Trouble in LibDem Land
Britain's Liberal Democrats have risen in recent years to become a bona fide third party, something many thought impossible given Britain's electoral system. Recently, however, the party has begun to question the leadership of Charles Kennedy, who has remained firmly out of the public eye since the last general election. (Regular viewers of Prime Minister's Question Time on C-SPAN will know Kennedy: he's the Scot whose questions always include the words "funding" and "rise," as in "Will the Prime Minister not agree with me that only a rise in funding will suffice to solve the problem?")
Now it seems that some in his own party are questioning his leadership. From today's Telegraph:
It's a rare sight in politics to see a leader take a party to its all-time best showing and lose its confidence at the same time. One suspects that more is going on here than meets the eye.
One would be right.
Britain's constitutional arrangement remains fundamentally a two-party political system. The LibDem rise to prominence was nothing more than a temporary rush to fill an unnatural vacuum created by a historically weak Conservative Party combined with the unusual tensions caused by the Iraq War. Now that new Conservative leader David Cameron has righted the ship, the resulting Conservative rise is squeezing out the always tenuous space the LibDems began to imagine was comfortably theirs.
(On a side note, I hereby pronounce that Lembit Opik is the best political name of all time. In the spirit of today's postings, I pledge to secure a "Vote for Lembit Opik" t-shirt in the Pedro mould.)
Now it seems that some in his own party are questioning his leadership. From today's Telegraph:
Charles Kennedy's woes deepened yesterday when the Liberal Democrats' "timidity" and lack of drive under his leadership were condemned by a senior colleague.
The criticisms, by Lembit Opik, the party's Northern Ireland spokesman, appeared to show that doubts over Mr Kennedy's leadership within the party were growing.
Another leading Liberal Democrat MP confirmed privately that there was "huge disquiet" over the state of the party and about whether Mr Kennedy could combat a rejuvenated Conservative Party led by David Cameron.
"If we got to a hung parliament, just what job would Kennedy get offered in a coalition government? Paddy Ashdown would have been shadow foreign secretary after 1997," said the MP in a damning comparison for the current leader.
Since taking his party to its best election result for decades on May 5, Mr Kennedy has struggled to curb internal discontent.
At the party's September annual conference Mr Kennedy appeared to concede that he was more of a chairman than a leader.
The anti-Kennedy grumblings, which surfaced after the general election, focus on the party's perceived failure to have made any headway during the lengthy Tory leadership contest.
It's a rare sight in politics to see a leader take a party to its all-time best showing and lose its confidence at the same time. One suspects that more is going on here than meets the eye.
One would be right.
Britain's constitutional arrangement remains fundamentally a two-party political system. The LibDem rise to prominence was nothing more than a temporary rush to fill an unnatural vacuum created by a historically weak Conservative Party combined with the unusual tensions caused by the Iraq War. Now that new Conservative leader David Cameron has righted the ship, the resulting Conservative rise is squeezing out the always tenuous space the LibDems began to imagine was comfortably theirs.
(On a side note, I hereby pronounce that Lembit Opik is the best political name of all time. In the spirit of today's postings, I pledge to secure a "Vote for Lembit Opik" t-shirt in the Pedro mould.)


