Are you a lib dem member or supporter? As someone who had optimistically voted for the lib dems in the last election, I think there are plenty of reasons for them to be embarrassed about their time in power. Anti-tech, anti-education policies are being proposed that we were led to believe the Lib Dems would be tempering, but from the point of view of the average person I can't see anything of the sort happening.
Member and campaigner. We have a major perception problem on that score - the work our ministers do tempering policy is inside the opaque government bubble, and the public (and indeed activists like me) have no idea who thought what before the unified public face of government is presented.
People on our democratic, party wide Federal Policy Committee have a better idea, because they're called in before decisions go public (I was astonished when I learned this, and greatly encouraged!)
I sincerely hope that the coalition process is made more open before we get to a 2015 "but we were saying this in private"-match during the election campaign (which would leave us looking either disingenuous, weak, or both.)
If what you are saying is correct, then policy proposals from the Tories are even more insane than what bubbles up, which makes the whole idea of being in power with them even more distasteful.
Considering the AV referendum is now gone, what's the point of staying with them any longer, apart from the occasional ministerial pension ?
Moderating their policies make them look better than they are, so they will stay in power for longer than they deserve, whereas a full-on minority government would have exposed them for the nutters they are.
I know we are arguing relatively small tactical moves, when looking at the grand scheme of things, but the grand scheme of things is built day by day by this sort of "small" moves.
It sounds a bit pretentious, but that's a conflict between tactics and national interest (tories look worse on their own, sure, but the country is also worse off) and the Lib Dems are choosing the national interest. It could mean we're just stupid, too, I'll grant you.
What is the point of being in government and actually having influence over decisions that affect the lives of millions of people?
Power is a device to improve the world - you hold onto it for as long as you can to do the most good you can. Obviously "as long as you can" is defined in terms of democratic parameters (without which people would do significantly less good with their power.)
If tory policy is even more insane (scrapping all employment law, anyone* ?) then that makes it even more important for us to be in there fixing it.
Do you have a citation for the claim that 'scrapping all employment law' was a Tory policy? Or do you mean that it was the viewpoint of one advisor (and so not Tory policy), or even that one advisor said something that might be construed in that way, or entertained the idea of such a thing?
The original claim made was "If tory policy is even more insane (scrapping all employment law, anyone* ?)", "* - no, really, from one of Cameron's advisers."
According to the article this was never Tory policy, so that is false. The Huffington Post are a second hand source here, reporting on something in the Telegraph. The details of course aren't available in either, but what is in the Telegraph (who actually saw the thing) look more reasonable (whether one agrees with the gist of it is another thing).
It's also rather misleading to say "one of Cameron's advisors" which implies this is a paid employee, rather than a successful businessman who has been asked to make a report (I imagine the government ask for and receive many reports most of which they ignore or only take elements of).
I only meant to imply that this was a Tory suggestion - not a policy - apologies that it looked ambiguous in that sentence structure, it was not intentional.
Even "Tory suggestion" is quite misleading. Something relating to reducing the protection of workers against dismissal was suggested in a report by someone to the Tories.
This sounds a bit suspicious to me - saying that the Lib Dems are the good guys who are tempering the bad policies of the Conservatives, but as it's all done in secret we can't see how good they are.
Well, it's my opinion. politics is the definition of subjective, alas!
"The Lib Dems" don't 'plan' stuff like that. We're a distributed party without any kind of hierarchy of command (to the extent that local parties often contradict one another, much to our opponents' mirth.) We have people at different levels making different decisions about policy for that level, sure, but we're not obliged to agree with people up the chain (as I certainly didn't and don't on Tuition Fees.) My local party, for example, strengthened a Labour council motion condemning the NHS bill, partly due to my urging.
Clegg was only ever a reluctant supporter of the Tuition Fees policy, but the NUS pledge was the NUS pledge, and all our candidates everywhere chose to sign it, including him. And 14 kept it and voted against the bill, too.
The Lib Dems have a reputation for saying whatever people want to hear, and it was suggested before the election that they would turn around when they were in power. I didn't think so so I voted for them, but I've now learned the error of my ways. Clegg's lies about the tuition fees policy is but one example. I doubt the public will be fooled a second time.
I'm sad you think so. So what we say/said on Europe, on Immigration, and on the Deficit even before the election, that was all "what people wanted to hear" was it?
Tuition fees was technically a lie, because all our MPs signed a "pledge" which some of them (more than half) then broke by voting for it or abstaining.
However, other examples are hard to find, because compromising on a manifesto to form a coalition is a legitimate reason to diverge from "what we said" in "what we're doing."
The Guardian did some analysis (which I can't seem to find now) that said something like 60% of our manifesto was being delivered under the coalition. I think that's pretty good going for the smaller partner, and while some of what the government is doing makes me good and angry (DLA 'assessments,' housing benefit changes especially in London, Tuition Fees, scrapping of PCTs, and so on), other bits are much better for it (the Tuition Fees repayment system, the Pupil Premium which was doubled again recently, raising the income tax threshold, the Youth Contract, and so on.)
