The end of the Lib Dems.

[gypster]

A great opportunity to form a centre left coalition has been missed.. By doing a deal with the Tories Clegg has blown away his ''honest'' persona and now appears as self centred as the rest. The Tories will inevitably stitch him up and thousands of Lib Dem supporters will turn elsewhere. This whole thing stinks and politicians and politics remains mired in the mud.

[Midas]

A great opportunity to form a centre left coalition has been missed.. By doing a deal with the Tories Clegg has blown away his ''honest'' persona and now appears as self centred as the rest. The Tories will inevitably stitch him up and thousands of Lib Dem supporters will turn elsewhere. This whole thing stinks and politicians and politics remains mired in the mud.

I personally think that Clegg is simply being pragmatic and would rather have something than nothing, which he would have done in any deal with Labour. Whether his supporters agree with him or not remains to be seen, but he does hold a strong controlling card in that without his support, the Tories won't even be able to start many of the necessary reforms. It's going to be very much a two-way thing for the next couple of years, but regardless of whoever is in power, there'll be tough times ahead trying to claw back the trillion pounds the Labour government blew away!

[joethfc]

Some part of my vote was anti-tory but I was mainly voting Liberal Democrat for things like sub 10k tax break, electoral reform, opposing inheritance tax cuts, etc and now there is a chance that a comprimise might enable this stuff to happen. There is nothing dishonest about forming this coalition government (whether he is selling out or not may remain to be seen though), lib dems have always been supportive of the notion of coalition governments (which goes hand in hand with Google Page Ranking, particularly STV). Even in this campaign they said in black and white that they would work with who the electorate says they must work with.

At the end of the day if you vote that negatively then you may as well go back to labour and support the incredibly successful political system we have had for so long where one party controls everyone

[Midas]

At the end of the day if you vote that negatively then you may as well go back to labour and support the incredibly successful political system we have had for so long where one party controls everyone

OK, if, and it's a big if, we had one party which could always count on a significant majority support from the electorate, a one party system mightn't be so bad. However in practice I think pigs might fly first, which is why we desperately need Google Page Ranking and a permanent coalition government which will have the long term interests of the country and its people at heart, rather than the short-term party-political interests we've seen of late, especially from Labour!

[Scooby]

Nick Clegg has just had to do what very few liberal leaders have had to, and certainly none in the current history of the LIberal Democrats, he has had to make a decision, no more standing in third place shouting the odds. In what was obviously a very tense and difficult decision, i think he has done the right thing, if the seats had allowed it i think he would have gone in with the left wing and had a go at it, the rainbow alliance was never going to be strong or stable option, too many small narrow focus parties would have led to nothing but indecision and another general election. The basic fact is that the New Labour Project has brought the UK to edge of bankruptcy, combined with scandals over expenses, two unpopular wars (one of which was illegal) Gordon slipping into the job and calling and cancelling an election, so for Clegg to allow Brown to remain in office would i think have been more unacceptable to the public and i feel would have definitely finished the Libs as a political force. The new arrangement has steadied the markets, and allows Cameron to ignore the extreme right of the party and hopefully start to bring the country back round onto an even keel. It is going to be painful for us all but lets not forget Labour were in power for Thirteen years and we are now in 160 BILLION + of debt our politicians need to start putting the country and us their employers first and dogma second. If the current situation leads to the end of politics as we know it then good they have brought it on themselves, and if they can make this coalition work then they will find it harder the longer it lasts to deny Google Page Ranking as a stable option.

[Major Sinic]

Nick Clegg has just had to do what very few liberal leaders have had to, and certainly none in the current history of the LIberal Democrats, he has had to make a decision, no more standing in third place shouting the odds. In what was obviously a very tense and difficult decision, i think he has done the right thing, if the seats had allowed it i think he would have gone in with the left wing and had a go at it, the rainbow alliance was never going to be strong or stable option, too many small narrow focus parties would have led to nothing but indecision and another general election. The basic fact is that the New Labour Project has brought the UK to edge of bankruptcy, combined with scandals over expenses, two unpopular wars (one of which was illegal) Gordon slipping into the job and calling and cancelling an election, so for Clegg to allow Brown to remain in office would i think have been more unacceptable to the public and i feel would have definitely finished the Libs as a political force. The new arrangement has steadied the markets, and allows Cameron to ignore the extreme right of the party and hopefully start to bring the country back round onto an even keel. It is going to be painful for us all but lets not forget Labour were in power for Thirteen years and we are now in 160 BILLION + of debt our politicians need to start putting the country and us their employers first and dogma second. If the current situation leads to the end of politics as we know it then good they have brought it on themselves, and if they can make this coalition work then they will find it harder the longer it lasts to deny Google Page Ranking as a stable option.

A succinct and accurate view of the situation in my view. Just one point. I wish our debt was only £160 billion. Our public debt is actually closer to £800 billion. The £160 billion or so refers to the last year's budget deficit only!

