SHOULD WE STAY OR SHOULD WE GO? IT'S REALLY NOT DIFFICULT

[I have taken to writing a blog some hours before posting it so that I can review the language. This is a good discipline particularly when referring to our charming coalition 'partners'. You might say there's no 'f' in coalition...]

Ouch. The Independent today discusses whether the Lib Dems should stay in the coalition with the Tories or whether we should accept that we have nothing in common with their self-destructive approach to the world and pull out now, probably precipitating a new General Election. The answer is simple. We have to stick it out, however hard we must hold our noses.

We went into the coalition with the Tories because it was in the national interest. People attack Nick Clegg for changing his tune but he said this before, during and after the General Election campaign. He was absolutely, unequivocally clear that we would work with whichever party won the most votes. Thankfully, in this case it was the Tories for, let no one forget, Labour in 2010 was entirely washed up, with one of the most unpopular leaders ever, a Chancellor promising cuts pretty much along the lines of what we have now and absolutely no idea about what to do next. They were lost and they still are, as Ed Miliband demonstrated on Sunday when the best response he could come up with in response to the European debacle was to declare that he agreed with Nick. And this man has ambitions to be Prime Minister. Seriously.

By contrast, the Tories offered us a good deal. We have lost out in some areas like student fees and the referendum - call it political naivety - but in others we are doing well, such as cutting taxes for the lowest paid, investing in education for disadvantaged schoolchildren and wrestling with the nightmare of our energy policy. We are doing good Lib Dem stuff in government and that will all stop if we walk away. We are also working hard to deliver the stability which is so clearly lacking in much of Europe and which remains the touchstone of this government's success. It's hard, it is hurting but if it succeeds we will all benefit, even union leaders on £120,000 a year who seek to derail all these plans. [Note: the fiery anachronistic leader of UNISON gets this princely sum each year. I wonder how many of his poorly paid members know that...]

On a more inward-looking tack, if the Lib Dems do leave the coalition and an election is called, it's unlikely to be wine and roses for us. We have good arguments and a principled stance but Joe and Josephine Public haven't been sold on that yet. We need time to get the message across that we are holding the Tories in check and delivering on our promises. I don't know many people who dislike the Tories as much as I do and that is because I have seen close at hand how they operate. This government needs principles and clarity of purpose to survive and that isn't going to come from them. Lib Dems need to fight them all the way but do it from the inside.

So plaudits to Nick for what has become one of the best assaults of recent years on arrogance and ignorance in government and the abject failure of British diplomacy in Europe, for which David Cameron is 100% responsible. Forget the nuanced arguments of various pundits about why he did it - he failed to negotiate wisely for our interests in an international forum, he failed to engage with partners and he was comprehensively outflanked by the French - the French, goddamit!

I agree with Nick and I wish him well in what is going to be a Hell of a week for us and for our disastrously isolated country.

HERE COME THE LIB DEMS - FINALLY

It's starting to get a whole lot more encouraging in London - or more precisely, Tottenham. Having endured around 14 months of Hell at the hands of the grubby media, this could be the moment Nick Clegg begins his rehabilitation as he steps into the limelight and confirms his role as the Minister for Doing the Right Thing.

His support for Vince and their joint call for banking reform to happen now, not when Dave and George's chums in the City want it, is what we fought the last election for and what the prophetic Vince has been demanding for an embarrassing (for the other parties) number of years. Nick's firm backing for Vince is what we want to hear and he needs to square up to Dave and make sure the Tory leader doesn't weasel out of this. Any compromise on this fundamental issue should be met by loud Lib Dem condemnation. Banking reform is solid gold, not blue...

His return to Tottenham yesterday to reaffirm the government's commitment to helping the area after the looting is also good, a clear sign that the Lib Dems don't just move on to the next story. Nick's visit appears to have been welcomed by people in Tottenham and even by the local Labour MP.

Nick has done more for his reputation in this one day than in the past 14 months of coalition government. I called yesterday's brief comment 'reasons to be cheerful' and for one of the few times since we went into coalition with the Tories, I am smiling. As I've said before, I don't envy our Lib Dem MPs their job of working with the Tories but I do admire them for it.

