The truth about Nick Clegg's manifesto referendum pledge - and how he is breaking it

By Mark Wallace
Follow Mark on Twitter

 The Lib Dems have been twisting and turning over the last few days to get out of supporting an EU referendum.

Their most awkward moment came as their leader stood in for the Prime Minister at PMQs. Veteran eurosceptic Edward Leigh brandished a Lib Dem leaflet from 2008, asking whether the person claiming to be Nick Clegg who promised "a real referendum on Europe" was "an imposter or a hypocrite"? 

At the time, this was a pledge Clegg felt strongly about - going to the point of trooping his MPs out of the Commons when the Speaker rejected an amendment proposing an EU referendum.

Obviously his position has changed, and he now seems dedicated to stopping the people getting a say.

The Deputy PM's standard get-out nowadays is to point to his party's 2010 manifesto (with no justification for the change in policy since then). It said:

"The European Union has evolved significantly since the last public vote on membership over thirty years ago. Liberal Democrats therefore remain committed to an in/out referendum the next time a British government signs up for a fundamental change in the relationship between the UK and the EU."

Backlash for Nick Clegg over immigration speech

By Harry Phibbs
^{Follow Harry on Twitter}

I sometimes feel that Conservative Party members don't take their role sufficiently seriously in terms of contributing to policy. However, the excruciating self importance of Lib Dem policy group members is hardly something one would wish to emulate.

Over at Lib Dem Voice a group of them are grumbling, having been provoked by Nick Clegg's recent speech on immigration. They seem to think that decisions on governing the country should wait upon the Deputy Prime Minister obtaining due authority from the gaggle of bearded sandal wearers at his Party's annual seaside gathering.

The group complains:

As members of the body setting up a review of Liberal Democrat policy on immigration and identity under Andrew Stunell MP, or members of the review itself, we feel the need to put a few facts in the public domain following Nick Clegg’s speech on Friday.

It would have been helpful had we been made aware of the contents in advance. It would have been very helpful if members of the Policy Working Group had been sent an embargoed copy of the speech the night before.

This is not just procedural fuss pottery. They are also objecting to the substance of what Mr Clegg was saying. In his speech Mr Clegg said he wanted to ditch the Lib Dem policy of giving an amnesty to illegal immigrants.

Clegg again paints the Conservatives as extreme. When is Cameron going to kick back?

By Tim Montgomerie
Follow Tim on Twitter

Nick Clegg's speech to the Liberal Democrats' Spring Conference is well worth a read. It's well constructed and it has a clear, simple message at its heart. In the Deputy PM's words (my emphasis):

"You can’t trust Labour to build a strong economy. You can’t trust the Tories to build a fair society. Only the Liberal Democrats can deliver a stronger economy and a fairer society, enabling everyone to get on in life. Get used to those words, Conference. Get used to saying them. That’s the message I need you to deliver across the country. I need you to explain it to people each and every day, from now, for the next two years and beyond."

There we have it. The central pitch of the Liberal Democrats may not be particularly new but its simplicity is its strength. The Lib Dems will present themselves as the party that will moderate Labour or the Tories. Team Clegg will argue that it will pull a minority Labour government towards fiscal responsibility and a minority Conservative government towards social responsibility. We need to think carefully how we counter that.

Yesterday, Lord Ashcroft's marginal seats polling suggested the Tories could win 17 seats from the Lib Dems. How can we maximise the likelihood of that gain? Part of the answer to that question might be to paint the Lib Dems as a party thart doesn't moderate politics but pulls politics away from the wishes of the public. The Lib Dems are, after all, more libertarian on immigration than 70% of the public - more enthusiastic about European integration than Labour - more pro-costly-renewables than Al Gore - and as soft on crime as The Guardian. We have to be careful, however, not to obsess about those topics. We mustn't just assert our differences with the Lib Dems. We must also assert common ground on issues like low taxes for the low-paid and investment in the NHS.

What happens if Nick Clegg resigns?

