Liberal democrats

Nick Boles proposed electoral pact (£) between the coalition partners would have a clear benefit for the Conservatives, it would make a deal between Labour and the Liberal Democrats after the next election impossible. That is quite a prize for the Conservatives. It would mean that David Cameron would continue as PM as long as the two parties between them held a majority of seats in the Commons. It is less clear what the Liberal Democrats would gain from it. Yes, it would help more of their MPs survive, but it would tie their hands ahead of another hung parliament and massively reduce their ability to claim that they are a distinct political party rather than just an adjunct to the Conservatives.

The 8.10 Today programme slot this morning went to Nick Clegg. The programme wanted to discuss with the deputy PM the BBC’s finding that those areas most dependent on the state would be hit hardest by the coming cuts, for some reason this statement of the obvious is regarded as news. But John Humphrys, in his haste to interrupt the deputy PM, made some statements deserving of further scrutiny.   First, Humphrys suggested that the cuts will take place before Christmas. They won’t. Unlike the cuts announced in the immediate aftermath of the election, these are not in-year cuts.   Next, Humphrys claimed that the economy is at ‘stall-speed.’ But growth in the second quarter was 1.

Some day soon – unless the coalition has already lost its bottle – a bill will be introduced to 'part-privatise' Royal Mail. It has to be done. But it will be a tough sell, for four reasons. First, the market for the Royal Mail's product is shrinking. It's a big fish, but its pool is getting smaller. It carries 75 million letters a day, but that's down by 10 million just in the last five years. And 87 percent is mail sent by businesses. Apart from Christmas cards, the rest of us now correspond by email. Last year's pre-tax loss was £262m: the reality is that the business is insolvent.   Second, the Royal Mail is decrepit.

MPs are back today from their long summer recess, and the Political and Constitutional Reform Bill is right at the top of the agenda. This is likely to dominate politics for the immediate future, since it might have profound effects on how politics in this country operates.   The Bill combines two different reforms in one package – the referendum on changing the electoral system to the Alternative Vote (AV) and reducing and equalising constituencies. These two issues address what Nick Clegg has called the “deep unfairness” in the electoral system. This unfairness is exemplified by the last two elections: Labour won a majority of 66 with a vote share of 35.3 percent and a lead of just 3 percent in 2005; in 2010 the Conservatives gained more votes (36.

Curious times, getting curiouser, for Nick Clegg. The Lib Dem leader might have thought that bringing his party into government would ensure him a triumphant reception at their conference in two weeks. But, instead, he faces a number of stories that could unsettle proceedings. Today, we hear that more Liberal Democrat councillors have resigned in what they claim is protest at the cuts being implemented by central government. What's more, a number of Lib Dem figures have added their voices to the general cacophony surrounding Andy Coulson. And that's before we consider the underlying, but most urgent, threat to the stability of the coalition: the Lib Dems' spluttering poll position. But Clegg should not be unduly concerned.

The ever-pugnacious Ed Balls was on the Today Programme this morning denouncing Tony Blair for saying that the coalition was, broadly, right in its deficit reduction plans. As Balls warmed to his task, he started reeling off Blair’s failings—his advocacy of entry into the euro, his one-sided account of things in his autobiography and the like— and I wondered: if this is his opinion of the man he called Labour’s greatest ever-leader, what on earth does he think of the other men who have led the party?   But in all seriousness, the coalition needs to start hitting back at the ‘growth denier’ charge that Balls keeps hurling at them.

On Monday, I wrote that the question of whether the Budget is fair or not will "pursue the coalition more doggedly than any other". Yesterday, we saw just how dogged that pursuit will be. But there's no need for the coalition to panic as Mark Hoban did on the Today Programme yesterday. Instead, with policies from welfare reform to low taxes for low-income earners, they have built a firm redoubt from which to stage a counterattack. They can put the chase to their opponents. It is encouraging to see Nick Clegg do just that with an effective article in the FT today. He was bluntly dismissive of the IFS report yesterday, calling the organisation's work "partial".

Nick Clegg is eviscerated by this morning's press. The Independent, The FT and The Guardian gleefully report that the influential IFS has decreed the Budget (supposedly a model of fairness according to Clegg) to be regressive, that there is discontent fomenting on the Lib Dem benches and that the latest polls place Lib Dem support at 12 percent. None of this is news. The IFS is reiterating what it argued on Budget day: Osborne’s measures will hit the poorest in 2014-15. That is still some way off and action can be taken to lessen their impact. Besides, the coalition should have delivered its promise to raise the income tax threshold to £10,000 by 20-14-25.