Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Ask a TSR Liberal Democrat

Announcements Posted on
Applying to Uni? Let Universities come to you. Click here to get your perfect place 20-10-2014
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    its called examining all the options, any sensible person would do the same. would you rather the LD-Con talks failed and we had to wait another week to see if a deal could be done with Labour? There is a country to be governed, Clegg is right to talk to both parties.

    As for your point about the BNP, its nonsense. Coalitions have to compromise, deportation of migrants would never be acceptable to the Liberal Dems.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    Because that's quite firmly against their policies. Of course you can't divorce the results of their partners legislation, but you don't need to. My point is very simple:

    The Lib Dems have a view of how the UK should be governed, that they were elected upon. Their job is to represent those voters as best as they can, which means getting the UK governed as close to that view as they can. Which means talking to both sides to see who'll give them that.

    What you're saying is that the LDs should ignore the pledges they made to the electorate, that they were elected upon. As Lib Dem voter represented by a Lib Dem MP, I'd be pissed off if my MP decided to backtrack on what he said he'd do. You vote for your politicians to fight for a set of views. Lib Dem voters deserve Lib Dem MPs who will do just that.

    Think about it this way. You're a Libertarian voter and the Libertarians end up able to form a coalition with either of two larger parties after an election. One of those offers greater freedom, the other doesn't. As a Libertarian voter, wouldn't you be pissed off if the party formed a coalition with the one the didn't offer greater freedom, whatever their reason? You elected them to represent the principle of greater freedom for all, surely it's their job to represent that?
    Yeah, I'd expect the Libertarians to go into coalition with the people who offered more freedom. But my point is that they'd never talk to the people who offered less freedom, because the power of that party would so dwarf our own that there's no way the "net" gain in freedom could be greater if we allied with the freedom-reducing party. The Lib Dems are in the same position. They don't have many seats. They DO have views on all the issues. Surely they know by now which party they're closer to - the Tories and Labour have different outlooks on when to tackle the deficit, education, etc etc. My point is: Do the Lib Dems really think they can be offered something from the party with whom they disagree more that will fundamentally increase their goals? They're ******* mental if they do.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    Yeah, I'd expect the Libertarians to go into coalition with the people who offered more freedom. But my point is that they'd never talk to the people who offered less freedom, because the power of that party would so dwarf our own that there's no way the "net" gain in freedom could be greater if we allied with the freedom-reducing party. The Lib Dems are in the same position. They don't have many seats. They DO have views on all the issues. Surely they know by now which party they're closer to - the Tories and Labour have different outlooks on when to tackle the deficit, education, etc etc. My point is: Do the Lib Dems really think they can be offered something from the party with whom they disagree more that will fundamentally increase their goals? They're ******* mental if they do.
    What if you have to enter negotiations to know which party is offering more freedom? The Lib Dems need to see whether the Tories or Labour will offer them more of their policies, as there's some discussion about which is closer.

    Also, I think you underestimate the power balance. Both Labour and the Tories need the Lib Dems to form a government. Them having far, far fewer seats doesn't change the fact that the Lib Dems can choose to form a government with either side yet Labour and the Tories have to convince the Lib Dems to choose them. It's a powerful position.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    What if you have to enter negotiations to know which party is offering more freedom? The Lib Dems need to see whether the Tories or Labour will offer them more of their policies, as there's some discussion about which is closer.

