Skip to main content

Germany moves Liberal

The grand coalition in Berlin was an expedient response to the electoral maths which the German voters delivered to their politicians. It allowed orderly administration but did not allow either party to change the political weather, given the closeness of the election result, one might well say fair enough to that.

However the grand coalition has also limited much of the freedom of action of the administration. The controversial Nordstream gas pipeline project continues, despite serious concerns about security, largely because the former SPD Chancellor, Gerhard Schroder, has carved himself a role as the Kremlin's international emissary- which the current Chancellor, Angela Merkel is known to have concerns about, though she has felt unable to say so in public.

Although the government has been able to put together a credible set of core policies to face the credit collapse, and is still held in generally high regard, the more dramatic policy prescriptions have not been adopted, simply because they can not be.

However in September 2009, a new general election is scheduled and it is quite clear that the political weather in Germany is changing dramatically. The defeat of the SPD in the state of Hesse has been accompanied by a dramatic rise in support for the Liberal FDP, who have doubled their vote. It seems likely that the grand coalition will lose their control of the upper house of the German Parliament- the Bundesrat- because the SPD result was as bad as it was.

All the evidence suggests that the FDP are headed for an exceptionally strong result in September and will be able to join a new administration under the current CDU Chancellor, but without the Social Democrats. As a Liberal who admires much of the FDP, I am pleased to see such a prospect, but I am also pleased that the SPD will finally be punished for their naked and unprincipled ambition.

At a time when the European Union faces deep challenges, the presence of the economically literate Free Democrats at the heart of government in Berlin can only help to steady the ship.

Meanwhile the increasingly shrill commentary coming from the likes of Ambrose Evans Pritchard in the Telegraph is matched by a much more sober, though sombre analysis from Wolfgang Munchau in the FT . In the end, the bile of the anti-Europeans may end up "all passion spent", as it becomes clear that even the massive devaluation of Sterling that has already taken place has not solved the problems facing the British economy- far from it. Despite the increasingly hysterical assertions that the demonstrations in Riga and Vilnius are "in fact" against Europe, rather than the slow formation of policy in Vilnius and widespread disgust at the corruption of the power elite in Latvia, virtually everybody recognises that the European Union will have a critical role in working out the crisis.

After even in the UK, the appointment of Ken Clarke to the Conservative front bench shows that whatever his public words, the leader of the most avowedly Eurosceptic mainstream political party in Europe accepts the reality that the EU is not going to fall apart and indeed may emerge stronger from this crisis than it was before.

With the intelligent voice of the FDP seemingly set to be heard much more widely in Germany, that is quite possibly a welcome state of affairs.

Comments

Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...