Toriers & Lib Dems, deal by Monday morning?

[Diamond]

I still think the most likely outcome will be a Tory minority government.

 

[butchersapron]

that's hague's spin on it, but I seriously doubt that's the 75% view among the parliamentary lib dems.

Are you calling William Hague a liar?

 

[elbows]

Hague has released a statement syaing the AV was a lib-dem prerequisite for working with them (or anyone) - doesn't sound like they're committed to PR or nothing to me:

Indeed, merely committed to some form of voting reform. Apparently Clegg stated months ago that he was up for AV+

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8644480.stm

Is Labour's backing for AV enough to get the Lib Dems' support?
In some ways yes, in some ways no. The Lib Dems argue that AV is not proportional, and can actually produce less proportional results than the traditional first-past-the-post system. However, they say Labour's backing for AV is "a small step in the right direction", and supported the proposed referendum on voting reform. In an added twist, Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg said in an interview in March that they would support an enhanced version of the Alternative Vote - known as AV+.

What's the plus for?
AV+ is the Alternative Vote as outlined above, but as well as voters ranking constituency candidates in order of preference, they would get a second vote at a regional level either for a party or for their favourite candidate from a list proposed by the parties. This would mean having a group of constituency MPs and a group of "party list" MPs. Some commentators think having two different kinds of MP is a disadvantage of this system. It is also not used anywhere in the UK at the moment. Its supporters say AV+ is more reflective of the proportions of votes cast, and retains the MP-constituency links of first-past-the-post.

 

[Diamond]

It clearly says coalition 'agreement'.

The point still stands. The party won't settle for AV. That's a commitment to PR whichever way you slice it.

 

[butchersapron]

The point still stands. The party won't settle for AV. That's a commitment to PR whichever way you slice it.

No it doesn't - if Clegg's been peddling his arse and AV is the price, that's most emphatically not a commitment to PR on his or his leadership's negotiating team's part at all.

 

[elbows]

AV+ has a bit of proportionality to it so thats the possible fudge solution?

 

[butchersapron]

AV+ has a bit of proportionality to it so thats the possible fudge solution?

I think so yes, but apparently the party will not stand for it. Course they won't

 

[Diamond]

No it doesn't - if Clegg's been peddling his arse and AV is the price, that's most emphatically not a commitment to PR on his or his leadership's negotiating team's part at all.

You're confusing your arguments. You started off making a point about the lib-dems, now you're talking about Clegg.

The point man is more to the right than most of the party and more flexible on electoral reform, but that's no news. It's the party that will enter into the coalition and provide support and as it currently stands to suggest that the lib dem parliamentary party is not committed to PR is a bit odd.

 

[Lo Siento.]

Been looking for an excuse for a few years now

The one thing I would say though that is fun. This is how politics should be. I must admit to being stunned at the Lib Dems because any alliance with Labour that leads to a Government is unworkable on so so many levels. Its suicide for both parties and thats what I dont get.

Lets drop all the tribalism for second. Do any of your Labour lot honestly think that such a coalition is a good idea for you ?

You're looking at it from your perspective though. For you, and people like you, The Tories moment has come and they're somehow owed a shot at government. Whereas fo 60% of the rest of the country, they were so desperate to avoid a Tory government, they voted for Labour and the Lib Dems! If the Lib Dems really want to get annihilated, they should try allying with your lot. No PR, lose all their Labour tactical votes and the votes of all the people who think they're a safe leftish protest vote. That would be annihillation.

Only the tribalists are left voting for Labour anyway, so who the fuck are they gonna lose?

Bottom line, in politics people have very short memories. The people who thought they liked clegg after the debates had forgotten about it a month later. For the Lib Dems, PR is the only chance of ever wielding power. For PR they're now or never basically. For them it's definitely worth taking whatever hit they get from this coalition.

Labour? Questionably if it's in their long-term interests. On the other hand their vote has bottomed out, so they've no immediate losses to deal with.

 

[butchersapron]

You're confusing your arguments. You started off making a point about the lib-dems, now you're talking about Clegg.

