"The Commonwealth of Britain" - Republican UK Wikibox TL

[powerab]

Osborne had a strong relationship with Senator Danny Alexander, who often acted as a go-between for Osborne and Cable

“The bombshell rise in VAT will lead to 235,000 job losses and put a permanent dent in the living standards of every family in the country, economists warn. Vince Cable’s decision to hike VAT from 17.5% to 20% from January will raise £12bn a year in extra taxes. The biggest revenue-raising measure in this week's Budget. But experts say it will have serious consequences for both the economy and the living standards of millions of families. They warn those on low and middle incomes will suffer the most. There was also growing anger over the decision to press ahead with the move only weeks after the coalition assured voters they would not raise VAT. Signs are growing that disaffected Lib Dem MPs could even stage a Commons rebellion over the issue. A group of independent economists, said the move would increase unemployment by 240,000 over the next decade and reduce GDP by 1.4% over the same period. Professor David Smith said his Budget modelling suggested that the decision on VAT was ' a mistake'.” - VAT rises will cost 240,000 jobs, Jason Groves, The Daily Mail (2009)

It was budget day in the Commonwealth, after weeks of negotiations between Cable, Howard and Osborne, dubbed the “three horsemen of austerity” by the left wing press, the national budget was now ready to present to the public. The headlines included the introduction of a new online “portal” where members of the public could see the salaries of any public sector worker earning over £150,000 and could see a detailed breakdown of all Government spending over £25,000. Howard hailed this as a “new age of transparency.” Howard based the plan on the Missouri Accountability Portal. A US website set up in the state of Missouri that provided citizens with a single point of reference to review how money was being spent. Howard was proud of the site. "It will show you why transparency is such a powerful tool in controlling public spending. It can have an especially powerful effect when it comes to salaries."

Another headline was a personal pet peeve of Osborne’s reducing Brown’s 50p tax rate for higher earners to 45p, rumours said that Howard had been keen to abolish the tax altogether but that this had been overruled by Cable. This was paid by a massive increase in Value Added Tax, by 2.5%, raising it 20%. This raised £12bn for the Government. However VAT was widely known as a heavily regressive tax, hitting the poorest the worst. This was protested by Labour and many back-bench Lib Dem MPs, as well as being incredibly unpopular with the public at large.

Islington Mayor Jeremy Corbyn was one of those who condemned the increase in income tax, saying it would hit communities like his the worst

Cable in his budget emphasised the managing and reduction of interest rates, referring to interest control as “radical monetary activism.” Cable stated that controlling interest rates and the national debt was the best way to repair Britain’s monetary strength. The budget also cut corporation taxes and “simplified” income tax into just four different tax bands. Most continuously the budget announced cuts to the Department of Work and Pensions in the name of “welfare reform.” The DWP, under the leadership of right-wing Michael Gove, announced 7bn of “efficiency savings” by cracking down on “fraudulent benefit claimants” and “top civil servant pay.” With the target being a cut of £17bn by 2014.

Gove announced a new form of benefits named "Universal Credit." To be detailed in a White Paper to be published in early 2010. Gove pledged Universal Credit would. Cut the complexity of the benefit system, reduce the risks for people making the transition into and out of work. Alongside this it would create a simpler system that would be cheaper to run and minimise the opportunities for fraud and error. Gove emphasised the importance that work be made the simpler and more attractive option. He pledged to "root out welfare dependency." Claiming welfare reforms would "reduce the inter-generational poverty that blights communities." Universal Credit was controversial to say the least, Labour Senator Liam Byrne condemned it as cutting “too much too quickly.” Presidential Candidate Gordon Brown said whilst Labour accepted the need for cuts, coalition cuts were going too far and falling on the most vulnerable. Green MP Romayne Phoenix went a step further and called for a Universal Basic Income of £70 a week.

Despite the controversy the budget passed through with only six Lib Dem MPs and three Senators rebelling against the Government. Britain’s first austerity budget, and Osborne’s first major challenge had passed.

“I'd like to focus on another part of Cable's speech - his comments about borrowing. In yesterday's blog I said: "debt cannot rise without raising doubts about the ability to repay. In effect, the British coalition thinks that the UK reached that point some time ago. This is why they decided against a mass-stimulus package. One of Osborne's advisers has pointed out that this was not quite the Conservatives' view. They thought that Britain was in danger of reaching that point quite soon, so the stimulus was not a risk worth taking. That may sound like a distinction without a difference (and, I should say, this adviser wasn't demanding a retraction.). But in fact it does matter, and it shows up a key challenge for the coalition as we wrap up the budget. To see why, you only need to look at Cable's speech. He devoted the bulk of his remarks on how to build a safer financial system for the future. But he can't resist a brief victory lap on the right and wrongs of fiscal stimulus.” - A Conservative Budget, Stephanie Flanders, BBC (2009)

The tense budget negotiations were described in Cable's 2016 book "After the Storm"

However the Commonwealth’s problems did not end there, in the Department of Health, Britain’s first case of swine flu was confirmed in Scotland, with a handful of cases popping up in Redditch, Dorset and London. Swine Flu was the first flu pandemic in 40 years - the last in 1968 killed about one million people. But, the pandemic started moderately and caused mild illness in most people. Most cases occurred in young working age adults and a third to a half of complications were presenting in otherwise healthy people. The flu had killed nearly 200 people in Mexico and was quickly spreading to Europe.

The Commonwealth’s response was led by Health Secretary David Howarth/ Howarth announced the government planned to use its stockpile of antiviral drugs to treat patients. Howarth drew the line at the wearing of face masks. "We are aware that facemasks are being given out to the public in Mexico. The available scientific evidence does not support the general wearing of face masks by those who are not ill." Howarth was also confident Britain would be able to combat the virus. "We have established a stockpile of enough antivirals to treat more than 30m people, that is to say nearly half of the UK population." A few days after the Howarth’s announcements over 100 cases of Swine Flu had been reported in the Commonwealth.

“Mortality in this pandemic compares favourably with 20th century influenza pandemics. A lower population impact than previous pandemics, but, is not a justification for public health inaction. Our data support the priority vaccination of high risk groups. We observed delayed antiviral use in most fatal cases. This suggests an opportunity to reduce deaths by making timely antiviral treatment available. The lack of a control group limits the ability to extrapolate from this observation. A large minority of deaths occur before healthy people. There is a case for extending the vaccination programme.” - Mortality from pandemic A/H1N1 2009 influenza in England, Public Health England (2009)

Swine Flu would hit hardest poor areas of London like Tower Hamlets

As if the budget and a virus wasn’t enough, in May 2009, two months before the Presidential Election, The Daily Telegraph obtained a full copy of all Parliamentary expenses claims. The Telegraph began publishing, in instalments from May 2009, certain MPs' expenses. The information originated from the parliamentary fees office. The whistleblower offered it to other newspaper organisations for more than £150,000. The assistant editor of the Telegraph, revealed that the newspaper had paid £110,000 for the information. He described it as ‘money well spent in the public interest’. The Times and The Sun had turned down an offer to buy the leaked expenses file. The report from the Telegraph that whilst in Government Labour Ministers had abused the expensive system for their own gain. Whilst Labour was the most affected in the scandal, Conservative Liberal and UKIP MPs had been caught abusing the system, in fact nearly every party had members abusing the expenses system.

The most eye-catching claims included ones for clearing a moat, maintaining swimming pools, and a £1,600 "duck island. One Senator claimed for a house that was neither in London, nor her constituency. One MP continued to claim for mortgage interest payments, after they paid off the mortgages - they blamed that on accounting errors. The press also ridiculed small claims - including a trouser press, a bath plug and some HobNob biscuits. And there was annoyance at large food bills - some charged even when Parliament was in recess. Whilst some argued that the scandal was proof of the Commonwealth’s corruption, many pointed to the outdated expenses system under the old system, especially for the former House of Lords, warning the scandal would have been much worse in the old Kingdom

Possibly worst of all for trust in Parliament, Commons Speaker Michael Martin and Senate Presiding Officer Alan Hazelhurst were both caught up in the scandal. Martin announced he would resign from his posts after the Presidential Election. Hazelhurst said he would look to stay in place but call a vote of confidence in his chairmanship. With trust in the main parties at an all time low, a financial crisis and a pandemic it felt like anything could happen.

“Senator Alan Haselhurst today announced a Vote of Confidence in himself as Senate Presiding Officer. The Senator for East Anglia told the East Anglian Daily Times: "I continue on in the role if my colleagues wanted me to." Haselhurst told BBC East Anglia he would be taking two weeks to "let the dust settle, but if I have enough support from my colleagues I will be remaining." He expressed scepticism that a different Presiding Officer could reform MPs' expenses. "The Officer is only here as a guiding hand," he said. "He can't force MPs to make decisions." He added that, if he held his job, he would improve understanding among the public of what MPs' jobs consisted of. But Haselhurt cautioned it was important not to jeopardise "routine matters". On the question of his own expenses claims, he said the public failed to understand why such expenses were necessary. "For example, people have said to me that I could commute rather than have a flat in London," he said. "But saying: 'Oh, sorry, chaps, I was stuck on a railway line' when the seat was empty wouldn't cut it." - Haselhust announces vote of no confidence in himself, Lucy Ward, The Guardian (2009)

Haselhurst had served as the Senate's Presiding Officer since its founding in 1999

“Swine Flu impacted the Presidential election more than the expenses scandal”, discuss (30 Marks)” - A Level History Exam (2019)

 

[powerab]

Haselhurst grossly misjudged the mood of his colleagues. Unlike his more politically astute colleague in the House of Commons, Haselhurst expected the expenses scandal to blow over and that his colleagues would be sympathetic and keep him in place. They were not. All major parties allowed the vote of confidence to be a "free vote" but the leadership of Conservatives, UKIP and DUP supported Haselhurst. Whilst the leadership of Labour, Liberal Democrats, Greens and SNP supported Haselhurst's removal. A large number of Senators from major parties either abstained or voted against their leadership's position.

The main dividing line became between reformists and small-c conservatives. The reformists were against Haselhurst and wanted a more activist Presiding Officer to radically reform the Senate. The conservatives wanted to keep the status quo and have a traditional, quiet presiding officer.

It was agreed Haselhurst and Martin would both remain in place provisionally until after the Presidential Election, however speculation already began for who would follow as Presiding Officer of the Senate, Alan Beith, Nigel Evans, Lindsay Hoyle, Michael Lord and Dawn Primarolo were all considered the front-runners for the position. With Beith and Primarolo as considered potential reformist Officers and Evans, Hoyle and Lord possible traditionalist Presiding Officers.

 

[powerab]

The Farage campaign struggled in the early days of the Short Campaign

“There are two regulated periods for candidates contesting Commonwealth elections. Known as the long campaign and the short campaign. Separate spending limits apply in each of these periods. The long campaign period for this year's Senate election began on 19 December 2014 and ends on the day before a person becomes a candidate. The short campaign period begins on the day a person becomes a candidate and ends on polling day. The earliest someone can become a candidate the day that the President dissolves the Senate. For the Senate election on 7 May 2015 this will be 30 March 2015. The Political Parties and Elections Act 2008 introduced a new pre-candidacy expenditure limit. The limit is extra to the election expense limits which apply to candidates during the general election campaign. As well as the limits on national party spending. The expenditure limit for each candidate is different. Parliament increased the limits last year by the Representation of the People Order 2014.” - Regulation of candidates’ campaign expenditure, Isobel White, House of Commons Library (2015)

In April the “short campaign” officially started this marked the legal beginning of the Presidential Election, Parliament was placed in purdah and the campaigns were allowed to turn on the spending taps. The polls at the start of the campaign were good for Howard, despite recent complications a YouGov poll put Howard at 42%, leading his nearest rival by 18 points, Brown was on 24% and struggling to hold second place against Clegg on 20%. Whilst Farage and Griffin were on 8% and 6%. Labour was still taking the blame from a worsening economic climate and soaring unemployment.

Many in Labour had hoped the expenses scandal would be the great leveller but unfortunately for Brown many of his ministers whilst Prime Ministers were the worst offenders. The only party the scandal really benefited was the BNP, who had not been in Parliament for long enough to claim massive amounts in expenses. However Howard remained popular, his relative lack of power during the Brown years actually benefited him as he kept his hands clean of the financial crisis and expenses scandal. With such an insurmountable lead it would take a minor miracle to remove Howard from his pedestal, most of Britain’s pundits instead focused on the question who would be his principal opponent, Brown or Clegg?

Back when Brown was PM, Clegg had been a thorn in his side during PMQs

Howard ran his campaign around being a steady pair of hands to guide the country through the triple threat of financial crisis, expenses scandal and swine flu. He ran with the slogan “Enough is Enough”, a dig at the leading Labour political class. Comedian Stewart Lee described Howard’s election persona as an “pretending to be an exasperated grandpa.” Lee said of Howard “he’s gone from dracula to everyone's grumpy loveable grandpa Vlad, who only occasionally wants to suck your blood.”

