Evening Stanners Exclusive: Vince Cable In Person

The following story sounds surreal even to myself. But thanks to a random set of circumstances, it happened. Here then, is the Evening Stanners' report on what's it like to meet an influential politician...

Putney Station, located close to the start of the Oxford-Cambridge boat race, is a confusing place. It assures me that the quickest train to Twickenham, where I need to connect with a bus towards Gunnersbury, is on Platform 3. Unfortunately, the train arriving at Platform 4 seems to suggests otherwise. Communication: this place lacks it. So what to do?

Weighing up my options, I decide to make a dash for it: hurtling up the stairs, belting along the footbridge, I worry I might not make it past the oncoming crowds. But a gap is found, and somehow, I make it into the carriage just before the doors close.

If commuters talked at will, they would have said "You jammy dodger!" As it was, the suits around me said little, though eyebrows were raised. Deciding to stand, I looked around what appeared to be an oasis of calm. It took me a while to actually realise just exactly who was facing me.

The trick to being a good politician is to be at ease with the public: to the point that they do not look out of place in a crowd. And on what was effectively his train home, the Right Honourable MP for Twickenham, and the Liberal Democrats' Deputy Leader and Treasury Spokesman, was very much at ease. After all, for a man who warned that allowing the banks to play fast and loose would end in disaster, and who remarked that Gordon Brown had gone from "Stalin to Mr Bean", he is not often under attack for a lack of achievements.

He seemed slightly tired, but steadfastly alert: with one hand on his portfolio, and the other near his rather small suitcase, which made me wonder how on earth he manages to be so efficient. But in a financial climate such as this, perhaps such economising is necessary for all of us.

I of course, had not expected him to be on the train: I am neither paid to follow politicians, or informed of their movements. And in any case, I had caught this particular train by chance in order to get to a party. So naturally, I did what any person would do when they are in the presence of someone who is famous: I mentally dithered. Would it be best to try and shake his hand before the train arrived at Twickenham? Should I just wink at him and then run like a madman to the bus stop? Or perhaps just not do anything?

Unlike my thought train, the actual one was running smoothly: and as we approached Twickenham station, Mr Cable stood up as if to leave. This, then, was a make-or-break moment : would it be best to try and engage in conversation, or simply leave safe in the knowledge that I had been on the train with a relatively well-known politician? Fortunately, Cable was already making the decision for me: he sidled up to the doors, looked me in the eye, and cautiously grinned, as if to say: "You weren't expecting this, I'll bet".

Aaaaaand relax. "It's an honour to meet you, Mr Cable", I said, sounding suspiciously like a Bond villain; fortunately, the handshake was still forthcoming.

"I'm glad to hear it" was the amicable response: his accent hinting at his Yorkshire roots, though he has been living in London for the last 13 years. His appearance is not automatically charming, but there is a definite warmth to him, as we descend into talk about the election.

It is then his turn to be surprised, as I tell him I have watched all three leaders' debates, and the Chancellors' debates too, over the last few weeks. "Have you really?" he asks, suggesting such an exercise, while highly commendable, might be bad for one's health. He seems reasonably pleased about Nick Clegg's performance last night, though he believes it is the first two debates that have really helped to transform the party: something that many would find hard to dispute.

As the train pulls up to the platform, I can't help but remark that this is a very encouraging election with regards to young voters. He heartily agrees: "I know there's a lot of talk about apathy in this country, but I have to say I've seen a lot of interest. I was meeting a group of sixth formers at a technology college in Nottingham, and you would be surprised at how many of them are excited about this election."

I also throw in the point about the need to engage with university students in areas such as Nottingham, especially with regards to crime: he simply nods, but he sounds pleased when I tell him that I've been discussing the need to vote with my friends, particularly on the internet.

It is here that I falter. How exactly do I tell a politician that I would be more encourage to vote for his party if he were leading it? Dodging my own question, I merely say that I am definitely thinking about voting Lib Dem, though of course it is difficult to decide on some issues, particularly over the issue of tuition fees.

