NationStates Jolt Archive

Seriously... a short while ago, when the party had some (drunken) credibility under Kennedy, the Lib Dems were seen as the only left-ish party of the main three, as New Labour moved increasingly towards centre-right away from its traditional base.

but now... i don't know what Clegg is doing. it seems to me, through promises to cut spending on public services and cut taxes, the Dems are starting on a fast track towards centre-right themselves. i'm disappointed, especially at a time when the Tories seem to be trying to mop up disaffected Labour voters. this may potentially be a progressive tax move, but i still feel slashing public spending is a mistake and could well harm low income families than a tax cut would benefit them. but that's just my two cents.

any thoughts?


The Liberal Democrats have backed plans to make cuts to income tax for people on low and middling salaries.

The party's annual conference approved a policy document promising "big" reductions for struggling families at the next election.

Several MPs opposed the plan, urging leader Nick Clegg to keep spending on key public services as his priority.

The vote means the Lib Dems are the only one of the three main parties currently offering tax cuts.

It represents an important victory for Mr Clegg as he looks to put his stamp on the party after almost a year as leader.

The move, on top of an existing pledge to cut income tax by 4p, is seen by some as a bid to win over Tory voters in the run-up to the next election.

'Tighten belts'

The Lib Dems have campaigned in recent years on specific tax-raising pledges.

The leadership proposes to find the money for its change of policy through £20bn worth of savings in public spending.

After the result, Mr Clegg said: "This confirms that the Liberal Democrats are the only party with a clear plan to make Britain a fairer place."

Backing the tax-cutting motion, chief Lib Dem policy adviser Danny Alexander told the conference, in Bournemouth, it was necessary for "government to tighten its belt a little so that low-income families don't have to tighten theirs a lot".

"We will target investment where it is needed," he said.

"But once we have invested in our priorities, I would rather hand back extra money to struggling families than give it to central government. That is the choice."

Science spokesman Evan Harris tabled an amendment to the motion, insisting public services should be the main priority, rather than tax cuts, but this was easily defeated.

"Hero worship of our leaders does not help them avoid the pitfalls of being labelled a tax-cutting party," he argued.

Supporting Mr Harris, housing spokesman Paul Holmes said the party risked becoming a "Trojan horse" for those who wanted to "slash and burn" public spending.

He said Labour's investment in services since 1997 had made a difference and the Lib Dems risked become too closely identified with Tory policies from the 1980s.

In the past, the party has campaigned for an extra 1p on the basic rate of income tax to pay for a better education system.

At the last general election it called for high earners to pay a 50p rate.

Defending the shift in strategy, Treasury spokesman Vince Cable said the promise of tax cuts was "progressive" and did not mean the party was less committed to tackling inequality.

"Struggling families are asking can you give us a bit more freedom to spend the money we have earned," he said. "Pensioners are saying can you give us a bit more freedom to spend the money we have saved."

At a fringe meeting earlier in the day, former leader Sir Menzies Campbell enthusiastically endorsed the tax plan.

Over the last two years, the Conservatives have consistently said they will not propose any "unfunded" tax cuts at the next election, while maintaining an aspiration to cut the overall burden of taxation in the future.

Yeah, they're going more right wing, but they're the only halfway decent party that can really make a difference.

Best party around. There's a difference between being right wing and giving people tax cuts.

Yeah, they're going more right wing, but they're the only halfway decent party that can really make a difference.

it just makes me really confused. not one of the parties holds any sway with me, ideologically, any more. i'll never vote Tory, but the other two are souring themselves for me.

i just won't know who to vote for next time round... i'll probably default to Labour tbh, but i'd like a party that genuinely represents my views, and the Lib Dems seemed to fit that bill a few years ago. *sighs*

Please don't vote Labour. Give the Lib Dems a shot, they can't make things any worse than Labour or Tories.

Best party around. There's a difference between being right wing and giving people tax cuts.

a combination of tax cuts funded by cutting public services seems pretty right wing to me.

They are just doing what ever mainstream party does, going for the votes.

They are just doing what ever mainstream party does, going for the votes.

wish i could remember the name of the economic law/theory that states in any single market, all agents will end up selling the same goods at the same price to maximise sales. happens in politics, too.

Clegg is a member of the Libertarian wing of the party, as opposed to the Social Democratic wing, of whom the likes of Kennedy and Menzies could be considered members.

