Why students should join the Lib Dems

Hats off to Team Clegg for another fantastic piece of spin. The whole of the press lobby in Westminster appears to have bought the line that the Liberal Democrat parliamentary party is discussing abstentions for ministers on the crunch student fees vote to avoid “embarrassment”. How different, and much more embarrassing, the truth really is for Nick Clegg.

From the National Union of Students' pledge that Lib Dem MPs signed, there are only three ways out that do not destroy trust and trash a politician's brand. To vote against a rise in student fees. To resign your seat and stand for re-election in a by-election. Or to persuade the world that the rise in fees is in fact part of a bigger package that is, in the round, a good thing.

Leading his party in voting against is out for Clegg because it would be an explosive violation of the Coalition Agreement and might well lead to a new general election. With the Lib Dems stuck at 10 per cent in the opinion polls, that would be suicide.

Low poll ratings also rule out the by-election route.

Only the third route of persuasion is left. The best outcome here would be for the NUS to endorse the government’s proposals as a decent compromise in hard times and “release” Lib Dem MPs from their pledge. This is why the government has periodically opened the door to the NUS, eg by inviting its president to attend John Browne’s personal tutorial on his proposals with with Clegg, David Cameron and Ed Miliband.

But the NUS doesn’t think the proposals are even close to acceptable. Hence Clegg and Cable have tried to go over the union’s head and appeal directly to students and elected officers in individual universities. As the sit ins this week demonstrate, that, too, has failed.

Next best would be to persuade the Lib Dem party that the proposals are progressive. But - and this is where Team Clegg’s spin has been so brilliant - that, too, has failed.

The Federal Policy Committee has reiterated the party’s opposition to raising tuition fees. And the recent elections strengthened the hand of the social liberals who are so problematic for Clegg on this issue, putting Evan Harris at the top of the poll and installing Tim Farron - an avowed rebel on fees - as party president.

So this is the real reason why Clegg is discussing the option of ministers abstaining on the crunch vote with the parliamentary party. Because voting with the government would be a violation of party policy and he does not want to risk civil war with his own party. His attempt at persuasion, to lead his party to a new place, has failed. Clegg simply doesn’t have the clout of Cameron or Miliband and could be accused of being a prisoner of party activists. Now that really is embarrassing.

But, with the notable exception of the BBC’s Nick Robinson, the press lobby down in Parliament seems to have become so used to Conservative and Labour leaders ignoring their party that it has bought Team Clegg’s spin and forgotten that the Lib Dems have always said they are different and really believe in party democracy. Now the party has proved it, albeit very discreetly.

Clegg is now in a political cul-de-sac. Even if he can twist enough arms and do enough deals to report back to Cameron that he has the numbers to guarantee victory for the government in the crunch vote before Christmas, he has no political cover. If he sticks with supporting the current policy, he is also sticking with a decision to trash his brand.

For universities, the risk is that Clegg decides the brand is more important than good relations with Cameron. In that case, all bets are off and the Valley of Death looms.

For students, there is a counter-intuitive conclusion. If you lean to the progressive side (as presumably most of the protesters do) and want to make a difference, which party should you join? Join Labour and you know you will be turning yourself into cannon fodder. Join the Lib Dems and it is now clear that you really can make a difference. Hang the effigies by all means. But Clegg’s despair is in fact a great reason to get one of those yellow membership cards.

Comments

[alice]

OK, but students are only one possible lobbying group in all of this. Important, yep, but only one.

Hence idea for a public commission.

Or would you just say humanities tutors should join the Lib Dems too?

[AndrewM]

Mr Bown, I have found your blog posts on the tuition fees issue very enlightening. Have you read pages 123-124 of the OBR's report today? It has some interesting estimates of the impact of the tuition fee rises on the public finances (£13 billion added to the national debt) and BIS' estimate that the average fee charged will be £7,500 (a nice round number, suspiciously).

http://budgetresponsibility.independent.gov.uk/d/econ_fiscal_outlook_291110.pdf

[William Cullerne Bown]

Alice - a public commission would be a godsend for Clegg but I see no sign of the Conservatives being willing to entertain the idea. The reverse in fact - the tactic of going for a simple vote to raise the cap on fees before Xmas seems calculated to force a crisis within the Lib Dems.

