![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
[Politics] The Liberal Democrats [2]
Jan. 10th, 2011 11:22 amIt's been rather interesting watching the way the the LibDems have (or very often haven't) adapted to actually having some degree of power and authority. When presented with a TV camera and asked to justify this or that policy which is actually having an effect on people rather than just being an attractive soundbite, senior members of the party have a tendency to stiffen and look about in a panicky way as if they never expected to be put on the spot and don't know how to deal with it. At the very least, it's good free entertainment.
I've mentioned in the past that they've had a couple of good policy wins in the coalition, but that's not good enough for their supporters - they want their land of milk and honey and they want it now, and the slightest deviation from what the conglomeration of sandal-wearing CND-types, disaffected Labour voters, old-school economic liberals and sundry hangers on who make up the LibDem core vote wants is being met with howls of outrage. Realpolitik meeting unrealistic expectation. I almost feel sorry for them.
The big LibDem policy win is yet to come - the referendum on a change to the voting system from FPTP to AV. Speaking personally, it is a matter of supreme indifference to me which system we use, and intellectually I can see considerable advantages and disadvantages to many different electoral systems. Anyone thinking that changing to AV will make the system more 'fair' is in for another glum feeling of sinking disappointment should it be implemented and it doesn't have the effects they think it should. However, hope springs eternal.
The thing about the word 'fair' is that I've never encountered anyone who uses it who thinks that they'll be worse off in a 'fairer' world. It's a catchall term which can mean anything to anyone, and so is of immense use in politics and the pro-AV crowd are using it with merry abandon. The other phrase I'm seeing wheeled out a lot is the cod-rhetorical question of "But don't you want your vote to count?" because someone read Socratic dialogue for Dummies and decided that asking leading, empty questions is a great way to get people to agree with you. Unfortunately, it isn't. It just makes people think you're a twat.
The big problem faced by the LibDems and the pro-AV campaign is that, if implemented, it would make coalition government a great deal more common in the UK - and that would mean the LibDems becoming the kingmakers more often than not and I'm sure this hasn't passed the LibDems - or anyone else in politics - by. Everyone except the senior LibDems (and especially Vince Cable), that is, who were stuffed like turkeys by the Telegraph the other week. Presented with a pretty girl in a short skirt, Vince promptly lost any sense of discretion and shot his mouth off about anything which came into his head for as long as the girl kept on leaning over in front of him and saying "Oh but that's very interesting, tell me more". Several others did much the same.
And it's this which really makes me worry about AV, and makes me think the case for it has been damaged. Given that coalitions with the LibDems are going to be a lot more common in an AV future, I'd argue that them demonstrating that they're really not very good at working in coalition, or keeping their mouths shut about it, damages their case. Their big hope was to show the world that they were competant and sensible and generally a safe pair of hands, and so telling everyone whilst the tape recorder was running that they aren't was probably a mistake.
I reckon that the AV referendum didn't have much of a chance before now, but this display of foolishness by cabinet members has probably holed it below the waterline. What do you think?
I've mentioned in the past that they've had a couple of good policy wins in the coalition, but that's not good enough for their supporters - they want their land of milk and honey and they want it now, and the slightest deviation from what the conglomeration of sandal-wearing CND-types, disaffected Labour voters, old-school economic liberals and sundry hangers on who make up the LibDem core vote wants is being met with howls of outrage. Realpolitik meeting unrealistic expectation. I almost feel sorry for them.
The big LibDem policy win is yet to come - the referendum on a change to the voting system from FPTP to AV. Speaking personally, it is a matter of supreme indifference to me which system we use, and intellectually I can see considerable advantages and disadvantages to many different electoral systems. Anyone thinking that changing to AV will make the system more 'fair' is in for another glum feeling of sinking disappointment should it be implemented and it doesn't have the effects they think it should. However, hope springs eternal.
The thing about the word 'fair' is that I've never encountered anyone who uses it who thinks that they'll be worse off in a 'fairer' world. It's a catchall term which can mean anything to anyone, and so is of immense use in politics and the pro-AV crowd are using it with merry abandon. The other phrase I'm seeing wheeled out a lot is the cod-rhetorical question of "But don't you want your vote to count?" because someone read Socratic dialogue for Dummies and decided that asking leading, empty questions is a great way to get people to agree with you. Unfortunately, it isn't. It just makes people think you're a twat.
The big problem faced by the LibDems and the pro-AV campaign is that, if implemented, it would make coalition government a great deal more common in the UK - and that would mean the LibDems becoming the kingmakers more often than not and I'm sure this hasn't passed the LibDems - or anyone else in politics - by. Everyone except the senior LibDems (and especially Vince Cable), that is, who were stuffed like turkeys by the Telegraph the other week. Presented with a pretty girl in a short skirt, Vince promptly lost any sense of discretion and shot his mouth off about anything which came into his head for as long as the girl kept on leaning over in front of him and saying "Oh but that's very interesting, tell me more". Several others did much the same.
And it's this which really makes me worry about AV, and makes me think the case for it has been damaged. Given that coalitions with the LibDems are going to be a lot more common in an AV future, I'd argue that them demonstrating that they're really not very good at working in coalition, or keeping their mouths shut about it, damages their case. Their big hope was to show the world that they were competant and sensible and generally a safe pair of hands, and so telling everyone whilst the tape recorder was running that they aren't was probably a mistake.
I reckon that the AV referendum didn't have much of a chance before now, but this display of foolishness by cabinet members has probably holed it below the waterline. What do you think?
