A golden period of good government? In some ways perhaps. An end to the daft reshuffles of Blair, creation of the OBR, an increased role for Cabinet with Cameron largely letting his Ministers get on with things.
Ultimately though the basic economic strategy taken was wrong in my view and led to the worst recovery from a recession in 50+ years.
Hmmm.
Two comments can be made in response to that:
1) There had already been three years where Labour pursuing a different strategy had failed to make noticeably more headway than the Coalition did at equally high cost;
2) It was the worst recession since at least 1931 and arguably (in this country at least) 1878 so it is not surprising the recovery was slow and uneven.
I can't agree on 1 - the recovery was going well when Brown left.
On 2 - I think it is true that there is evidence which suggests banking crises take longer to recover, but generally a deeper recession = faster recovery.
Unemployment now half the level Brown left
Unemployment has definitely been the positive news story (after an initial upturn after which Osborne eased up on austerity somewhat).
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I expect we'd have heard a little less of this argument had they gone into coalition with Gordon Brown.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
You are right and wrong.
They are done because many erstwhile supporters have no idea about the realities of being in power as the junior member of a coalition government.
Such supporters would no doubt have preferred the party to remain out of power, inviolate.
Politics is about doing something, in the least bad way. It's not about criticising from the touchlines.
Cleggs destruction of the Lib Dems was a key enabler of Brexit. A tragic figure. Icarus.
Clegg's point blank refusal to allow any discussion of an EU referendum during the Coalition allowed UKIP to build up the head of steam that made the Referendum inevitable. If the Referendum had been held during the Coalition years - then I have little doubt that Cameron/Clegg would have prevailed.
A lot of it is about airtime. When they were clearly the number 3 party they got decent media exposure and that helped get them across as the alternative to the big 2.
Now they are one of the "other" group it is harder for them to differentiate and to attract the attention of the voters.
Additionally, when you have some lingering angst amongst left wing voters that they supported the Tories in Coalition it makes it harder for them to gain ground in their natural target area, while if you really want to "stop Brexit" then surely the incentive is to vote for a party that (a) can win and (b) might - you believe - stop Brexit: i.e. Labour
Given how Labour voted this week on Brexit why would anyone with half a brain think that Labour would reverse or soften Brexit?
Depends entirely on their party's self interest. With the Tories in power, most of them are happy watching the Tories marching towards the cliff. If they get a sniff of power, things could easily change, particularly if public opinion has changed (which is pretty much a precondition of their getting power in the first place).
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I expect we'd have heard a little less of this argument had they gone into coalition with Gordon Brown.
Who they went into coalition was largely irrelevant, they were doomed the minute they jettisoned signed pledges to get a ministerial Jag.
A golden period of good government? In some ways perhaps. An end to the daft reshuffles of Blair, creation of the OBR, an increased role for Cabinet with Cameron largely letting his Ministers get on with things.
Ultimately though the basic economic strategy taken was wrong in my view and led to the worst recovery from a recession in 50+ years.
Hmmm.
Two comments can be made in response to that:
1) There had already been three years where Labour pursuing a different strategy had failed to make noticeably more headway than the Coalition did at equally high cost;
2) It was the worst recession since at least 1931 and arguably (in this country at least) 1878 so it is not surprising the recovery was slow and uneven.
I can't agree on 1 - the recovery was going well when Brown left.
On 2 - I think it is true that there is evidence which suggests banking crises take longer to recover, but generally a deeper recession = faster recovery.
There was no sustainable recovery when Brown left office - just the splutterings of everything he could raid from the piggy-bank to keep his Government going. If there was a sustainable recovory, interest rates would not have been - and continue to be long after his departure - on the floor.
So between 1995 and 2010 they'd already lost 25% of their councillors, and since then they've lost 60% of the remainder.
They are down 70% from their 1995 peak, when they held for instance East Hampshire (now 100% Tory), Guildford, Ryedale, etc.
Now they hold only Watford, Cheltenham, Eastleigh, South Lakeland, Eastbourne, Oadby & Wigston, Sutton and Three Rivers.
That's not like-for-like, though, as there are far fewer councillors now than in 1995 as much of the UK has gone unitary.
On a percentage of all councillors, the LDs peaked in 2007.
How would you view a company who's absolute revenues had been declining since 1995 and whose market share had been falling since 2007?
The LDs have been in decline for a decade.
That might change this year, it might not.
But in the general scheme of these things, a decade is actually not that long. Labour councillors (as a percentage) probably fell every year between 1997 and 2010, as did Conservative between 1984 and 1997.
Yes but by and large that was because they were in government and no one likes the government. The Lib Dems started their decline before the Coalition and have not recovered since. If Vince Cable got any coverage out of the budget yesterday I didn't see it which is unfortunate because economic analysis is his stronger suit. They just seem to have nothing to say.
I would expect the LDs to gain councillors in 2018 and 2019, simply because UKIP is fading fast from the scene.
But I doubt they will go anywhere, unless they can find a differentiated leader who people want to hear from.
Vince Cable is not that man.
I think of the Lib Dems like a pet chihuahua: a bit yappy and no one really knows what they are for, but pretty harmless and kind of cute
We just got a chihuahua.
I'm not sure what it's for.
There are a lot in France. I believe they chase spiders.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
You are right and wrong.
They are done because many erstwhile supporters have no idea about the realities of being in power as the junior member of a coalition government.
Such supporters would no doubt have preferred the party to remain out of power, inviolate.
Politics is about doing something, in the least bad way. It's not about criticising from the touchlines.
Also right and wrong. Whilst distant from power the LibDems have consistently adopted 'fringe' positions and so accelerated the process of their becoming mainstream. Policy on issues such as drugs and prostitution are likely future candidates.
Taking a long view of social issues (for example party positions in the 1960s) the Liberals have been the most successful party in terms of seeing their platform implemented.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
Funny wasn't it! I think he's got a bit of catching up to do
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I think medium to long term, post-Cable, they are in a good position.
A lot of it is about airtime. When they were clearly the number 3 party they got decent media exposure and that helped get them across as the alternative to the big 2.
Now they are one of the "other" group it is harder for them to differentiate and to attract the attention of the voters.
Additionally, when you have some lingering angst amongst left wing voters that they supported the Tories in Coalition it makes it harder for them to gain ground in their natural target area, while if you really want to "stop Brexit" then surely the incentive is to vote for a party that (a) can win and (b) might - you believe - stop Brexit: i.e. Labour
Given how Labour voted this week on Brexit why would anyone with half a brain think that Labour would reverse or soften Brexit?
Depends entirely on their party's self interest. With the Tories in power, most of them are happy watching the Tories marching towards the cliff. If they get a sniff of power, things could easily change, particularly if public opinion has changed (which is pretty much a precondition of their getting power in the first place).
Maybe.
I think those who think Labour under the current leadership will reverse Brexit or soften to it to stay in the Single Market are believing what they hope will be true. Deluded might be another word. But in any case I think they will be disappointed.
Corbyn and McDonnell should not be underrated. And, equally, people should believe what they say and have said for a while. Both of them have made clear that they do not want to stay in the Single Market.
