The Liberal Democrat surge has been incredible. The election is alive. Politics is fizzing again. The invigorating force of a democracy where voters get to engage with politicians without intrusive mediation is clear. Well done Nick Clegg. But credit also to Gordon Brown and David Cameron for allowing this to happen. Is this the first digital election? No, the first television age election. And we’re loving it.
We’ve had these change moments before- where the entire basis of two party, majoritarian politics is threatened- and they have tended to fizzle away. The SDP/ Liberal Alliance challenge to Labour’s position as the main opposition is the obvious example. We are potentially in that type of moment again. What, this time, is different?
Actually, we are in a different place. The reason for the SDP/Liberal Alliance’s success was a mirror image of Labour’s failure. It wasn’t so much that they promised a new politics. It was that they promised an alternative progressivism to the outmoded vision put forward by the Labour party. Labour survived- just- and then recovered.
This time the demand is for an entirely new type of politics and it is across the board not just in the centre and the left. The expenses scandal crystallised the notion that our politics is no longer representative; politicians are now called the ‘political class’ and that says everything. More and more of us don’t vote and fewer and fewer of us vote for the two main parties. It’s just there was no alternative. Suddenly, and majestically, Nick Clegg has given voters an alternative. And neither of the two main parties can comprehend what might be happening. This is the change election. Labour is the incumbent and so finds it difficult to present itself as change and David Cameron has fallen breathtakingly short of articulating a new politics.
The really remarkable thing is that in response to his failure to be the new politics, David Cameron and his team are now reaching for the safety blanket of the old politics. Today he was on the stump using an increasingly empty sounding language of change while offering little but the old politics. How distant the ‘big society’ vision seems today. The attack on a hung parliament is exactly the sort of self-serving nonsense that voters have come to smell a mile of. And the smell is repugnant. If nothing else Nick Clegg’s performance on Thursday detoxified the hung parliament brand.
The notion that a hung parliament would have any real impact on financial markets is tenuous at best, irresponsibly misleading at worse. How do we know? After the leaders’ debate which massively increased the chances of a hung parliament, financial markets barely batted an eye-lash. Edmund Conway at The Telegraph- my new best friends- saw the markets’ reaction as a big ‘so what’?
Meanwhile, leading independent Tory site, ConservativeHome, advocates a return to a hard campaigning message directed at the Liberal Democrats’ temple. Attack them on crime, immigration, tax, and defence (as we’ll see in the Tory press every day between now and the end of the campaign); go at the notion of a hung parliament (as we saw Cameron do today); and puncture the ‘holier than thou’ act- the Mail on Sunday piles in on that score with its normal trash- his mother was Dutch and his father was half-Russian don’t you know. Yawn.
That sort of negative campaigning will play right into Nick Clegg’s hands. As long as he can parry the policy attacks then it will all play into the old v new politics narrative where he is a different way of doing politics and Cameron is the same old way of doing politics. Eventually, it will be even more corrosive of the Tories’ own position (remember 2001 and 2005 Tory campaigns anyone?) Furthermore, many of the Lib Dem policies- with the likely exception of immigration and crime- will be rather popular. Their tax package seems to benefit many- though it is clearly not targeted at the poorest- and the Tories may do him a favour by highlighting it. So I suspect that Tim Montgomerie’s may be a siren voice for Cameron on this one.
So he’ll need a strong shield to protect him from the attack from the right. The bigger problem is how he deals with Labour. There will be some negative stuff on immigration, crime and national security and Alan Johnson seems to be the person deputed to do that dirty job. Beyond that, Clegg will find himself being love-bombed by Labour. Just like Jungle Book’s King Louie it will wants to walk like him, talk like him, oh oobedoo.
But this is disastrous for Clegg if he goes along with this. His support has come from the fact that he is a new politics. He is not Conservative or Labour. So just as he’ll need a shield to protect himself from the right, he’ll need a cattle prod to keep Labour away from his left flank. This week should focus on themes of difference between the Liberal Democrats and Labour. The ‘you may be saying that now but you didn’t do it while you had the chance’ line is his best one.