“Richard Ottaway, Conservative Candidate for Croydon Mayor has launched a major anti crime campaign across the borough. Richard’s ‘Enough is Enough’ campaign, supported by posters in over 250 shops, calls for less paperwork for police officers. This will allow more police on the streets - and proper transparency on criminal sentences. Richard is concerned that some violent offenders are being let off with cautions. Richard said: “Under our Labour Mayor and hard-left Premier, too many offenders seem to get away with it. It’s time things changed.” Jason is also supporting Croydon Council’s campaign to get more police officers on Croydon’s streets to boost the borough’s fight against crime. Residents and businesses are being urged to sign a petition. The council will present it to Premier of London, Ken Livingstone, on behalf of the people of Croydon. Although Croydon is the largest London borough, it only has the eighth highest number of police officers. This is far less than some boroughs with less crime. Jason says “I’d urge all residents to get behind this call to the Premier.” - “Ottaway for Croydon Mayor” leaflet, Jason Hadden (2009)

Howard’s campaign mostly stuck to safe Conservative issues, for example he pledged to raise the inheritance tax threshold to £1.2 million. Howard also felt most comfortable campaigning on issues of law and order, he attacked Labour for allowing 900,000 young people to fall into unemployment, claiming that this caused “thuggery and hooliganism.” Pledging to get Britain’s youth back to work allowed Howard to link the issue of youth unemployment to his favourite topic of crime.He pledged that Councils and police would get powers to shut shops or bars selling alcohol to children. A Howard Government would double the fine for under-age alcohol sales to £20,000. He also pledged to treat the causes of crime in the community. Howard promised to increase the use of Social enterprises to deliver more public services aimed. The underlying theme was a broken Labour Britain of drunken unemployed youths that only Howard could put a stop to.

Meanwhile on the Brown side, after a little help from ad agency Saatchi & Saatchi, the Labour Party unveiled its general election slogan: 'A future fair for all'. Gordon Brown told party activists in St Davids that Labour would tap into voters' 'submerged optimism'. The future and fairness were ideas that had always been at the heart of the New Labour project. Underlining this was the 'for all' part. This was a reworking of the powerful 'many, not the few' sentiment. Both highlighted the dividing lines with the Tories. Brown’s campaign was based around the perceived unfairness of the coalition’s cuts. Brown pledged that those with the “broadest shoulders” would bear the brunt of paying down the national debt. Labour’s campaign also tried to paint Howard as a nasty “old-Tory” in the mould of Margaret Thatcher rather than the moderate George Osborne.

Brown made housing a clear pillar of his campaign. He pledged a total of 120,000 affordable homes for the Government to build by 2012 at the latest, creating 50,000 jobs. He promised local authorities would be given the powers to give greater priority to local people on waiting lists. He also promised to reform Council house finance to allow councils to spend the proceeds of council house sales and council rents. Brown also retreated to the one place where Labour had a clear advantage; healthcare. Polls showed voters did not trust Howard with the NHS and Brown aimed to take advantage of this. Brown said his Government would guarantee "enforceable rights." These included treatment within 18 weeks, access to a cancer specialist within two weeks, and free health checks for over-40s. Brown set out long term goals of NHS dentistry, better access to GPs and individual budgets for long-term or chronic conditions.

Brown visited several hospitals during the campaign, especially northern ones like this one in Sunderland

“Under a Brown presidency cancer patients will be guaranteed a specialist screening within one week. Brown said he would divert budget savings into purchasing diagnostic equipment for the NHS. This would enable doctors to screen patients for cancer more swiftly. The pledge to introduce the change before the end of the parliament extends a policy announced in March. Brown said he would ensure the government would end its reliance on targets in the health service. Instead the NHS would give users "entitlements". Among those new entitlements were rights for all patients to be seen within 18 weeks or to be offered alternatives. Brown said he would give hospitals extra resources to help them meet these obligations. With funds of £1.2bn over five years. NHS officials have said the two-week right could be implemented within three years. Brown staffers estimate the diverted money could pay for over 600,000 ultrasound tests.” - Gordon Brown to woo with cancer pledge and new NHS cash, Allegra Stratton, The Guardian (2009)

Clegg’s campaign slogan was one word; “change.” Inspired by, if not completely ripped off from the 2008 Obama campaign. Clegg was the youngest candidate on the stage at just 40 years old, compared to Brown and Howard at 58 and 68 each.The Liberal Democrats had been in the Commonwealth’s Government longer than the Conservatives, Liberal Democrat Mayors ran cities up and down the country, they had a successful administration in the South West and they had several well-known cabinet ministers. Now, according to Clegg they were ready to take the top job in the country.

Clegg had a unique position amongst the Liberal Democrats as one of its few leading members not to serve in the Cabinet, this gave Clegg wiggle room to attack both Howard and Brown directly as part of the “same failed consensus”, ironic considering Clegg’s party served in the Howard Government. Like Brown's campaign, fairness was a key strand running through Clegg's manifesto. The Clegg campaign incorporated three main themes of fair taxes, more chances for children, and a greener economy. Whilst the coalition had lowered income tax for lowest earners, Clegg wanted the tax scrapped on earnings up to £8,000. Clegg pledged to protect the state pension and increased pay for service personnel. Clegg also promised to "clean up politics." This prong of the campaign included limiting political donations to £12,000, and introducing an MP's recall system.

Political reform was a large part of Clegg's campaign

Finally at the bottom of the pack was Farage and Griffin, scrapping for the anti-immigration vote. Farage tried to take advantage of the anti-establishment mood caused by the expenses scandal by adopting the slogan “sod the lot.” However Farage’s anti-establishment message struggled with the fact that UKIP MPs and Senators were some of the worst offenders for expenses abuse, Farage himself had claimed nearly £15,000 in MP’s expenses, including for a flat in London, despite the fact Farage lived in Kent. just 30 miles from the House of Commons.The main thrust of Farage's campaign was, of course, withdrawal from the European Union. Farage claimed membership cost the Commonwealth £120bn per year. Along with that, President Farage would scrap EU fishing quotas and introduce controls on immigration. Farage insisted this was not a one-issue campaign. He had other proposals including a tax-free earnings threshold of £11,000, followed by a blanket 31% tax rate - with National Insurance scrapped. Farage also suggested the creation of "county boards" to oversee policing, education and health.

Griffin’s slogan was even more on the nose than Farage’s “British jobs for British workers.” Griffin hoped to win over disaffected Labour voters in working class areas like Barking in East London and Stoke in the East Midlands. Fear about swine flu, financial anxiety and an anti-establishment sentiment due to the expenses scandal had made the 2009 election a prime target for the BNP, with some suggesting the party could reach two million votes. Griffin said his Presidency would bring an end to immigration from Muslim nations. He promised to "encourage" some UK residents to return to "their lands of ethnic origin" (although he didn't say how). Griffin promised to bring back British troops from Afghanistan immediately, leave the European Union, abolish regional Parliaments and bring back the Queen. Griffin also made a point of reallocating funds from the foreign aid budget to increase spending on frontline NHS services.

In the early campaign Howard had apparently hit his ceiling and had nowhere to go but down, he was the reigning champion and the other candidates knew this. Brown made a strong impression, his manifesto launch in Preston was slick and drew a decent crowd. As the Commonwealth saw so many times and the elections moved along voters slowly trickled back to the two main parties, Farage especially struggled, with a right-leaning Tory to his left and the unabashed radical Griffin to his right Farage’s polling stagnating and he became at risk of losing fourth place to Griffin.

Griffin wasn’t only causing a problem for Farage, over in Broadcasting House as the BBC made preparations for the TV debate, the number one question execs were asking was; should they invite Griffin?

“The BBC is not alone among studios in wanting to attract as much attention to itself as it can. In a noisy, crowded marketplace, if you’re not known, you are unlikely to get watched. So they will not be unhappy to see the coverage today of the controversy over whether to have BNP leader Nick Griffin on the Presidential Debate. Griffin’s appearance is going to happen, the build up will be big and there will be angry debate among Griffin, other candidates, and the studio audience. Anger among the audience has become a key part of politics. I’m not sure whether Griffin will enhance the quality of the debates, but when the media was driving the expenses furore, the ratings rose. If Griffin does appear, the BBC will report it in advance, which will help ratings rise again. In the BBC’s defence, the BNP has won seats in Parliament and passed the threshold for a Presidential candidate. Under the rules of impartiality, they have to reflect that. The other parties have to respond to this change too. The line that ‘we do not share a platform with the BNP’ is less easy to hold.” - Labour should put Brown up against Griffin, Alistair Campbell blog post (2009)

The BBC had set a precedent by inviting Griffin onto their flagship "Question Time" show twice

“Brown had the strongest campaign launch in 2009”, Discuss - A Level History Exam (2019)

 

[powerab]

Thompson aggressively defended the BBC from allegations it was enabling Griffin

The BBC Director-General, Mark Thompson announced the BBC would invite Griffin to the debate. Thompson said "keeping Nick Griffin off air is a job for parliament, not the BBC". He said that excluding Griffin would be a form of censorship, which was a matter for the government and not the BBC. Brown’s running mate, Alistar Darling condemned the BNP’s “nasty message of hate” but confirmed Brown would join Griffin on stage, since the BNP’s ascension to the national Parliament, the major parties had reviewed their policy of not sharing a platform with the BNP, with BNP politicians appearing on shows like Question Time and Andrew Marr semi regularly. However this review was intended for local hustings with a BNP candidate, not a national platform of millions like the TV debate would provide. But the BBC had made their decision. Stockport was decided as the location for the debate and as soon as the announcement was made protests prepared to give Griffin and Farage a North-West welcome.

The controversy only caused hype in audience expectations for the debate, 11 million people tuned into watch, the BBC chose their headline act, David Dimbleby as the debate moderator. Howard was confident going in, whilst not the strongest media performer, polls looked good for the incumbent President. A YouGov poll the day before the debate had Howard on 38, Clegg on 22, Brown on 19, Farage on 12 and Griffin on 9. With Farage and Griffin on the stage, Howard looked positively moderate, and there was no love lost between Brown and Clegg, fighting bitterly for second place. Howard knew all he had to do was appear Presidential and rise above it all and he would be home dry.

The order was chosen randomly. Former Prime Minister Gordon Brown was selected for the converted first place in the speaking order, his voice would be the first audiences of Britain would hear.

“This is no ordinary election, and these are no ordinary times. At home we have unemployment and poverty, abroad we have our brave soldiers fighting in the Middle East and the scourge of swine flu encroaching ever closer to the UK. We don’t need blame, we need solutions, we need experience. I have held the biggest jobs in our country for the last decade. I was Chancellor for two years, Prime Minister for nine, I have spent my life preparing for this moment. There are some on this stage who have never had to balance a budget, run a country, or look our generals in the eye. I have. There are also some on this stage who have achieved nothing in power, five years and nothing, who seek to blame others and divide the nation instead of leading it. I offer something different. Not blame, not spin, just solutions.”

Many were excited to see sparks fly between Clegg and Brown in the battle for second place

Brown had a strong opening, tackling his record as Prime Minister head on and reforming his image as the man for the hour. He successfully highlighted the inexperience of the third party candidates, especially his rival Nick Clegg, and he took Howard to task on his record, a very strong 60 seconds.

Nick Clegg was next in his opening remarks.

“Change. It’s not just a slogan, it's not just a buzzword, change is about making the lives of our people better. The two main parties on this stage told us change was impossible, that this was as good as it gets, the Liberal Democrats proved them wrong. We’ve been in power longer than the Tories, we run more cities than the Tories and more Councils than Labour. We are Britain’s true opposition. We've served loyally in the public interest under Labour and Conservative Governments, securing a reduction in your income tax, and pulling back British troops from abroad. There is an alternative. The Liberal Democrats are ready to lead, I am ready to lead.”

After Clegg’s blowout Primary Debate performance, expectations were high. Whilst not a bad opening, many voters found it confusing and convoluted, Clegg tried both to play the experienced establishment leader and the plucky outsider, neither particularly convincingly. It emphasised the bind the Liberal Democrats had found themselves in the Commonwealth years. Having served in Government they were too established to play the insurgent, compared to Farage and Griffin, but they were still a third party so he couldn’t play the stability card Brown and Howard could. Thus Clegg was stuck in the middle, in the worst of both worlds.

Farage was next up. “

Farage and Clegg aggressively went after each other during the debate. So much so that some pundits joked they had their own "Europe mini debate"

"40 years, 40 years. That’s how long it's been since we’ve talked about Europe. The BBC doesn’t want to talk about Europe, the other parties don’t want to talk about Europe, but it's vital that we do. When you were last asked, it was to stay part of a “Common Market”, it was all about trade apparently, well it wasn’t true. We are now a vassal state. Most of our laws are made somewhere else. The inconvenient truth is this; it doesn’t matter who you vote for. It doesn’t matter what the candidates on stage say because the people with the real power are nearly 500 miles away from Stockport, in the European Commission building. The candidates on stage may promise you they’ll plug the deficit, well they can’t whilst we’re sending billions of pounds to Brussels. They may promise you they’ll get a control on immigration, well they can’t when they have open borders in the EU. None of this matters, unless we get out of Europe. So vote for me and within six months I will secure a referendum on Europe and if the people vote yes, I will get us out within a year. That is the only promise I’ll make, and the only promise that matters.”

Farage stuck to script alright, he “banged on about Europe”, as a certain Oxford Mayor said to a Conservative Association meeting, but Farage was supposed to be UKIP’s great leveller, a media performer who could stop it being a single issue party and reach out to the average voter. The truth was Farage squandered his opening talking about nothing but the EU, and many voters switched off.

Howard was next to speak.

An alumni of Cambridge University, Howard often returned to his former stomping ground to hone his oratory skills

“Whoever wins this election will face an onslaught on day one, day one. The minute they walk into Buckingham Palace they will have to take calls from Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin, they will have to meet top financiers to get our economy back on track, and NHS leaders to coordinate our response to Swine Flu, all the time working with a Conservative Cabinet led by our brilliant PM, George Osborne, this is all before lunch. It’s not a game. You don’t get any second chances, if you slip it has grave consequences for this country. Mr Brown has slipped once, he slipped and gave us recession, he split and sent millions of people into unemployment. If you give him the reins he will slip again, then lord knows where we will be. Do not risk it. Vote Howard on the 4th of June.”

