The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I agree that could well be the deal they ask for, but..
Hence no coalition. There's no way Cameron could sell that to his backbenchers. They would never vote for it. They will want confidence and supply and dare Labour and Lib Dems to vote an EU referendum bill down.
In fact, Cameron may even prefer that as he could blame it on them rather than be obliged to deliver.
And the Libdems would then look and sound like Alex Salmond when faced with a Referendum answer from the voters that they did not like, only with far less legitimacy if they found themselves back in another Coalition Government with even less representation than this time. I mean seriously, give us the electoral reform we want without asking the voters if they want it too, and we will then give the voters a chance to choose on an In/Out Referendum?
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
Referenda do seem to produce the status quo. If the LibDems do demand electoral reform, presumably the Single Transferable Vote in Multi Member Constituencies it would show that they really believe in it because as things stand it would result in them moving from the 3rd to the 4th largest party. They have around 8.5% of the seats currently which is pretty much their opinion poll rating at the moment - although far below the 23% of votes they achieved in 2010.
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I agree that could well be the deal they ask for, but..
Hence no coalition. There's no way Cameron could sell that to his backbenchers. They would never vote for it. They will want confidence and supply and dare Labour and Lib Dems to vote an EU referendum bill down.
In fact, Cameron may even prefer that as he could blame it on them rather than be obliged to deliver.
That's why anyone who wants an in/out referendum needs to vote Tory next year. Increases the chances of a Tory majority and no need for a coalition with the perfidious Lib Dems
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I agree that could well be the deal they ask for, but..
Hence no coalition. There's no way Cameron could sell that to his backbenchers. They would never vote for it. They will want confidence and supply and dare Labour and Lib Dems to vote an EU referendum bill down.
In fact, Cameron may even prefer that as he could blame it on them rather than be obliged to deliver.
That's why anyone who wants an in/out referendum needs to vote Tory next year. Increases the chances of a Tory majority and no need for a coalition with the perfidious Lib Dems
Only if you're in a Tory marginal seat. (which is about 1/10th of the population at most.)
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
What system though? Tories might come around to AV now that UKIP is a thorn in their side.
Multi member STV constituencies.
Tories won't go for that.
They might agree to STV for local council elections though. But generally I think Tories will not do coalition again - it will be minority and then 2nd election in a year. They can afford it.
Hold that thought.
Hopefully, there might be a guest 'thang' on that very subject on this blog (by yours truly) courtesy of the gracious accommodation of TSE, very soon.
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I'd be happy with that particularly if there is Hol reform as well.. Personally I'm also quite relaxed about an EU referendum as I think the public will vote to stay in because Cameron will gain a few face saving concessions (which is why the right have never trusted him) and as we saw in Scotland business will intervene big time on the jobs lost if we leave the EU theme. My prediction 55-45 to stay in.
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I've been thinking along these lines, but it would be extremely unpopular just 4 years after we pretty solidly rejected the idea in a referendum. I guess they could pick another system and say we only rejected AV, but generally it'd be a publicity nightmare.
I'd expect something like that to get bogged down in the House of Lords - pretty much the only thing the Lords is good for now is holding up contentious* meddling with the Constitution that wasn't in the government's election manifesto.
Look at this issue from the Tories rather than the LibDems. First, we have to assume that the party is the largest and by some measure in May: the minimum has to be around 300 seats and the putative coalition to command a decent overall majority.
In these circumstances, it is utterly inconceivable that the referendum pledge would be jettisoned. It is an absolute red-line. If the Libs refused then Cameron would form a minority government and introduce the referendum bill within weeks and challenge the LibDems and Labour to defeat it with the threat of resignation and the likelihood of a second election (though can't be guaranteed because of the Fixed Term Act).
So, in reality, the LibDem's bargaining position would not be strong. I can envisage the Tories granting STV for local government, as in Scotland, but not for the UK as a whole. Take it or leave it.
But, in truth, the LibDems probably don't have much to fear from an EU referendum anyway as the chances are that Cameron will negotiate a deal that will allow him to recommend a yes vote in 2017, which stands every chance of being sustained by the voters as in 1975.
