Are the Lib Dems broken.

[????]

They've seen the books and know we're on the precipice and just how close we were (are) ...it's beyond politics at the momenmt, it's about our creditwothiness which is why all the anti-bankiung stuff is riseable, without the massive contribution they make to our tax take and national economy we're heading to Zimbabwe

[Ridgley]

I agree with DJKQ the but I fear that at some point the heirs of Thatcher will rule the roast

[SeanMacGabhann]

Paying huges amounts of tax and providing jobs doesn't in and of itself put anyone above criticism tho does it?

They might well do all that and still be a large factor in why we are in this position in the first place

And as for creditworthiness well let's look at the jokers who decide THAT shall we?

[????]

Those who have the money to lend (not just the credit agencies)....if they don't believe us and our figures don't add up they won't lend cheaply, won't lend at all or call in their loans. It's not just Moody's and Fitch making it up Sean and we need to borrow the money from somewhere without the money tree.

Western governemnts have borrowed to a point that is unsustainable on long term projections on pensions/healthcare, public sector wage bills, everything. You can't square that circle, states can't afford to spend when their credit runs out....Go and get your money tree if you want to carry on spending. It really doesn't grow on trees you know. And if we get rid of the 18% of direct tax FS contributes, the 1/3 of our imports it pays for on our already terrible Balance of Payments let a alone all the connected city business services from our global centre of excellence the we are going to Zimbabwe quicker than you can say Ireland. But, get rid of the scum bankers...of course, Yeah, right on.

[SeanMacGabhann]

I really can't talk to someone who keeps saying that is what I am saying

[Loz]

Back to the Lib Dems point... one thing Clegg is achieving is giving the Lib Dems the experience of government and this should not be underestimated nor undervalued. One of the things always thrown at the Lib Dems was they they were not serious government material. Now they are - even if you disagree with their policies - showing that they can govern.

And whilst things may look bad at the polls, the public have an amazingly short memory (just look at Labour). If the LibDems are back on the cross benches come the next election (most likely, as the Tories will probably get a working majority next time around), then they will be well placed come the following election. Though almost certainly with a new leader - I can't see Clegg fighting even the next election. He is now too easy a target.

[DJKillaQueen]

I really can't talk to someone who keeps saying that is what I am saying

In fact quids, no-one is saying that if you actually bother to read what is being written. You may well think the banks and those that ran them are beyond reproach but a whole sector of the public disagree and for good reason, just as it is also ridiculous to suggest that only an economy driven by huge personal debt can deliver growth. And to pretend things can continue as before is just asking for more of the same.

Now they are - even if you disagree with their policies - showing that they can govern.

But they are NOT governing. They are a side show to a Conservative government, a side show that are destined to be humiliated in April by the referendum on voting reform and destined to be held responsible for any misery poured on the public by the policies being currently pursued. There are already signs that the economy is downturning (a consequence of the measures put in place by the coalition) and there is trouble ahead for the euro and other things out of our control that will almost certainly squeeze any chance of recovery within the next five years. It is just pure fantasy to think that either the Conservatives or Lib Dems are going to increase voting share in the light of all that.

[Loz]

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Now they are - even if you disagree with their

> policies - showing that they can govern.

>

> But they are NOT governing. They are a side show

> to a Conservative government, a side show that are

> destined to be humiliated in April by the

> referendum on voting reform and destined to be

> held responsible for any misery poured on the

> public by the policies being currently pursued.

> There are already signs that the economy is

> downturning (a consequence of the measures put in

> place by the coalition) and there is trouble ahead

> for the euro and other things out of our control

> that will almost certainly squeeze any chance of

> recovery within the next five years. It is just

> pure fantasy to think that either the

> Conservatives or Lib Dems are going to increase

> voting share in the light of all that.

If you are in government, you are governing. They are making mistakes, but that's how you get experience. Also, the referendum is still alive and polls are showing a slight edge towards reform. There are no signs of a downturn at all - where did you get that from? Granted there's not much in the way of a recovery, either, but I wouldn't be playing Chicken Little just yet.

As I said, the Tories are probably going to win the next election anyway. Labour don't have a leader of any standing and there are more credible candidates for Australian cricket captain than there are for Labour leadership. Labour have failed to convince the general public of their line that the cuts (as a whole) are not necessary. It should be an open goal, but Ed doesn't realise he's supposed to kick the ball.

Anyway, my post was on the long term outlook for the Lib Dems and the experience they are gaining now is invaluable. There will be short term pain, but in the long run this will be beneficial for them.

