Suspicious minds

I’ve a feeling all these negotiations will start to get ever edgier today.

It’s reaching that point in the courtship when the suitors get tired of bringing flowers and choccies and instead grab their prize by her enlaced arm and demand “what do you want from me woman?”

But even if a Tory or Labour party leader manages to come to some sort of arrangement with the Lib Dems, I’m getting the impression they may not be able to take their MPs with them.

Chris Williamson, the new Labour MP for Derby North (above), told me last night that he found the Lib Dems “untrustworthy” as a party.

“What’s clear from their desire to form an alliance with the Conservatives is that they are not the face of progressive change,” he said.

Of course he said a Labour influenced government would be better than the Tories, but it hardly points to the possibility of a harmonious progressive alliance.

Meanwhile on the Tory side I’ve spoken to several MPs who’d prefer Cameron to stop meaningfully negotiating with the Lib Dems, sit back, hold his nerve and let the Lib/Lab pact fail on its own.

They’re sure it would, and as long as it was made to look as though they had tried to negotiate with the Lib Dems they could then run a minority Government from the moral high ground.

They could even have another election which they’re sure they’d win because they think people would be dismayed with the way the Lib/Lab coalition has tried to “betray” the election result.

There is also the matter of money, surely only the Tories could afford another election.

Some of this is born out of a fear that the Alternative Vote system, which might come about if Cameron teams up with the Lib Dems, could rob the Tories of seats.

The thing is there must also be a gaggle of Tory MPs who are unwilling to go down the minority Government/election route because they have only just won their seats with small majorities.

Another fraught day ahead.

The devil's choice...

“We haven’t been discussing the leadership,” said Yvette Cooper as she ran away from Downing Street shortly after Gordon Brown announced he would resign.

I wonder if there is any other statement she could have said at that very moment which would have been more unbelievable.

Even though I’ve only been based in Westminster two years, I know that I’ve just experienced the most nail-bitingly intense day of politics that I will see for a long while to come.

A bidding war has seen the two parties throw everything down on the table to try and lure the Lib Dems into bed.

The Tories have agreed to a referendum on the Alternative Vote (AV) system and Labour, as well as giving up its leader, has agreed to definite AV legislation and a referendum on proportional representation (PR).

It’s a devilish choice for the third party. They have been aching for PR and this may be their only chance to even come close for decades.

But even if they take it, the Lib Dems and Labour would still have to get the support of other marginal parties to form a majority. Have no doubt that the closer they get to their majority, the higher the price will be for those last few seats.

The Tories’ offer is far more likely to come about, but taking a referendum on AV would be like the Lib Dems accepting a glass of sour house wine, when the next bar along is offering free Champaign.

All in the national interest of course.

Emotions get a hold of Adam Boulton...

President Cameron/Brown?

Labour’s Graham Allen, who was re-elected in Nottingham North yesterday, wants Parliament recalled now so that our political situation can be discussed by MPs on the Commons floor.

It’s a parliamentary election in a parliamentary system, he argues, so why isn’t Parliament involved right now?

Delay is the answer of course, and because as soon as the chamber doors were unlocked Gordon and Dave would both dash for the PM’s seat and end up scuffling on the Commons floor.

But Allen, who has backed a proportional voting system before, claims to have a way to sort out our current deadlock.

"David Cameron is alleged to be softening on a more proportional electoral system, but still apparently wants the strong leadership which first past the post normally delivers.

"He, and everyone else in politics, can have their cake and eat it too, by having a first past the post system to directly elect the Prime Minister, and a proportional system to elect the legislature."

This would basically see our Prime Minister elected in the same way as an American President and I imagine would have to see him removed from Parliament, though Allen hasn’t specified that.

We have had the TV debates, the thinking goes, and most PMs act like presidents these days anyway. So why not make them more accountable by splitting the executive from the legislature?

For me we’ve already gone far enough down the presidential route, but by all means strengthen Parliament and make it more representative.

There is an appetite for change and if Cameron can convince the Lib Dems his plans are enough, for now, then we’ll have a Lib/Con pact on Monday morning.

Cameron reaches out, but not at full stretch...

Cameron’s speech made the right noises of wanting to work with the Lib Dems.

But his offer of joint working did not involve much compromise, i.e. new steps.

Cameron outlined things where the Lib Dems and Tories already agree.