The Libertarians are at the helm of the party, and so will push for an agenda of laissez-faire-esque economic policy, and cutting government services. Simple.

a combination of tax cuts funded by cutting public services seems pretty right wing to me.You sure your Liberal Dems aren't channeling the spirit of Dubya? Sounds really familiar.

I have no problem with lower taxes for low income earners - I recall Vince Cable saying that the 10p tax rate should have been reduced to 0p rather than doubled to 20p in Labour's tax fiasco. (They really ballsed that up, didn't they?) but any further cuts to the now 20p tax over and above the 4p cut they already propose I look on with extreme suspicion, considering the current state of government finances.

That said, I won't miss the 50p rate policy (when you add NI you already have one, and creating an effective 60p rate seems a tad excessive, and any local income tax on top of that, which is a good idea).

What I'm more concerned about is privatisation, in particular inside the NHS and education, which no party has proposed to even stop, let alone reverse in the fields of the railways, water and energy, for example, were we are royally screwed over. (The words 'Energé de France' ironically spring to mind). I would never suggest that we go back to the '60s and '70s where nationalised industries were merely an arm of government policy, but I object to being a cash cow cartelocracy we have now.

They are just doing what ever mainstream party does, going for the votes.
Reminds me of the Tories: when fuel prices were rising rapidly the wanted to put a moratorium on fuel duty (effectively a cut over time because of inflation) and 'sharing the proceeds of growth with tax cuts', when the Tories wanted to take Labour/Lib Dem votes (Vote Blue Go Green, NHS Yes! etc) they wanted to increase taxes on aviation fuel (but the party wouldn't have it) and have also publicly commited to keep Labour's GDP spending plans.

Speaking as a rank and file Lib Dem member.

a combination of tax cuts funded by cutting public services seems pretty right wing to me.

I disagree that tax cuts are right wing. Much of them are being funded by closing tax loopholes (top rate of pension tax relief, long term non-doms etc) that exist for the rich.

Raising taxes on the rich to cut them for the working/lower-middle classes, hardly a hallmark of a right wing party. Sounds more like that redistribution of wealth idea.

It depends on the public servicces that are being 'saved' really, since only part of the savings source have been revealed. Cutting a load of the QANGOs would be a positive in my book, as is telling every high paid non-frontline public employee to justify their employment. Provided all the savings are in a similar vein, then I'm right behind him.

Speaking as a rank and file Lib Dem member.



I disagree that tax cuts are right wing. Much of them are being funded by closing tax loopholes (top rate of pension tax relief, long term non-doms etc) that exist for the rich.

Raising taxes on the rich to cut them for the working/lower-middle classes, hardly a hallmark of a right wing party. Sounds more like that redistribution of wealth idea.

It depends on the public servicces that are being 'saved' really, since only part of the savings source have been revealed. Cutting a load of the QANGOs would be a positive in my book, as is telling every high paid non-frontline public employee to justify their employment. Provided all the savings are in a similar vein, then I'm right behind him.

But tax cuts by cutting public services is right wing.

it just makes me really confused.
Clegg clearly stated he would take the party in this direction before and when he got elected. The leadership election was a battle between the two different wings of the party, essentially.

As UN Protectorates says, the Libertarian wing won.

Pfft... the Lib-Dems went from a party of incompetent common sense to a party of incompetent blending in with all the rubbish everyone else seems to be up to, like a spoilt child who goes crying to mummy because he is not popular.

any thoughts?

Start voting Socialist Worker and hope for the best?

That's about all I've got.

any thoughts?
They're trying to steal New Labour's ex-voters now that it's obvious they're up for the taking. You can't beat the Tories by taking their backing, so go for the ronins.

Pfft... the Lib-Dems went from a party of incompetent common sense to a party of incompetent blending in with all the rubbish everyone else seems to be up to, like a spoilt child who goes crying to mummy because he is not popular.

And you support...?

liberal democrats? is that one of those third parties who do whatever it takes to make local news :p

liberal democrats? is that one of those third parties who do whatever it takes to make local news :p

I've heard it's mainly populated by doddery old women who like to give out a lot of tea and help hedgehogs.

And you support...?

Old Labour :tongue: (i.e. I have no political representation thanks to Blair)

"After the result, Mr Clegg said: "This confirms that the Liberal Democrats are the only party with a clear plan to make Britain a fairer place."

Nothing could be more scary than that. I am so glad, as are my two ex-British co-workers, to not be living in the UK. They are so very ready for the descent into a fully realized police state.

