LIBERAL Democrat Solihull MP Lorely Burt has defended her party’s coalition with the Conservatives after a backlash from some party supporters.The MP told The Silhillian that the Parliamentary deal offered a stable Government and the prospect of electoral reform for the Lib Dems’ coveted proportional representation system.
Some Lib Dems are unhappy about the coalition and The Guardian today reports the MP has received hundreds of angry emails.
Click the headline or link below to read the rest of this story.
Mrs Burt – narrowly re-elected over the Tories last week – said she was ‘amazed’ by David Cameron’s offer of talks that was ‘open, conciliatory and even respectful’.
Lib Dem talks with Labour – which angered many Tories – was important to get the ‘best deal’ and showed the Conservatives they were not the ‘only game in town’.
Yet she said the talks were ‘disappointing’ compared to the ‘very open’ Conservatives.
She said: “We could have refused to work with anyone and kept our principles ‘pure’.
“However, having talked about proportional representation for so long, rejecting the first chance to demonstrate coalition government can work in Britain as it does all over the Continent would have been cowardly and self-defeating.”
A minority Tory Government would have led to a second election in October, she said.
Mrs Burt’s full statement is below:
“Well it’s been exciting times for the last few weeks in politics here in Solihull and nationally. Personally speaking, I’ve had quite enough excitement for some time to come!
I would like to start by thanking everyone who supported me both before and during the election period. I cannot begin to tell you about the hard work and dedication of the volunteers who stuffed enveloped, delivered leaflets, displayed posters and manned the office.
Of course, all this effort means nothing without the votes of people who put their trust in me to serve them for another term. I am immensely grateful and feel truly humbled.
Since the election there has been a seismic shift in British politics, the likes of which we have not seem in peacetime for over 70 years. The British people voted for three, not two, main parties, and despite the voting system which does not directly link number of seats with votes cast, we ended up with no party having an overall majority.
This had been portrayed as a recipe for disaster by other parties, while smaller parties like the Scottish Nationalists were licking their lips at the prospect of the deals they could extort from the ruling party as a price for their co-operation.
The story of what happened is fascinating. Here’s my take on it.
David Cameron immediately announced an offer to work in coalition with the Liberal Democrats. Having been used to every statement from him having a barb or an insult, I was amazed at the tone of the offer, which was open, conciliatory and even respectful.
Following our promise to open negotiations with whoever got the greatest mandate, we began talks with the Conservatives. However, following this and a call from Gordon Brown, we did subsequently meet with the Labour negotiating team.
We were criticised for this, but it seemed to us fair because we wanted the best deal to fulfil our own manifesto promises and therefore what we considered to be the best deal for Britain. (For negotiating purposes it didn’t hurt either to let the Conservatives know they were not the only game in town either!)
However, the first meeting with the Labour team was disappointing, while the Conservatives were very open and willing to consider almost all of our demands. This proved to be the continuing picture as steam ran out of the Labour negotiations and an announcement was made that talks had actually broken down, which was news to us.
It should also be noted that a coalition or other arrangement would have involved not only working with a labour party which is riven with divisions and distracted by a leadership race: it would also have involved a rag-tag and bobtail of small parties who would have wanted their ‘pound of flesh’ as a price of co-operation.
Now some people see working with the Conservatives as a betrayal of Labour leaning voters who supported us to keep the Conservatives out. I understand their feelings, but the options facing us were stark.
We could have refused to work with anyone and kept our principles ‘pure’. However, having talked about proportional representation for so long, rejecting the first chance to demonstrate coalition government can work in Britain as it does all over the Continent would have been cowardly and self-defeating.
If we had left the Conservatives to go it alone, two things would have happened. Firstly, in desperate economic times, the country would have no stable government and they would have had huge difficulties in getting economic measures through Parliament. This would have made our economic situation worse, meaning more job losses, more company failures, less money to run our services and even the spectre of seeing Britain go the same way as Greece.
The second outcome of this would be that because of the political and economic uncertainties, the Conservatives would almost certainly have called another election in the Autumn, saying that only with first-past-the-post can you get the strong government you need to take decisive action to get us out of the economic mire. I believe 14th October was already pencilled in.
And they would in all probability they would have got a huge mandate: tossing any hope of PR or of re-election into the long grass for a generation.
If we talk about grown-up collaborative politics we have to walk the walk. It’s going to be an extremely hard path which will have many twists and turns: but better to be on the path than in the mire.”