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I'd be happy with that particularly if there is Hol reform as well.. Personally I'm also quite relaxed about an EU referendum as I think the public will vote to stay in because Cameron will gain a few face saving concessions (which is why the right have never trusted him) and as we saw in Scotland business will intervene big time on the jobs lost if we leave the EU theme. My prediction 55-45 to stay in.
The argument on jobs would not work with an EU ref. The problem for Scotland was losing the pound; if the UK left the EU we would keep the pound.
(Although the rest of the arguments are much more detailed than that and I haven't formed a view which way I would vote).
putting up the income requirement to bring someone here
Specifically how much money do you think you should have to earn before you're no longer considered too proletarian to be permitted a luxury foreign spouse?
@TheScreamingEagles - I've been thinking of a possible guest article on the general subject of 'Ed is crap' but with a new slant and with betting implications. Is there likely to be any interest, or do you already have a long queue of people wanting to explore that subject?
Piss-poor is the new and enhanced crap. Don't forget.
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I agree that could well be the deal they ask for, but..
Hence no coalition. There's no way Cameron could sell that to his backbenchers. They would never vote for it. They will want confidence and supply and dare Labour and Lib Dems to vote an EU referendum bill down.
In fact, Cameron may even prefer that as he could blame it on them rather than be obliged to deliver.
That's why anyone who wants an in/out referendum needs to vote Tory next year. Increases the chances of a Tory majority and no need for a coalition with the perfidious Lib Dems
Only if a Tory majority is actually feasible. If the polls are as they are now, it'll be clear that the Tories don't have a chance at a majority, and they wouldn't get their referendum either in coalition with Lib Dems or in minority.
In that case, or if you're not in a Tory marginal, if a referendum is the only thing you care about, the most sensible thing would be a UKIP vote, as that would at least keep piling pro-referendum media attention on, and would make it more attractive for other parties to promise a referendum in the future to avoid losing votes to UKIP.
@TheScreamingEagles - I've been thinking of a possible guest article on the general subject of 'Ed is crap' but with a new slant and with betting implications. Is there likely to be any interest, or do you already have a long queue of people wanting to explore that subject?
Piss-poor is the new and enhanced crap. Don't forget.
Did you notice how much better Spurs became when I said Poch = Ed
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I have to say given you are a known Conservative supporter, this is pretty desperate stuff. You may of course be party (so to speak) to things that I (as a mere Party member) wouldn't know anything about but that's your business and what you hear in the Manchester bars may be accurate or just gossip.
I have long been of the view that unless the party's losses are more limited than some on here seem to think, not only may the LD total not be significant enough to support a majority Coalition Government led by either the Conservatives or Labour but there will be no appetite withjin the Party to repeat the Coalition experience.
Of course I'd love to see STV which is Party policy but it's always been recognised within the Party that such a major change needs public assent via a referendum. As for an EU Referendum, there's evidence views have changed and a vote to leave is no longer a certainty - indeed recent experience shows the status quo may have more support than polls and opponents suspect. In any case, the two parties who least want a referendum are the Conservative and Labour parties as both will be split from stem to stern just as Labour was in 1975 (and we all know where that finished).
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I'd be happy with that particularly if there is Hol reform as well.. Personally I'm also quite relaxed about an EU referendum as I think the public will vote to stay in because Cameron will gain a few face saving concessions (which is why the right have never trusted him) and as we saw in Scotland business will intervene big time on the jobs lost if we leave the EU theme. My prediction 55-45 to stay in.
The argument on jobs would not work with an EU ref. The problem for Scotland was losing the pound; if the UK left the EU we would keep the pound.
(Although the rest of the arguments are much more detailed than that and I haven't formed a view which way I would vote).
Remembering back to the original European Referendum, business came out with all guns blazing to stay in. I'd imagine the same would happen and the recent majority shown by the opinion polls to remain in would be boosted. 60% IN, 40% OUT.
@TheScreamingEagles - I've been thinking of a possible guest article on the general subject of 'Ed is crap' but with a new slant and with betting implications. Is there likely to be any interest, or do you already have a long queue of people wanting to explore that subject?
