I've just listened to Radio 4's World at One bulletin and heard another half-hearted endorsement of Charles Kennedy from a LibDem MP. Susan Kramer MP clearly sees her leader as on probation. On this morning's Today programme Simon Hughes hesitated before agreeing that Mr Kennedy would fight the next election as LibDem leader.
The big fear for Mr Kennedy, however, is that his deputy Menzies Campbell has finally lost patience with his laziness. Yesterday 'Ming' would only say:
“I have had a very long and profitable relationship with the leader of the party.”
"Had"? "Had"! Mr Campbell has been unavailable for comment today. Is he planning to challenge Mr Kennedy? Wat Tyler is keeping the blogging community up-to-speed with his Runners & Riders site.
Ha! Sir Ming the Merciless!
On a sober note: do we really want three months saturation coverage of obscure Lib Dem nonentities as if they are important or relevant people, trundling out their barking insane theories? I'm not worried that the free publicity might help them, I just can't face the tedium of it all.
Posted by: William Norton | December 15, 2005 at 14:16
My money is on Sir Ming, I think the younger "orange book" lib dems will eventually support him as a way of stopping Simon Hughes and biding their time. Most of the new generation probably realise it is too early for them and a candidate like Sir Ming could take over for the next 4 years go into the 2009 election and resign afterwards handing over to one of the younger MPs.
Expect Sir Ming to make a pact with the younger MPs- their support in return for top jobs.
Personally I quite like Sir Ming, I think he gives politics a respectability and gravitas and could attract dissident Cameron unbelievers to support the Lib Dems.
Posted by: Frank Young | December 15, 2005 at 14:38
BBC News is just reporting that Ming has given Kennedy "his full support". The end must be nigh!
Posted by: Richard Weatherill | December 15, 2005 at 15:28
"BBC News is just reporting that Ming has given Kennedy "his full support". The end must be nigh!"
Would that be similar to the dreaded 'vote of confidence' that football managers get just before they're sacked?
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | December 15, 2005 at 15:30
Not only is Sir Ming the Merciless backing Charlie, but they've put his statement on their website (which still can't spell "retirement" correctly). And now Hughes the Useless is expressly confidence and loyalty.
So if the Deputy and the President (whatever that is) are behind him, he's toast - I regret to say.
Posted by: William Norton | December 15, 2005 at 17:15
Editor: please delete if the following is beyond the pale...
But what exactly is with all the innuendo in the press about Mr. Kennedy's "lifestyle" and "health" and so on. What's the insinuation? That he is an alcoholic?
Posted by: Goldie | December 15, 2005 at 18:17
"Not only is Sir Ming the Merciless backing Charlie, but they've put his statement on their website (which still can't spell "retirement" correctly). And now Hughes the Useless is expressly confidence and loyalty."
Ah yes but will Oaten be Gloatin' over the corpse of Kennedy's political career? (Sorry I know that's rotten but I just couldn't resist...)
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | December 15, 2005 at 18:43
"do we really want three months saturation coverage of obscure Lib Dem nonentities as if they are important or relevant people, trundling out their barking insane theories?"
Absolutely not. And I think some Tories are getting a bit carried away with what they think the impact will be for them. It will either be minimal, or too difficult to predict. Either way, it's not worth paying too much attention to the Lib Dimwits.
Posted by: John Hustings | December 15, 2005 at 20:36
I'm interested in this Lib Dem uprising simply because I think it will be hilariously funny to see the Daft Democrats running around like headless chickens and attempting to "up the ante" on the Tories or the like.
I cannot see one Lib Dem frontbencher who would be able to gain a substantial amount of votes from Labour or the Tories. Sir Ming the Merciless has the gravitas but (as someone said in an earlier post) not the appeal to the young voters that the Lib Dems often rely on. I would laugh to heaven if Hughes became leader - completely unelectable and will only help the Tories.
Posted by: Elena | December 15, 2005 at 21:55
Well, leadership crisis's are hardly good publicity.
With Michael Howard we never had a leadership crisis. We had a leadership election.
A bunch of Liberals arguing about each other will hardly be a good thing for them, but I understand the point that getting themselves in the news at all makes them seem newsworthy.
Posted by: Terry Keen | December 15, 2005 at 22:02
I actually think the coverage will lessen their appeal - the comment above that we had an election vs their crisis is spot on. More than that - the Orange types that on the surface I found quite attractive: there was an interview with Mark Oaten in the Telegraph today (or yesterday? Gosh I'm losing it!) and he came across as vapid and pointless. If I am at all representive of the centrist-Tory-who-finds-right-wing-Lib-Dem-intellectually-attractive party, then the more exposure for people like Oaten, the better for us electorally.
Posted by: Graeme Archer | December 17, 2005 at 17:38
Oaten was also fairly useless on 'Any Questions' where he was hammered predictably by Ken Clarke and unbelievably by Nick Brown who must be one of the weakest debators in the Parliamentary Labour party!
Posted by: malcolm | December 18, 2005 at 16:08