1. Great Night for the Tories.

Whatever you think of them (and i’d guess most people reading this would have a fair few choice words!) one has to admire the political skill with which Cameron and Osborne have conducted their affairs of late. They were dealt a pretty darned tricky hand, in a large part of their own making. They badly misjudged things in 2008, made the wrong call about early cuts and economic stimulus and allowed Gordon Brown to win part of the argument and gave Labour an “in” at the 2010 General Election that probably we were not expecting. They didn’t do enough to win an election (which as I have mentioned several times previously was a gaping own goal) and given the Tory appetite for Regicide there must have been some worrying moments.

Tories consulting omens about early election.

But they acted really rather boldly in forming the coalition, and in doing so have landed themselves in a much stronger position that they could possibly have hoped for at this stage in proceedings. Whilst the Liberals have taken nothing but grief for their part in the coalition (more on that later) the Tories, and Cameron in particular have been able to garner a fair amount of credit for “doing the right thing”. However much it is bollocks, they have created a narrative of acting stoically in the “National Interest” under difficult circumstances on the economy and however unpalatable it might be for us on the left they are winning the argument with “the man on the street”.

The big story yesterday for me was the buoyant performance for the Tories in English elections. Rather than being unpopular due to the government and finding themselves in a retreat and a collapse their position held up (in fact at the time of writing they have enjoyed a moderate improvement winning around 4 extra councils and about 80 extra cllrs). They remain solidly the party of Local and National government in England. The Tories will see this as a great platform to be able to win a general election. With their coalition partners massively diminished, AV having gone south and Labour enjoying mixed results at best, they might even start thinking about a snap election at some point if the omens look good….

2. An awful night for the Lib Dems.

If Cameron and Osborne were on a sticky wicket the day after the 2010 general election then Libs were on a stickier one. They clearly hadn’t really expected to get into the position they were in (despite surely their whol electoral strategy being predicated on that outcome), they had made promises they couldn’t keep (and in the case of the tuition fees never had any intention of keeping). I guess they had little choice but to go into the coalition (though hindsight certainly suggest they would have been better off with a supply and confidence deal). I think their real tactical error was the massive love in they engaged in. That they seemed to willingly become the “human shields” for the worst ill effects of what the government was doing was just ridiculous (why does Danny Alexander always give the treasury bad news?)

Well they have “got theirs” and big style. The party took an almighty kicking, their local activist base has been decimated and destroyed. The big prize, of electoral reform, has gone south (and some! Let’s be honest) and their bargaining position has been totally undermined. They can have no credible threat in any negotiations with the PM because he and his party know that the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Party simply cannot afford to be going to the polls in an election anytime soon. They are locked in an embrace in the coalition hoping that the economy improves closer to the election. What they must realise though in their heart or hearts is that even if it does it is probably going to be the Tories that reap the benefit.

I suspect between now, and the next election, the Liberal Democrats are going to have a fair few awful nights like yesterday. Ho hum, you reap what you sow.

3. Mixed night for Labour.

I said in a piece I wrote for LabourList yesterday that it was “Time for Labour to Wake Up“. Now I stand by that blog in it’s entirety. What happened in Scotland was a disaster, and I am very surprised that we were unable to garner a majority in Wales. But winning 800 councillors across England was a really positive start in terms of the party bouncing back (after what was a crushing, crushing defeat last year). What is clear to me though is the scale of our gains (especially in the context of the Tory vote holding up so well) are not pointing to us coming back to power in 2015. Things are not as bad as they could be, but not as well as we hoped. I hope yesterday shatters the illusions of anyone who thinks we just need to turn up  next time and we will win.

4. We didn’t vote to keep FPTP in perpetuity.

Perhaps my ballot paper was misprinted. But on mine it asked me a very specific question about if I thought we should adopt the AV system or not. I chose yes, most people chose no. John Reid has claimed that there was an overwhelming endorsement of FPTP, Matthew Sinclair (Of the Tax Payers Alliance fame) claims this referendum should “close the door on electoral reform for a generation. I think analysis of the cold hard facts ought to suggest otherwise. Some 32% of people voted for a change to AV, several million and whilst it clearly was rejected there remains amongst a lot of people an appetite for change.