"Which university do you study at?" asks Cable; a Cambridge graduate himself, he seems more willing to scrap tuition fees if the finances will allow it, but there is little room for flexibility these days.

"Exeter, Cornwall Campus.", I reply, "Near Falmouth. I think your candidate there is Terrye Teverson?"

"Oh yes, that's right, Terrye" Cable responds immediately. "I'm actually going to be round that way on Tuesday: one last big push before the polls."

The conversation is nearly over: we have reached the ticket barriers. Cable immediately opts for the second one: I try the third, but the machine, annoyingly, refuses to work. Cable gives me a look that seems to suggest that he has had similar problems in his time; but these days, he manages better than most.

"Well, very nice to meet you," he smiles: "Take care".

"The same to you, sir: good luck", I respond, infuriated by Network Rail's incompetence yet again. The chance to get an autograph has clearly gone, but one suspects that would be a bit too much for a man who's been travelling on and off for the past three or four weeks.

And with that, we go our separate ways: both making sure to steer clear of the rather stern-looking woman handing out Conservative leaflets. She seems almost disapproving of Cable's presence: but then, it is not surprising. On this evidence, his ability to leave an impression is remarkable.

All that is left to do is to ring someone in order to tell them the news: though they do not sound quite as impressed as I am about my priceless interview.

"Why didn't you tell him about your blog?" asks my brother Al, with an incisiveness I often lack. Oh well. Maybe next time. For now, all I can do is watch a potential chancellor stride off with a quiet confidence, making me consider my options yet again. Lib Dem, or not Lib Dem?

Chris Stanley (The Evening Stanners)

PS As you can tell, I was quite chuffed to actually meet someone so high-up as Vince Cable: he's certainly very easy to talk to, but then I didn't have a massive camera pointing right in his face! I mentioned the fact that some of you have been really interested about the election, and he seemed quite encouraged: so who knows? I might have shaken hands with a man who'll be at the heart of negotiations over a hung parliament. If there is one, he'll surely be one of the big players.

PPS He's got a remarkably firm handshake, by the way. Not that I couldn't beat him at arm-wrestling, mind.

Third Debate: Brown And... Out?

Seconds out... it's Round Three! Still can't believe I've survived watching all three debates, but on with the show. Tonight's debate was about the economy, and featured tax, manufacturing, housing, immigration, and a whole bunch of other things. David Dimbleby was moderating: as a result, it was a proper debate. Dimbleby would be excellent on any network, of course, but the BBC will be extremely pleased with how he did.

The impartial verdict

Cameron: Much better. Starting to look like a man who can lead, even if it means leading a coalition. Immigration cap argument poor, otherwise incisive and unflappable. Looked most like a Prime Minister, which always helps.

Clegg: Wobbled a bit on immigration, but still fresh and engaging on teaching and being open with people: slightly repetitive, but focused on both cameras and questions. Expectations were high, though not as high as last week, and he still polled second place overall.

Brown: Brilliant mind, terrible PR. Had sound arguments in places, but spent far too much time attacking Cameron when he could, in theory, have done much better by destroying Clegg. "I agree with David" his worst moment of the night: seemed to be doing his best to destroy the idea of a Lib-Con coalition. Now it just looks even more likely.

Third Debate - Cameron 36%; Clegg 35%; Brown 29%

Second Debate - Cameron 32%; Clegg 33%; Brown 34%

First Debate - Cameron 30%; Clegg 38%; Brown 32%

They think it's all over: it is now?

In terms of the leaders' debates, yes: but in terms of the result, it's anything but. The polls are encouraging for the Conservatives and David Cameron: but anything can happen in a week, and now is no time for arrogance. Still, you have to argue he did a lot better than first time around.

For me, it's relatively simple: Brown cannot quite move with the times. He is stuck in the past, when for Labour, life was much, much easier.

