The deputy Prime Minister and Liberal Democrat leader has expressed regret over the inclusion of the pledge not to raise tuition fees in the election manifesto.

Speaking on ITV's Daybreak program he said "I should have been more careful" when he signed the pre-election pledge.

The comments come after heated debate in Prime Minister's questions in which he stood in for David Cameron who was away having a Jolly in China.

Harriet Harman taunted Nick Clegg in PMQs informing the house that he had been "led astray" by the Conservatives and basically insinuated that the Lib Dem leader had sold his soul to the devil during the negotiations that lead to the Lib Dem/Conservative coalition.

However Clegg managed to fire a few shots back at Harman i.e. the fact that it was her party that left the country broke hence the need for cuts.

However going from a pledge to keep tuition fees at £3,290 to raising them to £9,000 is proving be a little difficult for Lib Dem supporters to understand.

Promises is promises.

Unless the reality of the country's inability to sustain the public sector at current station is drummed home to core of the Liberal Democrat party support there will be trouble ahead.

Nick made no bones about the fact that there was a policy and a pledge and now there isn't. The reason given for the clear U-turn is simple.

No money to fund higher education.

I try not to be political but there is a simple reason why there is no money and everyone knows it even in the Labour party who are proud of their financial legacy.

That reason is Labour's spending.

I don't know how anyone in Labour can criticise the coalition cuts when they left them with no choice, but the coalition are also decidedly showing a lack of guts with regards to the deficit.

There is an elephant in the room and it is sucking all the money out of the system yet no one wants to utter its name.

The banking system is not supporting business and instead squeezes the margins out of the recovery yet business is still supporting the banks.

Why?

The same goes for anyone with a mortgage.

Why?

Because those we elected have no stomach for upsetting their friends and this is the by-product of an elitist political ruling class that is very much prevalent in politics and banking, which go hand in hand (not every banker/politician falls into that category and I have many good friends who are in senior positions in banks and politics but there is a majority rule here).

Could the anger shown by the demonstrators opposing tuition fee hikes be a small taster of the underlying discontent and hatred that much of the country now has for those who sit in ivory towers sipping champagne, telling the peasants that they must work harder and tighten their belts.

Probably.

The talk on the street is clear.

If you squeeze us any more and give us nothing in return we will remove you for we are many and you are few.

Makes those structured investments seem a little unsafe, but this is not necessarily a bad thing. If you have a house full of rats that is falling down and in danger of spreading disease and damage to nearby houses, the best thing is to burn it to the ground so you can build something rat proof back up in it's place.

So if you're black, furry, small and have a tail you had better start proving that your not a rat.

Comment Here!

comments