No blood spilt
that no-one expected but which many Lib Dems privately said they wanted to hear - an opportunity to select a new leader without having to spill the current leader's blood.
This afternoon Menzies Campbell told shocked staff at his party HQ that he did not believe he could turn his or his party's ratings around.
It was always assumed that this fiercely proud and competitive man would never surrender the top job. It now appears clear that that pride did not allow him to continue as the media hounded him and as few in his party would come to his defence.
I'm 
Comments
was it his pride, or the Gang in the lords who made him go??
I agree; he was let down by his own from his very first PMQs.
Ming was always a man who spoke from knowledge, not the liberal prayer book - something he seemed not to be able to do as leader.
Hopefully his good friend at number 10 will find him a job in foreign affairs where he can make a real difference - he has a lot to offer, I suspect, and that should not be wasted on the back benches.
Not sure if briefings such as Cable's and Hughes' count as 'bloodless'. Ming is making a bold step in making sure there isn't another divisive assassination, but that doesn't mean that his hand wasn't forced at all.
So, who is the new leader going to be? Charles Kennedy coming back would be a good move, or someone younger and highly ambitious - an unknown, would be great. One thing is for sure, the Lib Dems need to galavnise. They haven't been a political force that could win an election in 80 years. It would be a lot better if this country had three parties thrashing out the agenda - a much more congested battle ground would mean that the tories and labour would be under real pressure to make great policy, not just good ones. I'm not a Lib Dem supporters - but like a huge amount of peope in this country, i could be. If they are the party that can get the balance right, then I hope that they can put in a mid-20 percent performance at the next election. But at the moment, the Lib Dems are in a woeful state - for all theie good will, they just aren't electable. The Lib Dems need to address this now by being brave when picking their new leader, go for someone with character, desire and passion, or face the end of the Liberal democrats as the third biggest party - something that is becoming more and more likely as time ebbs and on.
Ming - probably a decent man crushed by the weight of modern political presentational expectations.
However, cynical (and/or corrupt)behaviour is hardly the exclusive preserve of the Lib-Dems or 'New' Labour.
The Tories are gasping to get their snouts back in the trough big-time.
I must read Martin Bell's new book, but a preview in the Times states that it paints a horrifying picture of venal and corrupt behaviour by MP's.
As Bell was an Independent MP, we can be fairly sure that he skewers MP's from all of the main parties.
One day, maybe enough people might cotton on that it is essentially a systemic problem, the political party system itself is deeply flawed and produces inefficient democratic outcomes.
I hope ageism isn't behind this. It's a sobering thought to think that Winston Churchill was 65 years old when he first became PM. Would our yoof-obsessed nation have the wisdom to accept him today?
(BTW, I'm a Tory supporter, under 50)
While it seems to me to be the right decision, I have to say that I have found the media attitude towards Ming's age a complete disgrace.
I suspect the upcoming election will be a repeat of the conservative one with Huhne (read: Davies) and Clegg (read: Dave)leading the way. I hope the libdems see sense and go for Clegg.
If Menzies Campbell had decided of his own accord to resign as Lib-Dem leader, I think he would have stayed on as leader until a new one had been elected (as Michael Howard did for the Tories), and he would have been keen to make the announcement himself (also as Michael Howard did).
As it is, he just disappeared from the scene, leaving others to tell the media that he had gone and Vince Cable to lead the party in the interim.
Add to this the rumours and statements of the last few days and Menzies' insistence he would lead the party through the next General Election, it seems likely that a lot of pressure was put on him to go.
A pity. I thought Ming was doing well. If he's gone my vote goes next to Lembit Öpik. We need more interesting politics.
Nick, you said on the news report, New 24, that this is good news for Labour and bad news for the Conservatives. Whilst I agree it may be good news for Labour in the short term - a leadership election will divert attention from their woes and lack of vision, I do not agree with the thrust of your argument.
A rejuvenated Lib Dem party may well take more votes from Labour, particularly if it keeps to the left of centre - although that may well depend on the leader.
What is almost certain is the new leader will be somewhat younger than Brown.
Compared to Cameron and the new leader of the Lib Dems, Brown will look old and less likely to be the vehicle of change.
A very interesting end to an odd chapter for the Lib Dems.