By Peter Hoskin
_{Follow Peter on Twitter}

I’m not saying that Nick Clegg will resign. Nor that the allegations surrounding Lord Rennard and his party, as dispiriting as they are, necessarily yet warrant a resignation. But the past week has certainly raised the prospect of blood further down the tracks. Mr Clegg’s appearance on LBC radio this morning didn’t create the impression of a man who is in control of his own defence – let alone of his own destiny.   

So what would happen if he did resign? The first point to make is that it would, most likely, fray the ties that bind the Coalition together. Relations between the Tory and Lib Dem leaderships may no longer be all roses and chocolates, as they were at the start of this Government, but Mr Clegg is still – as I’ve written before – a natural ally for David Cameron. He remains one of the most effective advocates of coalition itself, and of this Coalition’s policies. He remains a venomous critic of Labour and of their policies. He is an adhesive helping the whole thing stick together.

When it comes to other senior Lib Dems, something similar could be said of Danny Alexander and David Laws. Norman Lamb, too, is someone who might do easy business with the Tories. And perhaps, to a much lesser extent, there are Ed Davey and Jo Swinson.

Clegg lays into Labour (and Boris lays into Clegg)

By Peter Hoskin
_{Follow Peter on Twitter}

If you believe that David Cameron’s likeliest route back to No.10 in 2015 is another coalition with the Lib Dems, then then the past fortnight may have been rather perturbing.

Reason being, there are increasing signs of unity between Labour and the Lib Dems. Of course, the two parties appear to be split—between a 10p tax rate and raising the personal allowance—on the best way of lightening the tax burden on low-income workers. But, apart from that, they have basically coalesced in their response to Oliver Letwin’s Royal Charter for press regulation and in their demands for a mansion tax.

And Labour are even trying to smoke out Lib Dem support for their mansion tax proposal with an Opposition Day debate in the Commons, or perhaps even—as the Spectator’s Isabel Hardman reports—an amendment to the Financial Bill after the Budget. This crude politicking has left Vince Cable, for one, cooing and flirting. He won’t be the only Lib Dem who feels some attraction towards Labour at the moment.

Labour and the Lib Dems stake out their positions ahead of David Cameron’s Europe speech

By Peter Hoskin
_{Follow Peter on Twitter}

Today’s the day for pre-emptive strikes. Ed Miliband, Douglas Alexander, Nick Clegg and Vince Cable are all spread across the airwaves, attacking David Cameron’s Europe speech in advance of its delivery tomorrow. And so their main points of difference with the PM have become clearer, but also — more neglected — their similarities. Here’s a quick run-down of both:

i) All three party leaderships agree with the “referendum lock”. As you’ll know, the Coalition Agreement contains a policy whereby “any proposed future [European Union] treaty that transferred areas of power, or competences, would be subject to a referendum on that treaty.” This is something that Labour has previously spoken out against, describing it — among many other epithets — as a “political gesture”. But, as the New Statesman’s George Eaton points out, Ed Miliband now appears to have changed his mind. Speaking on the Today programme earlier, the Labour leader admitted that he would not repeal the legislation.

I'm Nick Clegg and I'm listening...

By Tim Montgomerie
Follow Tim on Twitter

What do readers think of Nick Clegg's decision to take part in a weekly radio phone-in - at 9am every Thursday morning - on, of all places, LBC? Mr Clegg is, after all, a Sheffield MP and Deputy PM of whole of UK - not just London.

An unlikely defender comes in the shape of David Prescott:

"He’s got nothing to lose and everything to gain. His personal approval rating as DPM is minus 33, Cameron grabs the credit for any Coalition success and his party is regularly slipping to fourth behind Ukip in the polls. And LBC is a really good call. Under its new station manager James Rea (Chris Rea’s nephew, pop fans!) LBC is positioning itself as a national talk radio station. And the liberating platforms of DAB, Sky, Freeview and the internet, means its not tied to the geographical limits of analogue radio. Upto 25% of its listeners are outside London, with a very high internet, iPad and iPhone listenership. This will continue to grow and grow. And if he say’s something interesting, it will get ‘clipped’ and distributed to the other radio stations in LBC’s Global Radio Group. That means Heart, Capital, LBC, Classic FM, Gold and Xfm – a total of 19 million listeners, a third of the UK population."