Howard too had a strong opening, he knew his weakness, his age and he turned it into a strength. More importantly he steered the conversation back to fertile territory, the economy and the recession Brown supposedly caused. In a nest of fools and extremists Howard was the steady hand the nation needed.

Finally, the moment the punditry had been waiting for, Griffin’s turn to speak.

“If Winston Churchill was alive today, who do you think he’d vote for? Churchill knew the dangers of uncontrolled immigration and he knew the dangers of fundamentalist islam. If Churchill were alive today the other candidates would call him Islamophobic. Churchill stood for preserving British sovereignty from a European Empire, had the other leaders been around today they would have handed Britain over to that Empire in the same way they are doing now. Tonight the other candidates will lie to you, about immigration, about Islam, about Europe and about me. Don’t stand for it. It’s time for us to get off our knees.”

Griffin’s audience was not the most receptive to his opening remarks, especially when he alluded the other candidates were Nazis, the end of speech was almost drowned out by heckling and laughter. Griffin had his big debut and it had been humiliating.

The streets of Stockport were filled with anti-racist protesters

How far do you agree with the following statement? "The BBC's decision to allow Nick Griffin into the debates helped his campaign more than it harmed it" (30 Marks) - A Level History Exam (2019)

 

[powerab]

49 year-old Alan Milburn had served as the Premier of the North East since the Commonwealth's foundation in 99. A Labour Government ran the region 99-02, replaced by a Labour/Green coalition at the 2002 election. In 2005 the Labour/Green coalition lost its majority and had to be propped up by the Lib Dems (the Official Opposition) abstaining in confidence votes.

Ian Wright had served as the region's First Minister since 2002, a long term supporter of devolution, Wright was the natural choice. He ended up being the only candidate on the ballot as his left-wing rival, Frank Cook, failed to even get on the ballot. Healthcare policy and the shutting down of hospitals dominated the campaign. Wright faced controversy after the Government announced it would shut down Hartlepool Hospital. Campaigners called on Wright to resign or call an election to protest the plan. Wright refused, to the rage of North East voters. This caused a storm of protest in Hartlepool. Campaigners said it went against a promise made in 2005 by Wright to keep the hospital open. This controversy caused the party's support to crash, losing 20% of its seats.

When the Commonwealth was founded the Conservatives were hit by a talent crisis in the North East as they had no incumbent MPs to lead the party in the region. The only national Conservative political in the whole region was MEP Martin Callanan who was press-ganged into being the party's North East leader. Callanan's campaign was based around criticising the corrupt "one-party state" North East Government and calling for further economic dynamism in the North, through a controversial policy to increase the maximum number of working hours in a week, in order to attract businesses to the North East. Callanan was fairly ineffective, benefiting from the national swing but only gaining two seats.

The Liberal Democrats were led by Fiona Hall, another 90s MEP placed into an emergency leadership position, who decided they quite liked the job. Hall's campaign was based around green energy and forging closer links with Europe, calling for further regional investment from the European Union that benefited areas like Cornwall and South Wales. Hall, like Callanan struggled in her role as Opposition Leader and failed to take advantage of the hospital scandal, whilst the Lib Dems were propping up the Government there was little Hall could do to criticise Labour without seeming hypocritical.

Third parties had a strong night, taking advantage over distrust of the main parties, the BNP gained a seat and the English Democrats and Socialist Labour broke into the Parliament, Socialist Labour had a relatively strong base in Hartlepool and had forged an alliance with the radical wing of Respect in the North East that had broken off from the main party. Furthermore Frank Cook, a Labour MneP had lost his primary and defected to the SLP, giving it its first representation in the North East Parliament. This combined with confusion about the name and anger towards Labour and Greens over the hospital allowed the SLP to break through.

On the other foot the Greens lost seats, as they were in coalition they couldn't criticise Labour for the closure of the hospital and were often blamed for allowing the North East Government to close the hospital in the first place.

After the election in Lab/Grn coalition fell further into a seat deficit, a minority Government was no longer viable, thus Wright invited the Liberal Democrats into coalition, forming yet another traffic-light coalition in the North of England.

"Veteran Labour politician Frank Cook said he was not surprised that County Durham Labour supporters deselected him after more than 20 years. The County Durham MNEP had a majority of only 1,870 when he entered the Commons as Stockton North MP almost 25 years ago. He increased that to 21,357 in 1997, before entering the North East Parliament in 1999. But after a local primary, County Durham Labour supporters decided not to chose Mr Cook as a candidate for the 2008 election. Mr Cook, 70, said: "I have been doing this for more than 20 years, but I have been working at it for something nearer 30. I would be telling lies if I said I wasn't disappointed, but it is not a surprise. But, my priority is to continue concentrating on my job to represent the electorate of County Durham." A Labour spokesperson, said party supporters wanted a change for the next Election. The members in County Durham made it clear that they wanted change. They also made it clear they wanted a person who lived in the area for most of their life to represent that change." - No surprise at party deselection, Claire Burbage, Northern Echo (2008)

 

[powerab]

Clegg had a lot of support amongst younger voters, this manifested in strange Clegg badges

The debate kicked off with a section focused on Home Affairs, most notably immigration. The first question of the section asked what the candidates would do to “make immigration workable and fair.” Nick Clegg was the first to speak.

“A fair immigration system, that's exactly what I want. When Mr Brown was Prime Minister he removed immigration exit checks, so we would no longer know who’s leaving. I want to bring those checks back so we know not only who’s coming in and who’s leaving. Secondly when migrants apply for a visa I would like a section of the application where they are asked where they are going, what region of this country. Because not all of our Commonwealth are the same, what they need in the South East may be different to the needs of Scotland. I want a bespoke immigration system where Nations and Regions tell us what we need and the National Government provides, not the other way round.”

Clegg tried to emphasise his devolutionist credentials when it came to immigration. Rather than giving a full throated defence of immigration like some Liberal Democrat activists would have liked, Clegg gave a fairly technocratic answer to an emotional issue.

Nick Griffin was next to speak

Griffin was confident he would "expose" the other candidates

“The truth is the entire political class, everyone else up on this stage, have imposed an enormous, failed, political experiment on this country. That experiment is called multiculturalism. No one asked the British people, no one voted for this, but the political class have pushed it through nonetheless. It shot up your taxes, transformed your streets. The English, the British have been shut out of our own country. The United Nations definition of genocide is destorying a culture and allowing children to learn their own culture, does that sound familiar to you? The indiginous people of this country are disappearing, they will not exist in a hundred years, I am the only person on this stage willing to stop that.”

Griffin was struggling to keep his mask on, his allegations of genocide was met with laughter by other candidates on the stage. He turned visibly red at points whilst making his speech. Griffin knew immigration was his chance to shine and he completely dropped the ball.

Farage retorted to Mr Griffin

“Are you happy Mr Brown and Mr Howard? This is what you’ve created. If you don’t let people talk about immigration openly you get men like Mr Griffin. The truth is I am and the true anti-facist candidate on this stage because I am the only one who will pull the BNP up by its roots. There is a truth about immigration but it's not the truth Mr Griffin is selling you. The EU has total free movement of goods, capital services and people, that is non negotiable. Now this system worked when the EU was only countries like France and the Netherlands with similar standards of living and similar wages, now we have countries from within the iron curtain in the EU, in Romania the minimum wage is a eight of what it is here, it's not a big mystery why they are coming here. We have opened the door to over 400 million people who can come here from the EU, there is no fix to immigration, there is no solution, the EU won’t allow it. There’s one way to stop uncontrolled immigration and stop Nick Griffin and that is to leave the EU.”

Farage found himself in a strange situation of simultaneously decrying Nick Griffin, whilst claiming at the same time he was the only man who could appeal to his voters, Farage was used to being the most right-wing the most anti-establishment candidate on the stage, with Griffin in the mix Farage had to make his classic points about immigration without aligning himself to the BNP, a difficult balancing act.

Farage spent most of the debate clashing with Griffin and trying to distance himself from the far-right candidate

Howard responded to Farage and Griffin.

“Both these men, as usual, are lying to you. The truth is this Government has, and continues to put in place sensible, reasonable controls on immigration. As President I have introduced annual refugee and immigrant quotas and bonds for temporary workers. This is real change, real solutions. Making stupid inflamatory speeches in Parliament doesn’t get the number of bogus refugees down, my Government did. Ranting about different coloured people doesn’t get mandatory health checks for new migrants, having a grown-up in charge did. When I am re-elected I will bring in an emergency cap on European immigration. I see you smirking Nigel but it can be done. I will travel to Brussels and I will say to them if you don’t give us this emergency break the Commonwealth will pull out of the EU. But when you make policies like this you have to work out the details, do you have allies? How will it work? Will Angela Merkel back it? The truth is Mr Farage doesn’t have a clue, and Mr Griffin isn’t even on the same planet.”

Howard’s response again emphasised his experience and record, he conceded ground to the right on the issue of immigration but pushed that he was the best person to bring EU immigration under control.

Brown then attacked Howard for taking an anti-immigration stance.

Brown planned to park his tanks on Clegg's lawn by giving a heartfelt defence of immigration

“Mr President, you claim to oppose the BNP but you’ve just handed them everything they wanted on a silver platter. There are not 400 million migrants coming from Europe, that is an outrageous lie, under my Government net immigration went down and it continues to go down to this day, for the last two years net migration has fallen. Mr Howard wants to take credit for these controls, but it was a Labour Cabinet that brought in ID cards for new migrants. It was a Labour Government that brought in tighter visa controls for foreign students, meaning 30,000 less students coming this year. What Michael wants is an arbitrary cap, he’s plucked a number out of the blue and decided that will be the limit, its nonsense. A cap would mean an employer who needs to bring in a skilled worker can’t get that worker because the cap. As President I will control immigration, but I will never bring in stupid policies just for the sake of appeasing some of the people on this stage.”

Brown received applause as the only candidate to take on Farage’s claim head on, despite his bizarre boasting on limiting the number of students, Brown’s attack on the emergency cap was the closest thing any of the candidates came to an outright defence of immigration policy. Brown managed to get some hits in on Howard without being dragged down to the level of Farage and Griffin.

The section on Home Affairs and Immigration continued for half an hour. It should have been fertile ground for the BNP and UKIP but the two parties spent most of their time attacking each other, Griffin especially became more and more agitated. Meanwhile Clegg struggled to make an impact, his answers on issues like police and violent crime remained technocratic, whilst civil liberties should have been an area he was comfortable with the Liberal’s membership of the Government made it hard for him to attack Howard directy.

Howard had a decent show in the Home Affairs section. Crime and punishment was Howard’s area of interest and he gave strong, if boring defences of his policing policy. Brown really shone in this area, Brown attacked Clegg and Howard for cuts in policing, proudly showing off his record as PM, hiring more than 10,000 extra officers since 1999.

However as Brown’s momentum grew the debate shifted to the one area Labour didn’t want to talk about, Foreign Affairs and the Middle East

The Lisbon treaty would be one of the sticks Farage would use to beat Howard and Brown

“Brown was more effective than Howard at confronting the far right during the 2009 Presidential Election”, Discuss (30 Marks) - A Level History Exam

 

[powerab]

In East Anglia, Premier Tim Yeo oversaw a shaky coalition between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, with Eric Pickles taking Bill Rammell's job as First Minister. Pickles and Howarth did not get along, the disagreements in the coalition were hardly behind closed doors and were well known to the public

The coalition had kept its promise of major cuts to the Anglian Civil service, including scrapping the role of Permanent Secretary. Pickles was a popular first minister, humorous and charismatic, he asserted himself over the more technocratic Howarth and saw off the challenge to his right from Tory opponents and UKIP. Pickles' popularity netted the party another eight seats.

For UKIP, Titford retired from front-line politics and was replaced by Thurrock-born 24 year old Tim Aker, Aker had been just 21 when he was elected to the Anglian Parliament, a rising star he was quickly promoted to senior positions in the party, associated with the moderate wing of the party, Aker took great steps to distance the party from the BNP. However, Aker's relative inexperience and UKIP infighting prevented him from a massive breakthrough.

Lib Dem leader David Howarth was miserable in the coalition and it showed. During the election campaign he made no secret of his disdain for the Tories with critics complaining he seemingly "forgot he'd been there coalition partner for three years." Howarth's distancing campaign seemed to pay off as he lost only three seats, compared to the nine or ten he was expected to lose at the start of the election period.

As for third parties, Anglian Labour declined even further, Rammell was turfed out of leadership by the members in favour of the left-wing Kelvin Hopkins, much to the dismay of Labour MaPs. The left-wing eurosceptic was a strange character. A left-wing republican, who was opposed to the Commonwealth and PR voting system. He made his campaign around trying to win back working class areas like in Essex, but he was mired by rebellions in his party and allegations of sexual assault. Hopkins' leadership was a disaster, loosing the party half its seats in the Anglian Parliament. For the Labour right, Hopkins became a cautionary tale for what happened when the left took power.

The Greens had a strong election, led by Norwich MaP Rupert Read. Read was from the liberal wing of the Greens and used the decline of Labour and the Liberal Democrats to great advantage, winning the party four extra seats. The BNP also did moderately well, slowly increasing the size of it's caucus.

The 2008 Anglian election was also noticeable for the number of minor parties who came close to a break through. UKIP MaP Robin Page, had split off from UKIP and founded the "UK First Party" which got more than 3% of the vote, the English Democrats also put in a solid campaign, also breaking 3%.