This week’s debate is foreign affairs which is marginally a plus for him. He opposed the Iraq War. He has been considered and constructive on Afghanistan. His policy of not replacing Trident is not nearly so unpopular especially amongst women voters, as many suppose. Besides, the policy is multilateral disarmament and cheaper alternative to Trident- he will just need to articulate that clearly. His pro-europeanism and vacillations on the single currency are problematic- but boy does he have an open goal with David Cameron’s friends in Eastern Europe. Overall, his foreign policy positions are slightly positive. He should be able to consolidate his position with another strong performance. Anyhow, fewer people will be watching this debate as it is not on terrestrial TV and is on foreign affairs.
But then things become more tricky. First quarter growth figures will be published on Friday. That could be a momentum shifting moment if it shows the recovery firming up and even gaining pace. Then the focus will be on the economy (Labour’s campaign matrix this week is also focusing on the economy.) The final debate a week next Thursday on the BBC is on the economy. This poses difficulties for Clegg because, and this applies to David Cameron too, this is Gordon Brown’s strongest suit. Secondly, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are much closer on the economy than either is to the Tories. It will be more difficult to present himself as different. This will be the trickiest debate for him and it could sap any remaining momentum just a few days before the election.
So are we in a moment of profound and lasting change? It’s difficult to say. There may only be 19 days to go but there is so much distance left for this campaign to cover. The easy received wisdom would be to say we’ve seen this before, the fundamental character of British politics doesn’t change, and the Liberal Democrat surge will evaporate. And yet. And yet…..there really is a mood for political change- and has been for some time. It’s just that no-one has successfully tapped into that. If the Liberal Democrats play a blinder between now and May 6th something incredible could happen. That’s not where my money goes but I wouldn’t have even contemplated the bet just a few days ago.
April 18th, 2010 at 10:32
‘Suddenly, and majestically, Nick Clegg has given voters an alternative’
I think perhaps you need to have a brew and settle yourself down, Anthony. Clegg is no alternative. He is the apotheosis of metro-liberalism whose relative anonymity has meant that, up until now, he has been able to creep below the radars – people are rejecting the two main parties precisely because of this liberalism, and they’re yet to discover that Clegg is simply a more extreme example of the same. He’ll be shown for what he is. The treachery of his party on the Lisbon referendum, his ‘progressive’ approach to crime and drugs, his wholesale embrace of the ‘green’ agenda (and I’m no climate sceptic), his uncritical adoption of the ‘equalities’ industry (read the manifesto – I never once saw white working class male listed), his position as the 21st century equivalent of the CND, his rather ambiguous and some might say prejudiced attitude toward faith schools, his willingness to use the state to fashion society along lines he sees fit, thus displaying the statist and authoritarian tendencies common to all social liberals: all these things will come to light, and the adulation will fade away. Which is why he’s desperately trying to court the ‘youth vote’: he knows wiser heads will see straight through his claim to be the change most people want to see.
April 18th, 2010 at 11:31
Michael, thank you for neatly laying out the reasons why a lot of people LIKE Nick Clegg, aside from the paranoid and ill-informed people like yourself. Progressive policies on drugs and crime? Great! About time. Get rid of out pointless and vastly expensive nuclear deterrent? Fantastic! Equal rights? What can possibly be wrong with that? Reform of politics? Finally! The great thing about the increased scrutiny of LibDem policies since the debate is that most decent and fair people actually rather like them.
April 18th, 2010 at 11:52
Andy – they like Clegg because they don’t know him, much like many people initially liked David Cameron because he was all PR slick and then baulked at his vacuity once the sheen had faded.
And I would be grateful if you could substantiate your ad hominem – in what way am I either paranoid or ill-informed? Or is that just a really easy way for you to score a really easy point without actually having to, you know, debate anything? Indeed, your following cheerleader act would suggest that you don’t think I’m ill-informed at all, it’s just that you happen to disagree with my position on a whole list of things – which, as astonishingly important as you no doubt are, is not quite the same thing really, is it?
