Home » Posts tagged 'Nick Clegg' (Page 4)
Tag Archives: Nick Clegg
Survey Results: If the Liberal Democrats want AV, they should ditch Nick Clegg?
23 people completed my AV survey last night in the space of two hours. Only people intending to vote Labour were invited to complete this short survey online. I offered this survey, as I have not made up my mind about AV. All respondents to the survey were given an explanation of what the AV system is. The United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum is a planned UK referendum on whether to adopt the Alternative Vote (AV) electoral system for electing Members of Parliament (MPs) to the House of Commons. The referendum is planned to take place on 5 May 2011, having been agreed as part of the Coalition, and put before parliament in July 2010 as part of the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill.
The history behind this, for Labour, is that we have historically been in favour of AV, so any U-turn on this may be in danger of being interpreted as political opportunism. It was an election manifesto commitment of Labour in 2010, and Gordon Brown was in support of AV. Nick Clegg is obviously behind electoral reform in some form, but is famous for being an advocate of PR. At the time of writing, the Labour think-tanks, the Fabian Society, Compass and Progress support AV. They are supported by the Electoral Reform Group.
I have witnessed on Twitter approximately an equal number of people in favour of AV as those who are opposed. Complementary to this, there was an even split in my poll results; 52% before completing the survey said that they would say ‘YES to AV’, and this proportion remained unchanged at the end of the poll. Interestingly, a huge proportion (72%) said that they would not be influenced by any campaigning. However, 65% said that they felt that the AV referendum was not a top political priority given recent political events, albeit the survey did not state any provide any details of these events. 74% felt that any official party line by Labour would not influence the voting choice for the respondent. 52% would not be worried if AV encouraged a coalition-style of government, and indeed the vast majority (72%) believed that Britain should have a coalition-style of government. However, a very high proportion (82%) felt that ‘coalitions break promises’, but worrying over half of respondents would consider voting ‘NO to AV’ if Nick Clegg remained Leader of the Liberal Democrats.
67% of voters felt that AV did not penalize extremist parties, and about half of the sample agreed that it eliminated the need for tactical voting (52%). The voters did agree with two major reasons usually given for voting ‘YES to AV’ including ‘the Alternative Vote is a fairer and more democratic way of electing our parliament’ (62%), and ‘it retains the same constituencies, meaning no need to redraw boundaries, and no overt erosion of the constituency-MP link’ (71%), and, more importantly, they felt that these factors matter.
The outcome of this very small study amongst Labour voters is that they don’t feel that there should be an official party line on this, and that they wouldn’t be influenced by any campaigning in any case. There was about a 50/50 split in those in favour of AV, and people did agree with the traditional reasons given for voting ‘YES to AV’. Intriguingly, this small sample suggests the Labour HQ should allow a free vote amongst the MPs. This would make sense for three reasons: if the country votes NO and the Labour Party vote YES, it could look as if Labour is ‘out-of-touch’, Labour HQ should be seen to trust its MPs, and, perhaps most relevantly, this vote is not supposed to be a ‘political issue’. Interestingly Labour voters would be more inclined to vote ‘NO to AV’ if Nick Clegg remained as leader. This suggests perhaps that if the LDs want AV the should ditch Nick Clegg. How ironic would that be…
Shibley's AV poll
Whether you voted for Ed Miliband, David Miliband, Ed Balls, Andy Burnham or Diane Abbott, or none of them, please complete this survey. It takes about 10 minutes to complete. There are 22 questions which should be answered YES or NO. You must be a Labour voter to take part. Please do not take part if you are a non-Labour voter.
Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world’s leading questionnaire tool.
For interest, the questions are reproduced here.
This survey is simply an exploration of views on the AV – the Alternative Vote.
Please only complete this survey if you are a Labour voter (although the issues are not party-political, officially).
This survey consists of 22 very brief YES or NO questions.
Thank you for agreeing to do this survey.
The survey will close at 11.59 pm on 10th December 2010.
What is AV?
Put simply, under our current system – sometimes referred to as First-Past-the-Post – the candidate that gets the most votes in an individual constituency is elected as the MP. The party with more MPs than all the other parties put together then forms the government.
Under AV – the Alternative Vote – the voters rank candidates in order of preference and anyone getting more than 50% in the first round is elected. If that doesn’t happen, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and their second choices are allocated to the remaining candidates. If no candidate at the second stage has a majority of votes, the next lowest candidate is eliminated and their votes are redistributed. This process keeps on occurring until a winner emerges.