Cleggs destruction of the Lib Dems was a key enabler of Brexit. A tragic figure. Icarus.
Clegg's point blank refusal to allow any discussion of an EU referendum during the Coalition allowed UKIP to build up the head of steam that made the Referendum inevitable. If the Referendum had been held during the Coalition years - then I have little doubt that Cameron/Clegg would have prevailed.
A golden period of good government? In some ways perhaps. An end to the daft reshuffles of Blair, creation of the OBR, an increased role for Cabinet with Cameron largely letting his Ministers get on with things.
Ultimately though the basic economic strategy taken was wrong in my view and led to the worst recovery from a recession in 50+ years.
Hmmm.
Two comments can be made in response to that:
1) There had already been three years where Labour pursuing a different strategy had failed to make noticeably more headway than the Coalition did at equally high cost;
2) It was the worst recession since at least 1931 and arguably (in this country at least) 1878 so it is not surprising the recovery was slow and uneven.
I can't agree on 1 - the recovery was going well when Brown left.
On 2 - I think it is true that there is evidence which suggests banking crises take longer to recover, but generally a deeper recession = faster recovery.
There was no sustainable recovery when Brown left office - just the splutterings of everything he could raid from the piggy-bank to keep his Government going. If there was a sustainable recovory, interest rates would not have been - and continue to be long after his departure - on the floor.
I suspect history will conclude that he (and copycats around the world) turned what would have been a seriously painful short-term major depression into a longer period of milder extended slump. The big question is when/whether we can return to 'normal' interest rates and wean ourselves off the morphine of QE, and if so what any lasting side effects might be.
A lot of economists seem to think the game is simply to resurrect interest rates (and stop QE) in time enough to restart free money the instant the global economy starts to look a bit peaky.
A golden period of good government? In some ways perhaps. An end to the daft reshuffles of Blair, creation of the OBR, an increased role for Cabinet with Cameron largely letting his Ministers get on with things.
Ultimately though the basic economic strategy taken was wrong in my view and led to the worst recovery from a recession in 50+ years.
Hmmm.
Two comments can be made in response to that:
1) There had already been three years where Labour pursuing a different strategy had failed to make noticeably more headway than the Coalition did at equally high cost;
2) It was the worst recession since at least 1931 and arguably (in this country at least) 1878 so it is not surprising the recovery was slow and uneven.
I can't agree on 1 - the recovery was going well when Brown left.
On 2 - I think it is true that there is evidence which suggests banking crises take longer to recover, but generally a deeper recession = faster recovery.
There was no sustainable recovery when Brown left office - just the splutterings of everything he could raid from the piggy-bank to keep his Government going. If there was a sustainable recovory, interest rates would not have been - and continue to be long after his departure - on the floor.
£160bn of borrowed money and £250bn of printed money tends to have that effect - in the short term.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
He said that any borrowing would pay for itself so that we need not worry about extra interest costs.
Now long-term investment funded by borrowing may well generate extra growth. But nonetheless the interest on the debt has to be paid for in the short-term. And that inevitably means higher taxes or spending foregone.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I think medium to long term, post-Cable, they are in a good position.
Firstly, they need to gt a new leader before the next election. As there is some uncertainty on when that election may be, it should be sooner rather than later. But - they can't. They are probably going to lose Westmoreland when Farron quits at the next election. They will lose Twickenham if Vince goes. They are on the back foot - whether or not any boundary changes get made. And they have a really, really limited gene pool in Westminter from which to choose Vince's replacement.
Secondly, they need some policies. But that requires the new leader in place to steer the policies he wants to fight the next election on. If Corbyn is still leading Labour, it could allow them to plug the idea of being the Sensible Left, contrasting Corbyn's crazies with their own measured approach to change.
Thirdly, they need a new trick to get noticed. At the moment, they look like a magician who is at the end of the pier show, playing to four people sheltering from a summer squall - and who all know how the trick works.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
The Tory budget was weak. They clearly don't know what to do while the economy grinds to a halt, bracing for Brexit.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
On topic, the Lib Dems need a better leader than Cable. He’s invisible and under him they will, at best, tread water.
Need a strategy and leader who can deliver that. Hard to see what their offer is, for reasons outlined below. Picking off soft Tories might be safest bet.
Failing that, there are not many of them. They could rotate on a monthly basis for a year to see who is least bad.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I think medium to long term, post-Cable, they are in a good position.
Firstly, they need to gt a new leader before the next election. As there is some uncertainty on when that election may be, it should be sooner rather than later. But - they can't. They are probably going to lose Westmoreland when Farron quits at the next election. They will lose Twickenham if Vince goes. They are on the back foot - whether or not any boundary changes get made. And they have a really, really limited gene pool in Westminter from which to choose Vince's replacement.
Secondly, they need some policies. But that requires the new leader in place to steer the policies he* wants to fight the next election on. If Corbyn is still leading Labour, it could allow them to plug the idea of being the Sensible Left, contrasting Corbyn's crazies with their own measured approach to change.
Thirdly, they need a new trick to get noticed. At the moment, they look like a magician who is at the end of the pier show, playing to four people sheltering from a summer squall - and who all know how the trick works.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
The Tory budget was weak. They clearly don't know what to do while the economy grinds to a halt, bracing for Brexit.
Corbyn response was pathetic and McDonnell struggles to even start to justify his spend, borrow and tax policies. Like it or not May and Hammond may be boring but they are serious politicians and I know who I would prefer leading us at this most difficult of times
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
Like the Conservatives, the Lib Dems are an old person's party. They need to rebrand. My suggestion is to pitch to those that see Freedom of Movement as liberty. It's a minority view, but there is a market for it, particularly amongst the young. The LDs would risk their remaining rural bastions, but they need to roll the dice now.
On the upside, Lib Dem supporters seem happy about who they are, which isn't entirely the case with Labour and the Conservatives. They have a cohesion and strength of purpose.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
You are right and wrong.
They are done because many erstwhile supporters have no idea about the realities of being in power as the junior member of a coalition government.
Such supporters would no doubt have preferred the party to remain out of power, inviolate.
Politics is about doing something, in the least bad way. It's not about criticising from the touchlines.
Also right and wrong. Whilst distant from power the LibDems have consistently adopted 'fringe' positions and so accelerated the process of their becoming mainstream. Policy on issues such as drugs and prostitution are likely future candidates.
Taking a long view of social issues (for example party positions in the 1960s) the Liberals have been the most successful party in terms of seeing their platform implemented.
I agree some of their positions, hitherto way out, have become mainstream. How much they were leading that move or how much they let history come to them I am not sure.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
With five more years of public spending freezes and falling living standards to come (and that's if we end up with a Brexit deal), it really doesn't matter what McDonnell says. People's day to day experiences will be what count.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
Cleggs destruction of the Lib Dems was a key enabler of Brexit. A tragic figure. Icarus.
Clegg's point blank refusal to allow any discussion of an EU referendum during the Coalition allowed UKIP to build up the head of steam that made the Referendum inevitable. If the Referendum had been held during the Coalition years - then I have little doubt that Cameron/Clegg would have prevailed.