It is the unfortunate side-effect of being in politics for so long: he has been Chancellor for 10 years, and Prime Minister for 3 years. That's some achievement, but it comes at a price: he still fights, but he fights in a world quite different to 1997. He does not identify with the new generation, he is not universally liked, and he has a reputation for dithering. The press, somewhat unfairly, brand him as yesterday's news: come next Friday, he might well be.

A wounded PM

After this past week, people will feel sorry for Gordon: and despite all his faults, I feel sorry for him. He's a damn sight better than those in his own party, who on three occasions were disloyal enough to try and evict him on their terms, not ours. But these days, clinging on to power is not a virtue, and many believe his personal success has come at the expense of an innocent electorate. What's more, at times tonight he simply failed to engage my interest, hard as I tried. So unless he can rally in the next few days, or Cameron commits the mother of all gaffes, he is finished.

Cameron "We fix it"?

And seeing as I've just mentioned Cameron, let me say this: my word, he's bounced back. Just as well, mind you, or he would have been finished off as well. Losing all three debates would have been disastrous for a man whose PR is supposed to be top-class.

He's still not quite the finished product, mind; and he is sorely lacking Blair's ability to make his party move with him on every issue. But he talks in a language that engages even his critics, and that might, just might, be enough. The key will be to remain quietly confident, and stop his team from declaring they've already won.

Clegger Clogs

Clegg, meanwhile, has still made a difference. The Lib Dems weren't in it until the debates: and while you may not like Clegg, you can't deny his effect. He's a man who did his homework, and it's paid off. If he gets 80 seats, he's done well: if he gets 100, he should be congratulated, though certainly not hero-worshipped. The Lib Dems used to be mocked on all fronts: not any more, it would seem.

So what does the "other" poll say?

Firstly, thanks to everyone who's voted in the poll so far: over a dozen already, which is very exiciting!

Secondly, the most interesting statistic so far, and one that seems to validate my thoughts, is that no-one who's voted wants a hung parliament with Brown in charge. 10 of the 16 votes (at the time of writing) have been for a hung parliament, and an impressive 11 out of 16 votes are for a result that puts Clegg as PM. So Cameron might need to do a bit more to convince young voters, perhaps.

Still closer than some would have liked: but over the next few days, if Labour start to slip, they will keep on slipping.

It has not been a good campaign for them.

And it might just get a whole lot worse.

Chris

PS Dimbleby for PM. What d'you mean, he's not running?

To The Polls!

Okay, so you can't actually go to the polling stations yet: though in the case of one woman in Northern Ireland who popped along to vote today, that hasn't always been made clear.

So what you can do, regardless of your political leanings, is to vote in my poll! It's basically asking you what you want to see on May 7th: do you want Labour and Gordon Brown to win a 4th majority? Would you be jumping for joy if Nick Clegg managed to get to No. 10? Or is it a case of If Any Man Can, Cameron Can?

Either way, this is one poll that isn't conducted by a national newspaper. Which therefore makes it less corrupt. Hurrah for low-budget surveys that aren't owned by Rupert Murdoch and the like!

Vote away m'dears,

Chris

If Stephen Fry Says It...

It must be true? At least, that's the impression you get from all the raving, die-hard, QI-Blackadder-Jeeves fans; who become somewhat disconsolate, nay indignant, if you dare to suggest that their man has a tendency to get things wrong every now and then.

So his latest comments on Twitter, in theory, should be treated with a pinch of salt, or at least considered over a cup of Twinings. But the man with almost 1.5 million followers has said something that might raise more than a few eyebrows, though perhaps not with amusement from the reds and the blues...

"Frankly I'm tempted to vote Lib Dem now. If we let the Telegraph and Mail win, well, freedom and Britain die."

He said that last Thursday, just before the second debate. And if you thought that was a one-off, here's a comment he made a few hours ago.