After the election, despite the leader's objections, maintaining the ConLib coalition was the only real option. However, to his great relief David Howarth was summoned to serve in the Cabinet. Unfortunately for Howarth, so was Pickles. It seemed the two were inseparable.

"Before Robin Cook died he said that the party system had changed particularly because of the way the Labour Party elects its leaders. In the past it had elected its leader through the PLP and as a result they had a range of views within Cabinet, from Shirley Williams and Tony Benn. There were genuine debates representing that range of views within Cabinet. Now, because of the primary system,the Cabinet is a cipher and if anybody steps out of line then they find themselves on the back benches. That is a crude simplification of his argument. But this has changed the nature of our party politics and has given greater power to the Prime Minister and President than in the past. They do not have to deal with the factions in the party anymore because they have got absolute control of the party. It started with Margaret Thatcher, but Margaret Thatcher was much more open and spoke to a range of views within her party more than did Gordon Brown. Gordon Brown was not interested in a range of views, he was interested in his own view. " - Kelvin Hopkins MaP speaking to a Norwich Unison meeting (2007)

 

[powerab]

Going on to foreign affairs, the first question was on Europe, Griffin was called first to speak.

The closest thing Griffin had to experience in Europe was giving speeches to anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist groups in Eastern Europe

“What is happening in Europe isn’t a secret. The godfather of the European Union, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi published a plan for a United Europe, and the ethnoside of European peoples. Since then an unholy alliance of leftist and capitalists have launched a campaign to stamp out British and English identity. First it was through migrant guest workers, then a multicultural experiment, then the answer to an ageing population, the same lies, the same excuses. There is only one goal of the European Union and that is to take away your pride and your identity, helped by the people on this stage. Do not let them.”

Quoting an anti-semetic conspiracy theory was probably not the act of electoral genius Griffin thought it was, but he’d said it now.

Clegg stood up to retort Griffin.

“I’ll just say two things, first Mr Griffin is talking absolute nonsense, but I won’t linger too long on that because I think you can see for yourself. I know Europe better than anyone on this stage, I worked there for years, I was elected to the European Parliament, I know more than anyone that the EU’s not perfect. But I also know there are things Britain cannot do alone. Climate change doesn’t end at the cliffs of Dover, international crime doesn’t respect lines on a map, I believe in working together and only by working with our European partners can we tackle these big issues.”

On the issue of Europe, Clegg was for once the most experienced person on the stage, he gave an emotional defence, although one with some caveats.

Farage quickly jumped on Clegg

Farage would repeatedly raise the threat of a "European Army"

“Once again Nick you’re talking the country down. We who want to leave the EU are not anti-European, we want to trade with our neighbours, and work with them to address the issues facing our country. But we don’t want to be part of a political union. We can do it without being in a political union. There is one thing standing in the way of us being a free sovereign country and it is Mr Howard, Mr Brown, Mr Clegg and the rest of the political careerist class. It’s the same political class that has run this country into the ground time and time again.There is no reason for us to be a part of a European super state. It’s time for a change.”

Farage jumped at a chance to talk about Europe, especially against Clegg. Unfortunately for Farage his condemnation of the “political class” sounded worryingly similar to Griffin’s conspiracy theories.

Brown chose this as his moment to wade into the debate.

“There’s 2.5 million reasons to be in Europe. They’re called jobs. 2.5 million off them, depending on our membership of the EU, our trade with the EU. We are gripped in two international crises, we should be leading Europe and the world, instead President Howard has pulled up the drawbridge, he’s scorned our allies in Europe and made Britain an empty chair on the world stage. When I’m President I will work constructively with other European allies to lead our response to the financial crisis.”

Whilst the other candidates argued about abstract concepts like identity, Brown brought the discussion onto the concrete issue of jobs, an area he was comfortable in. Bringing up the financial crisis was a risky move but Brown felt he had to face allegations head on.

Howard saw his opportunity and he took it.

“You mean the financial crisis you caused Gordon? The European leaders understand one language, strength, red lines you don’t cross. It’s because of my work in Europe that the single market has been strengthened whilst the commission has been weakened. Nigel talks about trade and Nick Clegg talks about reforming Europe, well I’ve done both. I’ve done it because I’ve been firm with Europe, I’ve looked Angela Merkel dead in the eye and said if you don’t give us what we want we will leave. Lo and behold we got what we wanted, a reduction in our payments, more British influence over the single market. But you can only achieve these things if you’re willing to walk away. Mr Brown and Mr Clegg have both said under no circumstances would they leave the EU, that means when they go into a negotiation they’ve already lost. Europe is working, I’m making it work, let's keep it that way.”

Howard attempted to drag the debate back onto the financial crisis whilst talking up his accomplishments in Europe. Whilst it wasn’t a major breakthrough it was a decent speech. Since Howard had such a strong polling lead that’s all he needed.

Howard knew he just had to do was seem patriotic, Presidential and not make any major gaffes

The second question was on the Middle East, asking if the candidates would commit British troops to another multinational effort in the Middle East.

The question Brown had been dreading, and he was first to speak.

“Look we have Al-Qaeda in Somalia, Afghanistan and Pakistan. When I was Prime Minister I got intelligence briefings nearly everyday of Al-Qaeda plots planned for the Commonwealth that originated in the Middle East. Stopping terrorism abroad stops terrorism at home. The mission in Afghanistan is working, we are training up the Afghan army and police to deal with their own problems so we can leave. If we leave straight away like both the Nicks on this stage want the country will collapse again. We’ll have to start all over again. But any and all military operations need to be done with our allies in mind we cannot retreat into isolation like Micheal wants.”

Brown tried to make himself Presidential and tough on defence, and to attack Howard on his own turf of national security, accusing him of putting national security at risk through his isolationist attitude to Foreign Policy.

“Do you want to retreat into isolation Mr President?”

Asked Dimbleby.

“No absolutely not. What I want to do is think before we act. My predecessor, supported by Mr Brown sent troops into Afghanistan without the proper equipment, without the weapons and vehicles needed. Most importantly, they went in without a political strategy to get out. I support counter-terrorism. In my Presidency I have created the Office of the National Security Adviser whose job is to liaise between the Home and Foreign Office to advise the President and put British security first. If it was necessary to protect our people then yes I would intervene abroad against terrorism. It was my team’s action that secured the release of our hostages from Iran. But unlike Mr Brown I would think the consequences through first.”

Defence Secretary Andrew Lansley was a strong supporter of the President. He did the media rounds after the debate

Howard brought the conversation back to his experience, pointing out the Iranian hostage crisis, his first introduction to the world stage.

At this point Farage interrupted.

“Our foreign policy has been an absolute shambles under both of you. We bombed Iraq and when that didn’t stop terrorism we bombed Afghanistan and Somlia and Eretria, and guess what, there’s still terrorism. Now Mr Howard has repeatedly talked up war with Iran. When things start going wrong you bomb another country and hope that fixes it. But I think the most worrying thing of all is this notion of a European Army, which none of the major parties have shot down, where British soldiers will be ordered around from Brussels, so whenever there’s a crisis in France or Italy they can be sent off to fight yet another war. Afghanistan was a mistake, Iraq was a mistake. The only way to prevent more mistakes is to get out of the EU.”

Farage again brought the debate back to Europe in a populist speech against foreign wars.

Before he could finish Nick Griffin stepped in.

“I find this remarkable that Mr Farage is criticising the Iraq war when most of his MPs voted for it, and he didn’t even bother to vote, he abstained. How much of a sniveling coward can you be. I am the only candidate on this stage who says to get all of our troops home, right now. No ifs, not buts no platitudes, now. Britain should be for the British, Afghanistan should be for the Afghanis, simple as that.”

Griffin’s speech was of little surprise to anyone who knew the BNP platform, Griffin knew Farage was his main rival and did everything he could to create space between the two.

Nick Clegg was next to speak

“It is extraordinary how all the candidates, at least the ones who matter, decry the Iraq War. Two of you voted for it and one of you abstained. Mr President you criticise Labour for not having a plan, you’re right, but why did you vote for the war then? I am the only one on this stage who voted against the Iraq War. I’m the only person who actually took a stand. You can say what you like about the war, but it's too bloody late. You should have all said this six years ago."

There was a steady stream of British service people being killed in Afghanistan

As the Foreign Affairs section wrapped up the debate turned to its final section, the economy.

To what extent was the Stockport Debate the most important event in the 2009 Presidential Election? (30 Marks) - A Level History Exam (2019)

 

[powerab]

The North West had been run by Premier John Hutton since Jack Straw's ascension to the Senate in 2007. Many had expected the North West Parliament to elect First Minister Michael Meacher as acting Premier. After an intervention by PM Brown they instead elected Hutton to the top job in the North West. A Labour/Liberal Coalition led by Meacher and Andrew Stunell had run the North West continuously for almost a decade.

After the embarrassment of the Hutton affair and discontent in the ranks of his caucus, Meacher stood down as the Leader of North West Labour at the 2008 election. He was replaced by Derek Twigg, the North West's Education Minister. Twigg was an ally of Jack Straw, from the socially Conservative Brownite strain of the Labour Party. Twigg's campaign emphasised infrastructure projects such as the Merseyside Gateway bridge. Twigg also ran on his record as Education Minister, he had aggressively supported league tables, whilst school outcomes had improved, Twigg was very unpopular with teachers. The splits in the party and national swing caused Labour to face a 6% swing.

The Conservatives were led by Stephen O'Brien, a moderate Osbornite and former member of the Social Democratic Party. O'Brien performed well on the campaign trail and campaigned around the rural North West, pledging to work for all the North West not just larger cities like Manchester and Liverpool. His campaign was successful and he gained the North West Tories eight seats.

Andrew Stunell had served as the Lib Dem Deputy First Minister for nine years, now he was one of the most experienced politicians in the North West, even serving as acting Premier for a few months whilst Labour had their Primary. Stunell emphasised the good work the Government had done especially in housing policy, it was Lib Dem ministers that passed legislation cracking down on empty properties. Unfortunately voters were fatigued with the coalition, like Labour, the Lib Dems lost a good number of seats.

As for third parties, the Tories move to the right left plenty of room for UKIP, Whittaker had now served as UKIP North West leader for three terms, a rare trait amongst UKIP leaders who often faced coups and divisions. The unity of North West UKIP paid off, Whittaker was well known amongst average voters and the party gained a bench of seats. The BNP also made moderate gains in line with the national swing. The Greens picked up a couple votes from Meacher supporters who distrusted Twigg and Hutton.

"Tackling the scourge of empty homes has been high up my agenda since entering government. Doing something to tackle this growing problem was one of our big housing “asks” in the coalition negotiations. National Government’s failed Pathfinder scheme ran out of cash. I was determined that this government was going to be different. We started back in October 2005 with two key announcements. The first was that we had secured £90m for the first ever government empty homes fund. We designed this fund to bring empty homes back into use as affordable housing. The second was the announcement that the Government would tweak rules for the New Homes Bonus (at my urging). This meant regional Government would reward councils for bringing empty homes back into use. If we are returned to Government we will allow councils to charge extra council tax on long-term empty properties. The proposals will allow councils to charge up to 50% extra on any property left vacant for two years or more." - Empty homes – the Lib Dem success story, Andrew Stunell, Lib Dem Voice (2008)

 

[powerab]

Dimbleby was praised for his chairmanship of the Debate

The debate turned to the economy with Dimbleby asking “We all know there will have to be further spending cuts after the election, why can’t you be honest and tell us?”

“President Howard, you first please.”

“We’ll you’re quite right, we have had to make cuts and we will have to continue making cuts. I have always said this, you can trust me to be honest about the challenge we face. I think we do need to protect front-line services, teachers in schools, police on the streets and nurses in hospital wards. But difficult decisions have to be made. As well as clamping down on waste my Government has taken the difficult decision to freeze public sector pay for two years, and to move the retirement age up two years by 2015 as well. Are these moves popular? No. Are they the right thing to do? Absolutely. The unfortunate truth if it wasn’t for Mr Brown’s incompetence we wouldn’t be in this mess, all the major candidates are promising cuts, but I’m the only one being honest about them.”

Howard tried to play up his credentials as an honest and responsible leader and hammer home the narrative of Brown being to blame for the Financial Crisis.

Howard's age came up several times during the campaign, he faced a grilling over his age on Good Morning Britain the day before

Nick Clegg interjected.

“Honest? Mr President I’ve read your platform, you have no detailed breakdown of costings, I do. In my policy platform, written down in black and white I have detailed breakdown of where I will save money, £16 billion pounds worth of it. I have made firm decisions, I am the only major candidate who wants to scrap the Eurofighter programme, which will save us billions. The other candidates like to talk about efficiency savings, there is a multi-billion pound hole in our budget, you can’t save that kind of money through potted plants and paper clips, you need to have the courage to make big decisions.”

Clegg continued to try and make himself out to be different by referring to the “other candidates.” The problem for Clegg was his own Vince Cable was responsible for the efficiency savings he decried.

Nigel Farage saw this as his moment to go after his rival.

“Nick has your platform been scrutinised by anyone outside your party? Because mine has, my platform is the first in the history of this country to have been reviewed by an independent economic think tank. Look, I had decades in business before going into politics, I’ve had a real job and balanced a real budget. Now is the time to take the low paid out of income tax, now is the time to help those in the squeezed middle, now is the time to help people back to work. Please please please can we remember we are borrowing £160 billion pounds this year alone. Our national debt is in the trillions, for god's sake get real.”

Since UKIP's assendance into the mainstream, UKIP student branches had popped up all over the country. Including this one at the University of Manchester, whom Farage gave a talk to before the debate

Farage tried to emphasise his “real-world” experience and paint himself as the person best placed to get the deficit down..