Lots of people - usually on the left- have bleated about the Lib Dems in coalition, some asking what the Lib Dems are for and praying for some kind of revival of their fortunes as we decline. Well, it has been a difficult time for us but the answer to that existential question is here. This is what the Lib Dems are for: doing stuff, delivering on our promises, keeping the Tories in check, reforming the banks, sorting out the mess left by Labour.

In three years' time we can go to voters and show them that we have actually done stuff in government. I'm no expert but I reckon people will quite like that.

REASONS TO BE CHEERFUL

The Independent headline today is 'Osborne and Cable at war over bank reform'. Why does this make me smile broadly before I have read a single word of the article?

WE'VE HAD THE GRIEF, NOW LET'S GET UP AND PUT OUR FISTS UP

Having lost the election in North Hinksey and Wytham I do now have the advantage of being able to speak freely about the results which have come in in the Vale and across the country. It's been a torrid few days and the most obvious conclusion to be drawn is that you simply can't trust the Tories.

I was deeply depressed when we went into coalition with them last year but I considered the various comments and plans over the following days and concluded that it was probably the best thing for the Lib Dems to do to demonstrate that we are a serious party and not a party of protest. That remains valid. We were also being offered nothing from Labour beyond supporting more of the same. It cannot be repeated enough that Labour was planning cuts of almost exactly the same severity had they won the election so we would have been damned for shoring up a failed government if we had sided with them.

So to the coalition and the first year has been interesting. I genuinely support the approach of localism, which seeks to give more powers to local areas, including local health providers. That doesn't mean a complete endorsement of the NHS plans, for example but I did see much to support in the idea of letting people who do health actually deliver it, rather than the cult of the manager which was introduced under the Tories and enthusiastically promoted by 'New' Labour, resulting in 6 managers for every nurse by the time Labour lost.

I even grew to trust David Cameron after many years of deep suspicion. His managerial rather than directorial approach was refreshing after the chaos of John Major and the control freakery of Blair and Brown. He seemed to be a conciliator rather than a leader, which I like. Sadly, his despicable performance in the AV referendum has alienated me completely so that if he comes to my local pub again (which he did a few weeks ago to celebrate its reopening) I might need to leave to avoid a difficult conversation with Special Branch. [Since we no longer live in a free country, for any obsessive security bods out there, I mean I'd like to give him a piece of my mind, nothing more].

As for Nick, well, I can't deny that I'm angry with him. He seems to have bought the coalition hook, line and sinker and, fatally for a politician, he seems to have put away his political antennae for the duration, failing to read the deep malaise across the country with the Lib Dems and our reputation. That doesn't mean I am aligning myself with the bleaters calling for him to resign - I hate that kind of defeatist talk - but I want him to come out with sleeves rolled up and gloves off. I want Cameron and his ilk to squirm because Lib Dems are taking them head on about fairness, health reforms, banking reforms - and how about going back to student fees?

How blissful to hear the voice of Vince once more ringing out in condemnation of the Tories. Let's never forget that Vince roared into leadership for three months and stunned the political world with his activities in that brief time. Chris Huhne is also taking the fight to the enemy - let's no longer mince words - and God bless him for doing so. I will always be a loyalist but Nick needs to up his game significantly.

Let's project forward to the approaching anniversary of the coalition. Apparently Cameron and Clegg plan a joint speech session. Well, Nick, why don't you go off on your own and give me a speech to stiffen my sinews, not one to make Tory hearts glad? Speak to your heartlands, all us mugs with aching feet and ink-stained fingers after this campaign.

And as for calls from Tories like Bernard Jenkin for Lib Dems to move closer to the Tories, wake up and smell the coffee. There is more chance of Blue winning Eurovision than of Lib Dem rank and file members treating your lot with anything other than contempt after this election.

I appear to have moved from grief to anger. I want to see my party do so as well (Go, Vince and Chris!). Rally round the flag, friends -the Gold one, not the one stained with blue. I also want no red in the Lib Dem colours - but that's an argument for another time.

THE TROUBLE WITH SIMON HUGHES

Simon Hughes is a Lib Dem party stalwart and 'Treasure'. He won one of the most contentious by-elections of the modern period, one in which no party covered itself in glory, despite what the preening Labour Party might wish to declare. He has worked Southwark and Bermondsey - a difficult seat with many local issues just a few of which would tax politicians of lesser mettle - for decades now. He remains an important conscience for the party and a persuasive force for what might in less enlightened times have been referred to as the 'left'. Great guy.

