Much better than my Jennifer Aniston comment. And Joe, I know what you mean about minority groups having too much say in important matters but surely these are the dangers of true Democracy. When I look around and ponder on the fact that some people have the right to vote when it is clear from their behaviour they should not even have the right to drive!!! In those minority groups are also people who could affect real change on the environment, so it's not only right wing racists in the margin, there are plenty of good people who have lost their political voice because of this silly situation of 3 main parties.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I know it's a scary prospect but it is only at that point you (not personally- the hypothetical you)would HAVE to engage them intelectually and defeat them at that level, which is when true democracy begins, when every voice matters, not just the loudest.
    Don't we have a second chamber? I don't even know how one becomes a member of that one. I think it envolves giving Blair a wadge of cash or something, not sure...

    ReplyDelete