QUESTIONS 1-9. Please answer the following general questions.
1. At the beginning of this survey, do you feel that the UK should we have a system of AV?
2. Do you think that an AV referendum is a top political priority, given other recent political events?
3. Would the official Labour party line be relevant to how you vote?
4. Should Labour have specific policy on how to vote in the referendum?
5. Do you think that coalitions break promises?
6. Do you think that Britain should have a system of coalitions?
7. Would AV encourage a hung parliament?
8. Would it worry you if the AV vote encouraged a coalition?
9. Would you consider voting no to AV if Nick Clegg remained as Leader of the Liberal Democrats.
QUESTIONS 10-15 The following reasons have been put forward as reasons to vote for AV. For each reason, do you fundamentally agree with the statement as given?
10. The Alternative Vote is a fairer and more democratic way of electing our parliament
11. All MPs would have the support of a majority of their voters.
12. It penalises extremist parties.
13. It eliminates the need for tactical voting.
14. It encourages candidates to chase second- and third-preferences.
15. It retains the same constituencies, meaning no need to redraw boundaries, and no overt erosion of the constituency-MP link.
QUESTIONS 16-20 And do these issues matter?
16. Does it matter the MPs would have the majority of their voters?
17. Does it matter that it penalizes extremist parties?
18. Does it matter if it eliminates the need for tactical voting?
19. Does it matter that the constituencies are the same?
20. Does it matter whether it encourages candidates to chase second- and third-preferences?
GENERAL QUESTIONS
21. And finally, at the end of survey, do you feel that the UK should we have a system of AV?
22. Are you likely to be influenced by any campaigning on this selective issue?
Thank you for completing this survey.
The UK of Clegg and Cameron (Tory) as reported on the BBC is a shameful disgrace
At the age of 36, as one of the top Queen’s Scholars of England and having obtained the second highest mark in 1996 in Natural Sciences finals at the University of Cambridge, the world’s top university, I find that the United Kingdom created by Nick Clegg and David Cameron a monstrous disgrace. The BBC’s coverage last night was comprehensive, but after alleged smears against Band Aid and FIFA, the BBC are also a disgrace, With an unshamedly better pedigree than all members of the English cabinet, and indeed mediocre gossip (not very bright) Tory or Libertarian bloggers, I must say that this picture of UK plc is an utter disgrace. The only good thing is about those bloggers is that they’re not the BBC, who have maintained a strongly pro-Tory bias and very anti-Miliband bias from BBC’s Nick Robinson and BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg. The fact – though it is not the fault of the Police – that these pictures were beamed all over the world is really shameful to us as a country, but this is not surprising at all with Clegg and Cameron having pitted disabled people against non-disabled people, students against Vice-Chancellors wishing to make profit in a market-lead higher education economy. I certainly do not condone violence, but these pictures beamed originally by the BBC were revealing. I thank the BBC for them, but the power of the internet is such that people are laughing at us. I am genuinely disgusted, and the sooner both the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives get out the better. They could have easily got the money from big corporations and had a much deeper and longer debate. Suffer the consequences. I am hugely patriotic, but I am intensely ashamed of Cameron and Clegg who do not speak for me.
What a contrast to Gordon Brown winning the International Statesman of the Year award 2009, which the BBC would rather vomit at than report. Here is a true intellectual talking about the global crisis. I fear genuinely now for this country.
Dr Shibley Rahman Queen’s Scholar, BA (1st Class; second highest mark), MA, MB, BChir, PhD, MRCP(UK), LLB, FRSA, LLB(Hons)
This is symbol of what has been projected all over the world regarding UK plc.
The LibDems reach the final precipice, but there they go!
“They reach the final precipice where they have a chance to turn back .. but there they go!”
The symbolism for the Liberal Democrats is amazing.
But these ones “survive the ordeal” by swimming. Will David Laws, Danny Alexander and Nick Clegg swim one way, while Vince Cable and Simon Hughes go the other way? Time will tell. And – above all – what will the ‘Lemming Legend’ do?
Clegg and more broken promises on tax avoidance. The BBC won't cover it.
Aside from what is happening on broken promises in elsewhere, today (Saturday) is a coalition against tax avoidance.
