Oh come now!
The Lib Dems have always told people what they wanted to hear, with little regard for that little thing called reality.

Did it not give it away before the election when they were attacking Labour for overspending on the public sector? This is the same party who campaigned in the elections throughout the 90s for an increase to the basic rate of income tax in order to fund a public sector expansion. The party doesn't really know whether it's socialist or not! If you ask a Lib Dem supporter what the party stands for they'll probably come up with some variant on the concept of "fairness". Whatever the hell that means!

The real truth is that it makes absolutely no difference what parties say before election. Circumstances change and pledges will be broken. This has happened a million times before and this u-turn from Clegg is hardly unique even if it is quite impressive.

The real difference between the Lib Dems and the Tories/Labour is the with the latter two, the parties are founded on certain principles that make them predictable in the face of changing circumstances. The spending plans that parties lay out before elections become irrelevant if a year later tax revenues turn out to be 25% lower than projected. But people know that the Tories would err on the side of harsher spending cuts, Labour would err on the side of yet more borrowing and taxation. If tax revenues are 25% higher, the Tories would err on the side of tax cuts, Labour would err on the side of protecting the public sector. With the Lib Dems, who the hell knows what they would do? The party doesn't appear to have any guiding principle other than some nebulous concept of "fairness" (which in political terms is whatever gives them the highest opinion polls that week). It is therefore unsurprising that when they actually get into power and that little thing called "reality" gets in the way of all their overblown promises, we see u-turns that would impress a joyriding chav fleeing the police.

Really, what did you expect?
(Mr T, Mon 6 Dec 2010, 15:40, Reply)