The trouble is that he says things like the Lib Dems need a veto in the coalition government and that we could work with Labour. Well, yes, sort of but actually no, Simon.

Don't get me wrong, I am very uncomfortable with the coalition and I still dislike the Tories with a majority of my being (99% of my soul) but I accept that Nick Clegg has delivered us real power and influence for the first time in decades and that a large dollop of the Lib Dem agenda is actually being delivered in government which, if you are sensible about your politics, you will accept is worth paying the price of adopting a fixed grin for when faced with Michael Gove across a table or sitting with Michael Howard in Parliament. (No, Michael, I'm not thinking what you're thinking but I'll bite my tongue for now.)

To ask for a veto in a coalition is to ask for the self-destruct button to be put in the middle of the table during disarmament talks. Some blithering idiot will eventually leap up and press it in the name of 'common sense', the interests of their party or some overweening principle. The simple fact is that in the coalition - in any coalition - everyone knows they can take this course but you don't want to encourage them to do so. You need compromise, you need general agreement, you need to hold your proverbial noses. Holding out the prospect of a 'veto' does not encourage the necessary collegiate thinking. The Lib Dems do not need a veto, we simply need to engage fully with the coalition - as we have done so far - and make sure our voice is heard loud and clear - as we have done.

Now, just like a good Lib Dem, let me immediately defend Simon Hughes by stating that he does not appear to have ever used the term 'veto' but this is how it is being reported in the meejah so this is the charge which must be answered, rightly or wrongly.

On the second point, Simon has commented that a coalition deal with Labour may be possible in the future. Er, just hold on, Simon. The Labour Party has driven this country into the ground in recent years [dissenters please note: PFI, Iraq, outlandish spending pledges in 2010, Tony Blair and our devastated international reputation] and it is now embarked upon an extended period of what will inevitably be vicious infighting as memoirs come out and their leadership race chunters on. Add to that the fact that if the thoroughly duplicitous Ed Balls wins that leadership battle through some mysterious alchemy (a stitch up) I doubt that many Lib Dems would consider any kind of accommodation. I have choked on a deal with the Tories but accepted it as the right thing to do. I would have to seriously consider reaching for the party card and scissors if a deal with Balls were proposed.

There is no doubt that we could make a deal in the future with a much reformed Labour Party which had an entirely new leadership and a much revised set of policies but at the moment that is very far from happening so our Deputy Leader might best consider avoiding comment on it at the moment. Labour has far to go and I don't want my party tarnished by any association with them while they are on this difficult and potentially destructive journey.

What I have always sought from the Lib Dem upper echelons is a clear, unequivocal desire to win elections, not just to carp from the sidelines or seek accommodations with others. Nick and the team are doing great things in Parliament - and getting no thanks for doing so at the moment. In 2015 I'd like to be a candidate again and I'd like to fight for power, not just with Labour or the Tories but on our own terms.

And there is the trouble with Simon in a nutshell, because he did just that the other day when he said that we would fight every seat without making any accommodation with the Tories. Well bingo, I couldn't agree more! The two thirds of voters in Henley who didn't vote for their Tory MP this year need a choice and I want to give them that choice in 2015. Shout, Simon, for all of us but choose your target better.

'GOVERNMENT UNPOPULAR' SHOCK - A NATION YAWNS

According to the newspapers the LDs' poll rating is slipping as more people say they do not know what we stand for any more. Well, if you've been an activist for a few years you'll know that this is a standard refrain and its not really anything to worry about.

Well, we're part of a government which is making bigger cuts to the public sector that any since the 1930s. We're in bed with our one time mortal enemies (some of us are still keeping a revolver under the pillow...) and we seem to be jettisoning our principles. Its therefore hardly surprising that we're not exactly racing in the polls.

There is no question that the coalition has been a shock for our traditional supporters - including me - but there is also no doubt that by signing up to this agreement the Lib Dems are actually achieving stuff, like a referendum on voting reform, which we have been going on about for decades. We have a commitment to fixed term parliaments, a promised reform of party funding, a commitment to reduce the number of MPs in Parliament and a long delayed - by Labour - reform of the House of Lords. We campaigned on all these issues at the election and they are now being introduced. Tell me, where's the beef?