In these circumstances, it is utterly inconceivable that the referendum pledge would be jettisoned. It is an absolute red-line. If the Libs refused then Cameron would form a minority government and introduce the referendum bill within weeks and challenge the LibDems and Labour to defeat it with the threat of resignation and the likelihood of a second election (though can't be guaranteed because of the Fixed Term Act).
It depends. I think given that challenge, both other main parties would still whip against it. Question is whether there'd be enough rebels to get it through anyway. Not sure how many you'd expect from each party.
But I agree they would rather have a minority government than ditch the referendum pledge and go into coalition with LD. That really would kill the party. I just think it may be almost as inconceivable that the LD would agree to the referendum, in which case the parties may just not be able to go into coalition, even if they wanted to
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I have to say given you are a known Conservative supporter, this is pretty desperate stuff. You may of course be party (so to speak) to things that I (as a mere Party member) wouldn't know anything about but that's your business and what you hear in the Manchester bars may be accurate or just gossip.
I have long been of the view that unless the party's losses are more limited than some on here seem to think, not only may the LD total not be significant enough to support a majority Coalition Government led by either the Conservatives or Labour but there will be no appetite withjin the Party to repeat the Coalition experience.
Of course I'd love to see STV which is Party policy but it's always been recognised within the Party that such a major change needs public assent via a referendum. As for an EU Referendum, there's evidence views have changed and a vote to leave is no longer a certainty - indeed recent experience shows the status quo may have more support than polls and opponents suspect. In any case, the two parties who least want a referendum are the Conservative and Labour parties as both will be split from stem to stern just as Labour was in 1975 (and we all know where that finished).
I'm also a defender of the Lib Dems.
I'm more optimistic on the Lib Dem chances next year than most.
I think the next coalition will be a lot more different than this one. It may have a break clause in it this time and a lot more preset red lines
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I'd be happy with that particularly if there is Hol reform as well.. Personally I'm also quite relaxed about an EU referendum as I think the public will vote to stay in because Cameron will gain a few face saving concessions (which is why the right have never trusted him) and as we saw in Scotland business will intervene big time on the jobs lost if we leave the EU theme. My prediction 55-45 to stay in.
The argument on jobs would not work with an EU ref. The problem for Scotland was losing the pound; if the UK left the EU we would keep the pound.
(Although the rest of the arguments are much more detailed than that and I haven't formed a view which way I would vote).
We've seen how for example Japanese firms have said how important it is the UK remains a member of the EU. So even if your contention is true it will not be how the public perceives it./ The possibility Scotland would want another referendum in the event of an out vote is also a factor of course. Any vote to leave the EU in the 2015 - 2020 parliament is doomed to fail barring a total negotiation cock-up by Cameron. Anyway as has been pointed Ed is crap is PM is the more likely result next year!
Some Scottish referendum figures by lower levels than council authority
South Lanarkshire
Clydesdale Yes 16,733 No 25,391 East Kilbride Yes 31,309 No 36,365 Rutherglen Yes 20,844 No 20,915 Hamilton 32,104 No 39,129
Edinburgh by Westminster constituencies
East Yes 27,500 No 30,632 North & Leith Yes 28,813 No 43,253 South Yes 20,340 No 38,298 South West Yes 24,659 No 39,509 West Yes 22,615 No 42,946
North Lanarkshire
Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Northern Corridor (Boxes 1-88 and Postal Votes 1-24 & 97) Yes 30,821 No 28,486 Coatbridge and part of Airdrie (Boxes 89-186 and Postal Votes 25-48) Yes 30,065 No 26,903 Remainder of Airdrie, Shotts, Bellshill and Viewpark (Boxes 187-267 and Postal Votes 49-72) Yes 25,795 No 27,685 Motherwell and Wishaw (Boxes 268-362 and Postal Votes 73-96) Yes 29,106 No 27,848
(Note for NL: "It is very important to note that whilst ballot boxes from polling stations were allocated and counted by area this was not the case for postal ballots which were simply distributed evenly across the four counting areas and any box could have contained votes from any area. Post ballots accounted for 14.3% of all votes cast")
@TheScreamingEagles - I've been thinking of a possible guest article on the general subject of 'Ed is crap' but with a new slant and with betting implications. Is there likely to be any itnerest, or do you already have a long queue of people wanting to explore that subject?
