Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Politics
Original poster

Really really fed up of the 'we didn't win the election' argument, particularly with respect to tuition fees

66 replies

LilyBolero · 14/11/2010 09:47

This is all I hear from the Lib Dems; "We didn't win the election, we are in a COALITION, we can't implement all of our manifesto."

I accept that. But each of the MPs DID win their constituency election, and that was where they campaigned on a ticket of " I promise "...(note, not "The LibDems will abolish fees)..." to VOTE AGAINST any rise in tuition fees ".

I read that as a PERSONAL promise, not a manifesto promise. If my kids say "I promise to tidy my room today" that means they will do it, it's not dependent on whether their new best friend does or not.

And if the LDs had won the election, there wouldn't have been a vote in which to vote against a rise, as they would be implementing their manifesto to abolish them (I'm being generous here). So the pledge would have been meaningless.

Phil Woolas has lost his seat for campaigning and winning votes based on lies. Shouldn't the LDs who vote to treble fees therefore have to fight their by-elections again (particularly those in university areas - one LD beat Charles Clarke by only 130 votes, student votes may well have made ALL the difference there.)

OP posts:
miffyjane · 15/11/2010 12:19

I don't remember the tories saying they would increase tuition fees threefold and scrap child benefit for the middle classes in their manifesto.

Both lib dems and tories have brought in unpopular policies which were not in their manifestos but all the public anger seems to be being targeted at the lib dems. Why?

If the lib dems get fewer votes the tories will get more seats and an outright majority. Is this what everyone on this thread wants?

I'm really cross with the lib dems but also cross with the tories and was not happy with labour either. I've no idea who I will vote for next time.

LadyBlaBlah · 15/11/2010 12:18

I think people remember liars. And never quite see them in the same light again.

popelle · 15/11/2010 12:15

You see I think if we get an economic recovery then the liberals will be seen as having acted in the national interest and will be forgiven for things that they may have gone back on.

GetOrfMoiLand · 15/11/2010 12:11

I totally agree with LilyBolero on everything she has said.

You expect the tories to be like they are being - but the way that snivelling Nick Clegg has capitulated is disgusting. Mind you I have always disliked the liberals, nasty party, useless people.

I probably would vote 'no' to vote reform.

LadyBlaBlah · 15/11/2010 12:10

I agree Tory supporters will support the proposals, etc, however I think the Clegg bashing is a helpful diversion for the Tories from the disastrous policies they are implementing, for example, in introducing elitism in education and letting market forces rule the NHS creating massive postcode differences and the erosion of universal healthcare.

Original poster
LilyBolero · 15/11/2010 12:07

popelle - you see, I think if the coalition is successful economically, that will gain votes for the Tories, not for the LDs. It is too easy to put together a campaign of Nick Clegg saying one thing and doing another - they will not be able to hold their heads up and argue honesty and integrity.

OP posts:
LadyBlaBlah · 15/11/2010 12:07

I don't see it being about results. It is about integrity. Clegg has proven he has none and hence is he is unelectable

Original poster
LilyBolero · 15/11/2010 12:06

hmm, I'm not sure the Tories are getting off scot-free - because they are simply acting like Tories. Tory supporters will support the proposals, Labour supporters will oppose them. But the LIbDems will be hammered because it is LibDems who are being a part of implementing these policies, having campaigned on a much slower and shallower range of cuts. So people who voted LibDem will have to ask themselves what they voted for - and in future elections may choose to vote for a different party that better represents them, because the LDs have proved they cannot be trusted to hold a position.

OP posts:
popelle · 15/11/2010 12:05

I don't think the Liberals have made themselves unelectable, the next election will depend on how the economy performs and if we're being honest no-one knows what impact the cuts will have on the economy. Clegg has gambled, if the cuts and the coalition is successful then it could boost the liberals to their former glories, if it fails then it could be the end of them

LadyBlaBlah · 15/11/2010 11:57

Ours too - the LDs only got in because of that line of campaigning

And it will be interesting to see how they differentiate themselves from the Tories at the next election / by election. They have made a massive ideological leap in the pursuit of power and are finished, but it lets the Tories off scott free.