We have got the tax threshold raised, as we promised at the election. We have a commitment to restore the link between pensions and earnings, which the Labour Party failed to do for 13 years. We have a commitment to greater freedoms for teachers and health workers to do their jobs, fair compensation for Equitable Life pensioners.

We have Vince Cable as Business Secretary, Chris Huhne as Energy Secretary, Norman Baker responsible for Transport. People who know what they are doing - LD people - are in the right jobs. We must give them time to effect real change.

The 'but' is that they are part of a coalition, which requires compromise. I don't suppose that Chris Huhne ever imagined that he would be declaring his support for nuclear power in Parliament but he is a pragmatist and he knows that if he wants to deliver LD changes to our energy policy he must compromise. That's the real world of politics which we must get used to.

The key for us is that in five years' time, assuming that the date for the next election is honoured, we will be able to enter an election telling voters that Lib Dems have been in government, we have demonstrated our ability to work with other parties, we have demonstrated that we can actually get things done and that for the first time in almost a century a Lib Dem vote can be clearly, unequivocally demonstrated to be anything but a wasted vote.

Courage, mes braves. Its a long road, a rocky one but the destination might just be worth it.

NUCLEAR POWER? NO CHANCE

Chris Huhne, the Energy and Climate Change Secretary, has announced that new, privately owned nuclear power stations will be up and running by 2018 and that they will receive no government subsidy. This, I assume, is the same Chris Huhne who bemoaned the abject situation in his new department when he took over in May this year. At the time, he complained bitterly about the fact that almost all of his budget for the foreseeable future would need to be spent on nuclear decommissioning, giving him virtually nothing to spend on renewables, which of course have the advantage of being, well, renewable.

What will change with new, private nuclear power stations? Will energy companies who seek to build these new stations be required to pay into a fund to cover future decommissioning costs? I think I can answer that with a resounding 'no' because as soon as any such costs - even taken at today's prices, which will doubtless rocket in future decades - are taken into account the cost of new nuclear power capacity would become hopelessly uneconomic. The clear, obvious outcome of new nuclear power generation to even the most short-sighted of politicians, which Chris Huhne certainly is not, will be huge, unknown costs for a future government when whichever private company decides to build these facilities either ceases to exist or simply walks away, leaving taxpayers with the bill for the mess.

Don't kid us - or yourself - Chris: there will be a taxpayer subsidy for new nuclear power capacity, just not immediately - and when it does arise the cost will be vast.

For the record, I'm not a woolly lefty who is against nuclear power for the sake of it. I simply believe that it is a failed technology. Nuclear power creates by-products which are among the most dangerous we know about and which cannot be made safe for hundreds of thousands of years. How many governments, countries or even civilisations do you know of which have lasted for 500,000 years. There weren't even human beings on the planet 500,000 years ago so who on earth can tell us with any confidence that this problem can be dealt with.

And yes, I am aware that we rely on nuclear power at the moment for a sizeable proportion of our energy usage. Well, we used to burn witches and bait bears but then we decided that we should move on.

We will end up paying and we will be saddled with an intractable problem. That's just not good business or good government. Why can't money be invested in renewables, cleaner existing technology and nuclear fusion, which has the potential to work and to be safe, instead of wasted on what are certain to be financial black holes in the future? Anyone who says it can't be done, consider the difference between a Ford Capri, using technology from 40 years ago, and a low emission, smaller engine, higher torque modern diesel car, of which there is a range to choose from. Similarly, remember a world without the internet? That was less than 20 years ago. I read just this week of a new invention, a bottle with an ultra-violet light powered by a wind up mechanism which can sterilise water in 90 seconds. Brilliant, simple and with the potential to revolutionise the way millions of people live.

I know he reads my blog (!) so here's a plea to Chris Huhne: remember you're a Lib Dem first and climb out of the box, where the thinking is easier. We have innovated our way out of problems before and the impetus can be given by government to do it again, not just to latch onto old technology for a short term fix with a very long term cost. Isn't that the role of a dynamic ministry?