Unlikely given again would have been a vote against the Coalition and many Tory Leavers and Blair's lack of transition controls still an issue.
The Budget was dull, but Mr Shouty's response was worthy of the Jeremy Kyle show rather than the Jeremy Corbyn show.
The LDs are in a crisis. They have no USP (I don't count raging against a democratic decision), and they made the basic mistake of reneging on a promise to an impressionable bunch still young enough to trust a politician's word.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
With five more years of public spending and falling living standards to come (and that's if we end up with a Brexit deal), it really doesn't matter what McDonnell says. People's day to day experiences will be what count.
But do they believe McDonnell and his policies will make them any better off? Tempered with a risk that he will actually make them worse off - by, for example, losing them their job. It will certainly be a topsy-turvy world where the Tories get to play the unemloyment card....
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
You are right and wrong.
They are done because many erstwhile supporters have no idea about the realities of being in power as the junior member of a coalition government.
Such supporters would no doubt have preferred the party to remain out of power, inviolate.
Politics is about doing something, in the least bad way. It's not about criticising from the touchlines.
Also right and wrong. Whilst distant from power the LibDems have consistently adopted 'fringe' positions and so accelerated the process of their becoming mainstream. Policy on issues such as drugs and prostitution are likely future candidates.
Taking a long view of social issues (for example party positions in the 1960s) the Liberals have been the most successful party in terms of seeing their platform implemented.
I agree some of their positions, hitherto way out, have become mainstream. How much they were leading that move or how much they let history come to them I am not sure.
Generalising horribly, liberals champion social change when it is still unfashionable, labour comes to embrace and eventually implement it, and conservatives oppose and only come to terms with it afterwards. As with drugs policy, I am quite sure that the exposure of being taken up by a mainstream political party accelerates this process and, in any event, being in front of change is more satisfying than being dragged along behind it.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
The Tory budget was weak. They clearly don't know what to do while the economy grinds to a halt, bracing for Brexit.
Corbyn response was pathetic and McDonnell struggles to even start to justify his spend, borrow and tax policies. Like it or not May and Hammond may be boring but they are serious politicians and I know who I would prefer leading us at this most difficult of times
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
Was a much improved performance TBF
Not saying a lot as the bar was very low though
I doubt we are near a deal. The EU way is always 59th minute of 11th hour etc etc.
I suspect May is feeling confident because there has been no challenge and there isn't going to be one now for two years.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
With five more years of public spending and falling living standards to come (and that's if we end up with a Brexit deal), it really doesn't matter what McDonnell says. People's day to day experiences will be what count.
But do they believe McDonnell and his policies will make them any better off? Tempered with a risk that he will actually make them worse off - by, for example, losing them their job. It will certainly be a topsy-turvy world where the Tories get to play the unemloyment card....
My guess is that the next GE will produce a result pretty much like this one, with Labour maybe making a few gains overall but the Tories remaining the biggest single party. I expect labour to win the election after that by a landslide.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
With five more years of public spending freezes and falling living standards to come (and that's if we end up with a Brexit deal), it really doesn't matter what McDonnell says. People's day to day experiences will be what count.
A golden period of good government? In some ways perhaps. An end to the daft reshuffles of Blair, creation of the OBR, an increased role for Cabinet with Cameron largely letting his Ministers get on with things.
Ultimately though the basic economic strategy taken was wrong in my view and led to the worst recovery from a recession in 50+ years.
Hmmm.
Two comments can be made in response to that:
1) There had already been three years where Labour pursuing a different strategy had failed to make noticeably more headway than the Coalition did at equally high cost;
2) It was the worst recession since at least 1931 and arguably (in this country at least) 1878 so it is not surprising the recovery was slow and uneven.
I can't agree on 1 - the recovery was going well when Brown left.
On 2 - I think it is true that there is evidence which suggests banking crises take longer to recover, but generally a deeper recession = faster recovery.
On 1 you need to dig into the data
What he had actually done is pull forward capital expenditure by using incentives. The impact is thstbitvflatters his time in office but it's just a timing difference not a fundamental recovery.
And it came at a huge cost - as well as doing nothing to fix the core structural problem
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
The Tory budget was weak. They clearly don't know what to do while the economy grinds to a halt, bracing for Brexit.
Corbyn response was pathetic and McDonnell struggles to even start to justify his spend, borrow and tax policies. Like it or not May and Hammond may be boring but they are serious politicians and I know who I would prefer leading us at this most difficult of times
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
Indeed I don't understand why people seem to be so glum about the Brexit negotiations right now? It seemed to me for about 4 months now that the key date for progress would be December and nothing has changed that. All indications and leaks appear to point to agreement to progress in December with an exit fee figure in the region of €40bn.
Once that fees agreed and we move onto the nitty gritty of trade talks, is the EU really going to fail to agree a transition and trade deal with what will be their #1 export market post-Brexit? The EU exports more to the UK than any other nation including the USA. Oh and they'll also have a pre-agreed €40bn riding on reaching a deal.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I think medium to long term, post-Cable, they are in a good position.
Firstly, they need to gt a new leader before the next election. As there is some uncertainty on when that election may be, it should be sooner rather than later. But - they can't. They are probably going to lose Westmoreland when Farron quits at the next election. They will lose Twickenham if Vince goes. They are on the back foot - whether or not any boundary changes get made. And they have a really, really limited gene pool in Westminter from which to choose Vince's replacement.
Secondly, they need some policies. But that requires the new leader in place to steer the policies he* wants to fight the next election on. If Corbyn is still leading Labour, it could allow them to plug the idea of being the Sensible Left, contrasting Corbyn's crazies with their own measured approach to change.
Thirdly, they need a new trick to get noticed. At the moment, they look like a magician who is at the end of the pier show, playing to four people sheltering from a summer squall - and who all know how the trick works.
* or she
From the perspective of being known, Jo Swinson would be the leading lady from their MPs - but didn't she decline to enter the leadership fray "for now"? Depends when now ends, I guess. Are any of the other three LibDem women MPs realistic candidates for leader? I'd assumed not, but would be interested to know.
I guess any of them are better than odious Ed Davey.
A lot of it is about airtime. When they were clearly the number 3 party they got decent media exposure and that helped get them across as the alternative to the big 2.
Now they are one of the "other" group it is harder for them to differentiate and to attract the attention of the voters.
Additionally, when you have some lingering angst amongst left wing voters that they supported the Tories in Coalition it makes it harder for them to gain ground in their natural target area, while if you really want to "stop Brexit" then surely the incentive is to vote for a party that (a) can win and (b) might - you believe - stop Brexit: i.e. Labour
Given how Labour voted this week on Brexit why would anyone with half a brain think that Labour would reverse or soften Brexit?
Because they are very good at speaking out of both sides of their mouth
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
Indeed I don't understand why people seem to be so glum about the Brexit negotiations right now? It seemed to me for about 4 months now that the key date for progress would be December and nothing has changed that. All indications and leaks appear to point to agreement to progress in December with an exit fee figure in the region of €40bn.
