Regressive Libservatism

I never thought I'd find myself writing this post.

I'm sitting in front of BBC news as it announces that Clegg and Cameron, after having already spoken on the phone, will continue talks this evening on the possibility of some kind of collaborative deal to form a functioning government.

I was among the many thousands of voters who were attracted to the Liberal Democrats as the new 'progressives', offering policies on immigration, defense and Europe that seemed far to the left of Labour. In the end I opted for Labour as I was concerned that the main party of the left should maintain a strong second place. But I engaged in endless debates with my friends and family about whether to cast a vote for the Lib Dems to support their seemingly progressive agenda. Many of those friends and family ended up opting for the Lib Dems, many of them with the objective to 'keep the Tories out'.

Though Clegg's revealing protestations about the primacy of the individual and his rejection of collectivism gave me some concern, there was a general consensus that it would be impossible for the Lib Dems to form any kind of coalition with the Tories, and so a stronger turnout for the Lib Dems would send a strong message to Labour that the time had come to promote a progressive agenda. Then came Clegg's assertion prior to the election that the Party with the most seats and the most votes would have the mandate to 'try' to form a government. More concern still. But better judgment told me, and many of my left-wing friends who chose to vote for them, that this was simply 'posturing' by a man so committed to democratic representation.

So it came as somewhat of a shock when, as the results became clear, Nick Clegg chose to announce the Conservatives as the only Party with the mandate to govern. Significantly, his announcement came ahead even of Gordon Brown's own very statesmanlike speech where he acknowledged the appropriateness for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems to engage in negotiations on forming a government. As it happens, in this speech Gordon Brown publicly agreed to forgo his constitutional right as the sitting Prime Minister to form a government - but Clegg could at least have respected the right of the incumbent PM to make that call.

Quite aside from the premature nature of Clegg's announcement, there are a number of serious reasons why the Lib Dems should not form a coalition with the Tories:

Even entertaining the notion of forming an alliance with the Tories betrays a fundamental disrespect for thousands of people who voted for the Lib Dems either to keep the Tories out, or as a vote for a 'progressive Party'. Clegg deliberately appealed to the progressive vote throughout all three elections with his strong positions on immigration and Trident.

As there is far more in common between the Lib Dems and Labour as there is between the Lib Dems and the Tories, it can safely be said that there is a 'progressive mandate' in this country for a centre-left government, as the Lib Dems and Labour together command 53% of the vote. For Clegg to side with the Tories shows a misunderstanding of that mandate

There is an inherent contradiction between Clegg claiming that voting reform is 'non-negotiable' as the current system is fundamentally undemocratic and unrepresentative, whilst simultaneously being a slave to its results. The Tories have nowhere near an overall majority of either the popular vote or the seats in parliament.

It is clear that the Tories will never agree to a referendum on electoral reform that they wouldn't campaign against as a Party. Clegg would be insane to agree to a referendum that the leading Party would rally against, using the vast sums of funding at its disposal from the likes of Lord Goldsmith. In which case the only alternative would be some paltry 'inquiry' into electoral reform that would never deliver what the Lib Dems want.

This being the case, it seems likely that the Lib Dems will agree to prop up the Tories on a policy-by-policy basis, which would mean sacrificing the one policy that is most important to them: voting reform. Through propping up the Tories for a transitional period, this would undoubtedly lead to an overall Tory majority at any election that may be called in the near future, and the Lib Dems would have lost their political and moral integrity for nothing, as an overall Tory majority would destroy any possibility of PR.

Lastly, and most importantly, if Clegg wants to do what is best for the country he should agree to form a government on the basis of common progressive principles - and this is more likely between Labour and the Lib Dems than in some 'Libservative' coalition. The Tories have demonstrated time and time again that they are still the Party of the rich, and the notion of George Osborn running our economy at such turbulent times is nothing short of frightening.

For all the reasons outlined above, if Clegg goes in with the Tories it may mark the end of the Liberal Democrats as a credible Party in this country - their showings in this election were already disappointing. If they alienate the progressive left who gave them the surge in the polls that they apparently deserved, they risk consigning their party to the history books forever.