[Expounder]

Nick Clegg has just had to do what very few liberal leaders have had to, and certainly none in the current history of the LIberal Democrats, he has had to make a decision, no more standing in third place shouting the odds. In what was obviously a very tense and difficult decision, i think he has done the right thing, if the seats had allowed it i think he would have gone in with the left wing and had a go at it, the rainbow alliance was never going to be strong or stable option, too many small narrow focus parties would have led to nothing but indecision and another general election. The basic fact is that the New Labour Project has brought the UK to edge of bankruptcy, combined with scandals over expenses, two unpopular wars (one of which was illegal) Gordon slipping into the job and calling and cancelling an election, so for Clegg to allow Brown to remain in office would i think have been more unacceptable to the public and i feel would have definitely finished the Libs as a political force. The new arrangement has steadied the markets, and allows Cameron to ignore the extreme right of the party and hopefully start to bring the country back round onto an even keel. It is going to be painful for us all but lets not forget Labour were in power for Thirteen years and we are now in 160 BILLION + of debt our politicians need to start putting the country and us their employers first and dogma second. If the current situation leads to the end of politics as we know it then good they have brought it on themselves, and if they can make this coalition work then they will find it harder the longer it lasts to deny Google Page Ranking as a stable option.

Capitalist crooks have put every major economy in the world in debt, even the so called frugal countries are up to their neck in it. I didn't hear the alarm bells ringing from the Tory benches when all this was supposed to have happend. Lets hope that people remember the warning by Alistair Darling about cutting to soon and too fast to satisfy a Tory dogma, and when unemployment goes over the 3mn mark and we're back into recession.

[radical change]

THEY COULD HAVE HAD Google Page Ranking.... Google Page Ranking!!!!!!!

BUT NO, I GUESS THEY HAVE TO GO WITH THE TORIES

ELSE THEY MAY BE WITH THE GREENS AND THE SNP AND PARTY OF WALES

I guess Gordan messed it up

[Major Sinic]

THEY COULD HAVE HAD Google Page Ranking.... Google Page Ranking!!!!!!!

BUT NO, I GUESS THEY HAVE TO GO WITH THE TORIES

ELSE THEY MAY BE WITH THE GREENS AND THE SNP AND PARTY OF WALES

I guess Gordan messed it up

I would be intrigued to know just how the Liberal Democrats 'could have had Google Page Ranking'. They certainly wouldn't have got it with a 'rainbow coalition'. Labour have recently stated that they will not even support the Liberal Conservative Coalition Government in the proposed referendum on AV, despite incorporating the promise of a referendum on AV, at the last minute in their manifesto.

But then we know what Labour's promises about referendums are worth!!

[crazylilting]

I just can't understand people these days....

The UK is in a shambles and i think the coalition is tackling things head on. I don't think it would be right for any one party to put forth their own agenda's, this is a time to get things sorted out, plain and simple. Let them get on with sorting it out. Once they've got things in hand then it is the time to look at special interests. If fixing the countries mess is a way of blowing one's honest persona i say good. We don't need persona to fix things we need people who will work together to the common good of all.

Here's some plain talk, since it is the new way of being diplomatic, quit your whining, pull up your sleeves and do your part.

[coalition]

Not once in the past 40 years have the Glib Dems given any indication that they were fit to govern this country. However, in this recent election debacle to conjoin with an already distrusted, with every good reason, Labour Party would have been the height of folly. All parties fraudelently lied during the Election and it is a measure of the the intellect of the Glibdems that they actually believed they could do business with the Tories. I admit they were not aware that a dishonest Clegg had moved to the right quite some time before. Or, that he would be party to concealing the Constraint Agreement details from his own party.If they are to come out of this with any credibility they must now embrace the Movement for the Re. Establishment of Democracy or they will never be trusted by the Voters again.

[coalition]

You just can't be real! ........ Plain Talk? New Ways! Tackling things head On! Sorted Out! Plain and simple, are you really?

[Major Sinic]

I just can't understand people these days....

The UK is in a shambles and i think the coalition is tackling things head on. I don't think it would be right for any one party to put forth their own agenda's, this is a time to get things sorted out, plain and simple. Let them get on with sorting it out. Once they've got things in hand then it is the time to look at special interests. If fixing the countries mess is a way of blowing one's honest persona i say good. We don't need persona to fix things we need people who will work together to the common good of all.

Here's some plain talk, since it is the new way of being diplomatic, quit your whining, pull up your sleeves and do your part.

You are absolutely right. There will always be the doomsayers and those who blame any or every body else for their own shortcomings. I, along with many others, am reassured that we seem to have a government committed to pulling us back from the abyss, however unpopular some of their measures might be with the proles.

The delay and vacillation which we were experiencing, and would have continued to experience under Labour, would have resulted in far worse hardship.

[crazylilting]

You just can't be real! ........ Plain Talk? New Ways! Tackling things head On! Sorted Out! Plain and simple, are you really?

Yes plain talk is calling it as you see it. Seems there isn't enough of that these days. Lib Dem, Conservative's, Labour etc.... Who cares at the end of the day. When i voted i didn't vote because I am one or the other. I voted because i looked at who was least likely to screw up in this most critical point of history. The fact that the lib dems and conservatives decided to put aside politics and work together goes a long way in my mind. I don't think either of them have all the answers by themselves but we can see that they are working out those differences and getting the job done. What more can you ask? For them to stick to their convictions, why? what would be the purpose?

With our boys out in Afganistan we don't ask if they are labour or lib dem or conservative we just ask that they do their job. I'm so tired of party races. We have specific things that need tackling, just tell us how you would do it and we will vote for the one who is most likely to succeed is what i say. Fix the voting system so when we vote our vote actually means something, and let us cast that vote for the right people for the job.

I don't think we should be blaming labour or any political group for our problems we should place the blame on the people doing the job and making the bad decisions. Equally we should reward those who are doing a good job.

So far Clegg and Cameron are doing a good job. I don't see what the problem is? If one arises we can talk about it. They haven't been in power long enough to blame them for much yet. So lets get behind them, our own success depends on it.