Once that fees agreed and we move onto the nitty gritty of trade talks, is the EU really going to fail to agree a transition and trade deal with what will be their #1 export market post-Brexit? The EU exports more to the UK than any other nation including the USA. Oh and they'll also have a pre-agreed €40bn riding on reaching a deal.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
While listening to Hammond, it felt like a plastic actionman toy, with the string pulled and the recorded script issuing forth. Humphries slow under arm bowled a couple with a tennis bowl, and you could virtually see it roll up and lightly bump against the stumps.
I'll take your word on the Macca interview, but from a couple of reports of Neil's recent interviews, something seems to be biting his nether regions. Does he think he's being edged aside in the BBC?
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I think medium to long term, post-Cable, they are in a good position.
Firstly, they need to gt a new leader before the next election. As there is some uncertainty on when that election may be, it should be sooner rather than later. But - they can't. They are probably going to lose Westmoreland when Farron quits at the next election. They will lose Twickenham if Vince goes. They are on the back foot - whether or not any boundary changes get made. And they have a really, really limited gene pool in Westminter from which to choose Vince's replacement.
Secondly, they need some policies. But that requires the new leader in place to steer the policies he* wants to fight the next election on. If Corbyn is still leading Labour, it could allow them to plug the idea of being the Sensible Left, contrasting Corbyn's crazies with their own measured approach to change.
Thirdly, they need a new trick to get noticed. At the moment, they look like a magician who is at the end of the pier show, playing to four people sheltering from a summer squall - and who all know how the trick works.
* or she
From the perspective of being known, Jo Swinson would be the leading lady from their MPs - but didn't she decline to enter the leadership fray "for now"? Depends when now ends, I guess. Are any of the other three LibDem women MPs realistic candidates for leader? I'd assumed not, but would be interested to know.
I guess any of them are better than odious Ed Davey.
The job is Jo's if she wants it. We really don't know whether she is seriously reluctant, or just needs more time. Its not a job any sane person would want, after all.
The last time we had a Jo leading our party, we started to recover well from a very low base.
Longer term Layla Moran is the other female possibility.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I think medium to long term, post-Cable, they are in a good position.
Firstly, they need to gt a new leader before the next election. As there is some uncertainty on when that election may be, it should be sooner rather than later. But - they can't. They are probably going to lose Westmoreland when Farron quits at the next election. They will lose Twickenham if Vince goes. They are on the back foot - whether or not any boundary changes get made. And they have a really, really limited gene pool in Westminter from which to choose Vince's replacement.
Secondly, they need some policies. But that requires the new leader in place to steer the policies he* wants to fight the next election on. If Corbyn is still leading Labour, it could allow them to plug the idea of being the Sensible Left, contrasting Corbyn's crazies with their own measured approach to change.
Thirdly, they need a new trick to get noticed. At the moment, they look like a magician who is at the end of the pier show, playing to four people sheltering from a summer squall - and who all know how the trick works.
* or she
From the perspective of being known, Jo Swinson would be the leading lady from their MPs - but didn't she decline to enter the leadership fray "for now"? Depends when now ends, I guess. Are any of the other three LibDem women MPs realistic candidates for leader? I'd assumed not, but would be interested to know.
I guess any of them are better than odious Ed Davey.
Currently she’s Deputy Leader, so on pole to take over.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
The Tory budget was weak. They clearly don't know what to do while the economy grinds to a halt, bracing for Brexit.
Corbyn response was pathetic and McDonnell struggles to even start to justify his spend, borrow and tax policies. Like it or not May and Hammond may be boring but they are serious politicians and I know who I would prefer leading us at this most difficult of times
JRM?
Not really but cabinet post yes
Peak Corbyn has been reached?
He really is a marmite character. To some he is horrendous - a ranty, shouty, student union protest organizer whose grasp of economics comes from Karl Marx; and to others nothing less than the 2nd messiah.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
With five more years of public spending freezes and falling living standards to come (and that's if we end up with a Brexit deal), it really doesn't matter what McDonnell says. People's day to day experiences will be what count.
I do wonder whether, in the current climate, the usual logic of public spending plans coming under scrutiny applies.
Brexit has thrown the whole idea of sensible public finances in to disarray. No longer is economic growth the principle objective of government. It has been replaced with Brexit, and delivering what people think they voted for.
Ideology has trumped realism for both parties: the Tories are the Brexit Martyrs, and Labour are socialist utopians. There will eventually be a space for pragmatists to emerge somewhere in the middle of these two extremes, but people want change because they are tired of two decades plus of sterile centrism.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I think medium to long term, post-Cable, they are in a good position.
Firstly, they need to gt a new leader before the next election. As there is some uncertainty on when that election may be, it should be sooner rather than later. But - they can't. They are probably going to lose Westmoreland when Farron quits at the next election. They will lose Twickenham if Vince goes. They are on the back foot - whether or not any boundary changes get made. And they have a really, really limited gene pool in Westminter from which to choose Vince's replacement.
Secondly, they need some policies. But that requires the new leader in place to steer the policies he* wants to fight the next election on. If Corbyn is still leading Labour, it could allow them to plug the idea of being the Sensible Left, contrasting Corbyn's crazies with their own measured approach to change.
Thirdly, they need a new trick to get noticed. At the moment, they look like a magician who is at the end of the pier show, playing to four people sheltering from a summer squall - and who all know how the trick works.
* or she
From the perspective of being known, Jo Swinson would be the leading lady from their MPs - but didn't she decline to enter the leadership fray "for now"? Depends when now ends, I guess. Are any of the other three LibDem women MPs realistic candidates for leader? I'd assumed not, but would be interested to know.
I guess any of them are better than odious Ed Davey.
The job is Jo's if she wants it. We really don't know whether she is seriously reluctant, or just needs more time. Its not a job any sane person would want, after all.
The last time we had a Jo leading our party, we started to recover well from a very low base.
Longer term Layla Moran is the other female possibility.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
The Tory budget was weak. They clearly don't know what to do while the economy grinds to a halt, bracing for Brexit.
Corbyn response was pathetic and McDonnell struggles to even start to justify his spend, borrow and tax policies. Like it or not May and Hammond may be boring but they are serious politicians and I know who I would prefer leading us at this most difficult of times
JRM?
Not really but cabinet post yes
Peak Corbyn has been reached?
He really is a marmite character. To some he is horrendous - a ranty, shouty, student union protest organizer whose grasp of economics comes from Karl Marx; and to others nothing less than the 2nd messiah.
Monday's BBC2 2017 Labour GE doc is well worth a watch whilst still on iPlayer, for any that missed it.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
Indeed I don't understand why people seem to be so glum about the Brexit negotiations right now? It seemed to me for about 4 months now that the key date for progress would be December and nothing has changed that. All indications and leaks appear to point to agreement to progress in December with an exit fee figure in the region of €40bn.
Once that fees agreed and we move onto the nitty gritty of trade talks, is the EU really going to fail to agree a transition and trade deal with what will be their #1 export market post-Brexit? The EU exports more to the UK than any other nation including the USA. Oh and they'll also have a pre-agreed €40bn riding on reaching a deal.
I don't see the reason for pessimism.
Er, Ireland?
Is it really in Ireland's interests to fail to reach a deal?
John McDonnell was again unable to say how much Labour’s spending plans would cost Britain in two further shambolic interviews this morning. Asked on both the Today programme and 5 Live how much extra would be spent on servicing government debt under Labour, a rattled McDonnell was eight times unable to give a figure. He snapped:
“This is a trite form of journalism, that’s why we have iPads and advisors… It’s minimal… I’m telling you, it pays for itself, it pays for itself.”
Perhaps, perhaps it is time for the LDs to follow the example of other small and devolved parties over recent years and have the leader of the parliamentary grouping separate and secondary to a party leader outside Westminster. It would broaden the selection, allow the leader to spend more time going about and courting attention. A sort of Liberal Farage would really make a difference.
No names leap to mind, only Clegg has the profile currently (but also the history), so it would have to be someone making a show from scratch. (Holy crap, Lembit Opik has now sprung to my mind - pmsl). Perhaps not Lembit, but you get the idea.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I think medium to long term, post-Cable, they are in a good position.
Firstly, they need to gt a new leader before the next election. As there is some uncertainty on when that election may be, it should be sooner rather than later. But - they can't. They are probably going to lose Westmoreland when Farron quits at the next election. They will lose Twickenham if Vince goes. They are on the back foot - whether or not any boundary changes get made. And they have a really, really limited gene pool in Westminter from which to choose Vince's replacement.
Secondly, they need some policies. But that requires the new leader in place to steer the policies he* wants to fight the next election on. If Corbyn is still leading Labour, it could allow them to plug the idea of being the Sensible Left, contrasting Corbyn's crazies with their own measured approach to change.
Thirdly, they need a new trick to get noticed. At the moment, they look like a magician who is at the end of the pier show, playing to four people sheltering from a summer squall - and who all know how the trick works.
* or she
From the perspective of being known, Jo Swinson would be the leading lady from their MPs - but didn't she decline to enter the leadership fray "for now"? Depends when now ends, I guess. Are any of the other three LibDem women MPs realistic candidates for leader? I'd assumed not, but would be interested to know.
I guess any of them are better than odious Ed Davey.
The job is Jo's if she wants it. We really don't know whether she is seriously reluctant, or just needs more time. Its not a job any sane person would want, after all.
The last time we had a Jo leading our party, we started to recover well from a very low base.
Longer term Layla Moran is the other female possibility.
Layla Moran's majority is only 816 though.....
We don't really have safe seats. She'll get an incumbency bonus next time, and leaders always get a further boost. So she just needs to get re-elected once.
The Irish proposal is quite remarkable: it is a state seeking to divide its neighbour economically. This despite the fact that only 15 per cent of Northern Irish exports go to the Republic while 60 per cent go to the rest of the UK.
It is often said that this idea is a non-starter because of Theresa May’s reliance on the Democratic Unionist Party. But this is to miss the point. Even if she had a majority of 100, she could not accept an internal UK customs border. As one cabinet minister who supported Remain points out to me: ‘It is not just the hard right of the Tory party for whom this is non-negotiable.’
Inside government, there is mounting anger at the way that the Taoiseach and his team are behaving. One normally mild-mannered cabinet member tells me that Varadkar is ‘playing with fire’. Another complains that the Irish foreign minister Simon Coveney has his own leadership ambitions, so is making the situation even worse.
Problem for the LDs is that some of their battles are won - e.g. cycle vs car in cities.
Also if you want to virtue signal and put a "cool" sign up in your garden during an election you have Corbyn. If you want to stay in the EU - you've got a London newspaper editor.
Perhaps, perhaps it is time for the LDs to follow the example of other small and devolved parties over recent years and have the leader of the parliamentary grouping separate and secondary to a party leader outside Westminster. It would broaden the selection, allow the leader to spend more time going about and courting attention. A sort of Liberal Farage would really make a difference.
No names leap to mind, only Clegg has the profile currently (but also the history), so it would have to be someone making a show from scratch. (Holy crap, Lembit Opik has now sprung to my mind
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
Indeed I don't understand why people seem to be so glum about the Brexit negotiations right now? It seemed to me for about 4 months now that the key date for progress would be December and nothing has changed that. All indications and leaks appear to point to agreement to progress in December with an exit fee figure in the region of €40bn.
Once that fees agreed and we move onto the nitty gritty of trade talks, is the EU really going to fail to agree a transition and trade deal with what will be their #1 export market post-Brexit? The EU exports more to the UK than any other nation including the USA. Oh and they'll also have a pre-agreed €40bn riding on reaching a deal.
I don't see the reason for pessimism.
Er, Ireland?
Is it really in Ireland's interests to fail to reach a deal?
Off topic - went to see Ink last night. Was really excellent; won't spoil it for anyone who has not or who is planning to see it. But really enjoyable play turning received wisdom on its head to a certain extent.
An added interesting element to the evening was the presence of the former CotE and current newspaper editor in the audience.
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
With five more years of public spending freezes and falling living standards to come (and that's if we end up with a Brexit deal), it really doesn't matter what McDonnell says. People's day to day experiences will be what count.
I do wonder whether, in the current climate, the usual logic of public spending plans coming under scrutiny applies.
Brexit has thrown the whole idea of sensible public finances in to disarray. No longer is economic growth the principle objective of government. It has been replaced with Brexit, and delivering what people think they voted for.
Ideology has trumped realism for both parties: the Tories are the Brexit Martyrs, and Labour are socialist utopians. There will eventually be a space for pragmatists to emerge somewhere in the middle of these two extremes, but people want change because they are tired of two decades plus of sterile centrism.
Yep. Hence the Tories' inability to take Corbyn apart on the economy.
When one or both of Brexit and Corbynomics fails, arises the opportunity.
Perhaps, perhaps it is time for the LDs to follow the example of other small and devolved parties over recent years and have the leader of the parliamentary grouping separate and secondary to a party leader outside Westminster. It would broaden the selection, allow the leader to spend more time going about and courting attention. A sort of Liberal Farage would really make a difference.
No names leap to mind, only Clegg has the profile currently (but also the history), so it would have to be someone making a show from scratch. (Holy crap, Lembit Opik has now sprung to my mind
Don't call us....
The tears rolling down cheek emoji I used unfortunately didn't get past Vanilla. Now edited...
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
An exit from Brexit deal with the cabinet.
I didn't get the chance yesterday to follow up on Brexit and Ireland and the reason why both the UK and the EU acting in Ireland's interests should focus on the transition in A50 talks, rather than the eventual trade deal. Ireland desperately wants Soft Brexit, possibly enough to reject a Hard Brexit deal*. The UK is incoherent in its demands, but what it really wants is continuity - for nothing significant to change as it exits from the EU. For a period of time a "transition", in practice an extension, gives both sides what they want most.