Original poster
LilyBolero · 15/11/2010 11:52

I guess that may be true. He has contrived to make the LDs unelectable though - in our area their entire campaign was based on 'a vote for LD is the only way to keep the Tories out'.

OP posts:
LadyBlaBlah · 15/11/2010 11:41

I think the hatred of Clegg will be whipped up so much that even the Tories won't have him

Original poster
LilyBolero · 15/11/2010 11:38

I actually don't think Clegg cares. He could swap over to the Tory party fairly easily, Dave would find him a safe seat. Cable - no idea what is motivating him. Danny Alexander really is a whipping boy. But I have lost respect for him over the forests - he is campaigning to save the Scottish forests from being sold off (he is a Scottish MP), whilst.....selling off the English forests. Because apparently 'it's a devolution issue, innit'. Hmm

OP posts:
LadyBlaBlah · 15/11/2010 11:35

I agree with Lily totally on this

My only fear is that Clegg has simply become the Tory whipping boy. The Tories have positioned Clegg, Alexander and Cable to take the flak while they ride roughshod over everything they touch, without a second glance or much criticism. This whole line of Clegg attacks is relevant but I see it diverting attention away from the hideousness that is the Tory policy.

Nick Clegg needs to go back to A Level politics and open his eyes to how he is being shafted good and proper

anastaisia · 15/11/2010 10:44

"Why are we wasting time on the Bill for AV cos AV isn't going to happen. The country was never interested and will only use the vote as a way to kick the LibDems where it hurts."

Actually; reasonably sensible polls say that the no change and the yes to AV voters at present are pretty equal. So it could depend on if the people who would prefer a better type of PR accept AV as a step or not.

I'm also suprised that there is a total acceptance that it's fine for Labour to campaign against AV, despite running on a manifesto that supported it; but when the Lib Dems change something, like tutition fees, they're the enemy of the people or something? How does that work exactly? Is it okay because Labour didn't get a majority? Because ummmm, Lib Dems didn't either?

I think that some Lib Dem MPs will vote against tution fees - some have already said they will; in 'personal' capacity because as you say it was a personal pledge. Why not wait for the talk of betrayal and all that(obviously all the while making sure MPs are aware that you don't support the tutition fee cap lifting) until a. you see some actual legislation and know what they're going to be voting on, and b. until someone actually breaks the pledge they made.

byrel · 15/11/2010 10:27

I think people are too harsh on the Liberals, they are very much the junior partner in the coalition so you've got to accept that there will be more Tory policys than Liberal ones. They are getting some of their policies implemented which gives some degree of satisfaction to Liberal voters.

purits · 15/11/2010 09:24

"I can see Clegg and his LD ministerial colleagues being wiped out at the next election"

Yup. Politics is about trust and they have blown it. No-one will ever believe a word they say.

Why are we wasting time on the Bill for AV cos AV isn't going to happen. The country was never interested and will only use the vote as a way to kick the LibDems where it hurts.

longfingernails · 15/11/2010 09:14

I am broadly supportive of the new arrangements.

But the arguments the Lib Demss are using to justify their u-turn are ludicrous! How likely, exactly, was a Lib Dem majority government? On the other hand, a hung Parliament was always on the cards.

They knew they were going to have to make a deal with either Labour or the Tories - both of whom weren't going to give up any of their cherished policy platforms to fund Lib Dem positions on tuition fees.

Signing those pledges was so stupid. It is the sort of shameless opportunistic politics they have played for so long, knowing they weren't going to be in government - except this time, there was a real chance that they could end up in government.

They messed it up. Clegg and Cable could see this coming, tried to ditch the position at their conference, but didn't have the guts to stand up to their party.