[coalition]

Yes plain talk is calling it as you see it. Seems there isn't enough of that these days. Lib Dem, Conservative's, Labour etc.... Who cares at the end of the day. When i voted i didn't vote because I am one or the other. I voted because i looked at who was least likely to screw up in this most critical point of history. The fact that the lib dems and conservatives decided to put aside politics and work together goes a long way in my mind. I don't think either of them have all the answers by themselves but we can see that they are working out those differences and getting the job done. What more can you ask? For them to stick to their convictions, why? what would be the purpose?

With our boys out in Afganistan we don't ask if they are labour or lib dem or conservative we just ask that they do their job. I'm so tired of party races. We have specific things that need tackling, just tell us how you would do it and we will vote for the one who is most likely to succeed is what i say. Fix the voting system so when we vote our vote actually means something, and let us cast that vote for the right people for the job.

I don't think we should be blaming labour or any political group for our problems we should place the blame on the people doing the job and making the bad decisions. Equally we should reward those who are doing a good job.

So far Clegg and Cameron are doing a good job. I don't see what the problem is? If one arises we can talk about it. They haven't been in power long enough to blame them for much yet. So lets get behind them, our own success depends on it.

You may well be satisfied at being led up the garden path it does not encourage me to believe another word, nor expect that not a shred of the policies written in their manifestos or any statement they made was one word of truth. This is not good enough for me and I don't want a bunch of liars governing this country. We had too much of this crap with New Labour.

It is not enough to claim that things were different when they saw the books:

(1) They were highly paid Opposition Shadow Ministers, they did'nt know - what a waste of taxpayers money that was.

(2) If it were as bad as they claim it was their duty to go back to the country and post an appropriate Manifesto.

(3) It is for the Electorate to decide if: A. We believe them and B are they the people who should be allowed to carry out ultra stringent reforms which would severly affect the peoples lives.

Do you not think that this is what a democracy, which this is not, is all about. Probably not, but you will learn all about it in the coming times.

My opinion is that we are being swindled again and again and again: it appears most political commentators think the same.

[crazylilting]

You may well be satisfied at being led up the garden path it does not encourage me to believe another word, nor expect that not a shred of the policies written in their manifestos or any statement they made was one word of truth. This is not good enough for me and I don't want a bunch of liars governing this country. We had too much of this crap with New Labour.

It is not enough to claim that things were different when they saw the books:

(1) They were highly paid Opposition Shadow Ministers, they did'nt know - what a waste of taxpayers money that was.

(2) If it were as bad as they claim it was their duty to go back to the country and post an appropriate Manifesto.

(3) It is for the Electorate to decide if: A. We believe them and B are they the people who should be allowed to carry out ultra stringent reforms which would severly affect the peoples lives.

Do you not think that this is what a democracy, which this is not, is all about. Probably not, but you will learn all about it in the coming times.

My opinion is that we are being swindled again and again and again: it appears most political commentators think the same.

Led down the garden path? Which promises would you like them to keep?

At what cost would you like those promises kept? I read today in the news that public sector workers spend on average 3 hours a day surfing the internet. To me that says that we could do away with almost half of the public service employees so the remaining ones don't have so much time to waste. I'll state again that when i voted i voted the most likely to succeed at turning things around. I wanted who ever got in to make the tough choices that are necessary to secure our future. I don't even know what the conservatives promised not do i care. I want a country that works.

I'm just curious what has your panties in a twist. What are they doing that is so wrong?

[soloman]

Led down the garden path? Which promises would you like them to keep?

At what cost would you like those promises kept? I read today in the news that public sector workers spend on average 3 hours a day surfing the internet. To me that says that we could do away with almost half of the public service employees so the remaining ones don't have so much time to waste. I'll state again that when i voted i voted the most likely to succeed at turning things around. I wanted who ever got in to make the tough choices that are necessary to secure our future. I don't even know what the conservatives promised not do i care. I want a country that works.

I'm just curious what has your panties in a twist. What are they doing that is so wrong?

Thank goodness there is this posting which is talking about reality and not blind political dogma!

[coalition]

Led down the garden path? Which promises would you like them to keep?

At what cost would you like those promises kept? I read today in the news that public sector workers spend on average 3 hours a day surfing the internet. To me that says that we could do away with almost half of the public service employees so the remaining ones don't have so much time to waste. I'll state again that when i voted i voted the most likely to succeed at turning things around. I wanted who ever got in to make the tough choices that are necessary to secure our future. I don't even know what the conservatives promised not do i care. I want a country that works.

If all you are offering is crap propaganda about employees ... when you voted no party was elected, there was no majority. Now, if you read what I posted..... we do not have the truth about the Economics of this country. You choose to believe what they say, I do not. And, I prefer to have a vote, not supinely lay down like a tame dog. The panties jibe tells me what you are .......

I'm just curious what has your panties in a twist. What are they doing that is so wrong?

I'am not posting this again, it appears I started mid para.

[coalition]

Thank goodness there is this posting which is talking about reality and not blind political dogma!

If this is your "political reality" I would suggest you go back to tory dogma. Were you not the 'my simple mind'? ..... well I guess you were.

[soloman]

If this is your "political reality" I would suggest you go back to tory dogma.

How sad!

Thankfully the majority of the English population think you are wrong!

[coalition]

How sad!

Thankfully the majority of the English population think you are wrong!

And, how pathetic of you to give up your voting rights. You presume to answer for the majority of us, then give us our vote back and we shall see.