But then on the crucial issue of voter reform only offered to set up a “joint committee of inquiry”.

To Clegg and to the Lib Dems I’ve a feeling that means little real action. Ball back in Clegg’s court.

Clegg is playing is hand...

It’s interesting that despite his party coming third in seats and vote share, despite him actually ending up with fewer seats and losing key front bench colleagues – Nick Clegg has managed to look statesman like today.

Clegg previously said that the party with the biggest vote share would have a moral right to move things forward in a hung Parliament situation.

He has been given immediate kudos on TV and on the web for ‘sticking to his word’ and suggesting it is now for the Tories to try and “govern in the national interest”.

What’s even more interesting is the way the Tories have responded so quickly, with Cameron almost immediately scheduling a statement to show how he’ll meet that challenge.

Despite the policy differences between the two parties, which are stark, it does show how the two leaders operate similarly.

At least it shows how much closer Cameron is to Clegg’s wavelength than Brown.

Labour has put out all sorts of people this morning to appeal to the Lib Dems – Harriet Harman was positively smooching the third party’s political behind on TV just now.

But they don’t seem to have made any headway and anyway, none of those people has been Gordon Brown; putting aside that rather stiff statement earlier.

The PM said: “It is my duty as Prime Minister to take all steps to ensure Britain has a strong, stable and principled government. This is, of course, chiefly a task for politicians and – in time – for Parliament.

“But to facilitate this process and consistent with the conventions set out in the draft Cabinet Manual, I have asked the Cabinet Secretary to arrange for the civil service to provide support on request to parties engaged in discussions on the formation of government.”

Not exactly vibrant stuff, particularly when time is of the essence.

So could a Lib/Con arrangement of some sort actually be quite dynamic? It’s moving so quickly that by the time you’ve read this we may well have an answer.

What will Clegg do?

Clegg was not a happy bunny this morning.

It looks like the Lib Dems may well end up with fewer seats than when they started – they just didn’t get the votes.

But Clegg may still end up as a winner.

A couple of weeks ago I was chatting with Nottingham Trent University politics expert Dr Matthew Ashton.

He explained: “The Lib Dems don't have to win this election to get what they want – they only need a hung Parliament and then they can sell their electoral support in a bid to change the voting system.”

The question is, will Clegg be able to stomach going through with a Lib/Lab deal when neither party seems to have a “moral right”?

Or will the reality of politics show him up to be a pragmatist – who will do what it takes to get what he wants – rather than the idealist he would have had us believe he was.

Bye bye McNulty

One time Lobbydog fodder Tony McNulty lost his seat today.

It would be rude to let the moment pass without saying something.

Tony, it was fun growling at you.

As close as it gets...

So Gloria De Piero wins Ashfield by the skin on her finger tip.

The Labour candidate polled 16,239 votes compared with 16,047 for Liberal Democrat Jason Zadrozny – he’s going to feel that in the morning.

Labour's majority going into the election was more than 10,000. But all that matters now is that De Piero is in.

I’ve a feeling it is going to make Westminster a slightly more interesting place.

I've been out of action...

Dear readers,

I have to apologize for the lack of blog and tweet action over the last few days.

I’ve been struck down with a vicious chest infection which irritatingly means I’ll be bed bound tonight when I should be sniffing around the election counts.

I had been thinking it was the worst thing that could happen to a political type on the eve of a general election, but then Nigel Farage had to go and out-do me.

Anyway, I’ll at least be trying to get involved on Twitter later and I'll be blogging as we go too…

The plight of De Piero's surrogate...

Before I nip off I want to tip my hat to a brave man.

As I reported in detail yesterday there were all sorts of shenanigans going on after Gloria De Piero refused to go to an Ashfield hustings.

Labour eventually allowed Andrew Clayworth, the Labour PPC standing against Ken Clarke in Rushcliffe, to fill in.

He initially had to deal with a man dressed as a chicken outside the event – an attempt to taunt De Piero for not turning up.

It was never a hustings he was going to “win”, but once inside he had a particularly torrid time.

Clayworth initially began by suggesting De Piero was constantly learning more about Ashfield. In fact, he said, she had been discussing things “with Geoff…”

It was as though he suddenly realised that if he finished the name of the former Ashfield MP, which seems to be unspeakable in the constituency, things would get worse.

As it was the word “Geoff” hung in the air like a bad whiff for a few seconds before the crowd began heckling.