David Cameron is right to resist Nick Clegg's drugs intervention

By Matthew Barrett
Follow Matthew on Twitter.

Nick Clegg has chosen today to launch an attempt to change Britain's drugs laws. The attempt has failed. David Cameron said, during a press conference in Brussels, that Mr Clegg is entitled to hold a view on the Lib Dems' plans for their next manifesto. That neatly bats away any notion that the Coalition will change current drugs laws. Mr Cameron said:

"I personally don't support a royal commission. In my view there's always a danger, as someone said, that they can take minutes and last for years. I am very happy to debate and discuss drug policy. I think the coalition government has taken a series of good steps. The government, I think, has got a good record on these things and there is some good evidence that drug use and drug abuse is falling."

Cameron is right not to follow Clegg's path.

Mr Clegg used an overly dramatic and inaccurate term in his interview with the Sun today. He said: "We are losing the war on drugs on an industrial scale." The real "war on drugs" primarily relates to actions carried out by the Mexican government against large armed drugs gangs. Some of the south western states of the US are also affected. Britain is not. If Mr Clegg wants to protest against the policies of the Mexican and American government, he is free to do so. But he should not pretend British drugs laws are anything to do with it. In reality, we gave up any pretense of a "war on drugs" in Britain decades ago. 

Nick Clegg continues to insult his opponents. This time he says Conservatives have an "irrational phobia" of property taxes.

By Matthew Barrett
Follow Matthew on Twitter.

After the botched and misjudged attack on Conservatives after the Autumn Statement, Nick Clegg has again attacked the Conservatives over taxes targeting the wealthy. In his "Letter from the Leader" email, available on Mark Pack's blog, the Deputy Prime Minister describes the "fair and balanced package" the heroic Lib Dems managed to achieve by fighting against the nasty Tories.

There was one paragraph in his email to Lib Dems that will particularly raise eyebrows. He wrote:

"Finally, we fought for our party policy of mansion tax. But the Conservatives have an irrational phobia against asking people who live in £2 million plus properties from chipping in a bit more when everyone else is making their contribution. So instead we agreed to ensure the richest pay their fair share by limiting pension tax relief for millionaires and increasing our efforts on tax avoidance."

I'm afraid, Mr Clegg, it is not irrational to oppose wealth taxes. Just because Tories in Downing Street and in Parliament don't want to introduce a tax on properties, does not mean they start shaking in fear at the thought of wealth taxes. It is a perfectly sane and respectable viewpoint, with plenty of economic and moral force behind it.

Mr Clegg tries hard to be taken seriously, but when he lets the mask slip, and he uses hyperbole more easily found in letters to the Guardian, or in Polly Toynbee's column, he marks himself out, yet again, as practising a deeply un-serious brand of politics. Why can nobody disagree with him without them being morally or psychologically suspect? Why must he insult people and viewpoints that differ from his? Why is he incapable of being civil with his opponents?

Nick Clegg thinks Eurosceptics are "insular", "chauvinistic" and "short-sighted". Why must he insult his opponents?

By Matthew Barrett
Follow Matthew on Twitter.

A video has been released (via Bloomberg's Rob Hutton), of a private dinner for businessmen held by Nick Clegg at the Lib Dem conference. In his remarks, Clegg describes Eurosceptics - or perhaps Euro-realists - as "insular", "chauvinistic" and "short-sighted". It is far from the first instance of him using childish and silly terms to describe opponents - earlier this month he called opponents of gay marriage "bigots".

Why can nobody disagree with him without them being morally suspect? Why can he not disagree with people in a civil manner? Why must he insult people and viewpoints who differ from him? This is another example of Clegg practising a deeply un-serious brand of politics.