Of course we need be seen to be moving towards an end goal, so the Withdrawal Agreement will talk about new relationships. It might include a UK commitment to practical steps to ensure a relatively soft border. The Irish would be allowed a say over those steps before any final deal is agreed. At some point those contradictions will need to be resolved but that's for later, after we have Brexited and after the "transition" has started.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
You are right and wrong.
They are done because many erstwhile supporters have no idea about the realities of being in power as the junior member of a coalition government.
Such supporters would no doubt have preferred the party to remain out of power, inviolate.
Politics is about doing something, in the least bad way. It's not about criticising from the touchlines.
Also right and wrong. Whilst distant from power the LibDems have consistently adopted 'fringe' positions and so accelerated the process of their becoming mainstream. Policy on issues such as drugs and prostitution are likely future candidates.
Taking a long view of social issues (for example party positions in the 1960s) the Liberals have been the most successful party in terms of seeing their platform implemented.
I agree some of their positions, hitherto way out, have become mainstream. How much they were leading that move or how much they let history come to them I am not sure.
Generalising horribly, liberals champion social change when it is still unfashionable, labour comes to embrace and eventually implement it, and conservatives oppose and only come to terms with it afterwards. As with drugs policy, I am quite sure that the exposure of being taken up by a mainstream political party accelerates this process and, in any event, being in front of change is more satisfying than being dragged along behind it.
Drugs policy would be a good issue for the LDs to campaign on, they have a clear policy in an area which needs reform and should set about gaining support for it.
IMO the current drugs policy in most of the West doesn’t work, it’s some washy washy middle way. Choose either the Portugal and Netherlands model or the Singapore and Dubai model.
It was not just the support of students they lost. But having u-turned on their most prominent commitment the LibDems looked like they would say anything and do anything to get into power. Trust gone overnight.
Hopeless to position themselves as a brake on the Tories after that. No amount of Sorry videos would make a difference.
Tragic. They are done.
I think medium to long term, post-Cable, they are in a good position.
Firstly, they need to gt a new leader before the next election. As there is some uncertainty on when that election may be, it should be sooner rather than later. But - they can't. They are probably going to lose Westmoreland when Farron quits at the next election. They will lose Twickenham if Vince goes. They are on the back foot - whether or not any boundary changes get made. And they have a really, really limited gene pool in Westminter from which to choose Vince's replacement.
Secondly, they need some policies. But that requires the new leader in place to steer the policies he* wants to fight the next election on. If Corbyn is still leading Labour, it could allow them to plug the idea of being the Sensible Left, contrasting Corbyn's crazies with their own measured approach to change.
Thirdly, they need a new trick to get noticed. At the moment, they look like a magician who is at the end of the pier show, playing to four people sheltering from a summer squall - and who all know how the trick works.
* or she
From the perspective of being known, Jo Swinson would be the leading lady from their MPs - but didn't she decline to enter the leadership fray "for now"? Depends when now ends, I guess. Are any of the other three LibDem women MPs realistic candidates for leader? I'd assumed not, but would be interested to know.
I guess any of them are better than odious Ed Davey.
The job is Jo's if she wants it. We really don't know whether she is seriously reluctant, or just needs more time. Its not a job any sane person would want, after all.
The last time we had a Jo leading our party, we started to recover well from a very low base.
Longer term Layla Moran is the other female possibility.
Layla Moran's majority is only 816 though.....
We don't really have safe seats. She'll get an incumbency bonus next time, and leaders always get a further boost. So she just needs to get re-elected once.
I think Layla will get back in. Tim Farron probably vulnerable next time round.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
That's my guess
Agreed, I've been saying throughout that a deal will be reached - it's the way the EU works, and even our government isn't really silly enough to prefer no deal. I also think there will be some bumps in Tory popularity on the way - when the December compromise is struck, when the final deal happens. But their underlying position is as weak as Britain's underlying position, and they'll be lucky to win next time.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
An exit from Brexit deal with the cabinet.
I didn't get the chance yesterday to follow up on Brexit and Ireland and the reason why both the UK and the EU acting in Ireland's interests should focus on the transition in A50 talks, rather than the eventual trade deal. Ireland desperately wants Soft Brexit, possibly enough to reject a Hard Brexit deal*. The UK is incoherent in its demands, but what it really wants is continuity - for nothing significant to change as it exits from the EU. For a period of time a "transition", in practice an extension, gives both sides what they want most.
Of course we need be seen to be moving towards an end goal, so the Withdrawal Agreement will talk about new relationships. It might include a UK commitment to practical steps to ensure a relatively soft border. The Irish would be allowed a say over those steps before any final deal is agreed. At some point those contradictions will need to be resolved but that's for later, after we have Brexited and after the "transition" has started.
Canada does not count as hard Brexit. A FTA is not hard Brexit to anyone but the most diehard Remainer for whom staying in the single market and leaving free movement in place is sacrosanct
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
Indeed I don't understand why people seem to be so glum about the Brexit negotiations right now? It seemed to me for about 4 months now that the key date for progress would be December and nothing has changed that. All indications and leaks appear to point to agreement to progress in December with an exit fee figure in the region of €40bn.
Once that fees agreed and we move onto the nitty gritty of trade talks, is the EU really going to fail to agree a transition and trade deal with what will be their #1 export market post-Brexit? The EU exports more to the UK than any other nation including the USA. Oh and they'll also have a pre-agreed €40bn riding on reaching a deal.
I don't see the reason for pessimism.
Er, Ireland?
Is it really in Ireland's interests to fail to reach a deal?
Didn't hear the Humphries Hammond interview this morning. Did hear Macca telling Mishal Husain not top worry her pretty little head about debt servicing. He didn't of course know how much his spending plans would cost.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
McDonnell interviews on BBC last night and 5 live this morning were really poor and he all but lost it on BBC last night.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
With five more years of public spending and falling living standards to come (and that's if we end up with a Brexit deal), it really doesn't matter what McDonnell says. People's day to day experiences will be what count.
But do they believe McDonnell and his policies will make them any better off? Tempered with a risk that he will actually make them worse off - by, for example, losing them their job. It will certainly be a topsy-turvy world where the Tories get to play the unemloyment card....
My guess is that the next GE will produce a result pretty much like this one, with Labour maybe making a few gains overall but the Tories remaining the biggest single party. I expect labour to win the election after that by a landslide.
It will likely produce a hung parliament and a Labour minority government at present even if the Tories win most seats. A few years of a Corbyn government post Brexit could then produce a Tory landslide rather than a Labour one.
To get a Labour landslide you probably need a Tory small majority next time and a charismatic Labour moderate to replace Corbyn.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
An exit from Brexit deal with the cabinet.
I didn't get the chance yesterday to follow up on Brexit and Ireland and the reason why both the UK and the EU acting in Ireland's interests should focus on the transition in A50 talks, rather than the eventual trade deal. Ireland desperately wants Soft Brexit, possibly enough to reject a Hard Brexit deal*. The UK is incoherent in its demands, but what it really wants is continuity - for nothing significant to change as it exits from the EU. For a period of time a "transition", in practice an extension, gives both sides what they want most.