Clayworth was faced with the unenviable task of trying to promote De Piero while explaining why she was absent – a question to which some people would not see any answer as acceptable.

In attempting to explain what De Piero would do as MP he started his answers with “Gloria intends/says/thinks…” – this soon become a recurring theme.

When the chair called him to answer one question, before he could get a word in, a man in the audience shouted “Gloria says…” drawing a fair bit of laughter.

What made things worse was that there were a lot of BNP supporters in the relatively small crowd. Because De Piero had not attended, Labour had not brought any support – so there was a fair bit of hostility about.

Clayworth had no reason to come. Perhaps he hopes it will help persuade his party to give him a more winnable seat than Rushcliffe next time round.

Either way, he took one for the team.

Off to Istanbul we go...

WATCH out! The Turks are coming. All 70million of them – all at once.

At least that’s what the BNP guy who was at the Ashfield hustings last night reckoned – and he must be right because he said he based his political views on “biblical morality”.

It’ll be terrible – we’ll all have to stand side by side and eat baklava off each other’s shoulders because there won’t be enough room to use our hands.

I guess the smart ones among us will just go on holiday to Turkey because there’ll be a whole free country just sitting there waiting for someone to emigrate to.

The thing is, while Edward Holmes said his views were based on biblical morality, some bits seemed to have gotten lost along the way.

That “turn the other cheek” stuff was no where to be seen. He advocated corporal punishment and “death by hanging”.

When one man challenged him cheekily shouting ‘what would Jesus do?’ he gave a perfectly rational answer about the ground opening up and pillars of fire shooting out.

With immigration such a significant issue these days – even more so after bigotgate – the BNP will no doubt think this is their “moment”.

There is a big problem with immigration that needs sorting. There are even bigger problems with deprivation in places like Ashfield that also need sorting – and would bring far more benefit if they were sorted first.

The BNP and Holmes like to paint themselves as the anti-establishment, anti-political party. But they are not. Holmes himself is the former Labour chair of Ashfield District Council.

Last night he was playing up to a friendly right-ish crowd in a way that is typical of scaremongering practiced for bare political gain by the BNP.

(More on Labour at the hustings coming soon...)

The hustings is on again...kind of.

I was a bit hesitant to blog on this when I heard, given the indecision up to now.

But it seems that Labour WILL put forward a candidate to defend their record at the Ashfield hustings tonight.

After Gloria De Piero refused to face her rivals down at the event Labour made signals that a substitute candidate would be sent.

Andrew Clayworth (below), who is standing for Labour against Ken Clarke in Rushcliffe, had originally said he would go to the Ashfield hustings in De Piero’s place.

Then this morning Labour began saying the party had made no commitment to send anyone – Clayworth noted however that he had been “stood down” by the party.

But the latest news is that the party will now allow Clayworth to go to the event.

De Piero’s refusal to attend says something about her willingness to let the press see her speaking to real people, while the party’s indecision says something about how Labour is dealing with “events” right now.

Clayworth is going to have a job explaining to the crowd why he is there and De Piero ain’t. Live Twitter feed from 7pm.

What will the gaffe mean ?

I just saw Mandy on Sky trying to undo the damage of what has come to be known as ‘bigot-gate’ (see the blog post below).

He was saying the most upsetting thing for Brown was that he had hurt the feelings of another person.

Really? Even more upsetting than the possibility his gaffe has derailed his election campaign? Hmm.

But putting that aside – along with the spin contest that is seeing parties bid to take control of the story – there could be some nasty consequences to this.

Immigration is a huge issue in certain areas of the country which were once Labour strongholds – places I’ve travelled through during this campaign.

In those places – like Stoke, Amber Valley in Derbyshire and Ashfield in Notts – lots of people feel totally detached from the party that once represented them.

Thousands will hold similar fears about immigration as those expressed by Gillian Duffy – some of those have already deserted Labour for the BNP or other parties that talk tough on the issue.

Brown’s comments will work to convince those who hold those fears but have remained loyal to Labour, that the PM does not think immigration is a big problem and that he sees as racist those people who raise it.

All the talk of a "Australian points-based immigration system" will be forgotten. Instead people will remember that Gordon Brown thinks people who are worried about immigration are bigoted.

Yes it was a private conversation. But I never understood how that was a defence – voters understand that people say what they really think in private.