"Still surprising myself with LibDem thoughts. Haven't yet heard good anti-hung parliament argument yet. Interesting. Few days to decide."

Come on Stephen, haven't the Conservatives and the press kept mentioning what a bad idea a hung parliament is? Well, the impression seems to be that, for now, the attacks aren't reaching at least one of their targets.

Twitter certainly does move in mysterious ways: and after the demise of the Labour candidate in Moray at its hands, the establishment does not trust it: mainly because, every now and then, it strikes a considerable chord. Quite possibly my favourite line about what is now being dubbed "Bigot Gate", or "Gaffe Gordon" as I called it, is this gem from Simon Pegg:

Seriously though, where are the Eastern Europeans "flocking in" from? My guess would be Europe, possibly East.

Indeed, your point is rather well substantiated Mr Pegg. However,

SWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN

Ah, good times. Stephen Fry + Simon Pegg = some form of hilarity that is generally classed as cool and/or British.

So, with a few notable celebrities behind them, can the youthful, sharp-witted army of Tweeters swing this election? Perhaps: after all, this is the first time we've ever seen social networking take an election by storm. But this much is clear: Twitter may have a taste for certain musical numbers, but it's not just a jump to the left.

Speaking of which, here's how (or possibly how not) to vote next week...

Chris

P.S. Turns out Rocky Horror came out in 1975, during the time of the hung parliaments. Interesting, no?

GAFFE! Aaaaaaaaaaah...

"Warning! Gaffe Gordon approaching!"

"What do you mean... Gaffe Gordon approaching?"


Oh yes, this threatens to be one of the defining moments of the campaign. As they didn't quite say in Jurassic Park, "Turn the mic off, turn the mic off...". Mind you, Jurassic Park would not have worked in Rochdale. "After careful consideration, I've decided not to endorse this mill!"

Alas, you get the feeling that Labour might be at the mercy of the public after this, regardless of how Thursday's debate goes, and what had been quite a good counter-argument by Stalin/Bean against pensioner Gillian Duffy's views on immigration fell to pieces the moment his car started driving away. As is now usually the case these days, when Brown finds himself being opposed by people who have strong links to Labour, he gets angry. Shortly after, he was still angry: with himself.



Unfortunately, the thing I can't get out of my head with that radio interview is the word FACEPALM. Curse you internet memes! And soon, other known figures in red were doing it too...

This is a tricky issue. As you might imagine, the right-wing press is loving it. Brown shows himself as being somewhat hypocritical: perhaps not a surprise after hanging out for so long with the somewhat unscrupulous Blair, who was always one step ahead of that clunking fist. But it is hard not to feel slightly sorry for him: especially as he had to come crawling back to Duffy and apologise. "You've got me begging you for mercy", perhaps?

Calling her bigoted was both unwise and irrational: the comments of a man who was far from calm. But it is the raging against a former Labour voter, in the usually safe area of Greater Manchester, that will rock the boat most. If Labour finish second in the popular vote, it might be enough to keep Brown in: but if they finish third, it will be a disaster of 1983 proportions. And with the Lib Dems yet to actually make any gaffes, that looks somewhat likely.

In other news

Away from politics (although I was in Westminster this evening), the book on the Tory transitions years is going well. Fascinating stuff by Tim Bale, no relation to that actor what plays Batman and swears at electricians. Judging from what I've read, any Conservative voter wondering why it's taken them so long to challenge Labour for power would do well to read about the William Hague years: he was prone to gaffes too, as I seem to remember.

What's really fascinating is to see how both Cameron and Osborne flitter about behind the scenes: Osborne actually has a bigger role than I realised, especially as part of the Hague entourage, before he became an MP. Fittingly though, he's not as confident about policy in public as he is in private. For me, he's a bit too like Cameron to really stand out.

