1. The number one priority was getting rid of Gordon and his rotten gang. It may sound petty, but this is not for trivial “I hate Labour” reasons, it is because they were irreversibly wrecking the country
2. This leads on to the Guido lead idea that here is an opportunity to possibly destroy forever the kind of Labour agenda that periodically comes along to lay waste to a sound economy, pursue narrow vindictive ends, supporting the worst kind of interest groups. It is an opportunity that we should at least try.
3. Electoral reform? Well the current system is obviously flawed. How about these suggestions (not original). The point is that “electoral reform” does not equate to “proportional representation”:
– fixed or maximum term parliaments
– maximum of 2 terms for any one Prime Minister
– roughly equal constituency sizes
All of which would make the system fairer, and remove the biases and abuses that Gordon has just been demonstrating, which brings us to..
4. Proportional representation.
The Knife finds it a bit odd that certain Lib Dems are obsessed by this. It’s not PR that has brought them to the brink of the Cabinet, it’s realistic mature negotiation. Furthermore, if there was a referendum, they would lose. **
Whatever Gordon has offered, it is Labour that has most to lose from PR, even if it doesn’t benefit the Tories either. Truly, Gordon is the most short termist politician that we have ever been burdened with. What a chancer.
But Dave should avoid offering anything other than an enquiry on this, and still reform the electoral system as listed above.
5. At a time of unprecedented stasis and confusion – Friday morning – Dave came up with a decisive and measured speech. He showed leadership in its true form and should be applauded for it. He will steady the economy.
6. Dave is also a real tactician and will be thinking three moves ahead. Tories need to trust this.
7. Ideally one would keep Cable away from any power, and Gove must stay.
The acceptable top three LD’S? Cleggy, Laws and…er…Charlie Kennedy (Scottish Secretary).
Standing back, history show that there are changes in politics which are long lasting, and there are changes which will rapidly implode if they’re unworkable. It would be foolish to presume that this Lib Con arrangement is doomed.
A second election would then be inevitable. This week it’s all about the economy.
PS: The Knife was wrong about a Tory majority, and lost money on it. The remaining pleasure however will be watching Gordon being carried out of no 10. Handcuffed.
**Update: John “vampire” Rentoul puts it nicely in today’s Indy:
“Indeed, there is so much muddled thinking on the subject of the voting system that one hardly knows where to begin. So let us start with Willie Sullivan, of Vote for a Change, who issued a press release while Cameron was addressing the nation about his “big, open and comprehensive offer” to the Lib Dems. “Right now, David Cameron is on all the news channels, announcing how he’s planning to form a government… his Conservatives having secured only 36 per cent of the vote nationwide,” wrote Sullivan. “It’s outrageous. But it’s not surprising, is it? This is what our broken system produces: broken elections.”
Not usually, actually. Our “broken” system usually produces decisive election results, such as Tony Blair’s majority of 66 five years ago, won on 36 per cent of the vote. Anyone who supports PR, which is the purpose of Sullivan’s campaign, ought to celebrate the result. Cameron, having won a minority of the vote, is forced to negotiate to put together a government that secures the consent of parties representing a majority. But blinkered thinkers see only a progressive coalition as representing the will of the people; they shut themselves off from the possibility that a centre-right coalition is its more popular or more authentic expression.”