But tax cuts by cutting public services is right wing.

What public services exactly are being cut? Or are you just making assumptions without investigating. I can live with the horror of cutting funding to the 'public service' of id cards for example.


"After the result, Mr Clegg said: "This confirms that the Liberal Democrats are the only party with a clear plan to make Britain a fairer place."

Nothing could be more scary than that. I am so glad, as are my two ex-British co-workers, to not be living in the UK. They are so very ready for the descent into a fully realized police state.
What are you talking about?


criticisms
And yet between 1 in 5 and 1 in 4 voters consistently stick an x in the box next to our name, without even calculating how many vote tactically etc. Strange that.

And yet between 1 in 5 and 1 in 4 voters consistently stick an x in the box next to our name, without even calculating how many vote tactically etc. Strange that.

yes I'm sure if somebody wiped out both the labour and conservative parties you could be king of the third parties!

"After the result, Mr Clegg said: "This confirms that the Liberal Democrats are the only party with a clear plan to make Britain a fairer place."

Nothing could be more scary than that. I am so glad, as are my two ex-British co-workers, to not be living in the UK. They are so very ready for the descent into a fully realized police state.
And this is so very different to the USA in what regard?

yes I'm sure if somebody wiped out both the labour and conservative parties you could be king of the third parties!

Them being wiped out is unlikely admittedly, but there's always the chances of one of them splitting, and sooner or later there will be a hung parliament and we get to play kingmakers, and if we ever get enlightened enough to have a fair voting system then we'll get the chance at significant power on a regular basis.

What do you expect us to do, give up because we might not be a government soon? By existing we influence the political centreground and the stances of the other two parties. Do you want a two party system along the lines of the USA? Appreciate your third party bitches, we're good for democracy.

And this is so very different to the USA in what regard?

No healthcare rationing, the ability to own firearms and defend yourself, no massive surveilliance systems, no sharia law,... My British friends could no doubt tell you many more since they gave up their citizenship to live in a "free society". Their words, not mine. Although I agree.

But hey, give Obama and his socialist agenda a chance and things could change. I hope for the better but I sincerely doubt it.

No healthcare rationing,
Healthcare rationed by the ability to pay.


the ability to own firearms and defend yourself,
Owning firearms is in fact legal in the UK, just restricted, self-defence is enshrined as law.[/quote]


no massive surveilliance systems,
You got one, congratulations.

no sharia law,...
Have you even read the sharia law thread? I'll say it slowly, sharia law can only apply to those who agree to have it apply to them in specific civil disputes.

any thoughts?
You can't believe that taxation + spending is automatically good? If you do, then please vote for the Flammable Ice Expensive Holiday Fund Party.

A hell of a lot of money is wasted by the government.

No healthcare rationing,
Yes you do. No country, including the USA, has a completely free market in healthcare provision, the only difference between the British and American system is the scale as to how many people are covered by the public system. As most people here use the public NHS, we ration based on need. The US health care system rations based on ability to pay, but even this has been diluted quite a bit. Rationing, no matter how you do it, is inherant in any health care system.

the ability to own firearms and defend yourself,
Which I can do. My grandparents hunted and shot for sport until very recently and I know people that do now. This probably isn't representative of British society completely, living in a semi-rural area, though. However, People can own firearms, although very few actually do.

no massive surveilliance systems,
Tell the NSA and ECHELON that. In fact, you probably already have.

no sharia law,...
Really? Can you tell me which contracts I have signed are goverened by sharia law and which offences are governed by sharia criminal law? I'd like to know.

My British friends could no doubt tell you many more since they gave up their citizenship to live in a "free society". Their words, not mine. Although I agree.
Which makes them right, of course. Oh, wait. Hang on. There are 40,000 Americans living in London, let's ask them whether the UK is free, shall we?

But hey, give Obama and his socialist agenda a chance and things could change. I hope for the better but I sincerely doubt it.
Epic phail.

law thread? I'll say it slowly, sharia law can only apply to those who agree to have it apply to them in specific civil disputes.
No matter how many times this is repeated, people with a very narrow agenda, both on this forum and in the UK, are reinterpreting this to suit their politics.

I fear this could backfire on the Lib Dems if they don't play it well. The tax cuts I agree with, they are mostly in regards to lowering the tax rate for the poorer earners (which got screwed by Labour with the 10p-20p debacle) but effectively raising it for high earners (with green taxes and closing loopholes). Similarly there is horrific amount of wasteful government policies ineffectively brought in by Labour... such as ID cards and a large number of related databases, red tape (oh, oh so much red tape) and a large number of aspects from our 'suveillance society' which really we could cut to save money and increase our civil liberties :D.

