Before and After
Today the Lib Dems had to face up to how their party's changed since ditching their leader.
Charles Kennedy reminded them of what they had before - a leader who was well-known, well-liked and well - not tainted by being just another politician. He ended his speech by declaring that "the best was yet to come" - and you couldn't help feeling he might mean for him and not just for his party.
The debate about Ming Campbell's tax plans confronted the Lib Dems with what they've gained after Kennedy - a leader who believes that seriousness and credibility matter more than personal popularity. His party voted today to boldly go where no party has gone before. That, of course, is for good reason. Voters may say it's time to do something about climate change but no-one knows if the Lib Dems are right that voters are ready to pay for it by paying more to drive and more to fly.
In those "before and after" adverts, people always look glum before and happy after. Today the Lib Dems looked like a party unsure whether it was better off or not.
I'm 
Comments
Honestly, this damn country. High 'green' taxes can only modify behaviour, not act as significant revenue raisers.
If people stop flying so often, or buy a diesel Jaguar instead of a petrol-powered Range Rover, 'green' taxes will have modified behaviour, but the government coffers won't be better off, for example, to the tune of 拢2000 per gas-guzzler for simple reason that fewer will be sold.
Try asking London mayor about his congestion charge. Instead of raising 拢200m per anum and rising, it drastically undershot that target, so it was raised to 拢8 and will shortly hit 拢10, or 拢25 if you have a car that averages less than 24mpg.
But of course, the higher the congestion charge, the fewer drivers that pay it, the harder it is to raise your tax take...
Let's call it the 'Green Laffer Curve' - policy wonks will know why...
The Liberal Democrats are screwed. From a local to a national level they don't have a mature mix of people or policies. Really, they're just a hobby party. Until they get over this they're not capable or deserving of government. In time, maybe. Not now.
However, the Conservative party has a long way to go before they've proved they've changed, and the Labour party has to stop squandering what progress they have made. All in all, politics is in a very sorry shape and the people who seek to lead need to sort themselves out.
If they can't take the pain they shouldn't be in the game.
Quoting from one of the reports on their taxation policy:
"But critics question whether there will be a black hole in the sums if the green taxes do succeed in changing people's polluting behaviour - something Lib Dem officials deny."
So... either they've estimated the effect the taxes will have on demand and used that to adjust their calculations, or this is a "green tax" that doesn't make the world noticibly greener. If it's the latter, maybe they should just call it a luxury tax instead?
This will go down like a lead balloon in Cornwall where house prices are high but wages are low, cars are a necessity because public transport is poor and domestic flights are becoming increasingly popular because rail fares are too high. The county's Lib Dem MPs could well have committed political suicide.
The fact that Charles Kennedy helped the LibDems massively, drastically improving their electoral fortunes is not questioned, and I expect that this is what is causing the vague regret that many in the party are feeling.
However, successful as he was, Kennedy was trying to lead a major party and take it further whilst sinking ever further into alcoholism, and having lied about that to the public and to the vast majority of his party, I believe that he had little choice but to go. I wouldn't be surprised if in 18 months time when he has recovered from his problem he was elected back as leader.
Good point! You might be right to acknowledge that politics is so much the cult of the personality. However after seeing numerous shots of glaciers melting in the news I tuned into the News at Ten this evening to hear about a ground breaking policy on tax and I don't feel informed by the news item on the Lib Dems at all! I believe the 麻豆官网首页入口 News team has a duty to inform debate and can reasonabley leave the personality debate bit to the tabloids.
Could this be the shortest suicide note in political history?
Don't you think the only thing going for Charles Kennedy is that he isn't Ming 'Saga Holiday' Campbell? Isn't his motive transparent, arn't the Lib Dems staring into the abyss? They've been a party 'against' specially appealing to Labour voters like those that voted for Sarah Teather ... and thats the problem for the Lib Dems. The very voters that voted for Sarah Teather are likely to be the least liberal people in the country, they've no base. And now, their economic policy - hiding tax increases, its all in tatters?
The Thai PM has been overthrown. Does anybody know where Gordon Brown is?
I was a party member when CK became leader. I voted for Simon Hughes. Given the unedifying recent contest - SH's historical lack of forthrightness about his sexuality; Mark Oaten's trial by tabloid and Chris Hune's utter lack of charisma - Ming is probably a safe pair of hands until CK serves his time or one of the kids makes a name for themselves. Ming is unable to acknowledge it in public, but a hung parliament with a LibLab AND LibCon majority would be the ideal scenario. As such, policy is currently far more important than personality. Ming was right about Iraq, but will not benefit from rubbing it in, and has his other stand-out position on tax. Things would be immesurably better in general if a Tory return to a small state heralded a genuine debate on tax, but that looks very unlikely. It seems to me that the LibDems are currently stuck between a public feeling the pinch of a high tax burden, and a cross party big state consensus. Getting rid of the 50p top rate idea was definately a good idea in the current climate. Unfashionable as it is to say, so is keeping Ming as leader in the short term.
