Liberally defeated
In the past year and a half, the Lib-Dems have been their most active in Parliament since 1906 when Bannerman had a majority government – gaining nearly 60% of seats in the Commons. Following this, the Liberals staged two elections in 1910, barely winning each election, until 1918 when the Liberals were then ousted from the public’s view of being a party to lead the country, in line with the growth of the Labour Party. In the early 1930s and mid 1940s, the Liberals had partial power in National Governments, though their MPs never held the most senior of roles in these governments.
So how does the current coalition differ from the National Governments of the ’30s and ’40s? Fundamentally they don’t in the sense of why they occured – to better deal with a crisis through greater cohesion in the House of Commons. There are two main differences; firstly, the 2010 General Election ended with a hung parliament, and in National governments all parties were included.
We all know what the crisis was the crisis in Britain – the recession. But on top of that, their was a degradation of public trust in politics because of the expenses scandal.
The TV debates significantly helped get the leader of the Lib-Dems (Clegg) words around the country, and he played the debates extremely smartly by not being as aggressive as Cameron and Brown. Clegg came across on face value as a man with clear objectives on how to fix Britain, offering something different to the norm – which at a time when politicians were abusing the finances available to them, he seemed to be the best out of the three.
The coalition was a rare chance for the Lib-Dems to show the country that they could once again take lead, but a series of broken promises to Liberal supporters has left in weak popularity. The political changes were no real surprise to Conservatives; it was the Liberals who voted for one thing and received a right-wing solution.
I write this post, of course, because of the results yesterday on local elections and the voting referendum, and reactions to the results. Yesterday was a big day for all parties – because it was in essence a national popularity update for parties. The results were clear – huge Liberal losses. They did terribly in the local elections, and also failed with getting AV through (Liberals were the largest party in full support). The Liberal losses say a lot about public view of the Liberals – it’s degraded in the year the Clegg has been the Deputy PM.
Were the Liberals ever really back, or was the country just unsure about who to vote for amidst the national crises? Clegg was given one chance, and he’s failed. With calls for Clegg to step down as leader of the party, and Scotland’s Lib-Dem leader standing down, will the coalition succeed? The Fixed-Term Parliament Bill of 2010 has not yet been passed, so there is a possibility that should the coalition fall through, a general election would not be restricted.
I’ve been debating with myself on the possibility of general election and the possible results. Would we get similar votes to what came about in 2010, or would a party gain a liberal majority? Until yesterday, I thought that results would be akin to the two elections in 1910 i.e. almost identical. But there was a clear siding with the Conservatives in the AV results, and Conservative councils gained similar numbers to the last local elections. However, Labour must also be considered due to their large gains, and the fact that the party was split on AV. In abstract, I feel that yesterday’s results shown that Britain is back to where it was before the 2010 election – two party politics: Conservative and Labour. Hallelujah!