I'm just worried as to where the cuts exactly are going to be and where they will stop. Lib Dems have generally been good at supporting welfare, the NHS etc... and though I've not seen anything to explicitly suggest they have reversed this, I haven't seen anything to explictly support stating they will support them either.

If they're not careful they're going to lose their socialist democratic base whilst trying to go after disaffected Tory and Labour voters and that would be a shame, because the base is more likely to give them long-term support.

Being the bored student at home during the holidays, I watched Mr Clegg's speech at the Lib Dem conference. Aside from the normal attacks on the other two main parties and their leaders, he said much of positive promises, but I was left thinking about the details of these and whether they are truly achievable. That and the amusing Cult of Vince Cable going on.

In many ways they most represent my views of the major parties, but more details need to be reported before I can have genuine commitment to voting for them. And I'm still miffed by their opposition to nuclear power.

Anyone else see it/bits? Thoughts?

You can't believe that taxation + spending is automatically good? If you do, then please vote for the Flammable Ice Expensive Holiday Fund Party.

A hell of a lot of money is wasted by the government.

no, i believe cutting spending on public services is bad. things can always be made more efficient and funding better spent - there's always room to make better use of the money going into public services - but cutting spending, and a party that once was promoting higher taxes for higher public spending, suddenly reversing their tack, gets my back up.

Hold on, the Liberal Democrats have always generally been free market, only marginally less than Labour and Conservative, they are also pretty socially liberal (which is the main reason people vote for them, socialists generally vote green).

no, i believe cutting spending on public services is bad. things can always be made more efficient and funding better spent - there's always room to make better use of the money going into public services - but cutting spending, and a party that once was promoting higher taxes for higher public spending, suddenly reversing their tack, gets my back up.

Cutting spending is bad, but cutting taxes is good. The trick is to get the right balance so that the cost of cutting spending is not more than the benefit of cutting taxes.

no, i believe cutting spending on public services is bad. things can always be made more efficient and funding better spent - there's always room to make better use of the money going into public services - but cutting spending, and a party that once was promoting higher taxes for higher public spending, suddenly reversing their tack, gets my back up.

It's not as much of a switch as you think, we used to advocate a penny on income tax to pay for education. Labour has since hiked taxes and thrown huge amounts of money at things without thinking them through and to little effect. So it's more the moving of the political ground than us moving.

Cutting spending is bad, but cutting taxes is good.

exactly my point. well, cutting taxes doesn't automatically equal good, but its certainly not bad if done properly and without negative effects to public services.

but then i am a bit of a socialist >.>

The trick is to get the right balance so that the cost of cutting spending is not more than the benefit of cutting taxes.

for consumers, yes. if reductions in public spending result in fewer ameneties for people, but they have more in their pockets and can make up those lost public benefits through private means, then that's fine. but i don't believe it works that simply - certainly not for the worst off, who rely on public services. for them, i believe, the cost of reduced public services from public spending cuts, will outweigh the benefit of tax cuts. i.e. exactly what you say: the cost of cutting spending will be greater than the benefit of cutting taxes.

the only way that could benefit the poor of this country would be to increase the progressive nature of the taxation system to tax the well off more to fund this difference and keep public spending the same. but i understand Clegg's lot have scrapped their plan for a 50p top band income tax rate... but i might well be wrong about that (because i'm not sure what i'm basing that on >.>)

It's not as much of a switch as you think, we used to advocate a penny on income tax to pay for education. Labour has since hiked taxes and thrown huge amounts of money at things without thinking them through and to little effect. So it's more the moving of the political ground than us moving.

well that's fair enough... though i can't imagine New Labour have gone more left over the years :p

Well if you think the cost is too much PM, all I can say is don't worry about it, the Lib Dems will never win anyway. :)

Well if you think the cost is too much PM, all I can say is don't worry about it, the Lib Dems will never win anyway. :)

well i wouldn't mind seeing them as the official Opposition.

you know where that would put the Tories in my little imaginary world, don't you ;):p

for consumers, yes. if reductions in public spending result in fewer ameneties for people, but they have more in their pockets and can make up those lost public benefits through private means, then that's fine. but i don't believe it works that simply - certainly not for the worst off, who rely on public services. for them, i believe, the cost of reduced public services from public spending cuts, will outweigh the benefit of tax cuts. i.e. exactly what you say: the cost of cutting spending will be greater than the benefit of cutting taxes.

