« Warning: LibCon pact ahead! | Main | 18DoughtyStreet.com launches second attack ad - against taxpayer funding of political parties »


The first thing that should happen is that B'Liar & Co. should be arrested and their assets sequestrated to prevent them fleeing justice.

Yes but that's unlikely to happen with a grinning Gordon Brown standing on the doorstep on No 10.

Which is exactly what we're on target foir under our present "management"

If that's the correct word for it.

In what sense would the first meeting of a Con-Lib coalition (NOT a Lib-Con pact as you keep calling it) involve three LibDems and only two Tories?

Given the dim-libs are the more pro-european union than any other party, might not a condition be that the Tories change the shorthand for "Conservative and Unionist Party" from Conservative to Unionist?

'Liberal Conservative' David Cameron will have no problem with forming a coalition with the Libdems, he is one!

Given his sellout on the EPP, I expect Cameron will change the name to "Federast" before too long.

Weren't Maude and his fellow "Modernisers" (ie Socialists) keen to change the party name two or three years ago.

I wonder why they have gone quiet on that front?

A great video. Made me laugh out loud.

Made me laugh too. Think it very unlikely though. They hate us too much for that I think.

The Lib-Dems hate the Conservative Party?

Pull the other one Malcolm.

The Lib-Dems will have the power they seek because they have backed the Conservatives in crucial votes in the past.

Cameron's regular meetings with the Lib-Dems aren't to discus the weather as you know very well.

A Conservative-Labour teamup would be more preferable than this one.

Ho hum,more Conservatives will be defecting I suppose over this idea.

You may well be right Ed. A tory-LibDem pact may be bad for our party. But to make that judgment now, as if it were some sort of a priori truth, is absurd. Who knows what the political and electoral position will be in 2 or 3 years time?

Well I don't know what world you live in Rudyard but in the one I inhabit the Libdems have been more vicious with us in every GE or by-election I've been involved in than any other party.
Remind me which crucial votes they backed us in the past 15 years? Maastricht?Iraq? Confidence Motions? I can't remember them supporting us once.

Simon Hughes who I notice has been placed in the picture, may well not be there by the next election - Lembit Opik is very keen to become the party president and following revelations about Simon Hughes personal life and possible hypocrisy that came out in the leadership battle, and tensions between him and Menzies Campbell and Charles Kennedy it is quite possible that he will lose the presidency and be frozen out of the Lib Dem frontbench to which Charles Kennedy has also not yet returned, additionally given that Simon Hughes joined the Liberal Party because he saw his local Labour Party as being "too right wing" how likely is he to be present smiling at a meeting for the formation of a coalition with the Conservative Party, even if a Conservative Party led by David Cameron.

I think that the day after the General Election, Gordon Brown will be basking in another victory and David Cameron will be left having to say that despite Labour having held or slightly increased it's vote that the Conservative Party had had it's largest total number of votes and percentage vote in a General Election since 1992 and with more seats was in a stronger position to win the next election outright and that the Liberal Democrats were finished. Menzies Campbell would be handing in his resignation to commiserations with many Lib Dems appearing to say that he had done his best and that he took over at a difficult point and that the Liberal Democrats now had to look to the future and that with the seats they had held they could look forward to making a renewed challenge to the big 2. And just maybe Nigel Farage will be telling the press that he was looking forward to addressing the House of Commons as his party's first MP.

despite Labour having held or slightly increased it's vote
Slight sort of freudian slip, I mean majority - I think both main partys will increase their share of the vote, their total vote and either hold or increase their total number of seats, although the 3 party vote may well go down.

I'm not sure if this is a sobering thought or very worrying, perhaps as the election draws closer and policy initiatives become more public things might change a fair bit!

If it still appears that the election will be close run, Labour and the LibDems will probably collude on tactical voting "to keep the Tory out", as they did in 1997.

The best bit was about the possible Lib Dem, Conservative, Cheeky girl pact!

It will be between Labour and the Conservatives mainly and less involving the Liberal Democrats, but maybe with UKIP and the Green Party making more of an impact. Who knows, to really confuse things - maybe with a decline in the Liberal Democrats, Steve Radford will finally become an MP leading to as well as Liberal Democrat MP's, also a Liberal Party MP as well in the Commons.

A Conservative/Labour Coalition would be more likely as they have more in common. Both are Authoritarian Class Parties, and both supported the Iraq War

Having seen the film, which is absolutely brilliant, on Doughty St just now, I have to say I love the comment from "Lord Campbell" (nice touch, hang in there Alistair!) and the predictable outrage from Cornerstone...

The "Cheeky Girl" with a Commons seat is pushing it a bit, but politics is a funny old game, so who knows!

Haha, loved the cheeky girl bit.

I don't see this happening. Ideologically, Lib-Lab are far closer than Lib-Con. Sure, Cameron is trying his best, but the party at large isn't changing, at least as much as he'd want it to. There's definately been a need for change, but that is to redefine values for the new challenges (God, that sounds Blairian), not to throw them out altogether. Besides, Ming and Brown are personal friends, and now the argument between left-right economics is generally won, it's down to social justice and such that issues arise, and on that sort of area, we'll find Lib and Lab far closer.

Iraq is going to be a huge problem for either combination though; I don't see Labour or Conservative doing a u-turn and demanding timetabled withdrawl etc.

Besides, we don't know a hung parliament is coming. I personally doubt it, I think a decreased majority for Gordon Brown, perhaps somewhere in the 15-50 region, with gains mainly for Cameron, possibly from the Lib Dems as well as from Labour.

Something like...Lab 335, Con 230, Lib 50. I don't think this change will be as dramatic as some are predicting. The losers will be Brown and Campbell, but the Tories won't gain enough from that for it to be a big enough difference.

The spoof is fun. Maybe I have misjudged our Editor and he has just raised this canard as a way of promoting the Doughty Street film. (see other related thread for slightly more serious view)

I think under Coalition conditions the Govt front bench would be rather crowded though, and that the only solution might be for the cheeky new junior culture Minister to sit on the new PM's knee - "It's all one big family policy now", says Cameron. A Number 10 spokesman added, "Although Cornerstone were upset at the pictures, it was either that or Simon Hughes, and Simon didn't fancy him."

John Prescott put out a statement that he was sad no longer to be in the House, but Mrs Prescott denied this and said she was keeping him in the house at all times.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker