Clegg has betrayed every Lib Dem voter – says Lib Dem Cllr as he joins Labour

As the Liberal Democrats head to Liverpool for what is sure to be a difficult conference, Solihull Councillor Simon Slater becomes the latest in a stream of Lib Dems  to leave the party to join Labour.

A Lib Dem Cllr for Shirley West since 2006, and Lib Dem Parliamentary candidate for Meriden in the general election, Slater accused the party leadership of selling-out their principles to secure “top jobs with their new Tory friends in government.”

On joining the Labour Party Cllr Simon Slater said:

Before the election Nick Clegg talked about not cutting too fast or too deep, he talked about protecting the most vulnerable in society, fairness for students and meaningful constitutional reform, and he fought against a Tory VAT bombshell. But now in government he has betrayed everything he said he believed in and everyone who voted for him.

The national Liberal Democrat leadership seem more interested in securing the top jobs with their new Tory friends in government than any principle.

Tags: , , ,

12 Responses to “Clegg has betrayed every Lib Dem voter – says Lib Dem Cllr as he joins Labour”

  1. I think I’ve just worked out what Labour’s 13-year plan was.

    You almost bankrupted us (you know, with a grossly inflated State and giving away half our gold for next to nothing, etc.), so when the new Government made the inevitable cuts needed to save the country from going under, there would be rats crossing to the Labour benches and everyone would hate the Tories (or in this case, the ConDems) and Labour would soon get back in to cause even more damage.

    Brilliant. Power is everything, isn’t it? How I admire the evil geniuses of New Labour.

  2. Daragh McDowell says:

    As a Lib Dem voter, I do not feel in the slightest ‘betrayed’ by Nick Clegg or the party. Nor does a small handful of opportunistic councillers suddenly having Damscene conversions to Labour in the face of a difficult political environment constitute a ‘stream’ or indeed a development of any significance at all.

  3. OwnUp-WhoVotedToryThen says:

    And the tories would’ve looked after the economy any better?! (with their rich friends/donors in the City?)

  4. Mark Senior says:

    The people who have been betrayed are the people of Shirley West who elected him as a LibDem in May . Will have the guts and honesty to offer them a chance to vote on his change of allegiance – not a hope , it is a ward where Labour have no chance of winning .

  5. Steve Howard says:

    Never heard such rubbish from Stewart Cowan. Its not the labour government that nearly bankrupted us but the tory bankers themselves , the greedy people taking risks with ordinary peoples savings and investments that did the damage, both here and elswhere in the world. I agree that not everything in the Labouir camp was rosy or hunky Dory but at least they were working in the interests of tyhe many, most of the time, not the few. Now there are something like 23 Millionaire cabinet ministers. Whose interests are they going to serve? Somone on 15000 pounds a year#? Not likely. Even the most ardent Liberal can see the injustice that gives a child from a rich background subsidised private education (charity status) and the rest having to go to school in leaking roofed classrooms, crumbling buildings and so on becuase of the Tory moratorium on building and in the knowledge that their little nest egg they would have had when they were born has been stolen to pay for the rich kids.
    Yeah the peoiple HAVE been robbed make no mistakes. Labour wasnt/isnt perfect but at least its there to help the least able in society. Maybe people who dont need that help dont care?

  6. Ian Redhome says:

    I suppose all coalitions require compromise – the Lib Dems problem is that they given the Tories everything and got so little back in return apart from some well paid Ministerial jobs for their elite. Nick Clegg now says he changed his mind to the Tory policy of huge cuts and quickly during the election campaign – why didn’t he say so – all those leaders’ debates and he was lying all the time – it doesn’t look good. No wonder people are leaving the party in droves let alone the defecting councillors!

  7. Mark Senior says:

    Steve Howard berates someone for talking runbbish then proceeds to do so himself . Labour are not there to help the least able , they are there to help the champagne socialists .
    The poor in Knowsley voted yesterday overwhemingly for Labour ( well the 15% who bothered to vote did . The question though is do they vote Labour in Knowsley because they are poor or are they poor because they vote Labour and have had solid Labour control both nationally and locally for the last 13 years .

  8. Anon says:

    I’d like to wish the Labour Party in Solihull the very best of luck with Cllr Slater and to advise them to watch their backs. Recently I have heard that Cllr Slater has said some hurtful comments about a former colleague in regards to Disability, but to his former colleagues face, Simon has been quite the opposite. The Liberal Democrats are better off without him and others.

  9. Jonas Clapham says:

    What would this councillor prefer? A minority Tory government, or a government based on compromise where some Lib Dem policies get through, right now he’s got nothing… so congratulations, that was a smart move :/

  10. Ben says:

    A minority Tory government would have been more honest more democratic and still enabled negotiation with the Tories to secure LibDem and Labour policies.
    A fixed term coalition is not democratic as they are pushing through extreme policies very few people voted for.

  11. Mathur says:

    The latest announcement by the Liberal Democratic Party leader in instructive; he seems to indicate that all those who came from the labour party via Social Democratic Party route in 80’s to create the present L D P were wrong and it is the same old Liberal Party that he wants. but more so if you read the economic scnario in Europe; you realize that he wants to pursue the vary dogma that has brought western Europe the economic disaster. Neocon or neo liberal economic policies are cousins to each other, they destroy society by making it subordinate to civilizational values.
    One of greatest cons of the last 40 to 50 years is belief that free markets are the answer to to all problems: without even trying to define the problem correctly and assuming that free markets are FREE. They rarely are.
    the assumptions about the freeness of the so called free markets is one of the greatest pretensions and ruse that ever was practiced.
    this is cons that the neo-liberals practice and it seems the liberal democrats have decided to do so.
    Free Markets are chimera, the capitalist and so called free marketeers do not really ever want truly free markets.
    and to understand one must read the economists that many have forgotten Karl Polyani.
    There is an observation that one of the most well known management writer has made and it is worth remembering and stating over and over:
    The obvious is not so obvious or more people would do it, Tom Peters. in his search for Excellence and it applies to what every one of has seen during the last 3 years, but really has been happening over the 30 years.
    How many of you have even ralised that there are quasi-currencies/ or semi-curriencies in operation in the economies in adtion to the official curriencys ?

    I am not joking. markets have created them when the means of measurement of ones labour is not fixed but subjectto market determining its values, it seizes to be a standard of measurement and yet we insist that our economic activity be measured and compared by it, so the search for a substitute starts, a means of preserving the value that one has been paid for ones labour, the result is there.
    The symtom is indicated by the price of gold , but in reality it is only the most visible. An item in finite supply takes on the place of currency and when that happens t be one of the factors of procuction it skews and destroys the freeness of the free markets. Free Markets are no longer Free.
    and same applies to free markets of politics.
    when decision are made on superficial grounds and personal whims and likes and dislikes and assumptions without specifying the assumptions, they simply are hoax,
    when the liberal leader made his dislike for a person who was the leader of another party a factor in deciding with whom the party will form a government ; it became a subjective decision . and if the criteria for policy in a party is that how to grab power by catering to the market where electorate are the consumers as in the stock markets by adopting that policy, than there are no values.

    When a leader has no compunction on repudiating a decision taken over 2 deaced back to combine 2 parties and says that only one of the label is operative, it is time to ponder as what sort of ethical and moral vues this leader really advers to as distict from what he claims.
    and finally the news that confirms this is the fact of the news release about the Chagosan islander represnted by Mr Oliver Bancoult; the volte face in span of just 24 hors speaks volumes for that leadership tlking about Human Rights and Civil Rights.
    there could be greater hypocrisy and when fundamental public stance concerning the most fundamental rights is changed for the sack of power it is quite clear as to the value commitment of the leadership.

    The councilor is quite right. and all should ponder and ask themselves the question
    if power is the main criteria for being in politics and if politics is being treated as a market ?

  12. Steve Howard says:

    Unfortunatley Mark Senior I do not as you assume believe that labour automatically means everyone is saved from poverty. It takes years of the ‘champagne socialists ‘ as you call them ( an out dated term btw and comes from the sixties and weve moved on a bit since then) with their better education, able to debate in parlimentary democracy and win arguments based on fact not prejudiucial fears that many people may have.

    Fact Give a child a better education and the means to get on in life and he/she will choose it. Keep children from poorer backgrounds in the dark and away from oppurtunity and they will grow up as failures. That has been proven in every society in the world. there will always be an under achieving class who live on benefits while we have tory style attitudes towards others less fortunate than themsleves.

    There is no shame in being poor or rich unless that situation has been built upon the backs of other hard working people. What justice can there be for a head of a company earning 100 times more than the lowest paid in that company or heads of companies that produce cheap food for the masses never touching the stuff they produce themselves.

    Where is the justice in the situation where a man can avoid paying taxes on his wealth, created in this country, and would have been used to maybe employ a few more nurses, doctors, policemen etc but is used instead to get rid of the politicians who supported socialism, only to put more of his like thinkers and doers into power?

    Why the first tghing they did after the election was announce a moratorium on school rebuilding/refurbishment, but at the same time allowed private schools to continue their charity status with all its benefits. The rich leading the rich I see.

    There is an old addage that if you cant beat em join em. that aplies to education too so an oxford education deosnt mean you are automatically going to be a tory any more does it? That rankles the establishment, I bet. All those hoo ha Henrys with a built in assumption they are the ruling classes. Now some upstarts are saying that wealth should be shared, whatever next?

Leave a Reply