Depends what they cut. Frankly cutting ID cards and associated databases I believe will save them a billion or so and also benefit people. Money can also be saved by reforms in several areas (e.g. criminal justice) where the solution until now has tended to be the throw money at the problem until it goes away and tightening up regulations on government private contractors. But I too am a bit iffy on these tax cuts until they make clear exactly where the cuts are going to be and how the savings will be made.

the only way that could benefit the poor of this country would be to increase the progressive nature of the taxation system to tax the well off more to fund this difference and keep public spending the same. but i understand Clegg's lot have scrapped their plan for a 50p top band income tax rate... but i might well be wrong about that (because i'm not sure what i'm basing that on >.>)


They have scrapped the 50p, instead focusing on closing loopholes which allow top earners and companies to avoid taxes altogether, and bringing in green taxes and related ones which will similarly hit the higher earners more. So they're using different ways to tax the rich :D

Yeah, they're going more right wing
Meh. Sort of.
but they're the only halfway decent party that can really make a difference.
I lol'd. They're not going to get into power in the next 10 years at the very least.

I lold. They're not going to get into power in the next 10 years at the very least.

Fixed. Did I ever say they would get in? No. I said they can make a difference, because they can.

Meh. Sort of.

I lol'd. They're not going to get into power in the next 10 years at the very least.

A hung parliament's not impossible, very unlikely, but not impossible. And being in a coalition would boost us significantly (and all bets are off if we could get even a vaguely decent voting system in place).

Having said the above, MORI polls put Tories on 50, Lab 24, Lib Dem 12. Which'd be a disastrous result for us, the silver lining is that MORI have recently redone their methodology and they've lost some credibility in recent years. But it's worrying to say the least. This poll was done Friday to Sunday for context, so not taking into account the latest economy news.

Having said the above, MORI polls put Tories on 50, Lab 24, Lib Dem 12. Which'd be a disastrous result for us, the silver lining is that MORI have recently redone their methodology and they've lost some credibility in recent years. But it's worrying to say the least. This poll was done Friday to Sunday for context, so not taking into account the latest economy news.
Now that sends a shiver down my spine. That gives the Tories 400+ seats.

Cold Calling Me!!! (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7619472.stm) :mad::mad::mad:

Lolz @ teh lib dems wriggling through loopholes.

No healthcare rationing, the ability to own firearms and defend yourself, no massive surveilliance systems, no sharia law,...

In my time on NS I can remember numerous threads started by US citizens along the lines of "I've got symptoms X but I can't afford to go to the doctor unless it's really serious, does anyone know what this means?" or stories about performing minor surgery on themselves with stolen scalpels. Give me the NHS any day.

You can own firearms in the UK if you've got a license.

Yes, we have far too much CCTV. That's one point out of four you've got right.

While I don't like the idea of Sharia courts, as long as submitting to one is strictly voluntary then presumably it indicates more liberty rather than less, no?

My British friends could no doubt tell you many more since they gave up their citizenship to live in a "free society". Their words, not mine. Although I agree.

The sad thing is there are plenty of legitimate criticisms you could have made about freedom in the UK: ridiculous libel laws, overly-restrictive 'hate speech' laws, 28 day detention without trial, house arrest and discrimination against the non-religious in schooling etc. Too bad.

Lolz @ teh lib dems wriggling through loopholes.

*Has just realised massive hypocrisy of Lib Dems*

How will we cut taxes without cutting tax revenue? CLOSE LOOPHOLES!

How will we get away with cold calling people? Make them listen to Nick Clegg's speech, then Lib Dem policies about various things and finally at the very end in case anyone is still listening, ask them about their views and call it market research. (BTW Thats using a loophole)

Now that sends a shiver down my spine. That gives the Tories 400+ seats.

With parties targeting to increasingly high levels national opinion polls mean less and less is the only positive I can take from it. Polls conducted in marginals are far more accurate in terms of seats.

What's sending a chill down my spine is a rumour that Jeremy Clarkson might be standing against Clegg in Sheffield Hallam, you'd hope the British public would vote for a serious politican over a TV personality, but...
And no jokes about Clegg not being a serious politician

Btw that poll still has a press embargo on it afaik, so feel privileged to be on the inside track.