Petulant Lib Dems betray their principles and the people

Published on Sunday 13 May 2007 01:13

MY three-year-old grandson Jack has a way of showing you when he is not pleased. He announces "I not happy!" then, head in hands, goes into a tragic scene with heartbreaking sobs. Thirty seconds later, especially after a sweetie, he is once again a little ray of sunshine.

I am thinking of nominating him as leader of the Liberal Democrats in Scotland - although I suspect he is a bit too grown-up for them.

Not for the first time, the Lib Dems are playing the politics of the pram. After a mediocre performance at the polls, they have thrown out their toys and refuse to play with any of their nursery-mates.

They are in official huff, turning down the chance to continue in coalition government, snubbing both SNP and Labour and preferring to sulk on the Holyrood backbenches. It does not matter to them that they are betraying one of the few principles (certainly the most important) their party has: proportional representation and consensus politics.

They fought for PR for the Scottish Parliament and local councils, yet they are not prepared to accept the inevitable consequences. The whole point is that it must result in stalemate followed by negotiation and alliances.

An even worse betrayal is that they are flouting the nation's best interests. A responsible political party would be entering government for the benefit of a stable Scotland, holding the balance of power and acting as a moderating influence on Alex Salmond and his independence-mad Nats.

Real politicians would rise to the challenge; they would not go off in a strop. But since when were the Lib Dems real politicians?

They are a mish-mash of the fag-ends of failed and defunct 19th and 20th-century parties, from the Whigs and National Liberals to the suicidal Liberals (remember Jeremy Thorpe?) and the treacherous Social Democrats (remember the Gang of Four?).

For too long it has been easy to dismiss them as the muddle-in-the-middle party with all-things-to-all-men beliefs, more interested in posturing than policies. Their leadership north and south of the Border tells us all we need to know about them - first, Charles Kennedy at Westminster and Jim Wallace at Holyrood, followed by Ming Campbell and Nicol Stephen. Or to put it another way: lightweight, bland and ineffectual.

Charlie's problems deserve only our sympathy, but Jim Wallace was nothing more than a smiling cipher as Deputy First Minister. After the party's poor showing across the UK in last week's elections, the Ming dynasty is in danger and unkind contenders are pointing out he will be nearly 70 come the next UK election.

And then there is Nicol (who he?) Stephen; the question is being asked even after the weeks of election exposure. In the last parliament, the title 'Nicol Stephen, Enterprise Minister' was a contradiction in terms and he became known as the 'Inertia Minister'.

Now he is noticeable for his absence from the poker table of coalition talks. Tavish Scott has emerged as the Scottish party's hard man and the conjecture is that namby-pamby Master Nicol has been locked in his bedroom.

Given all that, we might suppose the Lib Dems would be grateful still to be regarded as a potential party of government, thanks to the vagaries of PR voting. We might even think they would leap at the chance of another four years of bums on the backseats of ministerial limousines.

Instead, they are opting for opposition and will not even sit down with Alex Salmond to see what is on offer and whether consensus can be reached. They are tired, poor things, of losing elections and propping up other parties in power so they will take a rest, regroup and rethink.

Places in a Nationalist-led Scottish Executive are theirs for the asking. After hemming and hawing, Alex Salmond would have to make the necessary concession of kicking an independence referendum into the long grass.

All but the diehard 'fundies' would forgive Salmond for selling out so they can get their hands on power for a full four years to prove that the SNP can govern Scotland, meanwhile creating the conflicts with the London government which would make fed-up Scots vote for breakaway.

It would be understandable if Stephen appeared on the steps of St Andrew's House after days and nights of wrangling and said there were too many deal-breakers. Not even to try is a dereliction of duty.

In opposition, if they run true to form, the Lib Dems will waffle to little effect. They are passing up on the chance to implement large chunks of the manifesto on which they have just fought. On energy, global warming, Trident, council tax reform, and business taxes, they are a snug fit with the SNP; and their demands for federalism, greater powers for Holyrood and reconvening the Scottish Constitutional Convention place them closer to the Nationalist position than any other party.

The people will not forgive them for the petulance which will create four years of instability and uncertainty - if Salmond's minority government lasts that long. They will ask: what is the point of voting for a do-nothing party?

By turning their backs on power, the Lib Dems could be self-destructing in Scotland. At least, that would leave the field clear for grown-up politicians.