I'd be very interested in that.
I have two guest articles in the pipeline. One goes up today. One tomorrow.
So yours could be up by the weekend.
Hi TSE, I have had an idea for a guest article for a while about why the main 3 parties have learnt the wrong lessons from Blair. Would you be interested?
In these circumstances, it is utterly inconceivable that the referendum pledge would be jettisoned. It is an absolute red-line. If the Libs refused then Cameron would form a minority government and introduce the referendum bill within weeks and challenge the LibDems and Labour to defeat it with the threat of resignation and the likelihood of a second election (though can't be guaranteed because of the Fixed Term Act).
It depends. I think given that challenge, both other main parties would still whip against it. Question is whether there'd be enough rebels to get it through anyway. Not sure how many you'd expect from each party.
But I agree they would rather have a minority government than ditch the referendum pledge and go into coalition with LD. That really would kill the party. I just think it may be almost as inconceivable that the LD would agree to the referendum, in which case the parties may just not be able to go into coalition, even if they wanted to
You make an excellent point in your first paragraph. I am pretty confident that all Tory MPs would support the referendum bill, and arguably a fair number (25? More?) Labour MPs, plus the DUP, and maybe a handful of LibDems joining them, leading to a Commons majority on 2nd Reading. Could be close run but by no means impossible.
My take on the General Election outcome is that almost no-one has been thinking GE, and nor will they until February/March. At that point UKIP could have a couple of MP's under their belt and will be picking holes in Labour as much as, if not more than, the Tories. However, Cameron and team have a massive advantage with the economy and they will hammer Labour on it until it is drilled into everyone's thinking. If you reckon Labour's Tax Bombshell was bad, you ain't seen nothing yet, for two simple reasons. 1. Labour are defenceless on their recent past. 2. The Conservatives have overseen (or seen) an economic recovery.
So …
Conservatives will pull ahead to around 38 or 39% Labour around 31% UKIP 15% LibDems: ? not sure but maybe around 10-11%
@Alanbrooke Why would the state interfere with the workings of the "market"? The "market" is self regulating perfection is it not? The answer is it isn't, and never could be, but despite pointing out its logical short comings, it seems there are those indeed "too blind to see"
The problems do not lie with 'the market', they lie with distortions placed upon the market by Governments, supranational organisations, monopolies and over-powerful corporations. 'The Market' does not exist -it is just another term for people. Attacking 'the market' for social and economic ills is as idiotic as trying to cure asthma by removing the lungs. Adam Smith wrote about the dangers of corporations in Wealth of Nations -it's always been there; these things aren't new. Sadly well-meaning people like yourself are being duped into pursuing an entirely bogus anti-capitalist agenda that calls for more 'regulation' -basically handing more power to pernicious international institutions, and harming social mobility.
That is an interesting point, do you think there is a realistic possibility that the Libdems could rule out a future Coalition with either of the two main parties after the GE at their party Conference?
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I have long been of the view that unless the party's losses are more limited than some on here seem to think, not only may the LD total not be significant enough to support a majority Coalition Government led by either the Conservatives or Labour but there will be no appetite withjin the Party to repeat the Coalition experience.
@TheScreamingEagles - I've been thinking of a possible guest article on the general subject of 'Ed is crap' but with a new slant and with betting implications. Is there likely to be any itnerest, or do you already have a long queue of people wanting to explore that subject?
I'd be very interested in that.
I have two guest articles in the pipeline. One goes up today. One tomorrow.
So yours could be up by the weekend.
Hi TSE, I have had an idea for a guest article for a while about why the main 3 parties have learnt the wrong lessons from Blair. Would you be interested?
My take on the General Election outcome is that almost no-one has been thinking GE, and nor will they until February/March. At that point UKIP could have a couple of MP's under their belt and will be picking holes in Labour as much as, if not more than, the Tories. However, Cameron and team have a massive advantage with the economy and they will hammer Labour on it until it is drilled into everyone's thinking. If you reckon Labour's Tax Bombshell was bad, you ain't seen nothing yet, for two simple reasons. 1. Labour are defenceless on their recent past. 2. The Conservatives have overseen (or seen) an economic recovery.