However, if you choose to go down the path of backing nuclear fission, make sure the companies who build these new stations pay upfront into a discrete, invested fund to deal with the consequences of their actions for generations to come - and make the cost realistic, such as 10% of the current annual cost to the taxpayer of decommissioning existing nuclear power stations. Don't do as British governments have done for decades and simply fail to deal with this problem now before it arises. Plan now for all our futures.

Finally, a note: no new nuclear power station has been built for decades. One is being built in Finland which is about 4 years behind schedule and 50% over budget. The model doesn't work, countless safety issues have been found with the design and it is still under construction. I wonder if the Secretary of State would care to comment on this.

MORE ALARM BELLS OVER THE COALITION

Hmm, having endorsed the coalition in my last post, I have subsequently read in Private Eye that our own Nick Harvey has rejected calls for an enquiry into the suspicious deaths of four young soldiers at Deepcut Barracks, which have been called suicides but which have raised questions ever since they occurred.

The Lib Dems have a proud record of raising issues like this. Indeed, our joker-in-chief, Lembit Opik, regularly asked Prime Ministers about this issue. Now a Lib Dem Minister says there should be no enquiry.

Has a little corner of our credibility just crumbled and fallen to the floor?

HELP, I SUPPORT THE GOVERNMENT!

I have a huge problem with the coalition government. My problem is that, notwithstanding some of the measures in the budget, like the dodging of a meaningful capital gains tax increase, I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with much of what is being done. This is a difficult position to be in when I want to maintain my independence and critical faculties.

When a British government owns up to the fact that prison doesn't work you have to cheer. It is easy for the nay-sayers to climb onto their tired bandwagon and mention the need to incarcerate rapists and murderers while ignoring the fact that the overwhelming majority of people in prison are there for petty crimes - unpleasant for the victims and annoying for society but not necessarily meriting imprisonment at huge cost, both financially and in terms of their lives and the lives of relatives and children. Alternatives can be considered for some people - not everyone - and it is quite shocking to have heard this honest assessment from a Conservative government minister. When Michael Howard opposes it, you know in your heart it must be the right thing to do.

As a reminder of how much of a shift this is for the Tories, the ridiculous Ann Widdecombe was on the radio this morning arguing the very point that restorative justice, which has had demonstrable, measurable results in Scotland and Northern Ireland, will not work in every situation. Well, what a stunning revelation that is and what a pleasure it is to remember that Widdecombe is no longer an MP.

When a Liberal Democrat minister, the exalted Vince Cable, announces a policy for a graduate tax to head off calls from a tiny number of rich universities who want to manage entrance to their hallowed halls through a crude financial mechanism of higher fees, instead favouring a system which will ensure that people from all backgrounds can study if they are up to it, you have to cheer. The fact that this proposal was welcomed by the notoriously left-wing NUS offers a pause for reflection about whether this is the right way to go but fundamentally this is a Liberal Democrat proposing to ensure that people can have a decent, affordable education. Cable has also been honest enough to accept that not everyone will be able to go to university and that some universities might close. Labour screech like banshees on the sidelines but they cannot avoid the simple truth that Cable is being honest, acknowledging that this is not where the LDs wanted to be but we live in the real world of coalition compromise. How deliciously refreshing.

When another Tory minister proposed abolishing tiers of NHS bureaucracy and putting control of the NHS into the hands of the people who work in it, I almost fell off my chair. This policy is entirely validated when the likes of the execrable Ed Balls and the ineffectual Harriet Harman rail against it. The policy announced of GP commissioning is radical, it will have problems - let's be honest, it might not work - but it is at least an attempt to address the rising costs and bloated bureaucracy of the NHS while trying to maintain standards and, to repeat, giving more control over the service to the people who work in it. I fought the election on that principle and it is wonderful to see it being applied. This particular path will not enjoy a smooth progress but it is at least a step in the right direction, in the humble opinion of this blogger.

Finally, it is delightful to see Nick Clegg speaking passionately about liberal principles and how he wants to see the country change fundamentally and become more liberal in the hoped for five years of the coalition. That's been one of my key problems with our party for years: we don't shout from the rooftops about how we want to change society. What is nice about this government is that we are, here and now. What's not to like?