Please look at this website post : WHY WE AND THE STUDENTS ARE FIGHTING THE SAME BATTLE
Tackling rich tax avoiders was one of the Lib Dems’ four key election pledges, right alongside opposing tuition fee hikes. Both have been broken. This coalition has let Vodafone off a £6bn tax bill and appointed serial tax avoider Sir Philip Green to advise the government on cuts. Sir Philip’s £285m tax dodge could pay the fees of 32,000 students. The money Vodafone were let off would cover every single cut to higher education many times over.
But this is not just an issue of fees, it’s an issue of solidarity. The students have done a damn good job of articulating their link to the wider anti-cuts movement. The issue of tax avoidance is a way that we can forge those links on the street. Pensioners, unemployed, those on incapacity benefit, public service workers, unionists and others have all joined UK Uncut actions around the country. Sitting together in shop doorways, blockading the high street stores of the tax avoiding rich, we can build the sort of networks necessary to build this movement beyond a single issue and bring down this government.
Whilst inflicting savage public spending cuts on the poor and indulging the rich, this government likes to claim that ‘we are all in this together.’ All we need to remember, is that if the government reclaimed the £25bn tax avoided by rich individuals and corporations every year, it could pay for all of the services the government is planning to cut.
This Saturday the students will be joining a growing coalition to take on tax avoiders. Let’s join together, let’s go on the offensive, let’s take this to the high streets.
NEWSFLASH – it’s going really well so far. Here’s Polly Toynbee and @pennyred
It looks as if some people have in super-glued themselves to Top Shop!
No doubt there’ll be another media whitewash by the BBC.
@wesstreeting classic tweet
wesstreeting Wes Streeting
Lib Dem voice readers clearly feel that Nick Clegg has betrayed them
A post Opinion: Clegg has not betrayed us! caught my eye this evening, not really for a statement, which I simply didn’t understand
Clegg, along with other Liberal Democrats, signed a pledge before the election. Before the coalition was formed, and before there was any possibility that he might be in a position to even govern. But this was a pledge of political policy, not of political principle.
but these comments below.
Reader 8 is the most challenging, because it represents a discussed dilemma for the grassroots Liberal Democrat leadership: their party, or their leader?
Reader 1
This really is desperate.
The Libdems attacked Labour for years for broken pledges and for betraying their values, and now the ‘coalition’ is used as an excuse to do the same.
The hypothetical asks the question: “where would we be if the Tories had gained power, without the Liberal Democrats to temper them?”
No, the question should perhaps be this: “Should Libdems just stop writing up a manifesto?”
If we are in a new political era where coalition governments are more likely, and it’s also obvious that the possibility of the Libdems governing independently is quite low, then there’s no point making any pledges at all. Because they seem to be junked at the first opportunity…. and then we get articles like this asking people to be pragmatic… just as Labour did for years.
Reader 2
I’m sorry, but these are weasel words – as a Liberal Democrat voter I feel deeply let down and betrayed by Nick Clegg. not just on tuition fees but on many other issues, the latest to receive publicity being animal welfare, wildlife and the environment (see http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/the-great-animal-rights-betrayal-2132827.html ). On many of these issues we are seeing unfettered (‘Nasty Party’) Conservatism, despite the fact that the Conservatives did not win the election. For example, why is Nick Clegg and his fellow Lib Dems in Government not doing more to rein in the likes of the appalling Agriculture Minister Jim Paice?
Reader 3
People will not fall for this rubbish. The LibDems have already lost half their support (some polls put them on 10%). Most of their progressive supporters have fled, many to Labour. And it’s not likely they’ll be returning any time soon. The LibDems will probably now become a rather sad adjunct of the Conservatives. Maybe this is what Nick Clegg wanted all along.
Reader 4
It’s articles like these, that give the impression that LDV is now no more than just the LibDem equivalent of Pravda.
Reader 5
You misunderstand the point about the tuition fees pledge. It has nothing to do with coalition compromises and which party got how many seats. It was a personal promise by a candidate to their voters. It doesn’t matter which party won or is in coalition with which other party. Our MPs said to their voters “If I win I will do this”. The promise was not conditional on which party won, or if there was a hung parliament or not.
Those MPs who will vote in favour of increasing fees will betray those voters who believed that promise and all those of us who believed that Lib Dems stood for something better than the sordid, selfish, self-aggrandizing politics of recent years.
Clegg’s betrayal is that he is going to whip his MPs into breaking a promise, forcing those who stand by their principles of honesty and honour to be “rebels”.