First kicking out the leader that brought them some of their greatest victories in living memory, then bringing in one of the "old guard" to oversee a period of decline and failure.
It's a real shame for the party- I'm sure I'm not alone in still remembering the Kennedy incident as reflecting very badly on the Lib Dems- people desperately politicking for their own power, rather than being concerned with anything important. And it's got them nowhere!
This is the only way for the Lib-Dems to make Breaking News. At least the Conservative Leaders resign after losing each election, but poor Sir Ming will go down history for resigning after NOT FIGHTING an election.
We do not live in a democracy
You stop the public from hearing all sides of the argument
Enjoy feasting on this new kill like the vultures you really are
If we do not live in a democracy then all bets are off
Menzies Campbell acquired the leadership on a wave of backstabbing and opportunism, and his career as leader was tarnished by overstretched leadership and a party composed of bungling amateurs. Stretched like a drumskin between the smug sharpness of Alex Carlisle and the banal populism of Lembit Opik, the Liberals were a rotting corpse blown up on their own gasses. The tearing of skin and smell of rotting flesh could only be compost or ash to a new flowering.
The Liberals have a problem. Part of that was Menzies Campbell trying to be more Liberal than Liberal, and they lost themselves in the Barbara Cartland pink chiffon of their own daydreams. The amateur rabble of a party was just too out of touch to be a balance to this. Imploding was as obvious as day follows night. This creates some pain but in that pain is opportunity, and that's why I suggested months ago they focus on improving themselves ahead of trying to win.
The Liberal party is useless and unloved, drunk as they are on their own ego. Britain demands men and women of calibre; people who will deliver and engage with society. The rhetoric of the podium, or advocacy built on insecurity, does not speak to this. If the Liberals wish to play a part in government they must stop being insular windbags and become capable of government, with all the soul searching and sacrifice that demands. If they cannot embrace this fear, the body count will rise.
I don't think Ming would have lasted until the next general election.
It was best for him to go now.
Gordon now looks pretty ancient up against two likely fresher alternatives.
This is bad news for Brown.
About time too... a capable man that was given the respect of an indulged uncle at PMQs and then ignored while his young nephews got down to the business of government versus opposition.
The Liberal Democrats should have had the guts to elect someone who could compete on style and presentation the last time. Regrettably content is only part of the equations these days.
It is amazing how short memories are. Was not IDS pushed out after his most successful speach at a conference.
I am sorry for Ming who is a decent man but lacks the charisma needed by a politician in a media driven age. In my opinion the Lib Dems do have a man with charisma and he is Nick Clegg. I hope he stands and wins.
With Simon Hughes slithering around, dagger in hand, I don't think Ming had much say in the matter. Mr Campbell seems a decent sort of chap, far too nice to mix with a group which should really be called the Nasty Party!
Think that Ming had no choice but to go in the end, once Cable did not give him the ringing endorsement that he had to give.
That has probably not done Cable's future prospects no harm at all, as he was probably singing from the same hymm sheet as someone like Hulme, who represents the style-smugness which became so banal whilst Blair was in office.
Voted for Sir Menzies in the last leadership election - can't say I ever regretted it, but he never really lived up to expectations. Was a lot more effective as a front-bench spokesman than a leader.
Personally, bring back Kennedy - they should never have gotten rid of him in the first place. Of the rest, I'd go for Öpik myself - but he's probably unelectable for as long as he's dating a Cheeky Girl. Still to be persuaded about either Huhne or Clegg.
I agree with Eddie at 7.55, a new fresh youthful leader of the Lib-Dems is likely to put the squeeze on a Labour vote that is already in terminal decline!
Enough of this.
What's happening in Myanmar is far more important than Menzies Campbell but seems to have gone off the radar.
I am amazed at your analysis of the effects of all this on the other two parties.
In my opinion the Lib Dems are now to the left of most of the New Labour Party (of course it does depend where and to whom they are talking to) so if there is any movement I would analyse that many old labour and new labour supporters would now be in a very uncertain position with a leader who frankly has shown up to be perhaps one of the most dishonest and visionless the Labour Party has produced may be rich pickings for a new Lib Dem leader. - just a thought.