Well, George Osborne, obviously but him aside things do seem to be going very nicely. That said, a moment's reflection reassures you that even having Osborne in Number 11 Downing Street is 'A Good Thing'. The Tories have tried desperately to deflect blame for the budget on to the Lib Dems but in the end Chancellor Osborne has stood out from the crowd as the sallow, inexperienced man at the heart of the really bad decisions which Lib Dems have gone along with as payment for some of the things we want, like the raised tax threshold.

So here's to the good times - while they last. We have Tories displaying principles most of them were unaware they had, Lib Dems in government doing stuff, rather than talking about it and Labour in total disarray with no prospect of a revival any time soon, given their choice of leadership candidates.

HOW WELFARE WORKS pt. 1

Here's a fascinating example of how the coalition's much touted 'big society' could look. It is a membership scheme in Southwark which encourages volunteering and allows older people to link up with neighbours and get help with a whole range of tasks. The scheme is predicted to break even in its third year, which is not something you can say of many public services.

A key aspect of this model is that it encourages participation by anyone interested and it removes the need for people with needs to jump through hoops to qualify for help, thus perhaps encouraging them to exaggerate any conditions which cause them to need care or support. The article also quotes Sir William Beveridge's concerns that the welfare state would stifle volunteering and innovation.

Perhaps the crucial point of the article is its acknowledgement that the approach of the Labour government was almost entirely top-down. People are children to be handed sweets produced in the state sweet factory and no alternatives are needed. I wonder what the Labour leadership candidates would say to that. No doubt much but in the end nothing. Labour - and British politics - desperately need a leader of imagination but the current candidates are so singularly lacking that it would be hard to imagine five less worthy people.

Anyway, I have mangled the article and I would recommend you read it if you are interested in society, cuts or the welfare state. This is the first pointer I have seen to a slightly more optimistic reading of where we currently are. We don't have to be passive victims in this supposed crisis, we can make things happen.

Whoops, apologies for the 'Obama-esque' call to arms there. I will ensure I am more English in my posts in future (i.e. not linking them up, not finishing them, not showing any flair, underachieving generally - oh, how it still hurts...).

A BUDGET FULL OF LD PLEDGES

It was very reassuring as a former candidate to hear clear Lib Dem manifesto commitments being announced in today's budget speech along with the necessary pain of higher taxes. If you remain dubious about the coalition (I do!) you may reassure yourself as follows:

1. From next year pensions will be linked to earnings, reversing a Tory decision from the 1980s which Labour avoided addressing for 13 years. That's a clear Lib Dem manifesto commitment. Our manifesto said we would increase pensions by the same rate as earnings, prices or 2.5%, whichever was bigger in any given year and that's exactly what Osborne said today.

2. From April 2011 the income tax threshold will be raised by £1000 to £7475, taking 880,000 people out of tax altogether. It's not quite the £10,000 we wanted but it is a huge step towards this goal and I am certain it would not have been introduced if there had not been Lib Dems around the Cabinet table.

3. Tax rises for public sector workers will be frozen but those on incomes below £21,000 will see increases of £250 a year. Our manifesto committed us to increases for lower paid public sector workers of around £400 so once again we have got pretty much what we asked for.

4. Capital Gains Tax will be increased to 28% from midnight. That's a surprisingly bold move from this Tory Chancellor but a very welcome one and another LD commitment delivered in large part. Tory right-wingers must be spitting blood.

5. From January 2011 a banking transactions levy will be introduced ahead of a much talked about global agreement over such a plan. That's another Lib Dem manifesto commitment which I doubt a majority Tory government would have introduced on its own.

6. A White Paper will be introduced in the autumn to propose changes to assist regional development, endorsing our manifesto commitments to focus on regional stock markets and local investment. By being in coalition, we have a great chance of getting these proposals adopted.

Like most people I remain deeply sceptical about the coalition but such announcements in a budget reassure me and I hope they reassure you. Lib Dems are delivering in government.

ARE WE BEING SOLD THE SAME OLD LINE?

The papers are full of talk of cuts, be they 'progressive' or 'radical' but somehow I'm not convinced by the rhetoric.

There is no doubt that we are in a bind. There is no question that severe savings are going to be needed. There is also no question that the commentators are more excited than they ought to be by the amazing return of 'politics', that poor relation to celebrity in the modern world but an old friend that many of us welcome back with warm affection. However, my problem is that we have heard all this before.

