Originally published @ 10:41 am, Sat 31st Jul 2010
The documentary by the BBC on the five days of negotiation after the General Election tried to create a drama on personalities that skated over the fundamental reasons why a Labour based coalition could not be formed.
The most obvious reason, that there weren't enough Labour MPs.
But also Nick Clegg telling the programme that he had changed his opinion on cutting back on public spending this year further than announced in the budget. Previously he said we shouldn't, and then he admitted he had changed his mind but campaigned on the policy anyway.
To be fair, as has been pointed out to me, Nick Clegg began many of his answers with "to be fair", and when he ventured it, he ventured "to be fair" to explain why people should be fair to him, or less challenging.
But how could any Labour-led coalition have got going with a reversal on the stance of not cutting spending further this year? Our stance was secure the economic revival. And 2 months in from the election, the projections on this year's borrowing are £12 billion better than at the budget and the economic growth figures just announced were better than expected. To have cut further would have damaged the recovery, which would have been under threat from the decisions to cut back on recovery packages elsewhere in the world - something that accelerated once Gordon Brown was not in a position to moderate world opinion.
Indeed, cutting further is damaging the recovery, which is already under threat from the decisions to cut back on recovery packages elsewhere in the world.
So back to the programme. Fouccsed on personality and process. But missing the big point. It was thought that Labour not leading a coalition was to betray the cause of progress in the country. But now we know, Nick Clegg and his colleagues are not for the cause of progress.
And, to be fair, even if the number of Labour MPs would have allowed a coalition, the reactioanry nature of the Lib Dem leadership did not.
Comments