Ming Campbell is just too decent and honest to survive in the bear pit of current British politics. He fleshed out concise policies and built an efficient electoral machine. Sadly in the celebrity world of today there was no zing in Ming.
My vote would now go to Nick Clegg,more charismatic than Ming and strong on detail as well as presentation.He could easily outshine call me Dave.
John.. Conservatives only resigning after defeats? Does a certain Ian Duncan Smith ring any bells? Ming's certainly not the first leader in history to resign without fighting an election, and in this media saturated era that we live in, i'm sure he will not be the last.
It seems that Menzies' departure is quite sudden, however was highly likely and would have happened sooner or later.
Let's not dwell too long on our loss and think ahead of the new leader for the Lib Dems. In my opinion it should be Kennedy, but Lembit would also be quite exciting.
There is no doubt tbat Menzies Campbell is a worthy public servant, but the fact is he and others in the Liberal Democrats have no zing, no zap, no wow factor.
Maybe it is the old intrenched politics of Labour, Tories and Lib Dems that has'nt changed since the beginning of the last century and nobody it seems is able break it up for the 21st century.
It is a pity as their green policies are the best of all the political parties and could lead the UK into a newer future that cares for the environment.
Nick. Must you be so dramatic and haven't you noticed we don't have a death sentence here in the UK? Don't you think "milk" would be a better word to use in the title of this blog? "No milk spilt" sounds a bit more humane and lib-dem, I would have thought.
That's it for me! There isn't a major party in this country that is about doing the right thing by the public. These politicians are about their own careers. Ming was a favourite of mine. A principled and old fashioned chap who had my respect even when I didn't support that party.
I've had it up to here with the system. I should think many will think this way.
Mary
#12 - IDS never fought an election either.
I was enjoying the blog until I read Charles E Hardwidge's comment above. Now I think I need a lie down, such is the imagery! Have a reality check Mr Hardwidge, if that's your real name...hang on! Isn't 'E Hardwidge' an anagram of Kennedy??!!
I think Nick got it spot-on both in the blog and the news report tonight. After Brown's dither and the temporary benefits to Cameron, not Campbell, I'm sure that Ming saw the writing on the wall. A great - one of the greatest - Parliamentarians, but the press pack were never interested in peddling HIS prime-ministerial credentials. And if that continued for another 3 years, the risk would have been to either let the 3 party system die quietly or have some noisy blood-letting while it still died.
A crying shame upon all those feasting on the corpse of his leadership. What a great, brave man he is and what a selfless, brave decision he has made. LONG LIVE MULTI-PARTY POLITICS!!!
It was hardly bloodless! The whole affair has left the Lib Dem bird with a wounded wing and a limp. Is there anyone within the party to act as the vet; The second leadership battle within as many years is not good news for the LDs.
His pride? Surely he was elbowed out. Hence why the statement was not given by Campbell himself.
The future; whoever gets the job faces a major defeat at the next general election.
Until the Tories once again fall out over Europe, the Lib Dems are high and dry.
I think the Lib Dems never fully recovered from the way in which Kennedy was 'dispatched'. It tarnished the Lib Dems, and even the most adherent of their supporters only saw Ming as a caretaker. Ming could have made it more permanent had he lead with charisma and vision and clearly stating the Lib Dem' case. All he seemed to do was slate other parties off, without any sense he could do even marginally better. The Lib Dems like the Tory's must reinvent themselves and re-engage with the people. Sadly, this means yet more hype and spin and less substance but regretably that is the market place politics has now descended to.
Its unfortunate but Ming's voluntary departure leaves a strong impression (rightly or wrongly) that despite the LibDems flat rejection of any notion that Ming's age could be an issue, he feels he can't cut it after all. It seems somehow that he dangled both feet in the water then realised that its too darned hot.
Wheather its a good or a bad day for the LibDems depends on your standpoint I suppose, but its surely a bad day for older people who are still up for it - and not just in politics.
I understand B&Q actively recruits the more mature store assistant, valuing their steadiness and reliability.
I think its quite clear that Ming resigned having been undermined by Hughes and Cable this week.
He didn't want to go. He jumped before he was pushed. The fact that he didn't personally make a statement was particularly telling. He was probably too angry.
This notion that his age at a possible future election was a factor is ludicrous considering that this wasn't an issue when he was appointed.