The point man is more to the right than most of the party and more flexible on electoral reform, but that's no news. It's the party that will enter into the coalition and provide support and as it currently stands to suggest that the lib dem parliamentary party is not committed to PR is a bit odd.

Wow, that's weak even by the standards of recent days. Nick Clegg is the leader, his negotiating team have (if Hague is correct) set down AV as a prequisite for a 'coalition agreement' after long talks with the party and the various bodies they have to report back to. What on earth makes you think that this is going against what has been discussed and agreed in those meetings? That really is grasping at straws.

 

[Diamond]

Wow, that's weak even by the standards of recent days. Nick Clegg is the leader, his negotiating team have (if Hague is correct) set down AV as a prequisite for a 'coalition agreement' after long talks with the party and the various bodies they have to report back to. What on earth makes you think that this is going against what has been discussed and agreed in those meetings? That really is grasping at straws.

No it's not.

The reason that the coalition didn't come about today was because Clegg was not given the go ahead in those meetings today.

It's really quite simple.

 

[free spirit]

Are you calling William Hague a liar?

no, but he also doesn't speak for the liberal democrats does he.

maybe at some point someone in the lib dem negotiating team said they might settle for AV, but this doesn't mean it would actually be acceptable to 75% of the party. In case you'd missed it, since the lib dems were last negotiating with the tories, they'd held a meeting of their MP's and decided to open negotiations with labour, which pretty much means that they weren't happy with the top line negotiating line discussed with the tories.

 

[free spirit]

No it's not.

The reason that the coalition didn't come about today was because Clegg was not given the go ahead in those meetings today.

It's really quite simple.

exactly.

 

[Diamond]

No it's not.

The reason that the coalition didn't come about today was because Clegg was not given the go ahead in those meetings today.

It's really quite simple.

Of course I could look like a total fool in a few hours time.

The next Lib Dem pow-wow is scheduled for 10pm.

Might be worth staying up late to see if there's an announcement.

 

[butchersapron]

no, but he also doesn't speak for the liberal democrats does he.

maybe at some point someone in the lib dem negotiating team said they might settle for AV, but this doesn't mean it would actually be acceptable to 75% of the party. In case you'd missed it, since the lib dems were last negotiating with the tories, they'd held a meeting of their MP's and decided to open negotiations with labour, which pretty much means that they weren't happy with the top line negotiating line discussed with the tories.

Which would fit exactly with Hague's narrative wouldn't it - as hague goes onto say that due the lib-dems opening talks with labour they will gracefully acede to the liob-dems demands - not for PR - but for AV.

Now, David Cameron and the shadow cabinet and the Conservative MPs have decided that, although our concentration in all of these negotiations has been on the financial situation, on reducing the deficit, on the improvement of education, on the other great issues facing our country, that in the interests of trying to create a stable, secure government, we will go the extra mile. We will offer to the Liberal Democrats in a coalition government the holding of a referendum on the alternative vote system, so that the people of this country can decide what the best electoral system is for the future.

 

[free spirit]

I think so yes, but apparently the party will not stand for it. Course they won't

tories haven't offered AV+ have they?

 

[ymu]

Wow, that's weak even by the standards of recent days. Nick Clegg is the leader, his negotiating team have (if Hague is correct) set down AV as a prequisite for a 'coalition agreement' after long talks with the party and the various bodies they have to report back to. What on earth makes you think that this is going against what has been discussed and agreed in those meetings? That really is grasping at straws.

It seems pretty clear that it was the parliamentary party rejecting whatever deal has been bodged up with the Tories that caused this evening's excitement. Clegg certainly wasn't admitting to formal negotiations with Labour until after today's meeting with the Lib Dem MPs.

 

[Diamond]

tories haven't offered AV+ have they?

I think its just your straight AV.

I'd be surprised if the Lib Dems went for it.

 

[stupid kid]

Been looking for an excuse for a few years now

The one thing I would say though that is fun. This is how politics should be. I must admit to being stunned at the Lib Dems because any alliance with Labour that leads to a Government is unworkable on so so many levels. Its suicide for both parties and thats what I dont get.

Lets drop all the tribalism for second. Do any of your Labour lot honestly think that such a coalition is a good idea for you ?