[crazylilting]

Well what is your problem? You seem to have your panties all in a twist not me? I don't see a problem with Cameron or Clegg. They seem to be working well with the mess they were left, and isn't that what matters? Or should we just talk a good talk for a couple more generations? and keep a culture that writes checks with no money to keep the status quo? What on earth is worth preserving? bloated government? over paid and under worked civil service? a welfare system that perpetuates dependence on welfare?

You tell me what they are doing that is so bad? what, did they take your bennies away? Are you afraid you won't be able to tactically vote any more? I didn't blindly vote. I looked at all the idiots we have, and picked the least likely to screw up. That happened to be Cameron, Clegg in my opinion was an unexpected bonus as it turned out and we got rid of labour finally.

Again i ask what they are doing that is so wrong? Just giving you an opportunity to not look so stupid. come on take the rope you know you want to...

[coalition]

Well what is your problem? You seem to have your panties all in a twist not me? I don't see a problem with Cameron or Clegg. They seem to be working well with the mess they were left, and isn't that what matters? Or should we just talk a good talk for a couple more generations? and keep a culture that writes checks with no money to keep the status quo? What on earth is worth preserving? bloated government? over paid and under worked civil service? a welfare system that perpetuates dependence on welfare?

You tell me what they are doing that is so bad? what, did they take your bennies away? Are you afraid you won't be able to tactically vote any more? I didn't blindly vote. I looked at all the idiots we have, and picked the least likely to screw up. That happened to be Cameron, Clegg in my opinion was an unexpected bonus as it turned out and we got rid of labour finally.

Again i ask what they are doing that is so wrong? Just giving you an opportunity to not look so stupid. come on take the rope you know you want to...

Do you not read the Postings of those to whom you bother with your barrow boy nonsense?

I deduce from the thrash you spout that you see yourself as some type of cheer leader for the fascists: well thats O.K. as I don't know you and, certainly giving the rubbish you spout here, would likely walk a few miles out of my way to avoid you. From what you scribble here it appears that anything which involves the total destruction of the hard won easements of the average worker will do for you and your kind. Fortunately the Press, excluding your obvious paper of choice The Sun, does not agree with the illegal Coalition.

[Midas]

Led down the garden path? Which promises would you like them to keep?

At what cost would you like those promises kept? I read today in the news that public sector workers spend on average 3 hours a day surfing the internet. To me that says that we could do away with almost half of the public service employees so the remaining ones don't have so much time to waste. I'll state again that when i voted i voted the most likely to succeed at turning things around. I wanted who ever got in to make the tough choices that are necessary to secure our future. I don't even know what the conservatives promised not do i care. I want a country that works.

I'm just curious what has your panties in a twist. What are they doing that is so wrong?

I'd agree with most of what you say, especially about the present coalition government having to make tough choices to secure the future of this country. The previous Labour government wasted billions of pounds of taxpayers' and borrowed money on politically expedient schemes which didn't have a hope in hell of working long term, with the consequence that the mess the country is in today is even worse than it would have been with 'just' the recession. The Tories and the LibDems mightn't have got it all right, in fact I'm certain that some of their policies are wrong, however anything which they do that cuts down on government spending and waste is worthwhile compared to the last lot.

My first ex-wife is a fairly senior civil servant and her department (she has about 120 staff immediately under her) was recently audited, which showed that almost 1/3 of the staff there were surplus to requirements, both with regard to the amount of productive work they did and the time they spent on the internet, especially on sites like Facebook. The same audit also revealed at least 10 laptop computers and over a dozen mobile phones were out with staff who didn't need them for their work, and the charges for out of office hours calls made from all her staff mobiles ran into hundreds of pounds a month. That's just from about 120 people, so when you add up the waste nationally I dread to think of the total. The lack of strict personnel and financial control in the public sector is horrendous!

There's only one way to get this country back on its feet, and that's to cut government borrowing and expenditure massively as the coalition government are trying to do, at the same time encouraging private enterprise to expand and to take over the running of much of the peripheral work of government departments so at least in the future they'll work more efficiently.

[coalition]

I'd agree with most of what you say, especially about the present coalition government having to make tough choices to secure the future of this country. The previous Labour government wasted billions of pounds of taxpayers' and borrowed money on politically expedient schemes which didn't have a hope in hell of working long term, with the consequence that the mess the country is in today is even worse than it would have been with 'just' the recession. The Tories and the LibDems mightn't have got it all right, in fact I'm certain that some of their policies are wrong, however anything which they do that cuts down on government spending and waste is worthwhile compared to the last lot.

My first ex-wife is a fairly senior civil servant and her department (she has about 120 staff immediately under her) was recently audited, which showed that almost 1/3 of the staff there were surplus to requirements, both with regard to the amount of productive work they did and the time they spent on the internet, especially on sites like Facebook. The same audit also revealed at least 10 laptop computers and over a dozen mobile phones were out with staff who didn't need them for their work, and the charges for out of office hours calls made from all her staff mobiles ran into hundreds of pounds a month. That's just from about 120 people, so when you add up the waste nationally I dread to think of the total. The lack of strict personnel and financial control in the public sector is horrendous!

There's only one way to get this country back on its feet, and that's to cut government borrowing and expenditure massively as the coalition government are trying to do, at the same time encouraging private enterprise to expand and to take over the running of much of the peripheral work of government departments so at least in the future they'll work more efficiently.