It is simply wrong to suggest that everyone who voted “no” wanted to clearly say that they supported first past the post. There was a campaign group called No2AV Yes2PR, I know anecdotally loads of people who voted “no” because they didn’t like AV specifically whom might have voted differently to a referendum on some form of PR.

I think we have to get real though in the recriminations a little. Yes the “no” campaign lied profusely, yes they were shadily funded by nasty Tory scum who see the present system as the best way of protecting their narrow self interest. But, in the final denouement, AV went down because people didn’t like or want it. David Allen Green put’s it quite simply here on his Jack of Kent blog. And can it really be a surprise? Now I imagine that I won’t say these words, in this order, all too often on these pages but….

Nick Clegg was right (god that feels weird). AV really is a “miserable little compromise”. Despite being a vocal and forceful advocate of Yes2AV I didn’t want the AV system. It is crap. It’s only virtues is that it wasn’t as bad as what we have got at the moment. And you know what I don’t really know anyone else in the Yes2AV camp who doesn’t to a greater or lesser extend think something along these line. The truth is we really didn’t believe in it, and that was always going to make it an impossible job to sell.

I support electoral reform because I believe that fundamentally in a democracy the make up of our parliament ought to reflect the views of those who vote. For me this is “Democracy: 101″, our current system does not do that. Millions of people who support UKIP, the Greens, etc. just simply do not have their views represented in our parliament and this is just plain wrong. If a question about voting reform is ever put to the British people again it has to be on the basis of a system that would delivery some sort of proportionality. It will have to be something the campaigners actually believe in, something we can positively advocate.

5…. But in practice it is FPTP for the next two parliaments at the very least.

I think when the public express such a strong view  on the topic it is always going to be seen as a compelling narrative of “status quo prevails”. I think there is no milage in reforms trying to get a proposal before the public for the next 10 years at least. People will simply be annoyed at being asked again even if the question is different. Unless circumstances change (and should 2015 deliver another hung parliament and coalition that would do it) then the argument will be different and better.

I think what needs to happen is reformers now have to look to make positive cases around changing other aspects of our system. Lord’s reform, constitutional reform, how local democracy works. There is more than one way to skin a cat, and maybe the best way to demonstrate that changing the election system for the commons can make things better is to deliver successful reform in other areas. There is a lot wrong in our politics and our system. Let’s focus our energy on making good things happen and see where it takes us?

I thought it was an interesting view that was worth a full blog post riposte, I mean who wouldn’t want the Lib Dems to get a kicking and the General Election early? I know the thought of that really pleases me.

The trouble is for me it just doesn’t add up. Clearly electoral reform is important to the Lib Dems (and all small parties for that matter) and was one of their big objectives coming into coalition government. It would inevitably be a slap in the face and a sap to the morale if there is a no vote.

The real winner if if No2AV wins.

But will this destabilise the Government and bring forward a General Election? From the Liberal perspective of course not. They are polling in the doldrums, 8, 9, 10% consistently over a long period of time. The party are taking most of the flak for what the government are doing, have a leader who is “Political Kryptonite”. If there was a General Election tomorrow the Parliamentary Liberal Democrat party would be wiped out.

Perhaps there are a few Lib Dem members of parliament that put conscience, belief, integrity and ideals before career (Vince Cable? Simon Hughes? Can you hear us……) but are there enough of them with an appetite to put themselves out of a job, which let’s face it is the most probably outcome if there was an election any-time soon. Anyone think this is even remotely credible?

And even if it was possible what would it be likely to achieve? How would resigning from the Government help their cause? Having lost a referendum on electoral reform if they then in a fit of pique also prove, in the eyes of reform detractors, that coalition government is unstable and unsuitable they will have hammered an extra nail into political reform for a generation. They just won’t do it.

But that isn’t to say the coalition is unshakable granite. It isn’t it is just looking at it from the POV of attacking the Liberal Democrats is the wrong angle. No the weak link of the coalition isn’t the Lib Dems, they have no choice to to hug tight and hope for the best. The weak link is the Tories, specifically the Tory right.

Lets remember in reality the 2010 election was a bit of a disaster for Cameron. He had a gaping own goal, a tired unpopular third term government widely discredited and out of gas. The most unpopular Prime Minister in ages. And a economic downturn of a scale not seen since the 1930s. He should have won a thumping majority maybe even a landslide but he came up short.

