A good day for... soundbites

Whenever there is a crisis it is time for representatives of each party to respond and offer the quote that will make the news headlines and newspaper columns. The soundbite can be as indicative of the individual as their position on the topic and how they stand on the party political divide (context depending).

Brown's quote on Hain's failure to declare £103,000 does not inspire confidence him him of the man he is defending: what does "It was a mistake that was made. It was an incompetence" tell us? Conservative leader David Cameron's response is a little lacklustre, or at least the bit quoted is: "He can get out there and explain himself or I think he will have to leave the cabinet"; perhaps it reflects a man who is metaphorically worried about throwing stones when in his own glass house.

Congratulations go to new Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg though, so far there are no claims of Liberal Democrat funding improprieties, thus he can happily say that Hain's credibility is in tatters (which surely it must be) and get in the dig that anyone should be proud of an perhaps half of parliament wish they had thought of: ""When Gordon Brown said he wanted a government of all the talents, no-one realised that incompetence was going to be one of them". I love that line!

Sorry is the hardest word

There is nothing better than a carefully worded apology, one that does not accept any respnsibility but never the less magnanimously takes a share of the blame, says sorry for the minor crime but in doing so allows it to be repeated. This is my analysis of Chris Huhne's apology to Nick Clegg via his website.

"On behalf of Chris Huhne's campaign, I sincerely apologise that a background briefing document of quotations from Nick Clegg on public services reform and proportional representation was sent out with a wholly inappropriate title. There is no excuse for this. The document title had not been approved before the document was sent out and neither Chris nor I were aware of it. In no way does the title of the document as sent to the Politics Show represent Chris Huhne's opinion and he completely dissociates himself from it."

Firstly it is on behalf of a campaign not the individual. Secondly it is the title of 'Calamnity Clegg' that is the wrong doing not the attacks on his opponents ability; almost good content but bad title. Combined it does bring the sincerity of the apology into question, or am I just too cynical? Does it read as sincere? It suggests that the negative campaigning will continue and divisions could entrench further.

Choice, or lack of choice?

Defining core values can be a difficult task for a party, often recently the values are attached to the leader as opposed to the broad mass but not so perhaps for Liberal Democrats. Nick Clegg, in declaring himself to be in the contest to be leader set out what the party stands for:

I want the Liberal Democrats to become the gathering point for everyone who wants a different type of politics in Britain. A politics that begins by giving power to people, their families and their communities... We are a nation with a strong sense of fair play and social justice. An instinct to protect the environment for future generations. We are suspicious of arbitrary power, impatient with bureaucracy and wary of government interference. We have always put our faith in the power of ordinary men and women to change our world.

The problem for Nick is that this maps pretty closely to statements by Conservative leader David Cameron, for example:

That's the political programme I will follow, based on my values of family, responsibility and opportunity, and driving forward our political agenda of giving people more freedom and control over their lives

An agenda that also includes the environment, reducing bureaucracy and giving power back does not offer a 'different type of politics', rather it is the same politics managed by a different party and leader. Whether there is space within the marketplace of ideas is questionable currently but it is clear that there is a lack of differentiation and this could be the greatest problem to face the Liberal Democrats. They will have a leader that is largely unknown and offer little that is fundamentally different, while not offering the opportunity for an anti-war protest vote, so on what basis can they steal votes from their opponents?