Lib Dems? Serious policies? C'mon your having a laugh, they have about as much chance as Leeds United have of being promoted this season, I can't honestly understand why anybody wastes so much time/effort on this party and its policies. They know full well they have absolutely no realistic chance of been in government or serious opposition that's why they make totally bizarre and irrelevant policies. I am totally neutral in my political opinon but Charles Kennedy is the only thing this party had going for itself and Ming put an end to that! Ps. Nick did you remember my Rock?
On reading the Lib Dems plans for taxing motorists one wonders whether they will pursue industry which is the major pollutant of our environment, with the same vigour.
Paddy Ashdown was on the Today programme this morning and was very impressive, I thought. It's hard to imagine either of his successors managing such a statesman-like performance. And when you're the third party in British politics, one thing you sorely need is a credible, authoritative leader.
Where is the new Ashdown? The Lib Dems are seriously lacking in intellectual credibility at the moment.
Charles Kennedy has managed to rouse the party faithful: they may very well have forgiven him for his drinking lapses. He is still able to command their support and memories are not short especially with regard to his solid parliamentary performances prior to the drink problem becoming public knowledge. Charles is a good debater and Sir Menzies Campbell has indicated that he would like to see Charles at the Liberal Democrat front bench. Time is a healer and given the effable character of Charles Kennedy he should be back to steering the Party to winning ways.
I wouldn't be happy if I were them. Ming has done absolutely nothing for them - I find him to be neither charismatic nor capable as a leader, and I'd certainly never vote for a party led by him. Still, they deserve it for forcing Kennedy out. Karma and all that.
Hi Nick
Great blog - here's a suggestion for a new political word - hope you get a chance to use it.
Best wishes
Huw
A couple of years ago an advertising colleague challenged me to invent a word for his new dictionary of creative terms.
I suggested Malacock: which I defined as "the feelings of a formally cocky person who has fallen on hard times".
The example I gave at the time was "the PM was quite malacock after seeing the latest opinion".
Considering the trials and tribulations of various formally strutting Prime Ministers around the world recently (from Thailand to Italy, Hungary and the UK) I think the word's time has come - Malacock Mr Blair, Malacock Mr Burlesque et al!
Climate change is not going to be solved by lib dems, the greens or any other party having more seats or being in parliament.
Climate change has happened and the only thing we can do is reduce the damage.
To reduce the only solution will be to change the way people think about life.
How many of us would rather walk than drive? Or consider "greener" solutions? Too few. It's good that the lib dems are considering ways around climate change but really is this not the same stuff that has been churned out by the conservatives?
Charles Kennedy has still got the determination and vigour to galvanize his party and make it a viable political party. He should put the drink problem behind him and show his political colleagues that he he has the drive to lift the party from its recent doldrums. By supporting Sir Menzies Campbell wholeheartedly he could most certainly convince the party faithful that he has the zest and capacity to lead the party again at a later stage. He still has the charisma but should never allow alcohol to take over his life again: in this way he could reach the pinnacle of political fame again.
Nick having seen the footage of Mr Kennedy, its hard to stop asking the question, just how sincere is he to be a back bencher? And as his policies have now been shelved, is his time is up? And as for Ming, he is serious, maybe too serious and like others in a different party, too much the quiet voice, although a voice of reason.
I don鈥檛 know if they are serious, I feel they may be. Serious contenders, sadly not. Not brash, not forthright, not nearly credible enough. Not stirring passion in any political soul I suspect. Too safe, too cautious, too much to watch for too long, as nothing stirs in this liberal democrats bones.
Too clean, too sanitised and too little too late. They need a ruck or two and some testing of their mettle, a clanking of armour and some grit and pith to grate me to attention. Bring back Paddy Ashdown? I lament he鈥檚 lost his 鈥渕ojo鈥 too or has he? Sadly yes. They all need a kick up their 鈥渞eputables鈥 in my own humble opinion.
The Lib Dems only ever had two trump cards - their anti-war in Iraq stance and Charles Kennedy.
There is only a limit to the number of times they can play the Iraq one, and even now it seems rather outdated, with only The Independent and occasionally, The Guardian, regularly giving front-page news about the conflict.
Politicians have survived greater scandals than alcoholism. Perhaps in removing Kennedy, the Lib Dems should have heeded the words of Mrs Thatcher - 'If you are going to slit your own throat, don't ask me for a bandage...'
If Ming survives until the next general election - I wonder how long it is before both Conservative and Labour use Michael Howard's words about 'being too old' to lead the country?
The Lib Dems are a mess. Their tax policies need to be looked at, and although their environmental policies are commendable, they seem to have forgotten the furore in 2000 over petrol prices. Instead of trying to declare war on the motorist (and people who use public transport who will end up paying in fare increases), why not try to stimulate research and debate into new technologies...
I am so angry!
Just what political acumen have the Lib Dems got?
With New Labour in meltdown because they lack ability to govern with the electorate having rumbled them, the Tories not really convincing due to their track record one would have thought that the Lib Dems would have seized the moment and gain as much support as possible.
So what do they do? Adopt an ill conceived tax plan for those of us that are struggling as it is!
Result..Less people will be voting at the next election!
I'm rather slow...when did Ming stop being Menzies?