Of course we need be seen to be moving towards an end goal, so the Withdrawal Agreement will talk about new relationships. It might include a UK commitment to practical steps to ensure a relatively soft border. The Irish would be allowed a say over those steps before any final deal is agreed. At some point those contradictions will need to be resolved but that's for later, after we have Brexited and after the "transition" has started.
Canada does not count as hard Brexit. A FTA is not hard Brexit to anyone but the most diehard Remainer for whom staying in the single market and leaving free movement in place is sacrosanct
An FTA is a Hard Brexit to the Irish and was a Hard Brexit to the Leave Campaign before they moved the goalposts after winning the referendum. It results in a newly hard border between north and south Ireland when it was soft before. I'm OK with referring to it as Hard Brexit. Definitions need to be useful.
John McDonnell was again unable to say how much Labour’s spending plans would cost Britain in two further shambolic interviews this morning. Asked on both the Today programme and 5 Live how much extra would be spent on servicing government debt under Labour, a rattled McDonnell was eight times unable to give a figure. He snapped:
“This is a trite form of journalism, that’s why we have iPads and advisors… It’s minimal… I’m telling you, it pays for itself, it pays for itself.”
I heard that interview with Rachel Burden and he really was lost. He became aggressive as he was unable to give an answer anywhere near credible to Rachel's reasonable question.
The report reveals that at a meeting between David Davis, Britain's Brexit Secretary, and the French ministers for Defence and European Affairs, Mr Davis barely mentioned Brexit.
This was much to the surprise of his hosts, who had regarded the meeting as an opportunity for Mr Davis to unblock French resistance to negotiations graduating to the next phase.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
That's my guess
Agreed, I've been saying throughout that a deal will be reached - it's the way the EU works, and even our government isn't really silly enough to prefer no deal. I also think there will be some bumps in Tory popularity on the way - when the December compromise is struck, when the final deal happens. But their underlying position is as weak as Britain's underlying position, and they'll be lucky to win next time.
I was struck by how chipper the PM seemed yesterday. I'm beginning to wonder if behind the scenes we are a lot closer to an exit deal than all the bluff and bluster suggests.
An exit from Brexit deal with the cabinet.
I didn't get the chance yesterday to follow up on Brexit and Ireland and the reason why both the UK and the EU acting in Ireland's interests should focus on the transition in A50 talks, rather than the eventual trade deal. Ireland desperately wants Soft Brexit, possibly enough to reject a Hard Brexit deal*. The UK is incoherent in its demands, but what it really wants is continuity - for nothing significant to change as it exits from the EU. For a period of time a "transition", in practice an extension, gives both sides what they want most.
Of course we need be seen to be moving towards an end goal, so the Withdrawal Agreement will talk about new relationships. It might include a UK commitment to practical steps to ensure a relatively soft border. The Irish would be allowed a say over those steps before any final deal is agreed. At some point those contradictions will need to be resolved but that's for later, after we have Brexited and after the "transition" has started.
Canada does not count as hard Brexit. A FTA is not hard Brexit to anyone but the most diehard Remainer for whom staying in the single market and leaving free movement in place is sacrosanct
An FTA is a Hard Brexit to the Irish and was a Hard Brexit to the Leave Campaign before they moved the goalposts after winning the referendum. It results in a newly hard border between north and south Ireland when it was soft before. I'm OK with referring to it as Hard Brexit. Definitions need to be useful.
There already is a border between North and South Ireland as neither the UK nor Republic are in Schengen and so you need a passport to enter both. A FTA which largely avoids tariffs between North and South is not hard Brexit
Perhaps, perhaps it is time for the LDs to follow the example of other small and devolved parties over recent years and have the leader of the parliamentary grouping separate and secondary to a party leader outside Westminster. It would broaden the selection, allow the leader to spend more time going about and courting attention. A sort of Liberal Farage would really make a difference.
No names leap to mind, only Clegg has the profile currently (but also the history), so it would have to be someone making a show from scratch. (Holy crap, Lembit Opik has now sprung to my mind
As the party of supposed centrist British liberal pragmatism, espoused by much of the establishment (the economist etc); Brexit + Corbyn was surely a scenario where the LD's should have become the second major party. They should have multiple defections from both other parties and millions of activists rally to their cause. It seemed to start to happen with the Twickenham by election, but it all faded. Why?
My own view is that
a) People can see that the current status quo, represented by the 2010 coalition is not working for them. They now want more radical change. The government were failing on multiple issues: Housing, jobs, providing a basic welfare system. Inequality was rampant and the government were indifferent to it.
b) People saw the LD's as indistinguishable from the Tories. It doesn't matter that they did a great deal of good work behind the scenes, that is the perception that people have. A great amount of their vote in 2010 was a left wing protest vote against Labour. So, by voting for tuition fees and other unpopular measures they effectively alienated a large part of their core vote.
c) Farron was not a credible leader. He wasn't making headway. He was good for Have I got news for you and kept going on rants.
d) The tribal nature of the labour party is such that no one seriously involved in it would ever consider defecting to the LD's. They really, truly, hate the LD's guts. It really would be like banishment to Siberia. People who leave labour just become independents.
e) The LD's are far from united on what their purpose is. It is a broad church with many different strains. There was a Liberal Leave campaign. Many people within the party are far from being obsessed remainers, including the parliamentary party.
It follows that any 'centrist' political project has to be free from the baggage of the past. The LD's are, in reality, in the way.
Its because no matter what their stance on anything, no one believes the LDs anymore after 2010, and people feel that to get power, the LDs would vote with the Tories.
Comments
They are done because many erstwhile supporters have no idea about the realities of being in power as the junior member of a coalition government.
Such supporters would no doubt have preferred the party to remain out of power, inviolate.
Politics is about doing something, in the least bad way. It's not about criticising from the touchlines.
Taking a long view of social issues (for example party positions in the 1960s) the Liberals have been the most successful party in terms of seeing their platform implemented.
Is that really what Lab supporters are happy with these days?
I think those who think Labour under the current leadership will reverse Brexit or soften to it to stay in the Single Market are believing what they hope will be true. Deluded might be another word. But in any case I think they will be disappointed.
Corbyn and McDonnell should not be underrated. And, equally, people should believe what they say and have said for a while. Both of them have made clear that they do not want to stay in the Single Market.
A lot of economists seem to think the game is simply to resurrect interest rates (and stop QE) in time enough to restart free money the instant the global economy starts to look a bit peaky.
Now long-term investment funded by borrowing may well generate extra growth. But nonetheless the interest on the debt has to be paid for in the short-term. And that inevitably means higher taxes or spending foregone.
Coupled with Corbyn's angry shouty budget response yesterday it is beginning to reveal just how poor the last election was in forensic examination of their so called fully costed manifesto and how they get agitated once serious questions are asked of them
I was really concerned before the budget but to be fair to Hammond he played his difficult hand well and the most pathetic response from the broadcast media over the stamp duty change for first time buyers shows that there is little to unravel this time.
