The Progressive

The Lib Dem leader is playing politics with the Queen’s speech

Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, yesterday writing for the Independent called for the Queen’s speech to be scrapped in favor of a programme of wide ranging political reform. Nick Clegg claimed that the Queen’s speech will be a work of fiction as Gordon Brown will only have 70 days to implement the legislation set out in the speech, and therefore would be little more than a road test of Labour’s next election manifesto and policy gimmicks to see whether they may save the governments skin.

The Lib Dem leader claimed that in the wake of the expenses scandal this parliament has lost its legitimacy, and therefore the only job that this ‘rump parliament’ is good for is the reformation of parliament. In his article for the Independent the Liberal Democrat leader suggested that parliament should focus their efforts on agreeing on an action plan to reform parliament in the few months until MPs leave for the election battle. The Lib Dem leader suggested a series of steps towards the reform of parliament. The first step in the Liberal Democrat leaders plan is for parliament to approve proposals to be set out by the public administration committee which would curb the powers of the commons whips and increase the autonomy and influence of the backbench MP’s. Nick Clegg also suggested moves to introduce fixed-term parliaments, agree a code of conduct for election candidates, sack corrupt MPs, make the House of Lords fully-elected and reform the Commons voting system. Nick Clegg stated that the one gift this failed parliament can give its successor is a fresh start. 

The truth is that although Clegg may be right about the need for parliamentary reform he is way off the mark on two counts:

One: the Queen’s speech serves more of a purpose than merely announcing the legislative programme of the government for the next term of parliament. The monarch’s speech at the state opening of parliament is a tradition that has been in place for over 500 years, it is after all her government. If the speech were to be cancelled especially at this late stage it would not only be done at huge cost to the British tax payer as all of the security procedures will already be in place for the Queen’s journey from Buckingham palace to parliament. But the cancellation of the speech would also signal a much more significant constitutional change. If the government were to stop the Queen’s speech then it would be the prime minister effectively overruling the head of state, effectively in one action removing the presumed authority in the crown. This action in itself would symbolize a major shift in British constitutional politics.

Two: his argument that the Queen's speech will be a complete waste of time and would be little more than a road test of the Labour party manifesto can be said of any Queen’s speech near the end of a parliament, both Labour and Tory. Harriet Harman rejecting this claim stated that this Queen’s speech would contain important plans to foster economic growth and make the banks more accountable.

The call by Nick Clegg is quite simply a blatant example of pointless politicking, the kind of which the British public has come to detest. I suggest that the Lib Dem leader gets off his high horse and takes a look around. This Labour government has introduced and passed legislation, which became an act of parliament in the summer, which will make sure that MPs no longer set our allowance system. And Gordon Brown announced his plan to have a referendum on electoral reform after the next general election.

Yes there does need to be reform in politics, but significant steps have already been taken, and Nick Clegg’s announcement seems to be playing politics in an area that needs unity and coherent action.

Jacob Lister

The Liberal Moment: A response

Rt Hon Nick Clegg MP                            20 October 2009
 
Dear Nick,

Thank you for sending me your pamphlet called 'The Liberal Moment'. It has rather small type but good to get ideas out and in print.

But I fear it is what the French would call ‘la politique politicienne’ – i.e. some very good arguments got lost in a pure party political appeal.

I can criticise Labour with the best of them but I know - unlike you if I may be rude - what South Yorkshire was like before 1997 and Labour has made a huge difference.

I also think the Tories are reactionary – not the least on Europe where we share some views.

In a Barnsley council by-election last week, Labour got 1600 votes, the Tories fewer than 90 and the Lib Dems fewer than 80. Therefore to place your party as the sole proprietor of decent progressive values which will hoover up votes may feel good when dictating a pamphlet but it is not serious politics for shaping government.
 
You also know that in Doncaster Lib Dems made a disgusting xenophobic attack on a Danish-born Labour councillor. I asked you with your mother and wife in mind to rebuke your local anti-Europeans but you chose to ignore my appeal. That’s la politique politicienne and you should be bigger than that.

You will recall a few years ago when we were speaking together in Sheffield I said people should vote tactically to stop the Tories winning back Sheffield Hallam, your seat. A good friend of mine who has a bright future in the Labour party and I hope in parliament was the Labour candidate there last time but I still believe it is better to have Lib Dem MPs not Tories in the House. But you did not reciprocate and I think this ‘politique politicienne’ approach weakens the cause of progressive politics.

I realise that at the moment from your point of view all guns must be turned on the government. But as you seek to rake Labour with gunfire you will end up making holes in progressive politics as a whole and Britain will fall under a reactionary, elitist, isolationist Tory party of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
 
 
Rt Hon Dr Denis MacShane MP

Where is John Leech?

Citizens of the hotly contested Manchester Withington constituency have begun a campaign to expose Liberal Democrat MP John Leech, claiming he has consistently failed to represent his constituents, and failed to take a stand on issues affecting the constituency.

Most notably, John Leech’s failure to stand up and take a position on the much-debated Transport Innovation Fund Proposals has resulted in anger from residents. These proposals will be put to referendum in December and, if passed, will involve a wide-ranging shake up of Manchester’s transport system. The investment will result in changes from cycle provisions to fast-transit bus routes to tramline extensions to a peak-time congestion charge. Lucy Powell, Labour’s PPC for Manchester Withington, favours the proposals, claiming that the benefits to Manchester Withington alone are enormous and that to vote no would put the biggest ever investment in Manchester’s transport system in jeopardy.

Despite the fact that the outcomes of the referendum would hugely affect the residents of his constituency, and that these proposals have been on the table for over a year, it would appear that Liberal Democrat MP John Leech has done his very best to avoid the subject. Despite the extensive and lengthy debate around the issue, residents claim Mr Leech has left it to the final few weeks before the vote to make a decision. At a recent debate on the Congestion Charge he refused to debate, yet still turned up and failed to vote when the audience was asked their opinions on the proposals.

Beyond the transport proposals, Mr Leech has caused further anger. In a recently created facebook group, whose membership is growing fast, creators cite Leech’s failure to attend the House of Commons debate where the Government re-awarded the Post Office Card Account to the Royal Mail. His absence was highlighted by neighbouring MP Sir Gerald Kaufman when, in questioning the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions he said, ‘May I thank him on behalf of the 8,000 of my constituents who are Post Office card account holders—and on behalf of the 6,000 constituents in the constituency of Manchester, Withington, whose Member of Parliament is once again absent from discussion of these matters?’ The group also claims that Mr Leech distributed leaflets on the Climate Change Bill yet did not attend votes on the bill on 9th June 2008 and again on Tuesday 28th October.

These issues of the utmost importance require the attention of a dedicated Member of Parliament. On one of the biggest issues facing Manchester in recent years, the Liberal Democrat MP for Manchester Withington has been notably absent. On other issues too from climate change to the Post Office, John Leech has been missing from public debate and from representing his constituents. These constituents are beginning to fight back. To join the facebook group click here