In the interests of what, you say?

I’m not, according to my record, a massive fan of the LibDems. But I had rather a soft spot for Charles Kennedy, who had a certain something that seemed lacking in other party leaders. What was it now, oh yes, personality. So I was sad to see him go, because he did a fairly good job as party leader despite being pickled most of the time.

His replacement was rubbish, as both time and the LibDems have shown. But the method in which the party got rid of him leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.

Sir Menzies Campbell has resigned as leader of the Liberal Democrats with immediate effect.

In a letter to party president Simon Hughes he said questions about his leadership were “getting in the way of further progress by the party”.

The official announcement was made by Mr Cable and Mr Hughes, who said Sir Menzies had taken the decision in the “interests of the party and of Liberal Democracy”.

Yes, in the interests of the party and of Liberal Democracy, the party leader was retired without actually saying that he was retiring; those with the most to gain from his retirement announced it. In fact, those who were busy working towards undermining Sir Wossface Campbell’s position as leader were the ones to announce his departure.

Doesn’t seem particularly liberal, nor democratic. Practically Soviet, in fact.

Well done lads, that’s two leaders stabbed in the back within eighteen months. Even the Tories give ‘em more time than that…

2 thoughts on “In the interests of what, you say?

  1. No need to wait for Kennedy to prove it, the list of spectacularly successful drunks throughout history speaks for itself.

    But yes, that may have played a part in it…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>