But enough of my obvious Osborne scepticism: it's a week before polling day. Millions of people have already voted: will it turn out to be a vote for Cleggmania? Could Brown cling on; can Cameron capitalise; or will the latter find himself in a Clegg coalition? Providing Cameron is flexible - and so far, he's been much more adaptable to change than his party - he might just come out the victor even if he fails to get more than half the seats on offer.

One thing's for sure: with the BBC still talking about a hung parliament just days before we go to the polling stations, it won't be like 1997, 2001 or 2005. The idea of Labour gaining a majority this time around will be one that's hard to imagine.

Unless of course, the Prime Minister wins the last debate.

Can he pull it off? Or will next week see the end of Gaffe Gordon (A Rochdale Production)?

We shall see.

Chris

Book Review In the Making! From Thatcher to Cameron

Evening all,

Am currently reading a book by Ian Bale called "The Conservative Party: From Cameron to Thatcher". It's a darned sight longer than any of the party's manifestos, so expect a review later on in the week.

What I can tell you about it so far is that, although with what appears to be a considerable anti-Thatcherite, pro-Cameron slant, it is extremely easy to read, and is as impartial as a book on politics can be.

It's also very revealing: for example, former PM John Major swearing. Yes, you heard right: apparently he said he was going to "f***ing crucify the right" for what they did to him. Which, if he'd actually said it in public, would certainly have got rid of the "he's too nice to be PM" tag.

"I've had it with these Eurosceptic snakes in this Eurosceptic party!"

If you want to know more about the Conservatives, it's worth the read. Then again, seeing as it's £25 in the shops, I suspect many would just prefer to read an impartial review. Which hopefully will be where I come in!

Assuming the book doesn't kill me. It is... 391 pages long. Hmm.

Chris

Reforming The Past

From the BBC live coverage

1417: David Cameron, on the trail in Southampton, goes into a toyshop and buys a plastic knight worth £2.99 for his son. He then pops in to a card shop, joking that he and his fellow campaigners have "probably frightened everyone off". As he leaves, a woman wearing sunglasses urges him to give "some detail" of his party's policy. Asked about the Lib Dems' manifesto, he jokes: "There are a lot of numbers in it, but there are a lot of numbers in Sudoko." About 81, we think????

Ahahahahaha. Oh you witty types down at the BBC, forcing yourself to laugh at a man whose main talent is not making jokes: hence why he's a politician and not a stand-up comic. In fact, the BBC have tried so hard to make the joke sound funny, they've gone and spelt Sudoku wrong. Oh noez!

See, this is why it's not always easy to be proud of being British, even though I'd like to be: because, to quote Saatchi and Saatchi, the establishment isn't working. In fact, such is its inability to adapt to change that it appears intent on rubbishing Twitter whilst at the same time constantly posting ON TWITTER. Remind me how that works, exactly?

So at the moment, the only thing that's saving David Cameron is that he's slightly less establishment-based than Gordon Brown is, which is not exactly what you would call a compliment. Though, in fairness to the man who could be king, he might well be able to turn that into a majority yet.

You see, this is the problem for the Conservatives and Labour. Clegg is annoying. A pest. A threat to the two-party system. He gets barracked at Prime Minister's Questions in a manner similar to Greg Rusedski's rant at Wimbledon in 2003. And then he has the nerve to say the first-past-the-post system needs reforming. Well, that's just not cricket, you Euro zealot!

In my opinion, Clegg is still somewhat of a lightweight: he only just beat Chris Huhne to win the Lib Dem leadership contest in 2007, which is not quite the same thing as winning a General Election. But although some of his policies do need quite a bit of scrutiny - the last time someone tried to scrap council tax she had to resign after several riots and a cabinet revolt - he will still happily talk about the elephant in the room, which is electoral reform.

I'm occasionally vague about where I stand - I've been invited to become both a fan of David Cameron and to take part in National Not Voting Conservative Day. But to borrow a phrase from one of the Conservative frontbench team - it's that Michael Gove again - the first-past-the-post-system is "eccentric". And politics is not currently the best place for people to be eccentric. A duck moat? That's a great idea! After all, nothing wrong with being eccentr... dammit.