[DJKillaQueen]

Great...we should excuse their mistakes (and the impact they have on millions who unlike them have no privilege to cushion them) because they are gaining useful experience? And no I don't think long term it will help them one iota. They will never win a general election.

There are other polls that show the referendum will be a no vote so we'll have to wait and see.

The last trade figures (widely reported in the press) show a slowing of the economy.

You have no way of knowing any more than the next guy who will win the next election. The measures of cuts (esp. in the public sector) haven't even begun to start to impact yet so it's a bit permature to even to begin to suggest that the Conservatives will be rewarded with electoral victory for the coming jobs losses and increase in required welfare spending.

A lot of people are going to suffer and whilst some of that is unavoidable (due to the global crisis), people tend to blame the government at the end of the day. The majority of the population do NOT earn average or above wages, have NOT gone to public school, do not have privilege to fall back on. The majority of people in this country are struggling to make ends meet, to provide for their families as best they can and that includes many middle income families too. London is a bubble...it is not reflective of the rest of the country.

I totally agree that Ed is a PR failure and wouldn't be suprised if the Labour party oust him before the next General Election (he's clearly not leadership material).

[Loz]

Interesting by-election results. Labour win - no surprise there. But the Lib Dem vote holding up surprised even me. OK, a lot of tactical voting by the Tories, but I suspect a lot of Tories didn't bother (which would help explain the much-lower turnout).

Looks like the Lib Dems will be around for a while yet. Back luck, Odyssey! :))

[James Barber]

So to answer the original question - the by election results in Oldham East & Saddleworth. Clearly shows the Lib Dems are not broken.

The Lib Dem vote seems to have held up very well. More people voted Labour.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12187965

I was a little involved in this campaign. We didn't have the 500 people Labour bused in on Saturday for example. What's really sad is how many people there didn't vote. They told me politicians are all the same, etc, etc. The damage that the likes of Woolas and Illsey have done to politics should'nt be underestimated.

I was also stunned how many openly told me they would be voting BNP. The results demonstrate this. Another fall out of the dirty politics these voters have witnessed first hand.

[Ridgley]

This is very worrying, if some voters are voting BNP this means there is a problem with the parties and voters have lost faith the last thing we want is a rise of that particular party.

[SeanMacGabhann]

I never ever ever ever ever buy the line from voters who say they are voting BNP because they have lost faith in the other parties ? it?s a lame-ass excuse

For a start if people care enough to vote but feel the parties have let you down, what is it about the organisation of the BNP that makes them think ?now there?s a bunch of people who have a proven track record and won?t turn out to be crass and manipulative?

[Loz]

I'd never vote for BNP, but you have to admit that, as a protest vote, it's rather effective. If the Greens or UKIP or the SWP vote doubled no one would care. If the BNP vote doubles everyone panics.

[Ridgley]

There are a lot of reasons why, voters vote BNP and I don?t take it likely that?s exactly what happen in France in the mid 90s the French took them for granted until they almost got into power.

[Huguenot]

The BNP appeal to base instincts of tribalism and violence that are a legacy of an earlier evolutionary stage.

People who vote for them are so intellectually stunted that they share the BNP's conviction that these instincts are a cure for all society's challenges.

They're a pretty good argument to drop universal suffrage and bring back serfdom.

[Ridgley]

Its funny they seem to only pop, when there is an economic crisis not when the country is doing well. You have a point H I remember when I was growing up, my mum was fairly close to our neighbour next door they would stop and have a quick chat form time to time then a few months later when my mum popped over to see her told my mum her family was with Enoch now and she had nothing to say to my mum anymore.

[DJKillaQueen]

The BNP are about to go bankrupt anyway.

James, dubious tactics in election campaigns are not the sole premise of the Labour candidate in Oldham as you well know....they can be found from all parties.

Is a blatant lie any worse than a claim made with no basis in truth? In my books no....the Lib Dems in my ward blatently tried to frighten voters with the unfounded claim that a Labour led council would sell hosuing management to a neighbouring borough......

Councillor Edwards recent findings into the sham of housing repair statistics lauded by the previously held Lib Demcouncil also make enlightening reading.

You might want to think before you take every opportunity that you do to dig at the opposition....is your own house clean?

Those are the reasons voters lose faith in politicians....there's no general intergrity anymore....just a drive to make every think look great...when for those on the ground, it so obviously isn't.

[SeanMacGabhann]

I'm not sure voters are any less contradictory or contrary Dj. You try being in any sort of power and keeping a constituentcy happy without coming across as shifty or plain wrong to many of them. Cant be done

[DJKillaQueen]

I agree Sean....and it's not a job I'd want to do for any price.