How about persuading the Brummie John Hemming to throw his hat in the ring - it would add some spice to the leadership election.
John #12, you have a short memory - IDS lasted 22 months as Conservative leader then resigned before ever fighting an election as Leader.
The Lib dems in parliament are obviously a very hard bunch to please. I believe Vince Cabel that there was no explicit calls for him to go but there must have been an element of pressure with the poll situation but I think ultimately it was his choice. Lets hope he remains a prominent figure in the lib dems.
You said: "...pride did not allow him to continue as the media hounded him". Surely it would be more accurate and fair to say that "It now appears clear that that pride did not allow him to continue as we in the media hounded him"?
Rather sad to see a decent man of strong principle being sacrificed by his colleagues. Menzies Campbell wasn't a great media performer - he was intelligent and thoughtful and always appeared to be thoroughly decent. Indeed a public servant rather than a modern spin based politician. It would be sad if the qualities he possessed were driven out of modern political life. Blair was all spin, Cameron still gives every impression of wanting to be Blair and the jury is stil out on Brown. Campbell was different, and I've never voted Lib Dem.
Ref comment 14, purple prose Mr Charles E Hardwidge, but very wide of the mark. There are many very competent politicians amongst the Lib Dems 62 MPs, more so as a proportion than either of the 'main' parties. Not only the obvious, Ming Campbell, Vince Cable, Nick Clegg, Chris Huhne etc, but also the likes of Steve Webb, David Laws, Norman Lamb, Julia Goldsworthy, Ed Davey, Norman Baker, I could go on. All of these MPs speak with authority in the Chamber, many play a leading role on select committees, do excellent work in pursuance of their brief, and some would be excellent candidates for Leader. This country is crying out for a more Liberal approach to government, and this could well be a turning point towards a more positive future.
Nick,
It is clear that some Lib Dem MPs hounded Ming out of office like they did with Charles Kennedy before him.
It might be 'bloodless' but it is also sneaky, underhand, dishonest, and just plain nasty.
The question is: where have the Liberal Voters gone - their support is down 12% and the Tories up 12%?
Have the Lib Dem voters gone straight to the Tories? If so it is bad news for Dave and Good for Gordon. This scenario would fit if a lot of the votes were 'I don't like Labour but the Tories are useless', whereas the Labour vote remains pretty solid.
Or has there been a gradual shift to the right in Politics? If so this is bad news for Gordon and Good for Dave as the Tories have gained Labour voters but the LDs have gone towards Labour, which means that Labour voting can be swayed by a 'lurch to the right'.
How much is publicity counted for? The Tory conference and Brown's Hari Kiri have produced a lot of publicity in the past two weeks so have the LDs been squeezed out?
Finally, of course, it appears that the troop numbers in Iraq are coming down which means that there is probably not the intensity of an 'anti war' protest vote that there was in 2005.
All will be revealed when the LD election is held and the winner presented to the Media (and the electorate), the party that loses most votes back to the LD had better look at itself closely in the mirror.
The Liberals have become a spent force. First the Kennedy fiasco, in Scotland their days sharing power with Labour and a poor May election result and now, Ming gets the message to move on with considerable assistance from the media and no support from his own. For a party that throws around that "Vision" buzz word as readily as NU Labour yet neither have a clue where they are going.
Anyone who wants Charles Kennedy, a known & recovering alcoholic, as the Lib Dem option to be Prime Minister, need their head examined.
Sir Ming has wisdom and real integrity, and has united the Lib Dems, but he never communicated the radical agenda of the party and was never really the right man for leader. Nick Clegg is the clear contender for leader now, and will be a lot more popular with voters. And the outcome. A stronger Lib Dem party means more problems for the Tories, especially in marginals, therefore better for Labour - well done Mr Brown, ever the true strategist. Maybe Mr Cameron will be his next scalp...
poor ming! im still in shock! if the libdems are finished we can all look forward to a one party state. by hey works for china.
No.4 (Charlie Peters):
Agreed.
So, there's the possibility for three young Turks to be thrashing the agenda out at the next election: Nick Clegg, David Cameron and... Ed Milliband?
Interesting. I hope it's a green one.
For me, Ming's demise is of his own doing; poor performances rather than age or anything else.
