Archive for the ‘Sir Menzies Campbell’ Category
Letter from Ming
Ming's masterstroke
David Cameron has now hoisted himself by his own petard. He’s had to admit that once Brown/Parliament have ratified the latest EU Treaty, it will be ‘too difficult’ to hold a retrospective referendum.
So, that’s that issue neutralised, in that Cameron will be unable to use it as a campaigning issue in the run-up to the general election. Also he is now under fire from the Europhobes in his party for this latest admission. Marvellous! I love it when a plan falls apart.
So, the Liberal Democrats are now the only party proposing any form of referendum on the EU. That is on the whole issue of our membership of the EU – out or in. Yes or no.
By the way, I think this position is subject to ratification by the whole party. But certainly Ming, Chris Huhne and Nick Clegg have all rejected a referendum on the EU Treaty and proposed a referendum on membership. The latter two confirmed this on Sunday on The Andrew Marr Show thus:
ANDREW MARR: Would either of you give this country a referendum on the European Treaty?
NICK CLEGG: No.
CHRIS HUHNE: No, but I do think we need a referendum on the big issues.
NICK CLEGG: Absolutely.
So, perhaps Ming should be thanked for a masterstroke here, after all, bless him. It’s turned out that (once the treaty is ratified) Cameron hasn’t got anything to campaign on, and has been left with Europhobes in his party fuming at him, while the LibDems emerge as the only party, post ratification, proposing a referendum on the EU.
Oh, actually, perhaps Cameron has got something to campaign on. He could campaign as the leader of the party who refused Britain a referendum when it actually mattered (i.e on Common Market entry in the first place, on the Single European Act and on the Maastricht treaty) but instead promised us a faux-referendum on a revising treaty which was only significant when you add it as an increment to all the other treaties since Rome.
TweetMing’s masterstroke
David Cameron has now hoisted himself by his own petard. He’s had to admit that once Brown/Parliament have ratified the latest EU Treaty, it will be ‘too difficult’ to hold a retrospective referendum.
So, that’s that issue neutralised, in that Cameron will be unable to use it as a campaigning issue in the run-up to the general election. Also he is now under fire from the Europhobes in his party for this latest admission. Marvellous! I love it when a plan falls apart.
So, the Liberal Democrats are now the only party proposing any form of referendum on the EU. That is on the whole issue of our membership of the EU – out or in. Yes or no.
By the way, I think this position is subject to ratification by the whole party. But certainly Ming, Chris Huhne and Nick Clegg have all rejected a referendum on the EU Treaty and proposed a referendum on membership. The latter two confirmed this on Sunday on The Andrew Marr Show thus:
ANDREW MARR: Would either of you give this country a referendum on the European Treaty?
NICK CLEGG: No.
CHRIS HUHNE: No, but I do think we need a referendum on the big issues.
NICK CLEGG: Absolutely.
So, perhaps Ming should be thanked for a masterstroke here, after all, bless him. It’s turned out that (once the treaty is ratified) Cameron hasn’t got anything to campaign on, and has been left with Europhobes in his party fuming at him, while the LibDems emerge as the only party, post ratification, proposing a referendum on the EU.
Oh, actually, perhaps Cameron has got something to campaign on. He could campaign as the leader of the party who refused Britain a referendum when it actually mattered (i.e on Common Market entry in the first place, on the Single European Act and on the Maastricht treaty) but instead promised us a faux-referendum on a revising treaty which was only significant when you add it as an increment to all the other treaties since Rome.
TweetSurprise? Really?
The BBC and others have described Ming’s decision as a “surprise”.
While I am gratified that the description “surprise” at least gives some leeway for Ming’s decision to be regarded as his own in respect, at least, to its precise timing, I am surprised that the “media” are surprised.
In Brighton at the conference last month, Ming gave 70 media interviews and was asked about his age in every single one of those interviews. (I might add that when Ming was interviewed by the LibDem Blogger of the Year shortlisters, none of us asked him about his age – according to my notes and recollection).
So, why the “surprise”?
In their last 70 interviews with the press, have the media challenged Delia Smith, Dick Cheney, Nick Nolte or Bob Dylan about their age? They are, you guessed it, the same age as Ming.
Many individual members of the media are hugely intelligent and discerning. But, and I don’t judge whether this is good or bad, there is a “pack behaviour” thing with the media these days related to the “narrative” which it collectively attaches to any given subject at any given time. This pack behaviour can be, at times, described as absolutely brainless.
If anything ended Ming’s leadership career, it was the “narrative”. Political death by narrative.
TweetThank you Ming
Paddy put it most eloquently on Today this morning. This is Ming’s day.
Amidst the bundle of emotions of the last few days (including, frankly, feeling a bit unworthy myself) my respect for Ming is overwhelming and increased by the courageous manner of his departure.
Of all the various political figures of whom I have knowledge, I know of no figure with such high integrity, unswerving decency and noble dignity.
He has been, and will no doubt continue to be, an outstanding and remarkably selfless servant of British Liberalism.
Tweet