It was now Nick Griffin’s turn to speak

“Look, it’s not hard. I could save us nearly 60 billion pounds. How? Well we spend over 39bn on immigration, asylum, EU membership and foreign aid we could abolish that all within months. We also spend £17 billion on tackling “climate change”, a scientifically unproven theory. I am the only one on this stage to stand up to the powers that be and get us that 60bn pounds. The BNP would also make savings locally, by slashing all politically correct council functions and "diversity" schemes, saving you millions in Council Tax. Again no one else on this stage will have the courage to say that. You can’t save money if you’re not willing to talk about where that money’s going.”

Griffin’s dogwhistle attacks on the “power’s that be” and his pledge to cut climate change spending may have played well with BNP members, but it did little to grow his appeal to ordinary voters.

Griffin had to make a quick escape from press and protesters after the debate

“I can’t listen to this rubbish any longer,” said Brown.

“Nick, climate change is real, you shouldn’t be running for President, go home and for once in your life read a book. Moving on, I have set out a four year deficit reduction plan starting from 2010. I am the only person running who has said not cuts to frontline services, no ifs not buts. I will ring fence spending on schools and hospitals. There will be tax rises, yes, but these taxes will be fair and target those who are best placed to pay. Spending cuts will be made equitably and fairly, I would use a scalpel, Mr Howard would use a chainsaw. If we cut too hard and too fast we risk damaging the economy and facing a double dip recession. We’ve already seen the damage one recession can do, don’t let this President cause another.”

Brown’s natural economist talent kicked in, he gave an authoritative speech, the “chainsaw” line would be one of the most memorable lines of the night.

The debate on the economy continued for half an hour, issues from taxes to business support bounced back and forth between the parties. Brown and Howard seemed to perform best in this regard, Howard was fighting on the Conservative’s natural turf and portrayed himself as a steady hand to captain the ship. For Brown, economics was his point of passion and he gave a mighty defence of his record in Government and got a good few hits in on the “ideological cuts” of the coalition Government.

As the debate wound up it now became time for closing statements, and the long-awaited snap poll.

Brown needed a strong performance in the debate to save his campaign

To what extent did the national debt influence the 2009 Presidential Election? (30 Marks) - A Level History Exam (2019)

 

[powerab]

Farage and Clegg struggled in the debate, both trying to act the outsider whilst being senior MPs

As the Debate reached it’s last ten minutes, Dimbleby called on all the candidates to give quick closing remarks.

Gordon Brown was chosen to go first.

“This election you have a choice on how we secure our recovery. Do we see years more of ideological cuts, taking money and growth out of the economy when it so desperately needs stimulus. I have made a commitment to protect schools and the NHS, no one else asking for your vote tonight has made that commitment. Yes cuts have to be made, but those cuts have to be equitable and fair. Do you want an uncontrolled Tory administration slashing and burning your public services? We’ve seen already the damage this coalition Government is doing, they need to be stopped. So please vote Brown on the 4th of June.”

Brown’s closing statement rested on the old Labour adage of protecting public services against reckless Conservative cuts. Brown spun himself as the man to reign in Osborne and Cable to thus prevent “nasty cuts.”

Labour lost the support of the Sun at the 2008 election, Brown hoped to regain it but they endorsed Howard shortly after the debate

Now came Griffin’s time to speak.

“The English exist. We’re here, we matter. No one else wants to say it but I will. I have one thing you ask the audience at home, why do you think the political elite is so afraid of me? Why do you think I have been assaulted and harassed this whole debate? Because they fear the truth, they fear the voice of the indigenous British people, they fear your voice. Make them afraid, visit Griffin4President.org and see how you can give the political class a kicking.”

Griffin's closing remarks were of little surprise to anyone, a populist rant against the “political elite.” Whilst his appearance on the debate stage had been an early Christmas present, if the reaction of the audience was anything to go by, he had blown it.

It was now Farage’s turn to make his closing speech.

“None of the major candidates have answered this simple question, do we have an open door to over 400 million migrants from Europe? The answer is yes. The people of this country are finally waking up to the fact that in the European Union we can’t control our own borders, we can’t control our own laws, we are a total vassal state. Now Nick and Gordon and the other politicians here tonight are part of the same political class that has governed Britain for decades and run this country into the ground, there is an alternative. We can get out of Europe, we can get out of the cosy LibLabCon consensus, but you have to vote for it.”

Farage had made dozens of anti-consensus speeches on the floor of Parliament, the other candidates knew it was coming and were prepared. Unlike Griffin, Farage didn't have the luxury of being a novelty

Maybe if Farage’s closing remarks had gone before Griffin’s he would have looked better, unfortunately for the radical anti-migrant voters he seemed too timid, compared to Griffin’s demagoguery, and for the moderate voter his speech seemed too familiar to Griffin’s. This problem would prop up again and again for Farage as he struggled to find his place as the moderate nationalist.

Micheal Howard now rose to speak.

“It’s important that politicians say what we mean, and mean what we say. There will have to be cuts. It won’t be funny or easy, but it's the right thing to do. During turbulent times you need your President to be honest. I won’t fluff up speeches with economics jargon, or blame the immigrant couple down the street, I will tell you directly what I am going to do as President. A safer society, a stronger police force and a diminished deficit. That’s it. Cuts are going to happen, everyone on this stage agrees, this isn’t about policy its about honesty. That’s all I have to say.”

Honesty was the theme of Howard’s debate pitch, he wasn’t the greatest speaker or the slickest debater, but he successfully hammered this point again and again.

Howard's campaign leaned into a theme of dressed down honesty. Campaign ads included Howard alone talking to camera with a plain blue background, his calculation being voters were tired of spin and over-produced election broadcasts.

Clegg was the last speaker of the debate.

“It's time to not just hope for a better future, but choose one, demand one. The two main parties have been playing “pass the parcel” with your Government for decades. They will tell you that things can’t get better, that the way things are are the way things have to be. I think tonight I’ve proven them wrong. We can face the big issues of the day, we can get the deficit down, we can make a fairer society, but we need to try something different. There won’t be a second chance, it’s up to you to break the cycle.”

Again Clegg’s plea for change might have worked in another life, but the truth was his party was in Government, he was just as established as Brown and Howard, his pleas for a new system rang hollow when he was part of the old one.

As the debate finished ComRes published the results of its live poll. Most voters had considered Gordon Brown to have won the debate, 35% to be precise, Brown was already a household name for many voters and he had managed to appear both authoritative and passionate. 24% of votes said Howard won the debate, expectations for Howard had been low and he managed to get his message across effectively. Nick Clegg had the opposite, expectations were high after his performance in the primary debate, but this gave the other candidates time to prepare and Clegg was unable to make lightning strike twice, only 18% of viewers thought Clegg won the debate. Griffin had a woeful debate and struggled to look like a calm composed President, only 13% of votes said he won the debate. Finally Farage came last with just 10% of viewers saying he won the debate. Farage found himself trapped between Howard and Griffin and struggled to connect with audiences, UKIP’s great media hope had slipped.

Brown’s strong debate performance helped him slightly but Howard’s polling lead was still mountainous. A Populus poll taken the day after the debate still had Howard with an 11 point lead over Brown with 38% to 27%. The good news for Brown was he narrowly overtook Clegg who was on 26%. Both the right wing candidates saw their vote share collapse, Griffin fell to 5% and Farage fell to just 4%, as the campaign entered it’s last few weeks it now fell on all the candidates to throw everything they had at Howard.

Piers Morgan said pundits would underestimate Gordon Brown "at their own peril"

How far do you agree with the statement “Brown’s debate performance had little impact on the election result.”

 

[powerab]

The 2009 Presidential Election would see journalists commonly use things like live-blogs and internet polls for the first time

"News organisations have, of course, devoted significant attention and resources to election coverage. For journalists "it's a exciting time", as observed by Jon Snow on his Channel 4 News blog, "a voyage into the unknown whose ending will affect all our lives." Concluding, "once an election is called, journalists go into overdrive. The influence of internet communication on electoral campaigns have been tangential. Indeed, both the 1990s and the early 2000s were plagued by many politicians across the world about what would be "the first internet election." (Or "the first social media election"), only to be followed by a failure to live up to most commentators' expectations. Iain Dale, argued in his assessment of the 2009 UK Presidential Election that "the internet has become all but an irrelevance" - Online Reporting of Elections, Einar Thorsen (2013)

With the end in sight the campaigns all stepped into overdrive, spending thousands of pounds on last minute campaign adverts and literature. Howard’s lead was still substantial but not insurmountable, especially if Clegg made it into the final round. Howard needed just one more slip up to make the race truly competitive. Luckily for Howard Clegg and Brown were still locked in a bitter fight for second place in the polls, with both being within a point or two of each other.

The last major event of the campaign would be a gaffe by Clegg. In an interview with the Times Clegg suggested the recession was an “opportunity” for men to 'reinvent' themselves as stay-at-home fathers.He said that as the Second World War had a 'liberating' effect on women who found jobs, the downturn could force unemployed men to look at their role in the family. Whilst Clegg meant well and tried to push for further flexibility in the workplace and a better work-life balance, he underestimated the pain the financial crisis had caused, at best it was a foolish gaffe, at worst he looked dismissive and elitist.

Clegg was the only major candidate to have gone to private school, he struggled to shake his "elite" image

This wasn't the first of Clegg's gaffes across the campaign. He had earned the nickname 'Calamity Clegg' after a series of embarrassing gaffes. These included boasting to GQ magazine that he had up to 30 lovers, miscalculating the level of the state pension and being overheard criticising several of his leading MPs on a packed plane.

Nigel Farage also found his campaign in dire trouble. His whole pitch to the UKIP faithful was that he was the great charismatic stallion who would launch them into the top-tier, instead the debate had been a disaster. During the primary Farage had pledged to break 10% in the first round, now he was polling 4%, behind Nick Griffin. Farage decided to go on the offensive, he broke the convention that the candidate should be in the media sparingly, instead appearing on every morning show and sitting down with every radio chat host. He even wrote an op-ed for the Guardian

“British jobs for British workers" cannot happen while we're still in the European Union. For we've signed away our right as a country to decide who comes to this country or who works in this country. We can all pore over the provisions of the Posted Workers Directive if we choose. The basic fact is that the government, unions and hundreds or thousands of angry workers cannot have any effect upon industrial policy. For it is the law, confirmed by the highest court that applies to us, the European Court of Justice (ECJ), that this is so. Jacques Delores hoodwinked the unions. He promised them a "social Europe" and they thought that was what they wanted. What's come back to bite them is that the Europe on offer is not what they thought. The absolute free movement of labour is what is on offer and there's no way of changing that without leaving the EU itself. The ECJ rulings are not mistakes: they are the aim, the purpose. To stop any country, any nation, from deciding who may live or work in that country or nation.” - We need our country back, The Guardian, Nigel Farage (2009)

Farage’s style in these interviews was aggressive, hitting out at all the other candidates. Farage described politicians in the mainstream parties as "ghastly", and he didn't hold back on his fellow candidates. Gordon Brown? "Dead man walking. Humourless. I don't like him." Nick Clegg? "Technocrat." Micheal Howard? "He doesn't believe in a damn thing other than he wants to keep the keys to Buckingham." Farage also received a last minute endorsement from Kelvin Mackenzie, the former editor of the Sun and high profile columnist. In fact several right wing journalists and columnists swung behind Farage in the last few weeks. Many influential right-wingers saw Farage as a necessary threat to Howard, if Farage crashed and burned there would be nothing holding Farage to the right. The elites of papers like the Sun and Mail were already distrustful of Osborne. Howard had to win yes, but they wanted to put the fear of god into him.

Farage would clash with Ed Miliband (Brown's surrogate) on Andrew Marr

Howard saw a small uptick in his poll ratings after the debate, the decline of Farage and Griffin also helped, whilst it wasn’t the landslide expected early in the campaign, polls still showed him winning with a healthy majority, Howard had a clear lead over all the other candidates on the economy, the most important issue of the day. Over his years in office with Gordon Brown, signing bills like the gender recognition act, Howard had gradually shed his “something of the night” image, whilst he was still as Conservative at heart his hands-off, elder-statesman attitude to governing had worked for him, whilst Tony Blair had gotten the blame when issues like Iraq went wrong, Howard managed to keep up his image of being “above it all” whilst he wasn’t massively popular he was seen as safe and trustworthy. As long as there were no surprises Howard expected to waltz back into Buckingham for another five years.

“Thanks to the economic crisis which first came to public attention with the Bank of England's bail-out of the Northern Rock in September 2007. Labour experienced its own version of the Conservative Party's "Black Wednesday" back in September 1992. A poll in the month before the Northern Rock crisis had put Labour 25 points clear of the Conservatives on the subject of economic management. By June of the following year, the Conservative Party's reputation for economic competence had been restored. Its rating of 36 per cent was back to where it had been before "Black Wednesday". It's lead over Labour on this subject was even wider (9 points compared to 5 points back in March 1992.)” - From Crisis to Coalition, Peter Dorey (2011)

Howard spent his last few days on a "charm-offensive" in rural England

Coming out of his debate victory Brown had hoped to snowball his momentum into an electoral victory, he travelled up and down the country on campaign stops, especially focusing in celtic nations like Scotland and Wales where he expected to do exceptionally well. Unfortunately for Brown whilst the debate boosted his standing in the poll, the polls quickly stabilized. He was in a better position than a few weeks ago yes but still in a double-digit deficit to Howard, Brown was praying for an “October surprise” that never came, Labour had been in power for a decade and they were finally starting to stall, as the days passed Brown appeared to hit a brick wall.