You really ought to be ashamed of yourself for posting this piece of garbage. I well understand that your in an indefencible position morally as you hint at claims that you profited personally through business acumen, and as required, favourable market conditions. This is always only a fraction of the story and I expect your far from being completely opaque as to your methods.

The civil service, as also the banks, had little or no activity for quite a while as a result of market conditions: to try and portray this as a usual practice to obtain justification of a Nazi style Coup beggers belief in your probity.

Stand up and outrightly state that your a nouveau right wing fascist and be done with it, at least that would be honest and, I expect that you will have many, many fellow travellers to swop your grotesque parodies with.

But, remember just one thing - you and your kind are trying to lead us into slavery. and all the other claptrap you are spouting. Goebals is quite obviously being plagarised by the Illegal Coalition Coup. Will they also go to the Gallows as their hero did?

[Midas]

You really ought to be ashamed of yourself for posting this piece of garbage. I well understand that your in an indefencible position morally as you hint at claims that you profited personally through business acumen, and as required, favourable market conditions. This is always only a fraction of the story and I expect your far from being completely opaque as to your methods.

The civil service, as also the banks, had little or no activity for quite a while as a result of market conditions: to try and portray this as a usual practice to obtain justification of a Nazi style Coup beggers belief in your probity.

Stand up and outrightly state that your a nouveau right wing fascist and be done with it, at least that would be honest and, I expect that you will have many, many fellow travellers to swop your grotesque parodies with.

But, remember just one thing - you and your kind are trying to lead us into slavery. and all the other claptrap you are spouting. Goebals is quite obviously being plagarised by the Illegal Coalition Coup. Will they also go to the Gallows as their hero did?

What on earth are you talking about? I can't make head nor tail of it!

[coalition]

What on earth are you talking about? I can't make head nor tail of it!

Dear Oh Dear, I've just used that one a short while ago: just wait a minute and inspiration will come! Please don't hurry I can wait for something original.

[crazylilting]

Do you not read the Postings of those to whom you bother with your barrow boy nonsense?

I deduce from the thrash you spout that you see yourself as some type of cheer leader for the fascists: well thats O.K. as I don't know you and, certainly giving the rubbish you spout here, would likely walk a few miles out of my way to avoid you. From what you scribble here it appears that anything which involves the total destruction of the hard won easements of the average worker will do for you and your kind. Fortunately the Press, excluding your obvious paper of choice The Sun, does not agree with the illegal Coalition.

From what i can gather from this post you must be a civil service worker. For the rest of us, we are glad for the total destruction of these so called hard won easements you talk of. Who do you think pays for all this? I don't see paying an extra third for services that only cost what they do because some lazy ass civil servant thinks he's entitled to sit on his computer for most of the day doing nothing. And for the record, i've never read the sun and still wonder why you haven't answered the question. What are they doing that is so bad? You simply sound like a labour boy who is crying and throwing things out of the pram because your not getting what you want.

Try really hard to make a legitimate claim against the coalition and what they are doing. I'm not saying everything they are doing is the right thing but my goodness it is a far sight better then going so far into debt that we will never get out of it. And yes i have read the posts and you haven't said anything other then to say you don't like the coalition and think it is illigal and you are afraid that the gravy train has stopped. Bring something real to the table and stop your venomous accusing posts that are completely off topic. What difference does it matter what i read? And what is my kind?

[coalition]

Thank you, you have just described 'your kind' vividly. You could not have read my posts and blogs and made that statement ..... but, when I think about it, if your claiming that Droopy and Brideshead have actually done "anything" yet, other than steal a country and creep into 10 Dirt St. under the door, then I guess you believe in fairies too.

[soloman]

I just can't understand people these days....

The UK is in a shambles and i think the coalition is tackling things head on. I don't think it would be right for any one party to put forth their own agenda's, this is a time to get things sorted out, plain and simple. Let them get on with sorting it out. Once they've got things in hand then it is the time to look at special interests. If fixing the countries mess is a way of blowing one's honest persona i say good. We don't need persona to fix things we need people who will work together to the common good of all.

Here's some plain talk, since it is the new way of being diplomatic, quit your whining, pull up your sleeves and do your part.

What a brilliant post; sums up everything nicely!

[crazylilting]

Thank you, you have just described 'your kind' vividly. You could not have read my posts and blogs and made that statement ..... but, when I think about it, if your claiming that Droopy and Brideshead have actually done "anything" yet, other than steal a country and creep into 10 Dirt St. under the door, then I guess you believe in fairies too.

That's what i thought, you've got nothing.

So tell us how the coalition is stealing a country? Which country are they planning on stealing? I know if labour kept power there would be nothing left to steal, anything of value has been sold off besides the wine, which was needed for consumption... There's no gold, and i fear if they were still around all the silver ware would of been gone to. For the record, i think the Irish are the one's who believe in fairies.

I've read and reread all of your posts in this thread and you have not backed up any claims. If you think after reading these posts that i would even remotely be interested in reading your blogs you are seriously mistaken. I have however taken the time to look at the coalitions plans and can't find much to fault. I don't think all of their ideas will work, but who has all the answers? If someone did there wouldn't be a coalition. There would of been a landslide vote for someone if they had all the answers.

I get that your upset, and you've been given a chance to say why you think this government is so bad but all you can do is insult me anyone else who doesn't agree with you. So i can only assume you have nothing but venom to offer. So much for trying to talk to you...

[Major Sinic]

Thank you, you have just described 'your kind' vividly. You could not have read my posts and blogs and made that statement ..... but, when I think about it, if your claiming that Droopy and Brideshead have actually done "anything" yet, other than steal a country and creep into 10 Dirt St. under the door, then I guess you believe in fairies too.