The Tory right were furious, they believed that this was because Cameron had been weak, too centrist. Had they tacked hard to the right on immigration, law and order, the family and low taxation they would have won a resounding victory (I mean that worked out well for Major, Hague and Howard right !). They felt let down.

The Tory right didn’t want a coalition, they wanted to go it alone and govern as a minority maybe calling a snap election in a “who governs?” way after a few months. A second election they confidently predicted would result in a Tory majority and a mandate to rule (well more than the God given one they assume as a matter of course!).

So the real threat to the Coalition is the Tory right seeing evidence that actually the Lib Dems are getting a far better deal, that Tory values are being eroded in a sop to the Liberal Democrats, that sacred cows are being sacrificed. But most of all that future Tory prospects are being damaged.

For me this is crystal clear, changing the electoral system in a way the Tories will fear hampers them will cause massive problems for David Cameron and George Osborne in managing their party. The “New Statesman” is reporting a Tory backbench plot to thwart AV if there is a Yes vote. If a Yes was combined with a bad showing in the locals and devolved parliaments for the Tories Cameron would be likely faced with an almighty backlash form both his grass roots and the 1922 committee. There would be many voices saying it would be better to call a snap election than let AV happen.

The reality is if you don’t care about the issue, but you want to give the government a kicking then by voting yes you get so much more bang for you buck. Clegg is a schmuck, an eejit and a wally. But he is a spent force; his own personal credibility amongst progressive voters will never recover. He is finished.

Cameron and Osborne are very real, potent and live threats to ordinary people and our country. They are the real enemy, they are the people whom our fire should be focussed on. And they want a “no” vote. Come on let’s smack Osborne in his smug face and vote YES TO AV!

Much of this debate focussed on the need to attack the coalition to try and bring it down as quickly as possible. Now I cant say that this would be anything other than a hot damn good thang! But I feel the need to write a couple of quick blogs about firstly how likely I think this is later how desirable it would be right now….

So first of all a “few reasons why I think the coalition will last”.

1. The Liberal Democrats simply cannot afford to be in a general election any time soon. With poll rating around 13-15% at the moment the Liberals could face being wiped out if an election was called in the near future. Whatever the morals, ethics or conscience of a particular vote bringing down the government at the moment would likely put many Liberal Democrat MPs out of a job.

   Now Turkeys may sometimes vote for Christmas, and I have no doubt there are a fair few MPs who would happily give up their jobs for a principle…. but I for one would not bet on enough of them doing that to topple the government any time soon.

   Much more likely if you ask me is that having taken the hit in terms of public opinion for the negative impressions of the coalition the Liberals are tied into hoping that their popularity increases if and when the economy starts an upturn.

2. This coalition is a once in a generation opportunity to try and get electoral reform. Nick Clegg recently claimed that electoral reform is not the be all and end all of Lib Dem policy, but the reality is it always will be due to the way First Past the post punishes third parties. For the Lib Dems (and for that matter and aspiring new party) changing the voting system is vital to them having any real prospects of influence.

   So it is of vital importance that the Liberals keep the coalition together to deliver a referendum on AV. If they pass up the opportunity to try and fight a referendum on this they might as well pack up their bags and go home.

   Combined with low ratings in the polls, if the Liberals cannot make the coalition delivery electoral reform, then they risk becoming a marginalised irrelevance for 20 years or so. I don’t think there is any realistic possibility of them taking this risk.

3. The Liberal Democrats need to be able to demonstrate that coalitions can work. As far as I can see there are very few people outside of the most tribal and blinkered Labour and Tory diehards who do not at least acknowledge that FPTP is unfair. But despite this many people have objections to the adoption of electoral reform on other grounds.

   One of the principal of such objections is the fear that coalition government is inherently unstable, weak and indecisive. People look at countries (usually those who operate straight party lists systems like Israel, Belgium or pre 90s reform Italy) and feel that coalition governments are necessarily flakey and prone to dissolving at the first sign of trouble.

   Again the Liberals have a once in a generation opportunity to try and change perspectives on this. Even if they suffer in the short term by making this coalition work, and last, they have the potential prize of demonstrating that a hung parliament is not a bad thing and can work. This, in the long term, is central to their chances of being an influential and successful political party in Britain over the long haul.

4. Next it is clearly suiting David Cameron having the Liberals forming something of a bulwark against the hard right within his own party, at least in the short term. A big risk of Cameron was always that the extreme of the party would be very unhappy with his urbane “Notting Hill set” style of leadership and political instincts.