It could be worse, he could be Nick Griffin, the BNP leader had gone into the election with high hopes but the more he was exposed to the public the less they liked him. Griffin retreated to giving speeches to the party faithful at private BNP meetings in strongholds like Dagenham and Stoke. Griffin had stepped out into the sun and gotten burned, he was not willing to take the risk again, as Griffin hid, Farage regained his momentum and BNP votes began to defect in droves.

As the last doors were knocked and exhausted activists trudged to local counts or house parties to watch the results, the candidates returned to their campaign HQ to settle in for another long night of David Dimbelby’s foppish Eton drawl.

“It's been the most exciting, unpredictable election for a generation, for the next few hours we'll discover how you voted. Welcome to election night here on the BBC. What an extraordinary campaign it's been. It began as a two horse race, it ended with three possible Presidents. In four minutes time when we have our exit poll we'll have our sign on who's the winner. Will Michael Howard be the first President ever to win a second term? Will Gordon Brown return triumphant to the top of British politics? Or will Nick Clegg win the top job? Millions and millions of people will have their votes counted in hundreds of polling centres at towns and cities across the country. We've got our cameras at more of them than any other broadcaster. I have the team around me here in the engine room to analyse the results as they come in. Our top reporters are at candidate HQs in Bexley, Sheffield, Edinburgh, Barking and Bromley.” - Election Night BBC Intro, David Dimbleby (2009)

The BBC election team before recording began

What impact did the internet have on campaigning in the 2009 Presidential Election (30 Marks) - A Level History Exam (2019)

 

[powerab]

(Big Ben Chimes)

CONSERVATIVES WIN

FORECAST HOWARD WINS FIRST ROUND WITH 38% OF VOTE

DD - And here's what we're hearing, no victory in the first round but President Micheal Howard has a plurality of the vote at 38%, behind him we have former Prime Minister Gordon Brown with 28% of the vote, nipping at Brown's heels we had Yorkshire MP Nick Clegg with 22% of the vote, trailing Clegg we have South East MP Nigel Farage on 9% and North West MP Nick Griffin on 3%. To make up this poll Mori spoke to nearly 20,000 people at nearly 200 polling stations in England, Scotland and Wales. All these polls have a small margin of error of around 3% and there may be different voting attitudes around the country, the exit poll models a uniform swing, this has been a very complicated election, it's just a start so please stay with us. Nick Robinson what do you think?

NR - A dramatic but not surprising exit poll. As polls have shown throughout this campaign Howard has a substantial lead, however this exit poll is on the lower end of Howard's polling with some polls saying a 12-15% lead. Nick Clegg's hopes of making it into the final round seem to have been dashed as he faces a mighty challenge to overtake Brown, it looks like the two traditional parties will dominate for another cycle. A whopping result for Nigel Farage though, some may remember after the debate he was polling behind Nick Griffin, he seems to have taken it back.

DD - Yes in last year's Parliamentary Election UKIP only just broke 5% of the vote, if this exit poll is true Farage has almost doubled that result. Not a good night for Nick Griffin, the anti-immigration vote seems to have collapsed around Howard and Farage, just 3% of the vote, if this was a Parliamentary election they'd fall below the threshold and lose all their seats.

NR - This seems to be the third or fourth election now where we expect the Lib Dems to breakthrough and overtake on of the major parties and they never seem to. Year after year they get their hopes up and Clegg was meant to be the face of a new generation of Liberals, is it possible the Lib Dems have hit their ceiling?

DD - Of course this is an exit poll, but from the information we have in front of us you seem to be on the right track. We in the punditry call this the "devil you know" effect, where voters say "this is it, this is the time I take a leap and vote third party", but get cold feet at the last minute. Polls have shown consistently that Clegg has a better chance of beating Howard than Brown does *if* he makes it into the final round. A few more percentage points for Clegg and Howard's lead might shrink dramatically.

NR - If the "devil you know" effect is real it certainly hasn't hindered Farage, 9% is staggering for a party of that size, especially considering the rather dysfunctional campaign. I really must emphasise this, no party outside of the big three has broken 10% of the vote in living memory, certainly not since the war if you discount the SPD.

DD - Yes that could be an indication that our exit poll may be bit off, we'll just have to wait for more results. Whilst you wait we have a treat in stall for you, down the line from Derby we have MP and Tory candidate for Premier of the East Midlands Patrick McLoughlin and from Bristol we have Head of Policy for the Brown campaign Andrew Adonis. Gentlemen thank you both for joining us. Mr McLoughlin, as I'm sure you're aware the East Midlands was the closest Premier election in 2004, Labour winning with just 0.4% of the vote. Does this exit poll make you feel confident?...

 

[powerab]

DD - I'm just hearing we are expecting the result for the crucial swing region of the East Midlands any minute, this is of course one of the few regions where Conservative Howard won the Presidency but Labour's Patricia Hewitt won the Premiership, so it could really go either way, Nick what should we expect?

NR - Yes the East Midlands is an interesting one, we expect it to go to Howard rather comfortably, our statisticians say 1.14 million, or around 41% of the vote is the result Howard should get if our exit poll is bang on, more than that would indicate a comfortable Howard victory, less than that and Brown might have a fighting chance. The East Midlands are also somewhat of a stronghold for UKIP and the BNP. UKIP is strong in areas like East Lincolnshire, and for the BNP Stoke is one of their heartland cities, so we expect a decent performance from both parties.

DD - There you go ladies and gentlemen 1.14 million votes, our first indication on how accurate our exit poll will be. We now go to the central counting centre in Nottingham where the results are about to be declared.

MB - I Mick Burrows, Chief Counting Officer for the Region of the East Midlands hereby give notice that the total number of votes for each candidate for the East Midlands Region is as follows: Michael Howard, Conservative Party, 1,191,038. Gordon James Brown, Labour Party, 748,574. Nicholas William Peter Clegg, Liberal Democrats, 486,991. Nicholas John Griffin, British National Party, 189,232. Nigel Paul Farage, UK Independence Party, 166,970.

DD - So there you have it, a clear lead for Howard in the East Midlands, like in 2004 he hasn't just met but exceeded our exit poll. Whilst few expected Mr Brown or Mr Clegg to win the East Midlands they needed a strong result in this region to stay competitive, looks like they'll be cracking open the champagne in CCHQ.

NR - Yes and Farage seems to have wildly under-performed our exit poll, if our exit poll was correct he should have got at least 9% in the East Midlands, instead he's gotten around 6% of the vote and coming behind Griffin. Looks like my declarations of purple rain early might have been a bit off.

DD- BBC East Midlands' political editor John Hess is in Nottingham now, John is all hope lost for team Brown?...

 

[powerab]

“When Michael Howard became the Tory nominee in 2003 it marked the culmination of a remarkable political rebirth. Five years ago, the former home secretary was elected to Buckingham after 14 years in the spotlight. Five years later, President Howard is still regarded as one of the Tories' big hitters. The right-winger's victory came as a surprise to some, but few at Westminster doubt the President's political abilities. His first 100 days as President saw him outline his "British dream" which would allow people to succeed on the basis of their own talents and efforts. He pushed for "smaller government and bigger people" in attacks on red tape. Mr Howard also served as the Conservative's leader in Parliament. His confrontations with Gordon Brown at prime minister's questions also won praise from pundits. Mr Howard is still remembered as a tough and uncompromising President whose clarion call was "prison works". Now Howard is the first President to reach a second term.” - Profile; Micheal Howard, BBC News (2009)

Howard comfortably strolled back into Buckingham. In some ways the result of the election had been decided months ago, the financial crisis and expenses scandal had crippled Labour and Swine Flu had created a “rally round the flag” effect to the benefit of the Howard Government. Whilst it wasn’t the twenty point landslide dreamed up in CCHQ in the final round Howard had a comfortable 10 point majority.

Conservative celebrations did end there on the regional level; they won eight Premierships, pushing Labour back to its strongholds of Scotland, Wales and the North East. The Conservatives also picked up 26 extra mayoralities, including in Labour strongholds like Leeds. For the first time since the Commonwealth was founded, the Conservatives dominated locally and nationally.

For Labour the result was heartbreaking. Brown had failed to counter the narrative that the party was responsible for the financial crisis and Labour candidates up and down the country had suffered for it. With just 28% of the vote it had been the worst result for Labour in the Commonwealth’s history. Previously safe Labour areas like the North West and Yorkshire would fall to a blue Premier.

William Hague became the First Conservative Premier of Yorkshire

The result would prompt much soul searching within the party. Some, such as Ed Miliband and Andy Burnham would argue that the party needed to rediscover is “radicalism.” Others, such as Alan Johnson and Douglas Alexander argued the party needed to move back to the “electable centre” in the mould of Tony Blair, they argued the party needed to reclaim economic credibility.

For the Liberal Democrats the result was another disappointment in a string of raised hopes. Ironically whilst Clegg wasn’t elected President he was elected Mayor of Sheffield. (Clegg had signed up to run as he expected to lose the Presidential Primary and then couldn’t drop out). The party also lost its only Premier, Stephen Webb. It felt like the party ran as fast as it could but kept falling back, maybe there was a ceiling for the party.

UKIP also had a disappointing night. Farage was supposed to have led the party to a great breakthrough, instead he barely exceeded Knapman’s vote tally. Those on the right of the party argued Farage spent too much capital trying to distance himself from the BNP, rather than winning over the BNP’s voters, Batten especially stated that the party needed a “reckoning with Islam.”

“He's one of UKIP's rising stars. He also suggests the Bilderberg Group is a "shadow world government", and wants to ban the building of new mosques. Meet Gerard Batten, senior Ukip MEP and top lieutenant to Nigel Farage. In recent weeks since the election, Farage has tried to dismiss the string of "unpleasant" remarks made by various Ukip officials. Batten, thus, poses a particular problem for his party leader. A founding member of Ukip in 1993, he has been the party's chief whip in the Senate since 2007 after being appointed to the post. Batten was also Ukip's Premier candidate in London in 2009 and came third in the party's primary in 2009. Yet the London Senator has a wide range of controversial opinions, as colourful as the pink suits he wears. "Gerard is much more hard-line than many of his colleagues in the party," a party insider says. "He's got very strong views, with many of them too strong for a lot of people." HuffPost UK spoke to a dozen sources, to find out more about the controversial top Ukipper.” - Meet Gerard Batten, Asa Bennett, Huffington Post (2009)

Batten would be the first senior member of UKIP to break ranks and attack Farage, a sign of the splits to come

For the BNP, any result was a victory. They had got on the ballot and on the stage, they were a real party worthy of respect and BNP interviews, 5% of the vote was just the cherry on top. The party now had to focus on holding onto its Parliamentary representation, and avoiding splits in the party that could destroy its newly found credibility.

After moving back into Buckingham and taking congratulatory calls from various world leaders, Howard summoned Osborne and Davey to Buckingham for a meeting. Howard’s had just been given a fresh and strong mandate. The first thing he wanted to do was conduct a reshuffle.

“A Conservative activist from an early age, Beconsfield elected Dominic Grieve to the Commons in 1997. He is a barrister and was on the Senate's Justice Committee for four and a half years. Now he's President Howard's new Business Secretary. Mr Grieve is an ex-member of the London Diocesan Synod with an interest in constitutional issues and an opposition to devolution. He previously served on the Scotland committee. Regarded as a skilled and assiduous Senate performer, he was Howard's justice adviser during the election. Grieve is seen as aligned with Prime Minister George Osborne.” - Howard’s government, BBC (2009)

New Home Secretary Chris Grayling arrives at Downing Street

Commonwealth Cabinet 2009-
President - Micheal Howard (Conservative)
Vice President - Michael Ancram (Conservative)
Prime Minister - George Osborne (Conservative)
Deputy Prime Minister - Ed Davey (Liberal Democrats)
Senate Leader - David Davis (Conservative)
Foreign Secretary - Chris Huhne (Liberal Democrats)
Chancellor - Vince Cable (Liberal Democrats)
Home Secretary - Chris Grayling (Conservatives)
Justice Secretary - David Heath (Liberal Democrats)
Defence Secretary - David Hughes (Liberal Democrats)
Health Secretary - Eric Pickles (Conservative)
Business Secretary - Dominic Grieve (Conservative)
President of the Board of Trade - Nick Harvey (Liberal Democrats)
Work and Pensions Secretary - Andrew Lansley (Conservative)
Education Secretary - Michael Gove (Conservaitve)
Environment Secretary - Steve Webb (Liberal Democrats)
Housing Secretary - Nick Herbert (Conservative)
Transport Secretary - Greg Clark (Conservative)
Northern Ireland - Tim Farron (Liberal Democrats)
Scotland Secretary - David Mundell (Conservative)
Wales Secretary - Cheryl Gillan (Conservative)
Digital, Culture, Media and Sport - David Laws (Liberal Democrats)
International Development - George Young (Conservative)

Howard promoted loyalists like Chris Grayling and Eric Pickles to senior positions in the Cabinet, including the all-important role of Home Secretary.The Liberal Democrats played hardball in their negotiations. Davey knew many of the party’s activists were repulsed by Howard and thought the coalition would be a temporary measure for getting a Liberal Democrat President, now this wasn’t going to happen they were clamouring to end the coalition. Davey used this to his advantage, gaining Foreign Secretary Chris Huhne and keeping Cable’s position as Chancellor.

Now that the Presidency was won, the coalition Government began to ramp up its promised austerity. Howard decided to get bad news out the way first. The coalition announced it would be raising the retirement age for all both genders to 66. Further to this the Government announced it would be capping public sector pay until the financial crisis was dealt with.