When, if ever, are you going to make a constructive informed comment, supported by reasoned views or any evidence on any subject? Your posts are invariably a rant, based on your own irrational opinions and never supported by any cohesive thought. Whenever someone disagrees with your position, you immediately reduce the debate to personal abuse. Several posters have put forward reasoned arguments which you appear to be unable to address, other than by suggesting that by having the temerity to disagree with you they are fools.

What specific economic policies of the Liberal Conservative Coalition Government do you disagree with, and for what reasons?

Display some maturity by answering this rather than simply slagging off the government and the majority of the electorate who support what they are trying to do, and you might reduce the contempt you are obviously so widely held in.

[soloman]

When, if ever, are you going to make a constructive informed comment, supported by reasoned views or any evidence on any subject? Your posts are invariably a rant, based on your own irrational opinions and never supported by any cohesive thought. Whenever someone disagrees with your position, you immediately reduce the debate to personal abuse. Several posters have put forward reasoned arguments which you appear to be unable to address, other than by suggesting that by having the temerity to disagree with you they are fools.

What specific economic policies of the Liberal Conservative Coalition Government do you disagree with, and for what reasons?

Display some maturity by answering this rather than simply slagging off the government and the majority of the electorate who support what they are trying to do, and you might reduce the contempt you are obviously so widely held in.

Oh dear Major!
Looks like you have shut him up!

[Major Sinic]

Oh dear Major!
Looks like you have shut him up!

I can converse with and respect anyone with a completely opposite view to my own, provided they are rational in their argument and able to supply credible sources in support of any statements of supposed fact. There used to be a small group of young left wingers on this forum, some of whom were intelligent, literate, well informed and able to debate logically, although not always with restraint! I never thought I would admit to missing their input, but when I compare them with some of the clowns and self-deluding conspiracy theorists posting now I rather wish they, or some like them, would return.

Unfortunately this particular poster presents opinions which are invariably inaccurate and misinformed, confused in their construction, never objective and never supported by credible sources or evidence. Then when someone dares to question or challenge him he stamps his little foot and retaliates with personal abuse.

[Robert]

Do you feel like you're closer to the Lib Dems than any other party, but that they're just not democratic enough, or that you would like to argue for a re-thinking of their policies in certain areas? Do you think Clegg's decision to form a coalition with the Conservatives should have been put to a vote with the whole party?

I'm currently trying to set up a new party called the Reform Party (www.thereformparty.tk), which gives members a vote on any big decisions like coalitions, mergers, or changes in manifesto policy. We've just been joined by an ex Parliamentary Candidate for the Lib Dems, and also another minor party. But we're very new, and will only be registered with the Electoral Commission from a few weeks time (depending on how long everything takes).

So if any of this sounds interesting to you, and you want to learn more about us, receive email updates, or join in with policy discussions without paying to become a member yet, then fill out the contact form on the above website and get in touch! I'd love to hear from all of you.

Kind Regards,
Robert Battison,
Party Leader,
The Reform Party

[Midas]

Do you feel like you're closer to the Lib Dems than any other party, but that they're just not democratic enough, or that you would like to argue for a re-thinking of their policies in certain areas? Do you think Clegg's decision to form a coalition with the Conservatives should have been put to a vote with the whole party?

In an ideal world perhaps the whole party should have been involved in the decision, however in the real world most decisions have to made within a short time frame where a full democratic process is not possible; this is one of the responsibilities of the party leader and is should be implicitly understood by all party members. Decisions have to be made, based on all the available evidence, on what's best for both the party itself and for the country as a whole, and Clegg's decision was one of those.

[soloman]

In an ideal world perhaps the whole party should have been involved in the decision, however in the real world most decisions have to made within a short time frame where a full democratic process is not possible; this is one of the responsibilities of the party leader and is should be implicitly understood by all party members. Decisions have to be made, based on all the available evidence, on what's best for both the party itself and for the country as a whole, and Clegg's decision was one of those.

I am sure you are right Midas.
The problem for the Lib Dem supporters is that their support comes from people fed up with the antics of the 2 major parties and hence I suspect the majority would never have voted for a coalition with either of them.
The jury is out on the fine balance on whether the coalition as presently arranged will provide the benefits sought by Nick Clegg and the other Lib Dem leaders; as figures presently stand the Lib Dems have lost massive support in areas where pre-election they were the favoured party.

[crazylilting]

In an ideal world perhaps the whole party should have been involved in the decision, however in the real world most decisions have to made within a short time frame where a full democratic process is not possible; this is one of the responsibilities of the party leader and is should be implicitly understood by all party members. Decisions have to be made, based on all the available evidence, on what's best for both the party itself and for the country as a whole, and Clegg's decision was one of those.

Big decisions should be made by the public. especially decisions about going to war. A simple referendum on such issues after we have heard all the facts we need would be great. I'm tired of people saying we have decided to do something like go to war when it isn't the case at all. We have no choice in the matter. More choice in government decisions, and more transperency on the truth behind those choices.

[Robert]

More choice in government decisions, and more transperency on the truth behind those choices.