April 18th, 2010 at 13:51
So what you’re saying, Michael, is that New Labour went to the liberal right to win in 1997. And the Tories decided to adopt the same tactics (moving closer to them on the equality agenda for instance) to win people back. And now Nick Clegg comes along espousing these same sort of liberal views and his poll ratings go up. And people don’t like this sort of thing???
I’m quite sure you know what YOU don’t like. That’s all very well, each to their own and all that, but I don’t think you have your finger on the pulse of what other people want. Most people I know, and it’s not like I hang around in certain circles, are either liberal like me or raving loony sorts who plan to vote UKIP or BNP. Those latter people are on the margins and though they do gather on certain newspapers comments pages they are pretty unrepresentative of our country.
Great article Anthony, I really believe you’ve captured something of the spirit of the moment. I share your reservations as to whether they can keep it up but here’s hoping!
April 18th, 2010 at 14:17
@Jae – people always vote for change, and then desert when they realise that what they’ve actually got is more of the same thing. Nick Clegg is, for the time being, the beneficiary of that, as was David Cameron a few months/years back, as was Gordon Brown briefly, and indeed as was Tony Blair (though for different reasons) back in 1997. The polls go up, and then they soon fall back through the floor. Clegg will come back down too, when more and more realise that his talk of ‘change’ really is comically misleading.
As for your finger on the pulse comment, voter turnout in the last two elections has hovered around the 60% mark, meaning Labour could govern a country with only around 22% of the electorate giving their support – I think we can agree that, if there should be a charge of not having a finger on the pulse of what people want, then it should be laid at the door of the political classes: which means they should question their orthodoxies, not endlessly replicate them, one of which being their narrow obsession with middle-class metropolitan liberalism (social and economic).
April 18th, 2010 at 14:30
Yes, but with the “liberal” Tories, “liberal” New Labour and the Liberal Democrats total vote share adding up to something around 80% in terms of themes if not policies I think there’s a clear “liberal” streak in the population. Don’t you? Even if we take the Tories out, as I would, we’re still looking at over 50%.
We are a nation of middle class, metropolitan liberals. You might not like it, but based on voting choices alone, and the fact even the Tories are aiming to win that segment of the population, it’s clearly true.
April 18th, 2010 at 14:37
Your first para, patently not: it shows we have a ‘liberal’ political class, and if the rest of the population really were like that then there wouldn’t be such a feeling of disconnect between voters and politicians?
Second para, patently not: we’re not at all a nation of middle-class metropolitan liberals, and that really is a ridiculous thing to say. Though it is perhaps revealing that you should say it.
April 18th, 2010 at 14:38
And my apologies for the typo – that first paragraph shouldn’t have a question mark at the end of it.
April 18th, 2010 at 14:45
A quick response as I’m shoe shopping. Interesting discussion. For me, the last few days shows two things. Firstly, a significant latent discontent with politics as usual. Clegg has successfully managed to channel this discontent in a way no-one else has been able to do- though many have tried. It may though be temporary- we’ll see. Secondly, it is an expression of the latent pluralism in modern Britain. In that sense both liberal and traditional labour associational viewpoints have a place. So in that sense you are both right. The future isn’t Liberal Democratic. It’s pluralistic. Now, how do we get there?
April 18th, 2010 at 14:49
Anthony – a voice of sensible moderation as ever. And good luck with the shoe shopping!
April 18th, 2010 at 14:53
Shoe shopping is going badly as ever! Which is why I constantly have holes in the soles of my shoes!
April 18th, 2010 at 22:58
This is evidence for the need of an AV system.
April 19th, 2010 at 05:40
The ghost of Tony Blair, 1997, has made its appearance in this election to offer inspirational change. When you think about it, it’s inevitable the heir to Blair would emerge from the Liberal Democrats once the Brits had got a dose of Gordon, Ed Balls et al. And Clegg is multi-Euro-lingual whereas Tony just had French.