It's better than George Osborne being the chancellor...

 

[butchersapron]

No it's not.

The reason that the coalition didn't come about today was because Clegg was not given the go ahead in those meetings today.

It's really quite simple.

The tories hadn't even offered AV so how the hell could he have had his AV plans rejected? It's nonsense. The lib-dems would not be negotiating on the basis of AV if it hadn't been oked by those previous lib-dem party meetings. It's craven self-delusion to imagine otherwise.

No leader would go to a meeting to discuss how and what to demand then go onto demand something entirely different.

 

[butchersapron]

It seems pretty clear that it was the parliamentary party rejecting whatever deal has been bodged up with the Tories that caused this evening's excitement. Clegg certainly wasn't admitting to formal negotiations with Labour until after today's meeting with the Lib Dem MPs.

Well whatever deal it was, it didn't contain AV. It wasn't 'rejected' for containing AV. That's the point. That's why it's now been offered after that 'rejection'.

 

[Diamond]

There's a difference between floating an idea and offering a policy.

As far as I understand, a move towards AV was on the table at the Lib Dem meeting today.

The Tory policy announcement this evening in reaction to Brown wasn't even really about negotiating, it was pure politics.

 

[free spirit]

Which would fit exactly with Hague's narrative wouldn't it - as hague goes onto say that due the lib-dems opening talks with labour they will gracefully acede to the liob-dems demands - not for PR - but for AV.

yes, but that would have been the lib dem negotiating teams bottom line negotiating stance prior to their meeting with MP's. After that meeting it's almost certain that this stance has changed, which is why negotiations have opened with labour because it was clear the tories could never go further than AV (plus being utter cunts).

if Hague had come back and offered STV, maybe he could have swung it, but coming back with AV is just taking the piss.

also, if I heard brown right, he was offering a mostly elected house of lords on top.

 

[agricola]

The Labour negotiating team is Balls, Mandleson, Adonis and Harman. How can anyone expect this to go well?

 

[Diamond]

The Labour negotiating team is Balls, Mandleson, Adonis and Harman. How can anyone expect this to go well?

I know, I just saw that as well. I wonder who takes the lead.

 

[butchersapron]

yes, but that would have been the lib dem negotiating teams bottom line negotiating stance prior to their meeting with MP's. After that meeting it's almost certain that this stance has changed, which is why negotiations have opened with labour because it was clear the tories could never go further than AV (plus being utter cunts).

if Hague had come back and offered STV, maybe he could have swung it, but coming back with AV is just taking the piss.

also, if I heard brown right, he was offering a mostly elected house of lords on top.

Why were the lib-dems negotiating on the basis of AV if they had been told at previous party meetings it was not acceptable? Or were they negotiating on that basis precisely because they'd been told at those meetings that it was acceptable? Either way, someones being massively devious or dishonest here.

 

[Maurice Picarda]

According to Guido, Conservative HQ staff at Millbank are having their contracts renewed for another 5 months. So they're planning for another round. Ashcroft might ask for his money to be spent on populist stuff this time, instead of Dave's Big Tent nonsense.

 

[ymu]

Well whatever deal it was, it didn't contain AV. It wasn't 'rejected' for containing AV. That's the point. That's why it's now been offered after that 'rejection'.

Ah, yes. I see your point now. Yes, Clegg was quite happy to go ahead without PR. That's why they've been talking about "political reform" instead of "electoral reform" in the last couple of days.

 

[Diamond]

I suppose what's most interesting if you take a step back and take a bigger picture approach is that this is all beginners stuff for the whole system.

All the adversarial instincts in both parties must be straining against the lust for power, tearing them this way and that. I wonder if there are any more trump cards for any party to stumble across.

 

[Diamond]

According to Guido, Conservative HQ staff at Millbank are having their contracts renewed for another 5 months. So they're planning for another round. Ashcroft might ask for his money to be spent on populist stuff this time, instead of Dave's Big Tent nonsense.

Judging by what Ashcroft's said recently, I doubt there'd be many survivors from the current campaign if they are to rely on his money again.