So …
Conservatives will pull ahead to around 38 or 39% Labour around 31% UKIP 15% LibDems: ? not sure but maybe around 10-11%
Overall Conservative majority of around 35-40
Bold...!
I think you are right though that Labour v Tory on the economy is like a bantamweight facing 12 rounds with Mike Tyson. There are two slogans that will resonate with voters:
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I have to say given you are a known Conservative supporter, this is pretty desperate stuff. You may of course be party (so to speak) to things that I (as a mere Party member) wouldn't know anything about but that's your business and what you hear in the Manchester bars may be accurate or just gossip.
I have long been of the view that unless the party's losses are more limited than some on here seem to think, not only may the LD total not be significant enough to support a majority Coalition Government led by either the Conservatives or Labour but there will be no appetite withjin the Party to repeat the Coalition experience.
Of course I'd love to see STV which is Party policy but it's always been recognised within the Party that such a major change needs public assent via a referendum. As for an EU Referendum, there's evidence views have changed and a vote to leave is no longer a certainty - indeed recent experience shows the status quo may have more support than polls and opponents suspect. In any case, the two parties who least want a referendum are the Conservative and Labour parties as both will be split from stem to stern just as Labour was in 1975 (and we all know where that finished).
I'm also a defender of the Lib Dems.
I'm more optimistic on the Lib Dem chances next year than most.
I think the next coalition will be a lot more different than this one. It may have a break clause in it this time and a lot more preset red lines
At least the parties will have no excuse this time for not having thought their positions through. Last time Labour seemed completely at sea with the situation. There was only really one realistic outcome, although it came as a surprise to most people (including me).
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I'd be happy with that particularly if there is Hol reform as well.. Personally I'm also quite relaxed about an EU referendum as I think the public will vote to stay in because Cameron will gain a few face saving concessions (which is why the right have never trusted him) and as we saw in Scotland business will intervene big time on the jobs lost if we leave the EU theme. My prediction 55-45 to stay in.
The argument on jobs would not work with an EU ref. The problem for Scotland was losing the pound; if the UK left the EU we would keep the pound.
(Although the rest of the arguments are much more detailed than that and I haven't formed a view which way I would vote).
Remembering back to the original European Referendum, business came out with all guns blazing to stay in. I'd imagine the same would happen and the recent majority shown by the opinion polls to remain in would be boosted. 60% IN, 40% OUT.
Mr Song, As OGH is fond of saying, "That was then". So, so many things have changed since the early/mid-seventies that I am not sure the same tactics that that worked then would work in 2017.
I am sure Cameron, if he gets a chance, will try and do a Wilson but I am not sure he could get away with it. For a start Society is far less deferential now than it was back then.
For example, the Chairman of the CBI or Gen Sec of the TUC carried clout in those days, people listened to them, because their words were reported and people had no other source of information than the MSM. The general public had no, or very few, other sources of news and information on which to base their views. That no longer applies.
One of the strengths of the "Stay-in" campaign in 1975 was that all the great and the good lined up with it. The "Get out" vote was all the "nutters" Benn, Shore, Powell etc.. Well that only worked because of the deferential society. Furthermore, when we look back the "Nutters" were actually, on the whole spot on. They were right, at least on the European issue.
So all in all business coming out in favour may not be the bigger winner that it might have once been.
That is an interesting point, do you think there is a realistic possibility that the Libdems could rule out a future Coalition with either of the two main parties after the GE at their party Conference?
I think the mood for such a decision could well be there, Fitalass, but there are two caveats.
I do not know how such a decision could be wangled into a resolution at the Conference. But Lib Dems are very ingenious.
And I am not sure whether it would be entirely sensible to rule out a future coalition entirely. If there were two blocks, Labour and Conservative, who really wanted to take office, they might have to enter a bidding war to win over the Lib Dems. In order to do so, they might have to go very much further than Nick Clegg would find acceptable.
Personally, I would not want to see the Lib Dems in any/next coalition government. Nor supporting a minority government through Supply and Confidence. After all, both Labour and the Conservatives campaigned against reforming the electoral system. Neither deserves any support.
The Lib Dem price for another coalition will be electoral reform without a referendum in exchange for an in out referendum.
