Ian Dale is speculating that David Laws is about to defect to the blue rinses.
He may be right for all I know, although I suspect that if he were he’d be keeping his gob shut. But there is one point I would take issue with:
I’m told he only joined the LibDems in the first place because he felt the Conservatives were too illiberal on sexual issues … [This] is transparently untrue nowadays…
Huh? Is this another Conservative Party of which I was not previously acquainted? It is certainly true that there are a number of openly gay prominent Tories these days (Iain is of course one of them), but anyone who thinks the Tories are now the party of tolerance are in for a big surprise.
My challenge to Iain Dale is to visit Guido Fawkes’ blog and then come back and tell me that rampant homophobia isn’t still endemic in the modern Conservative Party.
Blood and Treasure (via Tim Worstall) has a couple of pertinent points to make to Guido and his Monkey pal as well.
The conservative party is as it has been for years; a loose collection of rascists, homophobes, eurosceptics, fraudsters, corrupt hacks and people whose ancestors have voted tory for generations and are too lazy to think. Oh and one ‘modern progressive liberal’ conservative, whatever that little oxymoron means (progressive, liberal conservatism? The round square party!)
I hope there was no hint of an inference that I am a homophobe. If there is, please come out and say it so that I might strongly defend my name.
But to the subject of your post: What we are seeing with the convergence of LibDem and Tory thinking is the illumination of the lie that there is a “progressive consensus” between Labour and the LibDems. At heart LibDems thinkers are soft Tories. Excluding their strengths on the war and top-up fees, all their success has been on the basis of being like tories but nicer.
University top up fees is an interesting example in that the LibDems instinctively opposed this measure, which acts as a progressive tax on the wealthy, contains lots of safeguards for the poor, and really should have been more difficult for the LibDems to oppose than it actually was. Their opposition without debate or compromise on this matter was based on electoral opportunism.
The LibDems have looked pretty left wing in recent years – again because of political opportunism – and if there is a resurgence in the right, then that is how the unprincipled hacks among their number will choose to portray themselves.
I will exclude their stance on the war as an example of their opportunism as i sincerely believe the vast majority of LibDem members opposed it on principle. Coincidentally, so did the vast majority of Labour members and there is a valid question of accountability to be answered.
I’m just looking forward to PR for the Commons because under that system, there will be easier entry and exit from the electoral free market. This will mean that a second, anti-war but ostensibly Labour party would have scooped most of the lefty protest votes just as a second, not-right-wing-loon tory party would have collected most of the protest votes that the Tories lost to the LibDems in the 90s.
The advantage to the LibDems of PR is that they will be reduced to their rump – which is those few old Liberals who actually know what it is for which they stand.
Recess Monkey
http://www.recessmonkey.com
recessmonkey@gmail.com
I certainly think you have a smutty and childish obsession with politicians’ sexuality (even before this weekend) which borders on the homophobic, yes. But the twittering commentators on your blog are far worse, I’ll happily admit, which is why I was referring to you all in the collective sense.
Amazing how bitter and twisted Dale has become after the severe kicking doled out to him by the North Norfolk electorate.
Also how easily the press will swallow Tory lies as spin.
As for Adrian Graves – well it sums up all that’s been said about the PCA.
Apart from being a member, obviously, what role did Graves have on the PCA? Given Harold Elletson’s outburst before Christmas and his links to the PCA, this may be significant.
Actually, having read the transcript of that podcast, courtesy of Mr Tim Ireland, I have to say that if Guido isn’t a homophobe, he’s the Rory Bremner of homophiliacs.
Tim hasn’t done a transcript of the podcast – he’s done ten seconds of a thirteen minute audio session. In percentage terms, we were quite well behaved