This chaotic mess is shown brilliantly by the establishment itself (ta very much beeb), with the seat calculator. I've been mucking about with it, and how's this for a statistic...

If Labour were to get 51% of the vote, they could get 500 out of 650 seats. So 51% of the vote effectively translates into 77% of all total seats.

I'm not a mathematician, but that seems a bit messed up. That would be like doing 5,000 words on my dissertation and being given a first for it. Or when the bowling computer decides that, actually, you did knock down all the pins, even though you could have sworn that last one was still standing.



The issue that's risen to the boil today is this scenario: Labour comes third, but wins. Confused? Well, if the Liberal Democrats get 31%, the Conservative Party gets 30%, and the Labour Party gets 26% (with other parties getting 13%), then the number of seats goes like this.

Lib Dems - 123 seats
Conservatives - 229 seats
Labour - 269 seats
Other - 29 seats

So under our system, Brown would then stay as PM: and perhaps reasonably, Clegg says that's a farce. Wouldn't you?

Well, if you support the two main parties, you do at least have a number of reasons for suggesting why not. Firstly, hung parliaments usually don't end very well for the party running them - the Conservatives got mauled after a coalition in 1945, both parties changed their leader shortly after the hung parliament of 1974, and the Lib-Lab pact ended in Margaret Thatcher winning.

So as Gordon Brown and David Cameron both have a chance of being the largest party on May 7th, but also have a chance of having no majority: well, you can see why they might have the odd nightmare.

And if they were to introduce proportional representation: why, that could make it worse! What if the SNP was to win the most seats in Scotland, just like it has in the Scottish Parliament? Or, perhaps more reasonably, if the BNP were to win a seat? Because I am with the Conservatives on this one: the idea of the BNP or UKIP getting into the House of Commons is not a pleasant thought.

However, the answer to such a problem is simple: treating a party like the BNP unfairly gives them an excuse to preach unfair values back. If you're not going to advocate proper democracy, then why on earth should they? Proportional representation may not be perfect, but if it allows racist parties to fall flat on their face (and it generally does), then I'm for it.

The European Union has been brilliant at tackling this: it has a policy of proportional representation, and last year the BNP picked up two seats. Not exactly what I wanted to hear. And yet, their effect so far has been... what, exactly? Plainly put, if you give a party like that free speech, you'll be surprised how quickly they put their foot in their mouth. Question Time being a great example.



As if to then mock his constituents in Manchester, where he is an MEP, the BNP leader Nick Griffin is now running as the MP for Barking. Oh yes, I take the Manchester-Barking train all the time. Only takes three hours and a change at Euston and Embankment. Maybe he should be a councillor in both those places? After all, if he's going to be passing through them every day, he might as well.

Oh, and the suggestion that the first-past-the-post system is the best way of getting rid of the BNP, a former splinter-group of the National Front? Well, 43 years of the latter's existence would suggest that argument needs work.

Don't get me wrong. I'd like to go back to before New Labour in ways: life definitely seemed simpler back then. But then, it's like trying to find eternal youth, or wanting to Fire Up the Quattro. Yessir, nostalgia is a powerful thing. But as far as I know, we're mortal, you can't actually go back in time (believe me, I've tried, but that Tardis in Cardiff is locked shut), and there's a fine line between preserving the past and obsessing about it.


Learning from the past: good. But trying to make the past the future? You might want to leave that to the writers of Doctor Who and Ashes to Ashes. I may not have decided who to vote for, but I've decided this: it will soon become a question of when, and not if, the first past the post system will have to allons-y.

But, but, my precious...

Shush, or I'll set Wormtongue on you. After all,

Cameron has always been our friend and ally...

Aaaand that's enough Lord of the Rings references, I think.

Thanks for reading,

Chris