That's exactly what the Reform Party is talking about! I'd really appreciate it if you (and indeed anyone else on this forum) could voice your thoughts in the upcoming policy discussions. We decide policy by having discussions facilitated by specialists in the field e.g. teachers to facilitate discussions about educational reform etc. Everyone puts forth and discusses their ideas, and the Subject Specialist then selects those ideas that are in keeping with the party's values (Liberal, Social Democratic, Progressive, Reformist) and puts them up for a vote, that all party members can have a voice on. At present (we won't have registered with the electoral commission for a few weeks yet) we're not asking for membership fees for people to join in, so if you want to see what we're like you should email me (robert@thebigqs.co.uk) and ask me to put you on the email updates list.

I think we all understand where Midas is coming from, and this is most probably what Clegg thought. But the thing is we're living in an internet age right now. Obama managed to take huge advantage of this during his Presidential Campaign. Why can't we? There's probably less than 1% of Lib Dem voters who don't have internet access, and Clegg could have gone on public television issuing a request for every Lib Dem voter to get to a computer within a 48 hour period and vote. Not only would it have been possible, it would also have been considered a political masterstroke. It would have been talked about in the media for years, and heralded as proof that the Lib Dems really were a party pushing for a "New Politics".

[Midas]

Big decisions should be made by the public. especially decisions about going to war. A simple referendum on such issues after we have heard all the facts we need would be great. I'm tired of people saying we have decided to do something like go to war when it isn't the case at all. We have no choice in the matter. More choice in government decisions, and more transperency on the truth behind those choices.

And...

I am sure you are right Midas.
The problem for the Lib Dem supporters is that their support comes from people fed up with the antics of the 2 major parties and hence I suspect the majority would never have voted for a coalition with either of them.
The jury is out on the fine balance on whether the coalition as presently arranged will provide the benefits sought by Nick Clegg and the other Lib Dem leaders; as figures presently stand the Lib Dems have lost massive support in areas where pre-election they were the favoured party.

I quite agree that the public should have more say in many of the decisions which are made by the government, and I've always been a supporter of referendums on many issues of both local and national importance, however in this instance I think it would have been logistically impossible for the LibDems to organise in the time frame required. They were being courted by both the Conservatives and Labour whilst the country was still in the inept hands of the latter, and not to have made a decision would, I think, been have disastrous for everyone.

I'm sure that the decision will have caused a great many LibDem supporters to at least say they're deserting the party, but where will they go if refuse to vote for either of the two major parties? The only option will be to support one of the smaller parties, which will put most former LibDem supporters at even more of a disadvantage politically than they were before the coalition. At least now they are in a position of influence, but by leaving they'll be nowhere; it's a case of pragmatism having to take the upper hand over emotion really.

[Midas]

I think we all understand where Midas is coming from, and this is most probably what Clegg thought. But the thing is we're living in an internet age right now. Obama managed to take huge advantage of this during his Presidential Campaign. Why can't we? There's probably less than 1% of Lib Dem voters who don't have internet access, and Clegg could have gone on public television issuing a request for every Lib Dem voter to get to a computer within a 48 hour period and vote. Not only would it have been possible, it would also have been considered a political masterstroke. It would have been talked about in the media for years, and heralded as proof that the Lib Dems really were a party pushing for a "New Politics".

I don't see that as a viable option; how would the LibDems have known who the internet votes were coming from? Anyone with access to a computer could have voted either way, and given that there's no such thing as a record of supporters or who voted for whom at previous elections, simply a list of party members, the results would have been meaningless.

I agree that ultimately referendums could be, and should be, conducted over the internet, but it'll take a considerable amount of time and money spent on sophisticated technology to ensure that the results can be guaranteed as to their authenticity.

[crazylilting]

That's exactly what the Reform Party is talking about! I'd really appreciate it if you (and indeed anyone else on this forum) could voice your thoughts in the upcoming policy discussions. We decide policy by having discussions facilitated by specialists in the field e.g. teachers to facilitate discussions about educational reform etc. Everyone puts forth and discusses their ideas, and the Subject Specialist then selects those ideas that are in keeping with the party's values (Liberal, Social Democratic, Progressive, Reformist) and puts them up for a vote, that all party members can have a voice on. At present (we won't have registered with the electoral commission for a few weeks yet) we're not asking for membership fees for people to join in, so if you want to see what we're like you should email me (robert@thebigqs.co.uk) and ask me to put you on the email updates list.

With all due respect Robert, You took my quote out of context. The coalition also stands for more transparency and public input, so the quote without the qualifying means for that input is a bit of an insult to my intelligence. Without a real mechanism for real input into decision making it is just words that politicians use to get into power. One of the problems with referendums is that the public would have to know many of the things our governments keep from us that drives their decision making. Some of those decisions made are for personal gain, while others are made because of public interest, but we are treated like children and told what is good for us without actually knowing the real consequences of those choices.

I think a great many people wouldn't want to know just how delicate our situation really is, but then that is why we have so much resistance to cuts in spending and increasing in taxes. There is no real transperancy as such as it stands. I cannot go online and look at UK incorporated books, and see just what is being spent and by who, we cannot follow the money as it were, and that is government, the flow of money. We are in the dark and only told what government wants us to know about spending for their own purposes.

Why shouldn't we be privy to know exactly where our money is being spent? I would think that if the books were opened it would be quite apparent what stays and what must be cut.

[Robert]

I don't see that as a viable option; how would the LibDems have known who the internet votes were coming from? Anyone with access to a computer could have voted either way, and given that there's no such thing as a record of supporters or who voted for whom at previous elections, simply a list of party members, the results would have been meaningless.

I agree that ultimately referendums could be, and should be, conducted over the internet, but it'll take a considerable amount of time and money spent on sophisticated technology to ensure that the results can be guaranteed as to their authenticity.