   Being in a coalition allows him to be able to blame any such policies on the Liberals and the coalition even if he privately supports them and would have tried to do it even if the Tories had won the election outright.

5. The Liberal Democrats are providing a handy pressure valve for the Tories. It seems that the majority of the backlash, and negative feelings toward the Government are being held toward the Libs. They are being blamed for the bad stuff, and the left is focussing most of it’s ire on them (wrongly in my opinion).

   Insofar as this continues the smart tactic for the Tories is to maintain the coalition and hope that if things improve in the run up to the next election, then it will be them and not their coalition partners that ream the reward.

I have long thought for these reasons it is fundamentally wrong headed to assume that it is going to be easy to bring down the government. I find it hard to imagine a situation in which an early election is going to be good for the Libs, and it can’t see the Tories wanting an election unless it starts to look like a shoe in that they are going to win the next election.

So anyway that is part one, next blog about why I am not even sure it is desirable, right at this moment, to bring down the coalition.

That aside the fact that I probably won’t get an opportunity to attend a hustings in person meant that I was keenly anticipating last nights televised one on Newsnight. I thought I would share my thoughts.

Format.

The Paxidermist.... not his finest hour

I am a massive fan of Jeremy Paxman, surely all political junkies love to see him savage aloof and elitist politicians. But in truth he really isn’t IMHO suited to chairing a hustings like this. His irreverent, jokey style which is great interviewing one person, or a couple didn’t really work in the environment. He failed to properly control the debate and for my money made the whole thing less intelligible and useful.

Clearly the relatively short time (40 minutes I think they had from start to finish) and the fact it was the first time they all got to do this on the TV meant that all the candidates were a bit too keen to get in and talk over one another. The net result was that all came across as a little undignified. Whilst this absolutely should be a battle about ideas and not presentation we shouldn’t lose site of the fact that hopefully whoever wins this contest will be the next Prime Minister and therefore the last thing we want to happen is the leadership campaign itself damages our eventual winner’s prospects at the next general election.

In reality for my money none of the candidates came across in a particularly good light… Hopefully next time they are on the Beeb there will be a full hour and Dimbleby will chair it.

Winners.

Against a backdrop of me not thinking it was a great night for any of them who were the winners on the night for me.

I think the big winner was Diane Abbott, she was able to present herself as being genuinely different from the others. Not having been a part of the Government meant her criticisms did seem to have more legitimacy. DA clearly is populist (at least within the context of the leadership election, if not the wider populace), and knows how to talk about the issues where New Labour really made mistakes to seem different and better.

In reality I can see DA picking up a fair amount of support from people who are disaffected with Labour, and a fair amount of preferences from those wishing to cast a protest vote. This could be a case of “Careful what you wish for”, Do we really believe Diane Abbott will win a general election?

Next winner was David Miliband. Going into the contest he is probably my 5^th preference, certainly in terms of policy. I think he is very much business as usual, more of the same, one big push and we’re back in government candidate.

However despite that for my money he came across very well, we seemed confident, passionate and authoritative. I would go as far as to say Prime Ministerial. And he was probably the only candidate who came across that way. I don’t want him to win because I disagree strongly with his public policy agenda but I think he did very well in the hustings.

My front runner.... at the moment.

Lastly Ed Miliband. I have to say that he has been my early front runner and the candidate thus far that is in pole position to receive my votes. I don’t think he had a particularly great night but in terms of policy and substance and in terms of saying public policy things that were “hits” for me at least he came out top.

However talking vaguely about “values” is only going to get you so far, sooner or later this is going to have to start translating into exactly what these values are substantively.

Losers.

I knew very little about Andy Burnham so I was quite interested to listen to what he had to say. Not least of which a candidate with a regional accent was set to be a bit different.

So now I have heard him speak and I can say for sure that if I was voting tomorrow I would have a new fifth preference. I intensely disliked him from start to finish in almost every way. And he seems even more of a right wing, nu labour continuity candidate than David Miliband.

Also whilst I don’t think he did anything particularly bad Ed Balls enforced all my preconceptions about him, that he is clever, has good ideas, but that there is no way he is going to connect with voters or me. I am sure we will not win an election if Ed Balls is the leader, and for that reason I cannot see how we can elect him as the Labour Party leader.