    Also, I think you underestimate the power balance. Both Labour and the Tories need the Lib Dems to form a government. Them having far, far fewer seats doesn't change the fact that the Lib Dems can choose to form a government with either side yet Labour and the Tories have to convince the Lib Dems to choose them. It's a powerful position.
    Well, it is a powerful position (which is reason #3593737 why PR is terrible - this would happen every 4 years) but I think you're overestimating it. The Tories don't need the Lib Dems to form a government. They could go it minority, and then dare the Lib Dems to vote down things they agree with just to spite them. And Labour need the Lib Dems and then some to have a majority, too. If they push the Tories too far, they could well end up getting nothing - and that's pretty obvious. So it still seems mad to me that they genuinely think that whatever crappy policies they might get from either Lab or Con would really out-do the effects of a government they don't want, from their eyes.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    Well, it is a powerful position (which is reason #3593737 why PR is terrible - this would happen every 4 years) but I think you're overestimating it. The Tories don't need the Lib Dems to form a government. They could go it minority, and then dare the Lib Dems to vote down things they agree with just to spite them. And Labour need the Lib Dems and then some to have a majority, too. If they push the Tories too far, they could well end up getting nothing - and that's pretty obvious. So it still seems mad to me that they genuinely think that whatever crappy policies they might get from either Lab or Con would really out-do the effects of a government they don't want, from their eyes.
    However the Tories do need the Lib Dems not to form a coalition with Labour. The Lib Dems can choose to form a government with either side, regardless of what the other side wants. If the Lib Dems form a coalition with Labour, the Tories don't have the minority government option.

    As for the last part, both parties have things they wouldn't want so both are, to some extent, a government they don't want. However if they say no to both they get a Tory government without any concessions. It seems clear that they're best off pulling whichever party on whichever side as close to their view as they can.

    Were we in a situation where one party was clearly far closer to their policies than the other, this would be an easy decision and there wouldn't be negotiations with both sides. However while most people seem to think they're closer to Labour, it's not entirely clear so they negotiate with both. Seems like the only reasonable solution to me.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    However the Tories do need the Lib Dems not to form a coalition with Labour. The Lib Dems can choose to form a government with either side, regardless of what the other side wants. If the Lib Dems form a coalition with Labour, the Tories don't have the minority government option.

    As for the last part, both parties have things they wouldn't want so both are, to some extent, a government they don't want. However if they say no to both they get a Tory government without any concessions. It seems clear that they're best off pulling whichever party on whichever side as close to their view as they can.

    Were we in a situation where one party was clearly far closer to their policies than the other, this would be an easy decision and there wouldn't be negotiations with both sides. However while most people seem to think they're closer to Labour, it's not entirely clear so they negotiate with both. Seems like the only reasonable solution to me.
    They're still harlots to me. The economy is such a key issue - either you think we should cut now, or keep spending. I don't understand how they can, in any good faith, compromise on that.

    That said, I hear rumblings that Brown's out and Cameron's into #10. I hear differing rumours, though: Some say the LDs have 6 cabinet positions, some say it's a Tory minority with LD supply.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    some say it's a Tory minority with LD supply.
    Most notably your man-crush

    That said, I think the only way the Lib Dems could possibly ingratiate themselves to the electorate is by securing the Chancellorship for Vince Cable rather than it going to Snotty Osbourne.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Vince as Chancellor would be amazing, though I'd be very surprised if the Tories offered that. Too much is run from the Treasury to give the Lib Dems control. They may hand over Chief Secretary, but the whole Treasury is run for the Chancellor so I can't see it giving the Lib Dems much influence.

    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    They're still harlots to me. The economy is such a key issue - either you think we should cut now, or keep spending. I don't understand how they can, in any good faith, compromise on that.
    The difference between the three parties is £6bn in a budget over 100 times that. The differences are far bigger in terms of what they want to spend on and how they want to tax - Tories cutting IHT and spending outside defence and the NHS; Lib Dems cutting low income tax, raising it on banks, raising spending on education and cutting it on defence; Labour seeming to do more of the same.

    As for how, in good faith, you can compromise on that, surely that goes for all parties? Faced with a choice between someone else's plans and a compromise of mine and someone else's, I know which I'd go for.
    • 26 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Will any TSR lib dems be going to the conference in Birmingham on the 16th? If so I would love to meet up. I'm still technically a RL lib dem seeing as my membership hasn't expired so I'll be there
    • 34 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DayneD89)
    Will any TSR lib dems be going to the conference in Birmingham on the 16th? If so I would love to meet up. I'm still technically a RL lib dem seeing as my membership hasn't expired so I'll be there
    :no:
    I have never been to a party conference before and I would like to go one day, but this year is not the year.
    • 26 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    :no:
    I have never been to a party conference before and I would like to go one day, but this year is not the year.
    Its going to be fun. I doubt I'll be a member of the lib dems after my membership runs out (probably join the greens tbh, though I'll most likely vote lib dem if we still don't have PR) but it will be fun to go
    • 34 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DayneD89)
    Its going to be fun. I doubt I'll be a member of the lib dems after my membership runs out (probably join the greens tbh, though I'll most likely vote lib dem if we still don't have PR) but it will be fun to go

