Wince at Vince

The highly egotistical Vince Cable is in more trouble than is really warranted, after having been "stung" by three Telegraph people into doing what he does best - and most - which is to talk his head off, usually (as in this case) about his own significance.

This has been able to be used to stir up something of a hornet's nest, as he has claimed (when talking to what he had been led to believe were activists from his own party) that he can always walk out of the coalition if he is "pushed too far" and (he thinks) bring the government down.

I don't think so: the first yes, but the second no!

David Laws, as the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, was in a far more significant position that Vince's job as Business Secretary, and Laws's departure hardly "brought the government down", so Cable's claim hardly enhances his reputation for understand much about how real government works. Of course, the Lib Dems don't exactly have a track record in that regard...

Cable is just a silly old fool (as commentators have been saying for a long time, especially during these past two days) with a very lefty background, who has been so obviously uncomfortable with the coalition with the Tories that everyone is already expecting him to walk out at the slightest provocation anyway.

There can be no bombshell from Cable!

So, however much the media play this up, it really isn't of any consequence. The only effect this whole incident will have is going to be even further distrust of the media, including those who pose as party activists (i.e. the dishonest ones).

It won't be the first time that has happened, and for similar reasons; but it all adds to the divide between politicians as a group and the rest of society, when they end up pushed into a mind-set like Private Fraser from the Dad's Army closing sequence, looking about him in an almost panic-stricken manner and suspicious of everything (and, in this case, everyone) around him:

In conclusion: no-one is going to benefit from the Telegraph's scam in the long run - but it's done now and there's no turning the clock back.

UPDATE 22 Dec: it seems that others have come to much the same conclusions that I have, including Jonathon Isaby and Paul Goodman, among others.

UPDATE 24 Dec: Guido has run a poll on whether people believe Vince could bring down the Coalition by resigning. Out of well over four thousand responses, nearly 90% said "no" and under 8% said "yes".

Farron far away

Liberal Democrat president Tim Farron has today responded to what the Spectator's Peter Hoskin refers to as "buttery overtures" from Ed Miliband to Lib Dem members to shift allegiance and join Labour.

Farron - no doubt with the backing of his party's leadership - has firmly rejected that plea from Red, in a statement affirming the value of the Lib Dems in coalition and the positive results that has brought. I cannot argue with that, nor with the killer line:

"Continuing that work is something far more attractive to Liberal Democrats than helping Ed Miliband's increasingly desperate attempts to work out what he actually stands for."

Those two words "increasingly desperate" do seem to sum up Ed-M's personal situation as he has made little impact (though at least there has been some) and the Labour party - despite recent voting intention polls - looks to be heading in the same general direction, if one reads what is happening with any degree of intelligence.

Political Betting also cover the statement (and also reproduce it in full, so there's no real point in my doing so here as well), posing the question "has Tim Farron become the [Liberal Democrat] party's attack dog?" It is a good question; and if true would certainly help to justify their choosing him as their new president. He is certainly pitching his party's current public stance far away from Labour. That might not last more than a few years, of course, but at least for now it is a clear distancing from the Reds.

I think he looks be an  interesting player, and is definitely worth watching!

Meanwhile, 'Red' is in need of friends, as Benedict Brogan shows very clearly. He isn't going anywhere without them; but whether his latest appointment will help him win any remains to be seen, and doesn't seem all that hopeful!

Quote of the day - 12 Dec 2010

Michael (Lord) Ashcroft, commenting in the Sunday Telegraph on his large poll regarding Liberal Democrat support now and at the election, this extract reproduced at ConservativeHome:

"The fact that the coalition decision cost the Lib Dems support does not mean it was wrong, even in partisan terms – though only 49% of their voters thought the decision was right, only 21% thought the party should have formed a coalition with Labour instead, and 30% thought they should have stayed in opposition.

Propping up a defeated Labour Party would have provoked fury, and turning down the chance of government would have meant that millions really did waste their votes, cementing the perception that they were not a serious party. Even many Lib Dem voters who do not much like the current government concede that the party was right to join it."

From Russia, with Mike

Not quite a James Bond story, but Lib Dem MP Mike Hancock's Russian research assistant, 25-year-old Katia Zatuliveter, is currently up for deportation on the charge of being a spy for the Russians' overseas intelligence agency.

Now, Mike Hancock is MP for Portsmouth South, with the naval base nearby, and is on the Defence Select Committee so has access to some quite sensitive military and other defence-related information. It does seem odd that he should get himself a Russian as an aide, especially a young female one who is described as "charming and intelligent".

It's all standard practice by spy agencies of course, and has been for decades (i.e. since at least as far back as the days of the old Soviet Union) as described in Chapman Pincher's famous work Their Trade is Treachery.

Now Mike Hancock has something of a chequered history, much of it documented by Guido in the LibDem category (so it'd need a little skimming through the linked page to find the Hancock stories, but I've done some of it for you), a few of which are possible perjury, before that arrest for indecent assault and here's some more general background info. He is known to be strongly pro-Putin and has had a whole series of Russian assistants over the years. It could all be perfectly innocent, but there's certainly something a bit strange there! Why all these Russians?

As another Lib Dem, Olly Grender, has today tweeted:

"I would be grateful if someone could please tell me just one thing Mike Hancock has ever done to enhance rather than screw up the LibDems"

I suspect he won't be re-selected to stand for the next General Election!