So there we go, I have already changed my mind a bit based on this so it is probably all to play for if others feel the same.

1. The Tories didn’t win.

This election was there for them, the Labour party had been in power for 13 years was becoming deeply unpopular. There was on the doorstep that feeling of “time for change”, which is so hard for a ruling party argue rationally against. We were in the middle of the worst recession since the 1930s, and incumbent governments will always get the blame. The right wing press were as rabidly behind the Tories as they have been in a generation and across the media we had a hugely difficult environment.

But despite all of this, despite this gaping own goal, the Tories somehow conspired to mess it up, and the reality is they are not going to be able to wield absolute power (more on that later). On top of that far from being wiped out the Labour party still has 250 odd seats and will be able to mount an effective opposition.

2. The Labour party have lost their way.

I didn’t want the Tories to get in, and I had (have) no doubt that in a Tory Britain things would get worse for working people. But, I also know that “The enemy of my enemy” only goes so far. The reality is for me 13 years of Labour government has been a crushing disappointment. Despite some early successes (minimum wage, signing the social chapter) in the main the Labour government has not lived up to what I had expected, hoped for and dreamed for growing up in Thatchers Britain.

As a keen student of the history of British politics I had hope for a genuinely radical, transformative agenda such as the Atlee post war government, or Roy Jenkins social reforms in the 60s. Fundamentally we didn’t get that, unfortunately the score card at the end of our most successful period of electoral history, three consecutive governments and 13 years or rule reads:-

The gap between rich and poor got greater, draconian trade union legislation remains in place and the biggest erosion of civil liberty in living memory took place….. And IRAQ.

Losing is never good, but if the Labour party can re-find some of the balance it lost around the turn of the Millennium, then it can refresh and renew and be electable. If nothing else it does afford the opportunity to remember why we are in politics and what the aim is. Harold Wilson said that the Labour party soars best when both its left and right wings are strong. Since Mandleson came back there has only been one game in town and if the Labour party wants to win again we need to change that.

3. It’s a coalition, Not Thatcher with a massive Majority.

We all like to imagine the worst, and for Political reasons it made sense for us to spend the whole election evoking memories of the Worst of Thatcher and Thatcherism. But in the same way as Labour governments are different so are Tory ones. Cameron isn’t Maggie and would have been a different type of leader even if he had won outright.

But the fact that they are in coalition means that they will inevitably have to make compromises, and whisper it, but some of the things that the Libs might get in we might even like. I, and most on the left I imagine, will (though perhaps secretly) cheer form the rafters when ID cards get scrapped, and if they repeal some of the worst aspects of the authoritarian legislation our lot put in.

4. Electoral Reform.

Change needs to happen, our political system is broken. Not only is it manifestly unfair, but the electoral maths of FPTP elections system skews the whole political system in favour of a narrow band of people. Put bluntly middle England, middle class, swing voters in swing seats decide elections. And the whole public policy agenda is therefore focussed on this narrow band of interest.

If we want the possibility of radical, transformative government who will make the world a better place, then the truth is we need to change to rules of the game.

And with this election result it looks like we are going to get a referendum on the Alternative Vote. I don’t think the AV system is fantastic, it is not what I would personally advocate (I am a fan on the STV) but it is definitely a step in the right direction. A small step like this could change politics in the UK forever and for the better. And for me this is a definite silver lining.

5. The Liberal Democrats tarnished.

As a general rule of thumb parties rarely get * more * popular as a result of being in Government. On the contrary normally the opposite is the case. The Libs have clearly benefited from being seen as “outsiders” and “different” and not tarnished by peoples memory of the Tories under thatcher or the current Labour government. This will change, the Liberals are in government. The cuts, and the pain, will be their cuts and their pain.

People often saw them as a “safe” vote if you hated the Tories but couldn’t back Labour. People will surely for a generation not vote Liberal to keep the Tories out again. What this means is that Labour are the only opposition, that if you disagree with the Government you cant vote Liberal or Tory. There is only one credible place to go. It becomes a fantastic opportunity for the Labour party to recover providing the party boxes clever and does not implode. In future when Labour people on the doorstep say “Vote Liberal, Get Tory” people will believe it. And that can only help the Labour party at the next election.

So there we have it things are bad, but maybe not the end of the world. There are 5 reasons for us on the left to be optimistic.