In his first speech since being elected, Howard identified two goals. The first was that his Government would end the structural current budget deficit to "achieve a current balance." The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through large reductions in public expenditure. Howard would achieve this through spending reductions and tax increases amounting to £120 billion. The age of austerity had officially begun.

“Howard attributed his party's recent electoral success to the fact it had one the battle of ideas in British politics. The proof of that victory was the creation of the New Labour project. The fact that New Labour's "Social justice and economic efficiency" had become "the new common ground in British Politics." Howard knew that a simple appeal to Thatcherite economic liberalism would be enough to rally the party's core voters. He needed an alternative political narrative. A mix of economic prudence, and a tough guy attitude formed the core of his political strategy.” - The Osborne-Davey Government, Simon Lee (2011)

President Howard and Buckingham Deputy Chief Staff Rachel Whetstone travelling to a meeting with Taoiseach Brian Cowen in Dublin

Who was more responsible for austerity economics, Micheal Howard or Vince Cable? (30 Marks) - A Level History Exam (2019)

 

[powerab]

Premieres
Conservative - 8 (+6)
Labour - 3 (-4)
Sinn Fein - 1 (+1)

Mayors
Conservative - 41 (+26)
Labour - 25 (-30)
Liberal Democrats - 7 (-)
Independents - 2 (Lutfur Rahman and Tony Egginton) (+2)
SNP - 1 (+1)
Green Party - 1 (+1)
Sinn Fein - 1 (+1)

 

[powerab]

Austerity and rising unemployment caused a rise in left-wing protest movements

“But let's talk about what we can do to help unemployed families. I have the greatest sympathy, but sympathy is not going to get them the help that they need. What we have to do in this very difficult time is to encourage small businesses to keep going. We need to make it easier for them to keep going and make it easier for them to take people on. So George Osborne and Dominic Grieve have proposed very specific targeted measures. These include a payroll tax reduction for small firms, a Corporation Tax reduction for small firms and a six months VAT holiday for small firms. These are specific measures which would help employers to get through this terrible crisis and enable them to offer people jobs. You make it as easy as possible for them to get a new job, that's what they want.” - Micheal Howard interview with Jon Sopel, BBC (2009)

Howard began to assert himself more publicly, appearing in the media semi-frequently

As Howard’s second term officially began the situation was dire for the Commonwealth. Unemployment in Britain was standing at a 15-year high of 2,300,000 and the quarterly rise in unemployment was the highest for 29 years. Much of this disaffection had led to the BNP’s relatively strong performance in the Presidential Election, 5% was nothing to sniff at and the BNP was increasingly recruiting unemployed and disaffected white youths. Nick Griffin held a “victory rally” at York but was chased off by protesters, leading to violent clashes where several people were injured, "Broken Britain" had been one of Howard’s leading slogans during the election, Britain certainly seemed broken.

The mass gatherings of rallies and elections had also led to further anxiety about the Swine Flu, this anxiety was further compounded in mid June, when the Scottish Government confirmed it’s first Swine Flu death, a 38 year old Glaswegian woman. This would be the first death by the virus outside the Americas. The Government confirmed 1,300 cases across the UK. Howard was criticised for sacking the left-wing Liberal Democrat David Howarth as Health Secretary, instead replacing him with a loyalist, Eric Pickles. Critics said the Conservatives wanted “the glory for themselves.”

“The Royal Pharmaceutical Society reviewed its plans for how the profession could best be supported to help during a pandemic. The society issued its first alert covering the supply of antivirals. In June, the WHO declared a pandemic. Not long after that the UK moved to a treatment phase, with community pharmacies acting as antiviral collection points. Pickles announced legislative changes to ensure continuity of supply during a swine flu pandemic. These included a permanent change to allow pharmacists to give an emergency supply of up to 30 days’ worth of prescription medicines. The Society announced it had made provisions for 21,000 people on the non-practising register to be registered should the Secretary of State declare an emergency.” - Swine Flu, Shortages and Errors, Dawn Connelly, The Pharmaceutical Journal (2009)

The Government delivered millions of swine flu leaflets to households across the country

At the same time both houses of Parliament were facing turmoil with both the Speaker of the House and Presiding Officer of the Senate being forced out of their positions. In the House of Commons the battle came between reformists and small-c conservatives. The radicals wanted to greatly reform the House of Commons after the expenses scandal, to modernise the institution. Their standard bearer was moderate Tory MP John Bercow. Bercow was an outstanding parliamentary speaker and popular with Labour MPs (not least because he often voted with them), but the Tories regard him with suspicion. In a more Labour-friendly Parliament Bercow may have had a better chance.

For the traditionalists there was socially conservative Labour MP Frank Field. The Labour former welfare minister was popular amongst the public because of his reputation for integrity. He was very popular with Tory MPs. But some feared he did not have the authority to command a rowdy House of Commons. Many worried Field would be too cautious for the post expenses age.

Field was seen as a continuity Martin candidate

Early on it looked like the race would become between these two candidates, previous front-runner George Young had taken a post in Howard’s Cabinet and thus disqualified himself. Deputy Speaker Sylvia Heal announced a bid but she struggled to get out of the shadow of Micheal Martin. Conservative backbenches Richard Shepherd and Patrick Cormack also made bids but struggled to make a noticeable impact. The BNP tried to run South East MP Paul Golding but he was unable to get three MPs of other parties to back him so was kept off the ballot. The BNP abstained on the speakership election in protest. Treatment of the BNP became a clear issue in the speakership election, Field arguing they had been elected and had a right to be dealt with impartially, whilst Bercow pledged to take on “the evil” of the BNP.

“Today Commons Speaker candidate John Bercow has upset traditionalists by making a robust attack on the BNP. In reference to the British National Party. This is what he had to say: "I'm under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to be impartial as between the forces of democracy on the one hand and the forces of evil on the other... I do feel, as someone from a Jewish background, that the evil of the BNP is that its whole politics is based upon and driven by hate. That is a poison which we could well do without." Very strong stuff indeed.” - Speaker candidate Bercow attacks the "evil of the BNP", Jonathan Isaby, Conservative Home (2009)

The contest seemed deadlocked until the last minute entrance of Menzies Campbell. Campbell was a former Presidential Candidate and Deputy PM so he had experience, but he was also respected throughout British politics. Campbell had authority and intellect, and was well regarded on all sides of the Commons. Although he did pay back some money after the Telegraph published his expenses, he was less damaged by the revelations than other MPs were. Campbell argued it was time for a third party speaker and he had the backing of several third-party MPs, from the Green’s Ashley Gunstock to even a couple UKIP MP’s

Campbell ran as a middle ground between the radical Bercow and cautious Field, his candidacy showed the newly found power of third party MP’s Liberal Democrats in particular, Campbell based his campaign around a “rainbow Parliament” of pluralism. Campbell achieved a narrow victory over Frank Field with John Bercow’s preferences in the final ballot.

Alongside the drama in Parliament, Osborne approved Defence Secretary David Hughes’ plan for an investigation into the Iraq War. The investigation had been a key demand of the Liberal Democrats for the continuation of the Iraq War, and Osborne saw it as a good way to embarrass Labour and it’s leadership. Former intelligence officer and civil servant John Chillcot was nominated to lead the investigation.

It was established by Hughes that it was "essential to hold as much of the proceedings of the inquiry as possible in public". In July 2009, Hughes announced that the committee would be able to request any British document and call any British citizen. In the week before the inquiry began hearing witnesses, a series of documents including military reports were leaked. They appeared to show poor post-war planning and lack of provisions. The inquiry commenced with the former chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, as the first witness. John Chilcot announced that the inquiry was not seeking to apportion blame but that it would "get to the heart of what happened". Chilcot emphasises he would not "shy away" from making criticism where it was justified.

Despite their losses in the election the Liberal Democrats were punching above their weight and letting their presence known. A storm over tuition fees was still to come. Besides, whilst the events in Parliament were shaking the political world, the world of journalism was about to deal with a storm of its own.

“Despite victory in the Speakership election, Davey's aides last week denied remarks attributed to him by one newspaper that he might be toast in a few months' time. They insist that his strategy is to defend the principle that "coalition politics works". This is the anvil on which his political strategy will turn. There is also a rueful regret in Davey circles that the Tory right is being so disciplined. They lament it makes it harder for the public to see the extent to which the party is punching above its weight in the coalition. But all senior Lib Dems recognise they are being damaged by the tuition fees issue. Some argue that over 30 seats will be lost, if they do not at least abstain, or turn the argument round. They fear the fees issues could become the equal of Labour's Iraq on middle-class doorsteps. Many admit they should never have signed the National Union of Students' pledge opposing tuition fees at the time of the election. Cable himself told Channel 4 News he would never have signed the pledge if he had known he would be in government.” - Liberal Democrat ministers under pressure to toe line on tuition fees, Patrick Wintour, The Guardian (2009)

To what extent did Campbell’s election as House of Commons Speaker demonstrate the power of third parties in the Commonwealth (30 Marks) - A Level History Exam (2019)

 

[powerab]

Tuition Fees would be a dividing issue throughout the ConLib coalition

“Let’s be clear about what has happened. The House of Commons has not voted only for a rise in tuition fees in English universities. It has voted for the privatisation of British Higher education. Micheal Gove announced the creation of Britain’s second private university – the first for 20 years. That university is run by BPP, a provider of various professional qualifications, listed on the Stock Exchange since 1986. In 2009, BPP became part of Apollo Global Inc. The purpose of Apollo Global is to make profit from the opportunities presented by a global knowledge economy. Individuals need qualifications to sell themselves on the global labour market, and they're willing to pay a lot of money for it. But entering the higher education market is challenging. The entry costs are high. It takes a lot of money to build and staff a campus, and years to develop the kind of reputation that inspires full confidence. And there are already lots of established ‘brands’ providing Higher Education.” - Britain, greet the age of privatised Higher Education, Alan Finlayson, OpenDemocracy (2009)

In the sweltering heat of July came a reckoning for the Commonwealth’s Liberal Democrats, the Higher Education Act of 2009. Amongst several reforms to “streamline” and “moderniser” universities, there was a raising of tuition fees from £3,000 a year under the Labour Government to £6,000, doubling the level of debt for young people. This policy was particularly damming for the Liberal Democrats, anti-war and anti-fees young people had been the party’s base of support throughout the last few Parliaments, worst of all Liberal Democrats, including Ed Davey and Vince Cable had signed the National Union of Students pledge to abolish fees should they get into Government. Not only had the Lib Dems failed to scrap fees, their MPs were actively voting to increase it.

Most Liberal Democrat candidates signed the NUS pledge during the 2008 election

Protests erupted in London and around the country. In Birmingham about 30 protesters occupied the city council's offices. There were also protests in Leeds, Sheffield, Edinburgh, Liverpool, Belfast, Brighton and Manchester. School pupils took to the streets to join students. The Met police arrested a total of 160 people during the course of protests in London. Some 140 were arrested for breach of the peace, and ten with violent disorder.

The opposition hoped to use this division to bring the coalition crashing down just a year after its birth. David Miliband condemned the fees as a "tragedy for a whole generation of young people". Miliband confirmed his party would vote against the proposals. Miliband argued that it was unfair that the cost of degree courses was being put on to students. Miliband warned that fees would "force students to choose the cheapest courses, not the one that suits them best". The Greens and SNP also saw an increase in support due to their policy of scrapping tuition fees. In a viral speech, Green MP Shahrar Ali condemned MPs for hypocrisy, arguing that they had all benefited from free tuition fees and had “pulled the ladder up behind them.” Despite rumours that Cable or Huhne would resign, most Liberal Democrats kept the faith and travelled through the aye lobby in support of the Government. The coalition was here to stay.

“The government has survived a revolt by Liberal Democrat and Conservative MPs over its plans to increase tuition fees. Parliament approved the policy 46 votes. The coalition lost its majority and had to be bailed out by UKIP MPs following an impassioned five-hour Commons debate. 46 Lib Dem MPs rebelled, along with five Conservatives. The coalition motion, backed by 340 votes to 294, would raise fees to £6,000 a year. The debate took place while thousands of students staged protests at Westminster. After the outcome became clear, protesters smashed windows in the Treasury buildings. Ministers said that the fees increase was necessary and fair, but Labour argued it would deter the poor from going to university. Some 46 Lib Dems rebelled, while 76 - including the party's ministers - backed the change, and three abstained. Five Tory MPs voted against the motion and two abstained. All Lib Dem MPs said before the election that they would oppose any rise in tuition fees. The coalition deal included an agreement to allow them to abstain in any vote on the issue.” - Tuition Fees Vote, BBC (2009)

This wasn’t the only scandal of the summer. The Guardian published allegations that the publisher of the News of the World paid £1m in court costs after its journalists were involved in phone tapping. The Guardian claimed News of the World settled three cases after obtaining information illegally. It claimed News Group paid £700,000 in damages and costs to the head of the professional footballers' association. News of the World targeted over 3,000 high-profile figures. These included model Elle Macpherson and former Vice President John Prescott. The scandal especially affected the Conservative Party, this was because the editor at the time of the hacking, Andy Coulson was now George Osborne's press officer. Osborne said he was "very relaxed" about the story. "The ramping up of this story is ridiculous - this is about a payment made well after Andy left the News of the World." This launched a massive legal case and the decline of public trust in both the media and the Conservative Party.