You read it here first.
I'd be happy with that particularly if there is Hol reform as well.. Personally I'm also quite relaxed about an EU referendum as I think the public will vote to stay in because Cameron will gain a few face saving concessions (which is why the right have never trusted him) and as we saw in Scotland business will intervene big time on the jobs lost if we leave the EU theme. My prediction 55-45 to stay in.
The argument on jobs would not work with an EU ref. The problem for Scotland was losing the pound; if the UK left the EU we would keep the pound.
(Although the rest of the arguments are much more detailed than that and I haven't formed a view which way I would vote).
Remembering back to the original European Referendum, business came out with all guns blazing to stay in. I'd imagine the same would happen and the recent majority shown by the opinion polls to remain in would be boosted. 60% IN, 40% OUT.
Mr Song, As OGH is fond of saying, "That was then". So, so many things have changed since the early/mid-seventies that I am not sure the same tactics that that worked then would work in 2017.
I am sure Cameron, if he gets a chance, will try and do a Wilson but I am not sure he could get away with it. For a start Society is far less deferential now than it was back then.
One of the strengths of the "Stay-in" campaign in 1975 was that all the great and the good lined up with it. The "Get out" vote was all the "nutters" Benn, Shore, Powell etc.. Well that only worked because of the deferential society. Furthermore, when we look back the "Nutters" were actually, on the whole spot on. They were right, at least on the European issue.
So all in all business coming out in favour may not be the bigger winner that it might have once been.
It was a while back, but as I said in a previous post referenda do seem to back the status quo. Despite UKIP and the Tory right making a lot of noise on Europe there seems to be a majority even at the moment for staying in http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/06/17/eu-referendum-record-lead/ . We've heard very little from the pro-EU side by comparison. I think that when sensible businessmen start overwhelmingly backing the IN side (as in Scottish referendum) it will move decisively in favour of staying in.
Comments
Hence no coalition. There's no way Cameron could sell that to his backbenchers. They would never vote for it. They will want confidence and supply and dare Labour and Lib Dems to vote an EU referendum bill down.
In fact, Cameron may even prefer that as he could blame it on them rather than be obliged to deliver.
If the LibDems do demand electoral reform, presumably the Single Transferable Vote in Multi Member Constituencies it would show that they really believe in it because as things stand it would result in them moving from the 3rd to the 4th largest party.
They have around 8.5% of the seats currently which is pretty much their opinion poll rating at the moment - although far below the 23% of votes they achieved in 2010.
Many of your fellow travellers on the Labour bus would have her hung, drawn and quartered for such a thing, and the school burned to the ground.
Class War, but only when it doesn't embarrass Ed.
Hopefully, there might be a guest 'thang' on that very subject on this blog (by yours truly) courtesy of the gracious accommodation of TSE, very soon.
The Lib Dems won't have ministers in every department.
They'll run whole departments on their own for example Energy and Justice staffed entirely by Lib Dems.
In these circumstances, it is utterly inconceivable that the referendum pledge would be jettisoned. It is an absolute red-line. If the Libs refused then Cameron would form a minority government and introduce the referendum bill within weeks and challenge the LibDems and Labour to defeat it with the threat of resignation and the likelihood of a second election (though can't be guaranteed because of the Fixed Term Act).
So, in reality, the LibDem's bargaining position would not be strong. I can envisage the Tories granting STV for local government, as in Scotland, but not for the UK as a whole. Take it or leave it.
But, in truth, the LibDems probably don't have much to fear from an EU referendum anyway as the chances are that Cameron will negotiate a deal that will allow him to recommend a yes vote in 2017, which stands every chance of being sustained by the voters as in 1975.
The argument on jobs would not work with an EU ref. The problem for Scotland was losing the pound; if the UK left the EU we would keep the pound.
(Although the rest of the arguments are much more detailed than that and I haven't formed a view which way I would vote).
In that case, or if you're not in a Tory marginal, if a referendum is the only thing you care about, the most sensible thing would be a UKIP vote, as that would at least keep piling pro-referendum media attention on, and would make it more attractive for other parties to promise a referendum in the future to avoid losing votes to UKIP.