[James Barber]

Hi DJ,

Before the May elections Southwark Labour party were stating they wanted to share services with neighbouring boroughs. They could'nt name any services they wanted Southwark to lead on partly because the Lib Dems had led Southwark for 8 years so it had to all be bad in their minds/their publicity.

Lambeth Labour party also said they wanted to share services and the first thing they did when they took power from the Lib Dems in Lambeth in 2006 was outsource all council housing - not part of any publicised manifesto. This was partly in response to National Labour policy of not putting central government grants toward decent homes into council run housing but only into Housing Association run or Arms Length Managemen organisations run ex.council housing.

So, we genuinely thought if Labour ran Southwark Council and central government Southwark council housing would be outsourced to Housing Associations and ALMO/s. Still a risk of this as I don't beleive I've seen any statements they wont.

However, the coalition government has said the government grants to help with Decent Homes are no longer limited to husoing run by Housing Associations or ALMO's so this driver has been removed.

As for the scrutiny report into Housing repairs - I hadn't yet read it until you piqued my interest.

The report can be seen at:

http://moderngov.southwarksites.com/mgConvert2Pdf.aspx?ID=4339&T=9

It shows a dramatic initial reduction in councillor casework. Unsurprisingly casework went up in 2010 when everyone's door was knocked on during election campaigns.

I was disappointed with the recommendations - doesn't mentioned any interest in audit plans by the suppliers or council officers. Another useful technique I've used is Graded Audits where field engineers have to take before and after photos of their work and submit them - works wonders on quality. So I've contact my three colleagues on the committee to follwo these up. Hopefully still room to improve the draft report.

[DJKillaQueen]

No James...The leap from the 'borough' sharing services and then housing services being run by the same company running Lambeths was campaigned on as being fact and formed the main headline of all Lib Dem campaign literature aimed at council tenants in my ward. Indefensible, especially on the basis that it 'might' one day happen. The intent was clear - to frighten council tenants with the prospect of massive rent increases (yes one headline said that Labour WILL hand council housing management to the same comapny that runs Lambeth and increased rents by 14%).

Fortunately the public were not fooled.

Yes the governement has taken away the limitations on decent homes funding (from ALMOs) but it has also cut the money available for decent homes to less than a fifth of what is needed. So no great geature there I think. Fact is that 80% of decent homes work will not get done. Nothing for the ooalition to bleat about.

But then what else can we expect form a party that lauded 99% satisfaction over housing repairs while the truth was that many repairs were not being done at all.

[James Barber]

For heaven sakes. Did you not read the Labour leaflets!

At least the Lib dem ones were based on facts and record of behaviour - Southwark Labour had said housing in Southwark was rubbish and they planned to merge services.

So are the Lib Dems broken - think we've established from last weeks election - no they're not.

[DJKillaQueen]

Oh dear James...throwing a hissy fit at yet again having your bubble of 'the Lib Dems can do no wrong' being burst?

Do you have anything to say about the fact that 80% of decent homes work will never get done? Or are you going to continue with the pretence that taking away the preference for Almo's somehow makes a difference?

And why can you get away with using the forum for promoting your parties cause in general debate when one of my local labour councillors has been told she can not do the same?

Of course I read the Labour leaflets....and your point is? Can you provide evidence that Labour in Southwark planned to merge services? My understanding is that the meeting is which merging was discussed related to borough boundaries where there is sometimes confusion over which borough is responsible and a merging of services for border areas might be a solution.

If the Lib Dem leaflets were based on facts then why have none of the proposed claims on rent increases and housing management by the company that runs Lambeth materialised?

Oh and then there's the false housing repair stats that the Lib Dems put out of 99% satisfaction, now discredited by Gavin Edwards report.

Oldham is one by-election (and according to political commentators not typical of most constituencies...so doesn't really say anything) .......the Lib Dems are a minority party, who took an opportunist chance to be in government. The majority of the electorate never voted for ANY of their policies and don't kid yourself that they'll be forgiven by many voters for that act.

[Huguenot]

I don't think you can criticise JB for defending the Lib Dems on a thread about the Lib Dems? Come on DJKQ, that's just cheap abuse.

The point about housing renovations is probably just mathematical - how much housing can be renovated with the available budget? What would the difference be between the parties? Hard figures please?

The rest of it seems like naff student politicking.... "Wooo there's spin in election manifestos, wooooo"

It's dispiriting when the apparatchiks criticise politicians for knocking off top hats..... whilst knocking off top hats.

Something about not being part of the solution, being part of the problem...