The coalition: from the perspective of a LibDem, has it been a success?

It comes down to each individual person to decide that for themselves, but it should be clear what it should be judged on. Regrettably, that is not what most of the press are judging it by.

1) Are we making important changes to government and policy?

A political party should only be campaigning for a position of power if, when it gets there, it does something worthwhile. If it doesn't do anything, then it doesn't deserve to be in power. Have we been able to introduce important changes to policy? Have we been able to improve some of the terrible wrongs instigated by the last government? Are we solving the problems faced by society? This is the main issue: if the Lib Dems can make Britain a fairer and better place and make the important changes that have been crying out to be made for decades, nothing else matters.

On this count, my answer would be yes. We ended Child Detention. We have inreased Capital Gains and brought in a Bank Levy. We have made it possible for Ken Clarke to oppose the 'Prison Works' canon. We have scrapped ID cards (collectively). We have also basically secured the 4 things on which we campaigned - pupil premium, increased tax threshold, green economy (secondarily through having both Business & Environment Cabinet Ministers) and crucially constitutional reform. This last point is so important to Lib Dems, including myself, that it is worth stomaching everything else.

2) Would it be worse without us?

The alternative to a Lib - Con coalition was a minority Tory government (we're ruling out the coalition of losers, which is not a good idea in any way), which would lead sooner or later to a new election and a likely Tory majority. The important matter then is how much worse would everything we dislike be if we weren't in coalition? How much deeper the cuts? How much more frightening the benefit reform? How much more regressive the ideology?

On two counts, I think, the coalition passes this test. If we hadn't gone in, we'd have played havoc with both the economy (because of the uncertainty), and the chances to achieve PR (because of the perceived impossibility of a hung parliament). Secondly, under a Tory only government everything would undeniably have been worse. People levy the criticism that Cameron is just pretending to be liberal so he can be PM. I agree, but this is better than being honestly conservative. If being a good liberal is the latest turn in Cameron's populism then I encourage it. Wrong reasons, but good consequence.

3) What is it doing to our elecoral chances?

This comes last, and so it should. We do have to think about it, but not that much. We need to do stuff first. That's why, I honestly think, people are Lib Dem and not Labour/Tory. We quite frankly don't give a shit about getting elected. We want to make the country and the way it's run better. That means getting elected, but otherwise we couldn't care less about opinion polls.


It's a shame the media and much of the public seem to care more about the last than the first or second. Lib Dems, and this is as much of an appeal than a statement, shouldn't. Let's think about the credit once we've seen the consequences. If those consequences are good, then who cares about the credit?