Thankfully, the right decision now seems to have been made. The Lib Dems could pay a heavy political price, but they are, at least on this matter, governing in the national interest.

Original poster
LilyBolero · 15/11/2010 08:17

The electoral reform referendum is a bit of a non-issue though - note that the Tories are allowed to campaign against it, and I'm pretty sure Labour will campaign against it as well. And I think the LibDems are deeply unpopular now, and people won't vote for something they perceive as being a 'Liberal' policy.

Raising of the income tax threshold - again, I think this is a bit of a disingenuous policy; it doesn't help the poorest in society, because they don't pay tax anyway, the HRT tax threshold is being lowered so that HRT payers don't benefit from this, but the result is that people who weren't previously HRT payers will now become HRT payers, with massive financial penalties via the CB cuts. Ill thought out.

The rights and wrongs of student finance can be debated all day - it is a worthwhile debate, and something did need to be done. What I object to is the way LibDem MPs have shown zero integrity, by buying votes and then reneging on their promises. And then some try and justify it by saying things like "well this is better than the current scheme" or "for some students we HAVE abolished tuition fees".

That was not what the implication to students was. You HAVE to retain integrity in my view, and if you have made a high-profile pledge like that (a personal pledge not a manifesto pledge), then you have a moral duty to stick to it.

OP posts:
huddspur · 14/11/2010 23:56

It wasn't a dealbreaker with the Conservatives but it wasn't one of our main priorities. I would much rather have the raising of the income tax threshold or an electoral reform referendum over the abolition or no raising of tuition fees for students.

Original poster
LilyBolero · 14/11/2010 19:44

But huddspur, they gained votes, not for a policy they would implement in power, but for a promise on how they would vote in any debate in the house. The promise was not to implement an abolition of fees, were they to win, and I would agree they would have no hope of persuading the Tories to do this. The promise was on how they as INDIVIDUALLY ELECTED MPs would vote on ANY proposal to raise tuition fees.

I honestly don't think it would have been a deal-breaker with the Tories. I think they would have had to accept that the LDs couldn't vote to treble the fees.

OP posts:
newwave · 14/11/2010 19:33

The NUS are trying to start an anti LD MP in university constituencies to out them. The LD spokesperson has the bloody cheek to call this a "partisan" act. The NUS have said any LD MP who votea against the increase in fees will not be targeted.

I can see Clegg and his LD ministerial colleagues being wiped out at the next election

huddspur · 14/11/2010 19:31

The policy on tuition fees is the tory one. The Lib Dems have accepted the Conservative policy on HE funding. This is just part of being in coalition, although I don't like the policy I accept it.

Original poster
LilyBolero · 14/11/2010 19:18

Nick Clegg should be absolutely ashamed of himself, he is a disgrace to politics. David Cameron and Gideon are behaving exactly as I would expect a Tory to, though even with that proviso I am staggered at their arrogance in stating ill thought out policy, and then asserting it to be 'fair'. But Nick Clegg has failed to grasp that;
i) his party came THIRD in the election - he has much less mandate than Gordon Brown would have had
ii) he campaigned on a manifesto of slower cuts, and NO deficit reduction this year - if you total the LD and Labour (who also went for this slower approach) votes, they total far more votes than the Tories, therefore the mandate is for SLOWER reduction of the deficit
iii) he campaigned on a lie, a bare-faced lie, and I hope this will come back to haunt him
iv) he is an unpleasant individual and I hate him

OP posts:
harpsichordcarrier · 14/11/2010 18:58

the rise in tuition fees is NOTHING to do with the 'unexpectedly bad state of the country's finances'- that is a total pile of bs. As is the other lie that this is the only way to get more money into universities.

  1. the increased fees won't be brought back into the country's finances until AFTER the country is into the 'black' again - several years down the line.
  1. the money isn't going into the universities. funding to the universities is being slashed.
  1. the public finances are in fact in a better state than predicted prior to the election.

bunch of lying deceitful and - thankfully - now UNELECTABLE losers.