Reader 6
If the the lib dems dont get their heads out of the sand you will be wiped out,i was a lib dem voter but the more people come out with rubbish like this the less chance i will ever vote for you again,The more you try to bullshit your way out of the mess you have got into the deeper hole you are diging for your party,Please stop trying to defend the indefensible and work to bring back the party to positions and policies it had before 6th may,its not to late.
Reader 7
Laughed, I nearly prolapsed when I read this article,.
What bloody planet are some of you Libdems on.
Are you sure you wouldn’t be better suited to the monster raving lunatic party?
“And here is the basis of understanding a coalition. One must no longer think about pledges, promises, scandal and success, but instead one has to think of the hypothetical”
The hypothetical asks the question: “where would we be if the Tories had gained power, without the Liberal Democrats to temper them?” Answer: More than likely Nick Clegg and co, would have joined the student protest march, demanding no increases to fee’s
The hypothetical asks the question: “where would we be if Labour were still in power?” Answer: in a damn site better state than we are now
The hypothetical asks the question: “where would we be if the Liberal Democrats had won the majority in the House of Commons?” Answer: in SH!T street, Liberal Democrats have already said their policies where wrong and the Tories where right and more progressive.
Reader 8
I find it hugely significant that in the last few days some of the more extreme Cleggmanicas have started to concede that propping up a right-wing Tory government will harm our party’s long-term prospects, but they consider this a price worth paying because they believe that the hollowing out of the public sector and hammering of the poor will ultimately be good for the country. Clearly, some Cleggmaniacs at least are perfectly prepared to sacrifice our party for the “coalition”, and I find their honesty in admitting it admirable.
What of Clegg? Does Clegg really care about this party, or did he join it and become its leader with the intention of destroying it? Clegg was a Tory when he was a student. His political views then were broadly Thatcherite, as they are today, but he couldn’t stomach the Tory Party’s fetishistic antipathy towards the European Union, so he joined the Liberal Democrats and only a short while later got himself elected to the European Parliament. Unlike most successful Liberal Democrat politicians, Clegg has never had to get his hands dirty. He has never been a councillor, he has never worked a ward, let alone a constituency. The guy has been handed everything on a plate. Why?
I, and others, warned that making Clegg Leader would be a very dangerous departure. Though seemingly coming from nowhere, Clegg was being hyped by the media as the “obvious” candidate to lead the Liberal Democrats (as Matthew Huntbach puts it). We were told that he was an oustandingly wonderful man, and that if we chose him, he would transform the party’s prospects in weeks rather than months. His right-wing views and lack of experience on the ground were known to many, if not most, party members. But still they were suborned into electing him, if only by 500 votes. Such is the power of the media.
The party was bounced into the “coalition” at breakneck speed by a catalogue of deceits: that Cameron would call a second general election and win an overall majority; that bond traders would take fright and send the economy into freefall; that Liberal Democrats would have real influence; that we would get some kind of PR. All these are now exposed as empty shams, and the disaster for the party grows starker by the day, but still there are Liberal Democrats who delude themselves into believing that the party should continue to prop up Cameron’s Tory government and that Clegg has not betrayed us.
I maintain that Clegg was propelled into the leadership by the media in order to realign the right. His long-term objective, I believe, is to merge the Liberal Democrats with the bulk of the Tory party to create an amorphous “super-party” of the centre right; a party that is pro-business and pro-American, but lacks the anti-EU fetishism and social authoritarianism of the Tory right. Such a party, supported by almost all the media outlets, could stay in power for generations, to the unimaginable benefit of the UK mega-rich, and the US military-industrial complex and billionaire families – the people who imposed Blair-Mandelson on the Labour Party and Cameron-Gove on the Tories.
Are we, as Liberal Democrats, going to sit back and let Clegg do this? Or do we get up off our knees and fight for our party?
Shibley's memo to Harriet
Today it will be Nick Clegg. He will wish to emphasize that Labour is in favour of a graduate tax, but you should remind him at that point he used to be as well, even signing a pledge card. When he jokes about how broken promises are nothing compared to illegal activities, perhaps alluding to you and your reversing into a bollard, MPs seeking parliamentary privilege for their expenses scandal, and Phil Woolas, you should then reinforce the perception of him in the mind of a lot of voters, including Liberal Democrat activists. A self-seeking politician who will say anything to do elected. At some stage, he will refer to the mess left behind by Labour, but then you should remind him that he was aware of details concerning the Eurozone during the actual election itself! Best of luck – he’s a very slippery customer!