Coulson made the cardinal sin of a political staffer, he became the story

Meanwhile, Health Secretary Eric Pickles was struggling to stay on top of the growing Swine Flu pandemic. The Government launched the National Pandemic Flu Service across England. This was a website and phone line allowing people who thought they had the virus to bypass the NHS to get antiviral drugs. The website crashed within hours of its launch due to the overwhelming demand. This further fed to the narrative of a dysfunctional coalition Government that was unable to deal with events, for a Labour Party coming out of a disastrous defeat, the chaos was warmly welcomed. Labour saw a small uptick in its polling mostly at the expense of the two coalition parties, especially the Lib Dems

“A new poll reveals that the 'fees generation' are opposed to any increase in university fees. The poll, conducted by YouGov for UCU shows that a staggering 85% of young people (18-24 year olds) oppose an increase in student tuition fees. Only 5% are in favour. 2011's elections will be the first for many students who started their university education. The poll's warning was echoed by Senator John Leech who called on the party to make education a natural Liberal issue. Scott said the party should force the Tories to show their hand on the issue. UCU is warning that the 'fees generation' may reap revenge unless the Lib Dems commit not to increase university tuition fees. In the 2008 general election the Liberal Democrats led Labour among 18-24 year olds, now Labour leads. UCU said today that any party wishing to win the next election could not afford to ignore voters on the controversial issue of student funding. Even in 2005, top-up fees' unpopularity had led to defeat for Labour in areas with large populations of students.” - Beware revenge of 'fees generation' poll warns Lib Dems, UCU (2009)

UCU Industrial Action spread like wildfire around the country

The Government’s attempts to get a handle on the Swine Flu situation included a mass delivery of informative leaflets to every household in the country, whilst this massive project started weeks ago, it faced a snag. Business Secretary Dominic Grieve had announced his intentions to privatise Royal Mail. This received a great backlash from Britain’s major trade unions who argued the Government was being opportunistic in its privatisation and should wait until after the pandemic, Royal Mail workers were risking disease through working and were scared of receiving worse conditions.

The Government didn’t listen and Osborne confirmed in October the privatisation would be going ahead. In response workers voted to take strike action over job security and working conditions. They voted three to one in favour of action, with nearly 62,000 out of a total of 81,000 workers who voted saying they wanted to strike. The Government tried to de-legitimise the strike, arguing said 60% of the total number of postal workers working in the UK did not vote to strike. Whilst most expected the union to vote in favour of strike actions, the landslide result came as a great surprise. Three quarters of union members polled endorsed the union's call for a national stoppage. This undermined the suggestion that disaffection was restricted to a few hotspots. The CWU, and its leader Billy Hayes were a formidable opponent. Vice President Michael Ancram "condemned" the plan to strike as "deplorable and irresponsible". He said it would drive away customers and undermine confidence in the postal service. The privatisation of Royal Mail would not be the last privatisation controversy of the year.

“Dominic Grieve today insisted the government's plan to privatise Royal Mail would bring a "gale force of fresh air" to its management. Whilst David Miliband said Labour would support the use of some private companies in Royal Mail, he ruled out supporting any full privatisation. Labour rebels are geared up for a fight over the proposals. The Business Secretary said that it was too much to expect the taxpayer to take on the whole burden of financing the modernisation of the company. But Labour and Liberal Democrat backbenches opposed to the move claimed that they had the support of some cabinet ministers. More than 30 Labour MPs have already signed a Commons early day motion (EDM) saying they are opposed to the scheme. They want Royal Mail to remain "wholly publicly-owned". Earlier today, Grieve met around 20 Liberal Democrat MPs in the Commons to discuss the issue. The meeting was "civilised", although the business secretary did not give ground and did not appear to win over any of his critics.” - Grieve insists Royal Mail privatisation will go ahead, Andrew Sparrow, The Guardian (2009)

The last 2000s saw an upsurge in industrial action in the UK, both from UCU and the CWU

To what extent did the 2008 coalition bring stability to the Commonwealth? (30 Marks) - A Level History Exam (2019)

 

[powerab]

Taken from Election Night 2009

DD - We have some breaking news from Belfast, Martin Martin McGuinness of Sinn Fein has been elected Premier of Northern Ireland, beating the DUP's Peter Robinson by less than 6,000 votes, BBC Northern Ireland's Political Correspondent Stephen Walker is in the studio to talk us through. Stephen what exactly happened?

SW - That is exactly the question the DUP are asking, just 6,000 votes or 0.3% of voters in it, the result here was incredibly close. Many in the Robinson camp blame Jim Allister and the TUV. Mr Allister told his supporters to put him as their number one choice and not put any further preferences, in protest of the DUP's position of "Reluctant Acceptance". This is the DUP's policy of not making the return of Elizabeth Windsor a red line in any Government negotiations.

DD - That greatly upset unionist communities correct?

SW - Exactly, when the UUP adopted an acceptance policy in the early 2000s it was seen as a betrayal by many unionists who shifted to the DUP, looks like those same have been scorned again. They're switched their votes to the TUV or stayed homee entirely.

DD - And what does this mean for the future of Northern Ireland, will we see a border poll in the next few months?

SW - Well of course this isn't the first time Northern Ireland has had a Republican Premier, moderate John Hume became Premier in 1999, but of course Mr McGuinness is seen as much more radical than Hume. Sinn Fein was the political wing of the IRA and some have accused Mr McGuinness of being a recent IRA fighter, charges he strongly denies, saying he left the Republican Army in the 70s. As for a border poll anything is possible but Mr McGuinness has said it is "not a priority at this time". Mr McGuinness hopes to try and cool anxieties and grow his support in the Northern Irish Parliament at the 2011 elections, there are currently more unionists than republicans in the Parliament so it'd be difficult for Mr McGuinness to push through a border poll even if he wanted to.

DD - I'm sure tensions will be running high in unionist neighbourhoods, is there any chance of this result being challenged? Or worse a return to violence?

SW - If there is violence it will be from smaller splinter groups I'd imagine, both the UUP and DUP have congratulated Mr McGuinness and say they want to keep the power-sharing arrangement under the Good Friday Agreement going. I'm sure Sinn Fein is very aware of how scary this will seem to some communities and that is probably why McGuiness' reconciliatory victory speech was so cautious.

DD -Thank you Stephen, I now have with me the Liberal Democrat Senator for East Anglia with me ,Matthew Oakeshott, Senator Oakeshott, only 8% of the vote for your sister party Alliance, it's not looking good for the yellow team, what is the lesson from this election?...

 

[powerab]

Vince Cable became the public face of privatisation

Cable and Grieve’s “privatisation blitz” continued as the Commonwealth’s hot summer turned to a damp winter. Cable announced plans to privatise major existing infrastructure as well as future infrastructure projects. The total sale was nearly £20 billion of public assets. The most contentious was the Government’s plan to privatise the Dartford Crossing. The plans caused an outcry, especially in Conservative/UKIP marginal areas of North Kent like Gravesend and Medway, locals were worried privatisation would lead to a marked increase in the toll, which could spell disaster for many companies on the Kent/London border. Over 150,000 vehicles used the crossing each day. The annual profit from tolls was nearly £60 million.

“David Miliband, the Leader of the Opposition welcomed the move to sell off assets but said any plans to do so in the current market were "barmy". He said: "Given the state of the public finances, asset sales, at least in principle, make sense. But this government does not have a good track record in getting the taxpayer a good price from asset sales. Attempts to sell off large amounts of government land into a very depressed market as we have now would be barmy. The Chancellor should base asset sales on a financial calculation not a political one." a Labour source described it as "the largest sell off since the 1980s privatisation".” - George Osborne's fire sale of public assets to raise £20bn, Allegra Stratton, The Guardian (2009)

Osborne and the Conservatives were still enjoying a honeymoon in the polls, which Osborne used to push through radical economic reforms

This scheme caused particular anxiety amongst South East Conservative MPs and Senators, Kent had long been a Conservative bastion, but in the most recent council election UKIP had broken 25% of the vote, winning 22 seats and becoming the County’s main opposition party, many South East Tories were nervous that UKIP would take advantage of the controversy to grow its political support in the region.

“The strongest vote for Ukip in the entire country came in the small town and port of Boston in Lincolnshire. 45 per cent of voters cast their ballot for the party. But this was not the only place where the party had increased its vote to surge past the 30 per cent mark. Most of its strongholds were market towns or working-class communities that were scattered along the east coast. from Lincolnshire to Norfolk, Essex, Kent, Suffolk, and round the cost to Sussex. They included South Holland, Norfolk and a large swathe of territory in Kent that covered Gravesham, Medway, Shepway and Swale. Some areas outside the east had also given strong support. These included competing with the BNP for the industrial Labour towns of Mansfield and Rotherham.” - UKIP: Inside the Campaign to Redraw the Map of British Politics, Matthew Goodwin (2015)

Over in Northern Ireland tensions were slowly simmering. Nationalists had great hopes for their new Premier, Martin McGuinness, republican areas were rolling out Irish tricolours ready for an imminent border poll that never came. For the most radical nationalists McGuinness was a disappointment, he continued to share power with the DUP and ruled out a border poll in the near future, whilst this was popular with most voters and helped cool unionist concerns, some radical republicans saw McGuinness and Sinn Fein as at best a disappointment, at worst a traitor.

This discontent with Sinn Fein saw a small increase in sporadic dissident republican attacks. A bomb was detonated under the car belonging to a Police officer's wife in the Unionist area of East Belfast. Paramedics took the woman to hospital with minor injuries as the bomb was set to go off in the passenger side where her husband usually sat. Luckily for the officer he was not present on the day. The Real IRA later claimed responsibility. A few days later an improvised bomb was thrown at an army base in the north of Belfast some time before 1am. The bomb didn't injure anyone. The base was the home of the North Irish Horse Regiment, a Royal Armoured Corps unit. The worst attack was a drive-by shooting by dissidents which killed two British soldiers. The Real IRA believed a deteriorating security situation on the streets would prompt backbenchers in Sinn Fein to push for a border poll. The various attacks were poorly organised and aside from the two soldiers no one else was seriously hurt. They were condemned by all sections of the Northern Irish community, but it did represent another issue the Government had to deal with.

Police presence in Northern Ireland would increase in the late 2000s

“Sinn Fein united with the British government in Westminster, in condemnation of attacks claimed by the Real IRA. A dissident republican group opposed to the Northern Ireland peace process said Sunday it shot dead two British soldiers at an army base. This is the first such killing in 12 years. A man from the Real IRA claimed responsibility for the attack at the Massereene barracks northwest of Belfast in a phone call to a newspaper. The soldiers were killed when two masked gunmen pulled up outside their barracks and fired two long bursts of automatic gunfire. The attack has raised fears that sectarian violence could return to Northern Ireland. The nation has seen relative peace since 30 years of sectarian unrest which cost some 3,000 lives was ended with a 1998 peace accord. Figures from all parties vowed the shootings, would not shake the political system put in place as part of the peace process. Northern Ireland is a British nation ruled by a devolved power-sharing government. Premier Martin McGuinness said the days of conflict "can never come back again". - Parties unite to condemn attacks claimed by Real IRA, France 24 (2009)

Despite the various challenges the Conservatives still had a comfortable lead of 13 points in the polls and the coalition managed to blast through several pieces of early legislation. Some highlights included the “Marine Access Act”, a Tory right pet peeve which regulated fishing in British waters, including the establishment of an exclusive economic zone. A cross party group of MPs also passed the “Autism Act”. The bill required the Secretary of State to prepare and publish an autism strategy. The strategy set out the strategy for meeting the needs of adults in England with autism. It called for an improvement of relevant services to such adults by local authorities and NHS trusts. Despite votes against by BNP and UKIP MPs, the Bill passed by a landslide.

The Autism Act was a great victory for neurodivergent rights activists

Labour was facing problems of its own, after the two defeats of 2008 and 2009 the party was looking for a scalp before the vital elections of 2011. David Miliband was a competent commons and media performer but struggled to articulate what specifically Labour stood for, many in the party, especially the left were annoyed at his lack of opposition to spending cuts and privatisation. Miliband’s support for the Government’s infrastructure privatisation project became the last straw for many Brownite and left-wing MPs. A cabal of 40 MPs, organised by arch Brownite Yorkshire MP Jon Trickett pushed for Miliband to resign, or at least announce he would not lead the party into the next election, his leadership in 2008 had been a disaster, his Presidential campaign had collapsed, he was essentially a dead man walking, all they needed was for someone to twist the knife.

A friendly and cordial meeting between Miliband and a group of the Trickett rebels took place in Miliband’s office in Norman Shaw North, after a ninety minute discussion the meeting was concluded, later that evening Miliband addressed the PLP, and then the media in the press conference. He announced he could not in good faith lead the party into the next election, nor could he walk away in a time of national crisis. Miliband announced he would serve a full term as Leader of the Opposition, but would not seek re-election in 2011, and thus would not lead the party into that election.

"Veteran Brownite hands launched a media offensive that ensured they set the tone for how many would explain Miliband's announcement. Tom Watson, described Miliband's strategy as a ‘hideous and ghastly experiment." Preeminent Brown ally, Ed Balls, claimed 2008 ‘was an election that Labour could have won. David Miliband lost it’. Miliband had discarded what Balls called ``the eternal Brownite truth". According to Balls, "a Brownite wants to win as broad a coalition of support on the centre and left to make the country fairer." John Trickett said on the issue "People talk about opposition for opposition's sake Blairites think you can win elections by agreeing with everything the Conservatives say. Support for support’s sake." By supporting many of the government's cuts and attacking Labour, Miliband alienated Labour's core vote." - Labour's Campaigns 2008-2011, Steven Fielding (2012)

Brown's defeat and Miliband's announcement played into the hands of Former Education Secretary Ed Balls, who was now one of the most senior Labour politicians left standing

“Brownism was the dominant ideology in the Labour Party 1999-2011”, discuss (30 Marks) - A Level History Exam (2019)