I’ll be tweeting from a hustings in Ashfield tonight and I’ve no doubt this is going to feature.

The gaffe that could finish Brown...

A surrogate De Piero

Tomorrow night I’m going to a hustings in Ashfield where Geoff Hoon’s replacement, Gloria De Piero, is defending a Labour majority.

But while the other party’s candidates have agreed to turn up De Piero has refused. It’s at least the second hustings she has turned her back on.

She obviously feels she has more to lose than the other candidates and more to lose by turning up, than by not.

But rather than negating the event, it has led to it becoming even more interesting.

The Labour party itself seems to want someone to turn up and defend the Government’s record.

They are putting up another person to go to the hustings after hearing of De Piero’s refusal.

As I understand it the Labour PPC who is standing against Ken Clarke in Rushcliffe will travel north for the night and argue on De Piero’s, and Labour’s, behalf.

The other parties are bound to use the whole farce as an attack weapon, making for riveting viewing.

I’ll be doing a live twitter feed from 7pm – look forward to seeing you then.

Politics or cake?

I’ll keep this quick because you’ve no doubt been pumped full of analysis by now.

After the debate last night I was presented with the choice of either writing a blog post or having a glass of wine and home-made blueberry muffin and so found myself politically apathetic all of a sudden.

However, watching the leaders knock chunks off each other was immensely more fun than the first debate.

Cameron did much better, enough to get him back in the lead, but only just. He didn’t shine. Meanwhile Clegg held out well, sometimes against a pretty intense joint-offensive from the other two.

Without a doubt for me the most improved performance was from Brown.

He managed to capture some of the gravitas that has often eluded him so far – he appeared substantial and was aggressive. I thought his closing statement was arguably the strongest.

As for who won overall, I would honestly call it a score draw. It sets it up beautifully for the last round which is on BBC and so might attract a bigger audience too.

Let’s see if that Clegg effect lasts another week.

This image may disturb you...

Those Tories are getting more and more creative on photo-shop. This is the image from their new poster.

The caption, which I've chopped off, suggests Brown can’t answer the question about his dodgy leaflets which make false claims about other parties’ policies.

"Yeah but, no but" is obviously the quoted phrase. It's certainly striking, if not a little disconcerting.

It was apparently produced in response to a Labour poster, which I admit I haven't seen.

But if Labour hasn't already, they should broaden this theme out I say and come back with a poster depicting Clegg and Cameron as Lou and Andy.

Lou Cameron: "Now Nick, why don't you have a lovely chair at the end of Commons Chamber near the door."

Andy Clegg (pointing at the despatch box): "I wont tha' one!"




I leave Labour bloggers to do the photo-shopping...

Manifesto Pledge of the Day

The Peace Party Manifesto: Appropriate Health Care pledges J and K

j. Decriminalise, then legalise, all psycho-active substances, bringing them into a system of education, regulation and taxation.

k. All psycho-active substances to be available for purchase through outlets registered with local authorities.

I guess the idea is you can’t fight if you’re stoned. Sounds like hazy thinking to me.

Two future Midlands ministers/shadow ministers...

Travelling around the Midlands I’ve had a chance to meet all manner of candidate – from the “we’re all doomed if he ever gets in” to the “why can’t they all be like that”.

I thought I’d note two that I’ve met who should be ones to watch after May 6. I imagine they might both walk into ministerial or shadow ministerial positions.

First up is Liz Kendall. She is replacing Patricia Hewitt in Leicester West and was also the former health secretary’s special advisor.

She was also a special advisor to Harriet Harman and an associate director at the Institute for Public Policy Research, a favourite Labour think tank.

Despite the stink made by her predecessor Kendall will probably win her seat comfortably, she is defending a majority of 9,070.

I met her for the first time yesterday at a rally where Ed Balls was speaking. She was confident, self assured and not afraid of the press. Why anyone would be I couldn’t say, but many are.

Then there is Karen Bradley who is standing for the Conservatives in Staffordshire Moorlands, she has a tougher fight on her hands to win her seat.

At the last election the constituency was won by Labour’s Charlotte Atkins, but due to boundary changes it is now considered a notional Tory seat.

Bradley was a big hitter for KPMG and worked directly under David Cameron when he was head of policy.

She has also worked for Michael Howard and with George Osborne on the party’s response to the budget and Finance Bill.

She knows her stuff economically and will not be far away from the Treasury team if she gets in.