Pick a Prime Minister - (almost) any Prime Minister - and I would put a significant bet on the fact that they have said when arriving in office that things are going to be tough. If they had any sense they will then have done all the really lousy stuff when they first arrived before rolling in the pork barrel as the next election looms.

The exception to this is of course Tony Blair who benefited from a strong economy in 1997 thanks in large part to Ken Clarke, everyone's favourite Tory. This was fortunate because his chancellor for ten years turns out to have been economically illiterate and to have done much to contribute to the depth of our current malaise by not thinking ahead, even if he didn't directly cause it.

'We have abolished boom and bust' shall surely be Gordon Brown's epitaph as much as 'Iraq' will be Blair's.

So here's the deal: yes there will be cuts; yes, they will be painful but I am not persuaded that things are as bad as they are being made out. I am of the view that we have been here before and that a lot of this is plain, old fashioned spin on the part of the shiny new coalition. Will all the cuts be necessary? Time for a pregnant pause.

If the coalition lasts for two years we should start to hit the upswing in time for the next election. New spending will begin, Dave's grin will return, the Tories will start to pull the duvet back onto their side and all bets will be off. As for the Lib Dems, I wouldn't want to be Nickers for all the vuvuzelas in Soccer City when the disengagement comes.

THOSE WHO FORGET HISTORY...

Here's a strange thought thrown up by my last blog. I doubt it is novel in the musings about the coalition but it has intrigued me. David Lloyd George, the last LD Prime Minister, was elected in 1918 on the back of his success in bringing the First World War to an end at the head of a coalition government. In the process the Liberals divided among themselves, resulting in his needing the support of Conservatives to govern. Ultimately the Liberals fell apart, allowing the new Labour Party to emerge as the main opposition to the Tories.

In 2010 we have a Conservative Prime Minister who has failed to win an election and who has instead called upon the support of the Liberal Democrats, to the evident dislike of many within his own party. His party appears to have lost its clear purpose in the process of seeking re-election and in many ways he is making common purpose more with Liberal Democrats than with Conservatives.

It may not be a ground-breaking notion but it is interesting.

LIKE DR WHO, THE CRACKS JUST WON'T GO AWAY

It is difficult to be anything other than disturbed by the enforced resignation of David Laws due to the revelations of the Daily Telegraph, a strong supporter of the Conservatives since time began and a truculent critic of the new coalition.

There is no question that Laws messed up and if it had been a Labour or Tory MP who had been exposed in this situation many Lib Dems would have joined the chorus baying for their blood but in the light of the antipathy being expressed towards the new coalition by numerous Tory leaning correspondents it raises questions.

It is of course a tremendous shame both personally and for the Lib Dems as David Laws has tremendous ability and he suited the role of Chief Secretary as few others could.

If we want to know how long this coalition will last we perhaps need to consider a couple of fundamental issues, such as whether the Torygraph and its ilk are planning more such revelations and who will be drafted in to fill the fifth LD place. Charles Kennedy for Scotland, anyone?

Of course it may strengthen the resolve of the members of the government and change the relationship between senior members and the more unpleasant elements of the Tory press.

Perhaps the fundamental question which will define the success or failure of the coalition is how much authority David Cameron has within his own party.

WHOOPS, THAT VEIL HAS FALLEN OFF AGAIN

Fascinating to hear an interview with Tory Cabinet Minister Philip Hammond this morning on the Today programme. He spoke cautiously as you would expect a newly installed government to do but one comment made me stop and think. When asked about the spending review and the cuts to come across government Hammond replied that he didn't know what David Laws had in mind. Not George Osborne, you understand, but Lib Dem David Laws.

Now this either means that David Laws has been given unimagined powers to control public finances to relieve Osborne of tasks which might be too much for him or it may mean that the Tories are already putting as much blame on to their supposed LD colleagues as they can, perhaps with an eye on a future election.

I shall listen very carefully to future interviews with Tory ministers

WHY THE COALITION IS A GOOD THING

Because Melanie Phillips of the Daily Mail is spluttering with indignation and railing against it on BBC1's Question Time. That is endorsement enough for me.