I have long been of the view that unless the party's losses are more limited than some on here seem to think, not only may the LD total not be significant enough to support a majority Coalition Government led by either the Conservatives or Labour but there will be no appetite withjin the Party to repeat the Coalition experience.
Of course I'd love to see STV which is Party policy but it's always been recognised within the Party that such a major change needs public assent via a referendum. As for an EU Referendum, there's evidence views have changed and a vote to leave is no longer a certainty - indeed recent experience shows the status quo may have more support than polls and opponents suspect. In any case, the two parties who least want a referendum are the Conservative and Labour parties as both will be split from stem to stern just as Labour was in 1975 (and we all know where that finished).
http://www.spanishpropertyinsight.com/tax-and-pensions/how-uk-pensions-are-taxed-in-spain/
But I agree they would rather have a minority government than ditch the referendum pledge and go into coalition with LD. That really would kill the party. I just think it may be almost as inconceivable that the LD would agree to the referendum, in which case the parties may just not be able to go into coalition, even if they wanted to
I'm more optimistic on the Lib Dem chances next year than most.
I think the next coalition will be a lot more different than this one. It may have a break clause in it this time and a lot more preset red lines
South Lanarkshire
Clydesdale Yes 16,733 No 25,391
East Kilbride Yes 31,309 No 36,365
Rutherglen Yes 20,844 No 20,915
Hamilton 32,104 No 39,129
Edinburgh by Westminster constituencies
East Yes 27,500 No 30,632
North & Leith Yes 28,813 No 43,253
South Yes 20,340 No 38,298
South West Yes 24,659 No 39,509
West Yes 22,615 No 42,946
North Lanarkshire
Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Northern Corridor (Boxes 1-88 and Postal Votes 1-24 & 97) Yes 30,821 No 28,486
Coatbridge and part of Airdrie (Boxes 89-186 and Postal Votes 25-48) Yes 30,065 No 26,903
Remainder of Airdrie, Shotts, Bellshill and Viewpark (Boxes 187-267 and Postal Votes 49-72) Yes 25,795 No 27,685
Motherwell and Wishaw (Boxes 268-362 and Postal Votes 73-96) Yes 29,106 No 27,848
(Note for NL: "It is very important to note that whilst ballot boxes from polling stations were allocated and counted by area this was not the case for postal ballots which were simply distributed evenly across the four counting areas and any box could have contained votes from any area. Post ballots accounted for 14.3% of all votes cast")
So …
Conservatives will pull ahead to around 38 or 39%
Labour around 31%
UKIP 15%
LibDems: ? not sure but maybe around 10-11%
Overall Conservative majority of around 35-40
I think you are right though that Labour v Tory on the economy is like a bantamweight facing 12 rounds with Mike Tyson. There are two slogans that will resonate with voters:
Labour: why would you take the risk?
and the even more effective:
Ed Miliband: why would you take the risk?
I am sure Cameron, if he gets a chance, will try and do a Wilson but I am not sure he could get away with it. For a start Society is far less deferential now than it was back then.
For example, the Chairman of the CBI or Gen Sec of the TUC carried clout in those days, people listened to them, because their words were reported and people had no other source of information than the MSM. The general public had no, or very few, other sources of news and information on which to base their views. That no longer applies.
One of the strengths of the "Stay-in" campaign in 1975 was that all the great and the good lined up with it. The "Get out" vote was all the "nutters" Benn, Shore, Powell etc.. Well that only worked because of the deferential society. Furthermore, when we look back the "Nutters" were actually, on the whole spot on. They were right, at least on the European issue.
So all in all business coming out in favour may not be the bigger winner that it might have once been.
I do not know how such a decision could be wangled into a resolution at the Conference. But Lib Dems are very ingenious.
And I am not sure whether it would be entirely sensible to rule out a future coalition entirely. If there were two blocks, Labour and Conservative, who really wanted to take office, they might have to enter a bidding war to win over the Lib Dems. In order to do so, they might have to go very much further than Nick Clegg would find acceptable.
Personally, I would not want to see the Lib Dems in any/next coalition government. Nor supporting a minority government through Supply and Confidence. After all, both Labour and the Conservatives campaigned against reforming the electoral system. Neither deserves any support.