3 ms·

These cuts have been really damaging and I don't think people realized how "the greenest government ever" was actually all the work of the Lib Dems. The current

These cuts have been really damaging and I don't think people realized how "the greenest government ever" was actually all the work of the Lib Dems. The current treasury led agenda is very short term thinking and pandering to NIMBY voters. There's been a lot of fuss about solar, but the UK isn't really that sunny, especially when we use the most energy. The real tragedy is Carbon Capture and Storage combined with biomass. That was looking really promising before it was scrapped, as it can actually remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

toyg 10y ago
The Lib Dems were complete suckers and were treated as such by the electorate -- and that's the charitable version.
- tonyedgecombe 10y ago
  They were between a rock and a hard place, the electorate blamed Labour for the financial crisis (even though it was probably just as likely if the Tories had been in power) so they took what was the only option. Other than not making that promise on tuition fees I'm not sure what they could have done anything differently.
  - toyg 10y ago
    They could have conditioned a minority Lab government, which would have been much closer to their positions than the Con manifesto ever was. Or they could have left government when it became clear that they were being played on all sides. One or two years could have been forgiven, not five. They were never likely to get a majority government on their own; even solidifying support after carrying out massive cuts on social programs would have been impossible for anyone left of Cameron. So what were they holding on for? They were used as cannon fodder for five years, and for what? They could have done many things differently. Anyway, it doesn't really matter at this point.
    - tonyedgecombe 10y ago
      But after the financial crisis and with Gordon Brown at the helm Labour was deeply unpopular, I can see why aligning with them wasn't that attractive either. If they had pulled out of the coalition after two years then they would just have been out of power for longer, I'm not sure their popularity would have bounced back.

toyg 10y ago

The Lib Dems were complete suckers and were treated as such by the electorate -- and that's the charitable version.

tonyedgecombe 10y ago
They were between a rock and a hard place, the electorate blamed Labour for the financial crisis (even though it was probably just as likely if the Tories had been in power) so they took what was the only option. Other than not making that promise on tuition fees I'm not sure what they could have done anything differently.
- toyg 10y ago
  They could have conditioned a minority Lab government, which would have been much closer to their positions than the Con manifesto ever was. Or they could have left government when it became clear that they were being played on all sides. One or two years could have been forgiven, not five. They were never likely to get a majority government on their own; even solidifying support after carrying out massive cuts on social programs would have been impossible for anyone left of Cameron. So what were they holding on for? They were used as cannon fodder for five years, and for what? They could have done many things differently. Anyway, it doesn't really matter at this point.
  - tonyedgecombe 10y ago
    But after the financial crisis and with Gordon Brown at the helm Labour was deeply unpopular, I can see why aligning with them wasn't that attractive either. If they had pulled out of the coalition after two years then they would just have been out of power for longer, I'm not sure their popularity would have bounced back.