He does however leave the party in a poorer state than he found it and no amount of sychophantic bluster from Cable or Hughes can deny that fact.
The 'powers to be', my own MP included, have in fact done irrepairable damage over the last two years and I'm, quite frankly, so disgusted, I will be voting for another - MRLP, I no longer care - but it won't be LD!
ageism and poor poll results ..he had to go..why not Mr Cheeky Girl..step forward Mr Lembit Opik ??
one of the few Liberal MPs in the national media.
I think that Ming has done the really grown up thing which many politicians would not have done. This leaves him free to do the job which he is good at; namely, the Foreign Affairs. He will be able to put it all behind him and focus on the new. He has been the safe pair of hands which was required for the events of the time and the Lib Dems can now move to the new position of the future.
The one area which none of the other political parties has satisfactorily covered is the disenfranchisement of our young people. There is no vision for the future of any but the academically inclined.
The ideas of the past where people could grow into a trade or craft because their make up was not geared to written work does not exist any more. The outcome is that there are whole swathes of youth with no way of working towards some idea of betterment. They are a group of people waiting for a vision which a party like the Lib Dems could offer. The new leader could look for this as a way forward.
I don't think ageism has anything to do with it. Menzies Campbell's problem was that he wasn't effective. He could be sharp and affable enough but when he got to drink from the firehose of power his immaturity of character grew like the magic beanstalk. His famed experience was shown to be mere habit. While he may have resigned in shame as an arrogant poseur, it's clear he was a well meaning and sensitive man. He and his party just lost touch with reality. This is a regret and something that can happen to us all.
Another week and yet more politicians treating us like fools. We're told Ming made this decision "himself" that he wasn't pushed. What nonsense. If he'd decided to go himself why, 24 hours earlier, was he still insisting he wanted to run on until the election? Why did he sneak out of the back door of Lib Dem HQ and leave Hughes to make the announcement? and why, given everyone's saying he was doing such a good job, didn't he "do a Blair" and stay on and hand-over to the next leader in December - perhaps show the other partys what "an orderly transition" really looks like? Instead, he's locked himself away in Edinburgh clearly feeling bruised at what's happened. Please Lib Dem's stop thinking we're all idiots and don't know what's really happened - that's Labour and the Conservatives job!!!!
Lets hope we can have as much fun with the leadership contest as we did last time.
A drunk leader, candidates with more sex scandles than a gary glitter christmas party.
As Ming famously said last week "bring it on"
I'm amazed no LibDem MPs have defected to either of the other parties during all this. Anything on the horizon I wonder?
Nick,
You are too quick with some of your predictions---e.g. that this Lib Dem coup is going to help Labour and hurt the Tories. What makes you think that those who have joined the Tories from the Lib Dems are going to flock back to the Lib Dems all because they get a new, young and vigourous leader---when anyone can see how nasty this party is TO its' leaders? They are the new nasty party, are they not? Maybe just wishful thinking on your part? (I refer to what seems to be your obvious bias in favour of Labour.)
You said that it was "the news that no-one expected", but surely after those polls ratings he wasn't going to last till the end of the year?
He did a very average job at a very important time for the Lib Dems, but they still have time to make progress before the next election.
Who is IDS? hehehe
I agree Clegg would be better than Huhne, but I can't see him having the impact of Cameron. Clegg is young but hardly charismatic. I have no idea if Charles Kennedy has conquered his demons. But, if he has, he should return to the leadership. Then watch the Lib Dems soar in the polls.
Re: Comment 48.
A leader with experience in the field of boozing could be just what the Lib Dems need to win back the middle class vote (see today's Have Your Say discussions)!
Having a new leader is a bit like changing the driver of a car with no wheels.
I'd choose an experienced turk than a young turk any day when it comes to leadership
Re Sean's Post no 56 above:
I am clear Ming Campbell was well within his rights to avoid the media slings, arrows and outrages which would inevitably immediately follow his resignation.
I am not at all keen on the shilly shally overblown Lib-Dems, but I fail to see why any of their honourable, if boring members has to provide peep show entertainment for the media and their "clients."
Political commentary seems to have been unduly influenced by "The National Enquirere" and "Hello" magazine, perhaps you might like to change topic if you require such titivation?