Andrew - thanks for the tip. Just taking a look now...

[Cicero]

Alice - National debt increases of course, but not the deficit. Note this line:

"However, financial transactions do not score directly in accrued measures of the deficit such as net borrowing, because the Government’s
overall net liability position has not changed."

[EcoJon]

William - an interesting read but I'm afraid that I don't agree with your conclusion that students can make a difference by joining the LibDems.

The party already has an established detailed party policy on tuition fees and made a specific Manifesto Commitment. We then have the difficulty of the individual pledges supporting the NUS position.

Problem is all this was ignored by Clegg and a small clique who secretly decided in March to ditch the policy should there be a coalition government.

What blind bit of difference would NUS students joining the LibDems make to Clegg and his clique who have already ridden roughshod over party policy.

[William Cullerne Bown]

@EcoJon - You see it just as the journalists do, that what Clegg says is the last word on the subject. But this argument is still not finished, that is why there is so much mess and confusion around at the moment. Look at the people who don't agree with Clegg: Kennedy, Campbell, Farron, Hughes. All have said they are either going to vote against or (in Hughes case) that he doesn't accept the party will renege on the pledge. And these luminaries are buttressed by the party's policy and support from the key party organs such as the Federal Policy Committee. See my latest post on this, http://exquisitelife.researchresearch.com/exquisite_life/2010/12/tuition-fees-playbook-the-key-events-and-decisions-in-the-next-five-days.html

[EcoJon]

Hi - you have put Cicero's name on my post and I assume the post with my name on it is probably Cicero's.

[EcoJon]

William - perhaps I see it the way journalists do because a vast period of my working life was spent in journalism - some good bits rubbed off on me though as well as the bad :)

I read your other post earlier and I've got to say that I find it inconceivable that the LibDems in Parly can countenance a 3-way split as it would be the seed to destroy the party and would set in motion serious moves to unseat Clegg as leader.

But if the Tories win the vote through LibDem abstentions and some ministerial votes I don't really think it will matter as the LibDem Parly Party will implode.

But we're in the OK Corral at the moment with Cleg and pledge backers staring eyeball to eyeball waiting to see who will blink first.

If Clegg doesn't blink he may win the vote but ultimately destroy his party. Clegg is no loss but there are a lot of good people in the LibDems and it would be a loss if the party went because you inevitably sicken people and they drift off into the political wilderness sometimes never to return.

There's plenty of other contentious issues coming up where the media will be able to inflict serious damage and as they have already smelt blood they will be merciless re Clegg.

[Cicero]

I get the feeling that the students have brought this upon themselves in many ways. They have always engaged in a shallow debate, starting with the position that tuition fees were immoral. "Education should be free," and stuff of that sort. It always appeared as if they would have been perfectly ok even if the Government had let the Universities tank as long as they didn't ask the students to pay anything.

Instead, the students should have focused on what the Government was providing to them. They should have engaged in the process of funding for the Universities and the challenges the Governments were facing. Rather than asking "what are you asking us to pay?" they should have rather asked "what are you paying for us?" If they had framed the question in terms of what the Government was paying, it would not have been possible for the Lib Dems and Tories to stab them in the back with such ease.

The public has gotten used to this. Whenever the tuition fees are raised, the students complain. So, what is new? Well, what is new is that the Government has essentially privatised Higher Education. The teaching grant has essentially been cut down to zero. Yet, the Government has been able to get away with murder, projecting it as just as another tuition fee rise. The students have cried wolf so often that nobody bothers this time.

How sad is that? Do you get it, Mr. Bown?

[William Cullerne Bown]

Yes, the reforms are radical. And that's the advantage the government gets from moving fast. Their real character doesn't really come out. Labour's vague graduate tax line hasn't helped either.