The warnings on growth and productivity were stark but perversely this could be a positive for May and Hammond as the Country will not be attracted by policies of excessive borrowings and tax rises put forward by labour.
A week is a long time in politics but who would have thought that in that week we would see Merkel barely hanging on in Germany and May and Hammond looking much more stable and to an extent in control
Secondly, they need some policies. But that requires the new leader in place to steer the policies he wants to fight the next election on. If Corbyn is still leading Labour, it could allow them to plug the idea of being the Sensible Left, contrasting Corbyn's crazies with their own measured approach to change.
Thirdly, they need a new trick to get noticed. At the moment, they look like a magician who is at the end of the pier show, playing to four people sheltering from a summer squall - and who all know how the trick works.
Failing that, there are not many of them. They could rotate on a monthly basis for a year to see who is least bad.
They are dead for a while yet in LAB/LIB areas.
Ask Nick
On the upside, Lib Dem supporters seem happy about who they are, which isn't entirely the case with Labour and the Conservatives. They have a cohesion and strength of purpose.
Not saying a lot as the bar was very low though
The LDs are in a crisis. They have no USP (I don't count raging against a democratic decision), and they made the basic mistake of reneging on a promise to an impressionable bunch still young enough to trust a politician's word.
£70 for the MANY
5 times that for the FEW
Will they never learn.
On Topic LDs irrelevant
I suspect May is feeling confident because there has been no challenge and there isn't going to be one now for two years.
12 years of Tory Austerity loses in 2022
Collaborators already punished
What he had actually done is pull forward capital expenditure by using incentives. The impact is thstbitvflatters his time in office but it's just a timing difference not a fundamental recovery.
And it came at a huge cost - as well as doing nothing to fix the core structural problem
Once that fees agreed and we move onto the nitty gritty of trade talks, is the EU really going to fail to agree a transition and trade deal with what will be their #1 export market post-Brexit? The EU exports more to the UK than any other nation including the USA. Oh and they'll also have a pre-agreed €40bn riding on reaching a deal.
I don't see the reason for pessimism.
I guess any of them are better than odious Ed Davey.
I'll take your word on the Macca interview, but from a couple of reports of Neil's recent interviews, something seems to be biting his nether regions. Does he think he's being edged aside in the BBC?
The last time we had a Jo leading our party, we started to recover well from a very low base.
Longer term Layla Moran is the other female possibility.
He really is a marmite character. To some he is horrendous - a ranty, shouty, student union protest organizer whose grasp of economics comes from Karl Marx; and to others nothing less than the 2nd messiah.
Brexit has thrown the whole idea of sensible public finances in to disarray. No longer is economic growth the principle objective of government. It has been replaced with Brexit, and delivering what people think they voted for.
Ideology has trumped realism for both parties: the Tories are the Brexit Martyrs, and Labour are socialist utopians. There will eventually be a space for pragmatists to emerge somewhere in the middle of these two extremes, but people want change because they are tired of two decades plus of sterile centrism.
https://twitter.com/Tim_Wallace/status/933624571433050112
https://twitter.com/Tim_Wallace/status/933625294883352576
“This is a trite form of journalism, that’s why we have iPads and advisors… It’s minimal… I’m telling you, it pays for itself, it pays for itself.”
No names leap to mind, only Clegg has the profile currently (but also the history), so it would have to be someone making a show from scratch. (Holy crap, Lembit Opik has now sprung to my mind - pmsl). Perhaps not Lembit, but you get the idea.
The Irish proposal is quite remarkable: it is a state seeking to divide its neighbour economically. This despite the fact that only 15 per cent of Northern Irish exports go to the Republic while 60 per cent go to the rest of the UK.
It is often said that this idea is a non-starter because of Theresa May’s reliance on the Democratic Unionist Party. But this is to miss the point. Even if she had a majority of 100, she could not accept an internal UK customs border. As one cabinet minister who supported Remain points out to me: ‘It is not just the hard right of the Tory party for whom this is non-negotiable.’
Inside government, there is mounting anger at the way that the Taoiseach and his team are behaving. One normally mild-mannered cabinet member tells me that Varadkar is ‘playing with fire’. Another complains that the Irish foreign minister Simon Coveney has his own leadership ambitions, so is making the situation even worse.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/11/the-irish-stance-against-brexit-is-a-dangerous-gamble/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=251118_Weekly_Highlights_47_NONSUBS
Also if you want to virtue signal and put a "cool" sign up in your garden during an election you have Corbyn. If you want to stay in the EU - you've got a London newspaper editor.
Tories proving they are on the side of the few.
Unless your one of the Few Disabled people like Mrs BJ
Or one of the few street sleepers.
Or one of the few needing foodbanks
An added interesting element to the evening was the presence of the former CotE and current newspaper editor in the audience.
When one or both of Brexit and Corbynomics fails, arises the opportunity.
Of course we need be seen to be moving towards an end goal, so the Withdrawal Agreement will talk about new relationships. It might include a UK commitment to practical steps to ensure a relatively soft border. The Irish would be allowed a say over those steps before any final deal is agreed. At some point those contradictions will need to be resolved but that's for later, after we have Brexited and after the "transition" has started.
Good article about the border country and how the Brexit border could affect real people's lives. It's not a diplomatic tussle:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/22/how-brexit-looms-over-the-irish-border-its-the-berlin-wall-approaching-us
* Canada counts as Hard Brexit
IMO the current drugs policy in most of the West doesn’t work, it’s some washy washy middle way. Choose either the Portugal and Netherlands model or the Singapore and Dubai model.
Perhaps the 1% could try that kind of better off
To get a Labour landslide you probably need a Tory small majority next time and a charismatic Labour moderate to replace Corbyn.
He is being rumbled
The report reveals that at a meeting between David Davis, Britain's Brexit Secretary, and the French ministers for Defence and European Affairs, Mr Davis barely mentioned Brexit.
This was much to the surprise of his hosts, who had regarded the meeting as an opportunity for Mr Davis to unblock French resistance to negotiations graduating to the next phase.
My own view is that
a) People can see that the current status quo, represented by the 2010 coalition is not working for them. They now want more radical change. The government were failing on multiple issues: Housing, jobs, providing a basic welfare system. Inequality was rampant and the government were indifferent to it.
b) People saw the LD's as indistinguishable from the Tories. It doesn't matter that they did a great deal of good work behind the scenes, that is the perception that people have. A great amount of their vote in 2010 was a left wing protest vote against Labour. So, by voting for tuition fees and other unpopular measures they effectively alienated a large part of their core vote.
c) Farron was not a credible leader. He wasn't making headway. He was good for Have I got news for you and kept going on rants.
d) The tribal nature of the labour party is such that no one seriously involved in it would ever consider defecting to the LD's. They really, truly, hate the LD's guts. It really would be like banishment to Siberia. People who leave labour just become independents.
e) The LD's are far from united on what their purpose is. It is a broad church with many different strains. There was a Liberal Leave campaign. Many people within the party are far from being obsessed remainers, including the parliamentary party.
It follows that any 'centrist' political project has to be free from the baggage of the past. The LD's are, in reality, in the way.