    I was always under the impression that you had to be a card carrying member to attend, is this accurate?
    I can see your point, I am sure it's interesting. Maybe next year.
    • 26 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    I was always under the impression that you had to be a card carrying member to attend, is this accurate?
    I can see your point, I am sure it's interesting. Maybe next year.
    I don't think you need to be a member to attend a normal one, but for this one you might.
    • 34 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DayneD89)
    I don't think you need to be a member to attend a normal one, but for this one you might.
    Because of popularity?
    • 26 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    Because of popularity?
    Because of its nature. Its not a normal conference, it's been called to discuss the coalition. As 75% of the MPs have voted for the coalition, and 75% of the federal has accepted the coalition, they don't have to ask the party, but it seems they are going to anyway to make sure the wider party supports this move. Here is the member E-mail:

    Dear Dayne,

    You will have seen from the news that the party’s Federal Executive and parliamentary party yesterday approved the coalition agreement negotiated with the Conservative Party.

    Both bodies endorsed it overwhelmingly, by much more than a three-quarters majority. The provisions of the ‘triple lock’ procedure approved by conference in 1998 have therefore been satisfied, and there is no requirement for a special conference to endorse the agreement.

    However, Liberal Democrats remain a democratic party, and we believe it right to consult our membership on this momentous occasion in our party’s history. The Federal Executive is therefore calling a special conference to take place on Sunday 16 May (1–5pm), in the National Exhibition Centre in Birmingham.

    The only item of debate on the agenda will be a motion to endorse the coalition agreement. Registration is now open for the conference, and I encourage all voting conference representatives to register online as soon as possible; online registration will be open until midnight on Friday 14 May. The more people who register in advance, the easier it will be for us to process them.

    It will also be possible to register at the NEC in Birmingham, from 1400–2000 on Saturday 15 May, and from 0830 on Sunday 16 May. To speed up the registration process, it will only be possible to pay cash at the venue; if you wish to use a credit card, please register online before the end of Friday.

    For the moment, registration is only open to voting conference reps – we want to make sure that we have enough space to accommodate all those voting reps who wish to attend. We expect that we will be able to open registration to other party members soon, but we need to judge the likely demand for the conference. We will send out another email as soon as we open registration to party members who are not voting reps.

    The agenda for the conference will be finalised as soon as possible after the coalition agreement has been made public. It will be available on our special conference website later today.

    This is a truly historic event, not just for the Liberal Democrats but for British politics. I hope you will take the opportunity to come to Birmingham, participate in conference and make your views known. I hope to see you there.
    Baroness Ros Scott
    President of the Liberal Democrats
    • Thread Starter
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DayneD89)
    Will any TSR lib dems be going to the conference in Birmingham on the 16th? If so I would love to meet up. I'm still technically a RL lib dem seeing as my membership hasn't expired so I'll be there
    I won't. I'm not a member of the Liberal Democrats in real life. Probably will in 2 years time, but my parents are in shock I'm a Liberal Democrat supporter - so becoming a card carrying one may give one a heart attack.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Afcwimbledon2)
    I won't. I'm not a member of the Liberal Democrats in real life. Probably will in 2 years time, but my parents are in shock I'm a Liberal Democrat supporter - so becoming a card carrying one may give one a heart attack.
    How could your parents be in shock at you coming out of the Lib Dem closet?
    • Thread Starter
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    As they are tories through and through.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Afcwimbledon2)
    As they are tories through and through.
    ... their party just joined in coalition with the Lib Dems. They should just lump it and accept that their lives will soon be overrun by Democrats
    • Thread Starter
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    When I say tories I mean bordering on UKIP, they blame the Liberal Democrats for whats happened over the past few days. They also had a go at me as if I was Nick Clegg for even holding talks with Labour. But then I went at them for not wanting change soon after.
Updated: March 11, 2013
New on TSR
Article updates
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.