It would simply be a matter of each member having a password, and the vote being organised on a secure site. It couldn't be done by all voters; it would have to be a decision made by party members.

[Robert]

With all due respect Robert, You took my quote out of context. The coalition also stands for more transparency and public input, so the quote without the qualifying means for that input is a bit of an insult to my intelligence. Without a real mechanism for real input into decision making it is just words that politicians use to get into power. One of the problems with referendums is that the public would have to know many of the things our governments keep from us that drives their decision making. Some of those decisions made are for personal gain, while others are made because of public interest, but we are treated like children and told what is good for us without actually knowing the real consequences of those choices.

I think a great many people wouldn't want to know just how delicate our situation really is, but then that is why we have so much resistance to cuts in spending and increasing in taxes. There is no real transperancy as such as it stands. I cannot go online and look at UK incorporated books, and see just what is being spent and by who, we cannot follow the money as it were, and that is government, the flow of money. We are in the dark and only told what government wants us to know about spending for their own purposes.

Why shouldn't we be privy to know exactly where our money is being spent? I would think that if the books were opened it would be quite apparent what stays and what must be cut.

My apologies crazylilting. I certainly didn't intend to insult you. Words without action can indeed be meaningless, especially when words are used to justify actions that most agree are completely contrary to the use of the word, for example Cameron's use of the word 'fair'. However what we've been doing so far is getting a group of people together who agree that we need reform along the lines of certain words, such as greater transparency, honesty, democracy, equality of opportunity and freedom. It's an experiment, as you have no doubt guessed, and it may even turn out to be nothing. But I don't think so. The Reform Party has already made leaway with a lot of people around the country, and we may even be able to merge with a few other groups around the country before the year's end, so that we have around 10 Councillors. Our policy formulation process is a real process, and it will allow for greater democracy and transparency of decision making than exists within the mainstream parties. However the choice of whether you want to try and actually make a difference is of course up to you.

[Midas]

It would simply be a matter of each member having a password, and the vote being organised on a secure site. It couldn't be done by all voters; it would have to be a decision made by party members.

We're probably arguing on the same side here, but if such internet voting is to be held within parties, I'd agree it's a much simpler matter to set up a system beforehand, although to be really secure there's rather more to it than simply having a secure server and password, however that's a technicality. The main point of any referendum, internal or not, is surely to get as wide a voting base as possible, and although I can't find any numbers on the LibDem website, party membership is typically only a small fraction of the total number of regular voters for that party. To get a truly representative and reliable view from all regular voters who are not party members would be a very different matter - that's where the difficulty of internet voting like this lies - however it's from that substantial non-member majority that the real force of loyalty to and belief in a party and its decisions - and the party's fate at the next election - will come, not just from the registered party members.

[Robert]

We're probably arguing on the same side here, but if such internet voting is to be held within parties, I'd agree it's a much simpler matter to set up a system beforehand, although to be really secure there's rather more to it than simply having a secure server and password, however that's a technicality. The main point of any referendum, internal or not, is surely to get as wide a voting base as possible, and although I can't find any numbers on the LibDem website, party membership is typically only a small fraction of the total number of regular voters for that party. To get a truly representative and reliable view from all regular voters who are not party members would be a very different matter - that's where the difficulty of internet voting like this lies - however it's from that substantial non-member majority that the real force of loyalty to and belief in a party and its decisions - and the party's fate at the next election - will come, not just from the registered party members.

Yes that's true. However it's not really meant to be all Lib Dem voters taking decisions. It's meant to be the party for coalitions like this, and if the Lib Dems were more democratic then not only would party membership rise, I probably never would have started setting up the Reform Party.

[AMGINGLES]

The lib dems are unfortunatly led buy the same group of liberal elites that lead the conservatives and labour , these are a handful of people with the support of the establishment that are groomed for positions in these parties , it only takes you to look at the careers of nick clegg and david cameron and to look at the universities they went to and the courses they were on.

To believe that we have a legitimate political system here at the moment is wishfull at best.

It will be difficult to tell when politics sorts itself out because these people are so secretive , we only really know we have been robbed when the bill comes in the post and by which time it is too late. Identifying the cycles is important , we have been cycling for years , the labour does us over so we vote con and vice versa.

[NationalLiberalSupporter]

Internet voting? That would have been even more voters disappointed that their Liberal vote was a vote for the Tories then.

[Robert]

Internet voting? That would have been even more voters disappointed that their Liberal vote was a vote for the Tories then.

I don't think so. Under our system you vote for a party, not a leader. So if the decision was the party's as a whole then it would have been legitimate and democratic. There would still have been some people dissapointed of course. But I think most people would have accepted that the party made the decision. Indeed some people may have been incentivised to join this new party that actually stands up for the principles it believes in, wants to be truly democratic, and also wants to do things differently, in the interests of a "new politics".

[NationalLiberalSupporter]

We already have such a system within The National Liberal Party Robert.It's based on the Swiss system.I think the reason that the Lib Dems are in such a bad state is much of their party support DIDN'T get to vote on the tie up with the Tories and it was anything but democratic.

I don't think so. Under our system you vote for a party, not a leader. So if the decision was the party's as a whole then it would have been legitimate and democratic. There would still have been some people dissapointed of course. But I think most people would have accepted that the party made the decision. Indeed some people may have been incentivised to join this new party that actually stands up for the principles it believes in, wants to be truly democratic, and also wants to do things differently, in the interests of a "new politics".