IF YOU VOTED LIBERAL DEMOCRAT BE ASSURED THAT YOUR VOTE REALLY DID COUNT

If you supported me in the General Election and you are feeling uneasy with the news that the Liberal Democrats are considering whether to enter into a formal coalition with the Conservatives, may I reassure you that your vote in Henley was important and not wasted.

Firstly, your support contributed to the overall number of votes for Liberal Democrats across Britain being recorded as nearly 6.8m. That figure compares to 8.6m for Labour and 10.7m for the Conservatives. The next highest vote tally was 168,000 for the Democratic Unionists. Your support means that the Liberal Democrats have been taken more seriously this time than they have for decades.

Secondly, Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrat negotiating team have been involved in detailed talks with the Conservatives to ensure that they can deliver Liberal Democrat policies in government. That is no mean achievement for a party which has been in opposition since the 1920s. In the coming months and years, I hope we will see Liberal Democrat priorities coming about, not just being talked about.

Thirdly, your vote ensured that the Liberal Democrat remain the only challengers to the Conservatives in Henley. You can rest assured that Henley Liberal Democrats will continue to work for your support and to deliver Liberal Democrat success in south east Oxfordshire. We will still challenge the Conservatives locally and we will argue for Liberal Democrat principles and values at every level of government but we will respect the co-operation which I hope will be established nationally to provide an effective government.

Please be assured that the Liberal Democrats will fight every step of the way for our beliefs and values and we will seek to earn and retain your support throughout this fascinating and potentially challenging period in British politics. And at the next election we will robustly challenge all the other parties, outlining Liberal Democrat policies and fighting for your support to ensure that we can continue to work towards our fundamental goal of a fairer, more equal society.

HERE COMES THE HANGOVER

The mood music now seems to be hardening in favour of the Tories.

I have just googled 'abyss' as I wanted one to stare into but sadly Google let me down. I will just have to imagine one instead.

MURKIER THAN A TRAMP'S BATHWATER

John Reid is against it. David Blunkett is against it. Ian Dale is against it. Even 'Lib Dem' Mark Littlewood is against it. [For the 8.55 argument on the Today programme, Mark Littlewood was asked to speak for the Lib Dems. His Labour foil, Sunder Katwala, asked why and pointed out that he could understand why Littlewood was in favour of a Tory/LD coalition since he runs 'a Thatcherite Think Tank'. Well, quite.]

These are all compelling reasons to think that a coalition between the LDs and Labour could work and could deliver a significant amount which a LD/Tory coalition would be unlikely to do. As ever, Paddy Ashdown shone for us on Radio 4 and explained why a Labour/LD coalition could work, despite the needless blatherings of Naughtie and the attempted intrigues of Nick Robinson. Essentially, Paddy's point was that the nationalists and other smaller parties would never vote with a Tory opposition and they would support PR or AV so a LD/Labour government could work. Also, could a Tory opposition which has made much of its desire to cut the deficit - with little evidence of how they would do this - vote against a budget which addressed this, even if they bleated that it 'didn't go far enough'?

I found a Tory election leaflet from Henley last night. In it my opponent railed against a coalition with the Lib Dems, incredibly using the Lib Dems' position on the Lisbon Treaty as the reason for his opposition to any such deal. There seemed to be no irony intended and perhaps the lack of space on the leaflet was the reason he did not set out how David Cameron had performed a startling reverse ferret on this very issue, promising a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty as a 'cast-iron guarantee' and then deciding that a referendum would not be necessary. From this I conclude that he is against a coalition. How many of his colleagues are as well?

Who'd be Nick Clegg...?

THE TORY MASK SLIPS A LITTLE FURTHER

You know, listening to another Tory MP on the BBC dismissively calling us 'the Liberals', then demanding that Nick Clegg acts in the national interest rather than narrow party political interest (perish the thought that Dave and his limited ranks might be doing this themselves) and then making the ugly point that the 'Liberals' can't afford to fight another election, I'm not exactly confident that Nick, for all his abilities, can make a deal with these [word deleted while discussions continue] - at least not one which Lib Dems could ever support.

The mask is slipping surprisingly quickly from the Tory face.

From a position of polite silence while my leader does his damnedest to cut a civilised deal, my position is hardening and its all thanks to the Conservatives, so I must thank them for giving me such increasing clarity as the hours tick by.