Funny business, politics. In 1988 Paddy Ashdown became the first leader of the Social and Liberal Democrats after promising they could replace Labour. Eleven years on, the plain old Liberal Democrats have enjoyed triumphs unparalleled since Lloyd George's days, but Labour has had the last laugh.
Westminster was baffled last night about exactly why Ashdown, who always said he saw the job as a long haul, has quit now. Thanks to Labour, his party has achieved many of its aims: devolution for Scotland and Wales, House of Lords reform, many non-Westminster elections to be held using proportional representation. Even PR for general elections, the Lib Dems' Holy Grail, is a possibility.
Perhaps the sheer scale of Tony Blair's parliamentary majority helps explain why Ashdown has suddenly, unexpectedly, now chosen to stand down. Any hope the Lib Dem leader had of his party holding the balance of power, and using its leverage to force through PR and a radical centre-left realignment of British politics, disappeared on May 1, 1997.
Alternatively, it could be that Ashdown feels his dream of a ''new politics'', involving a permanently ''progressive'' Lab-Lib government, will happen anyway, even without him, and ''the project'' is safe in the Prime Minister's hands. The two men are close personal friends and political soulmates, and both loathe what they recently labelled the ''destructive tribalism'' of yah-boo British party politics.
Or it may simply be that after 11 years Ashdown has tired of the fray, especially at Westminster, which he regards as a pompous and unreal place. Even Commandos retire from the battlefield. In recent months he has appeared increasingly tired, uneasy, and irritable. He was keenly aware of the rising tide in both parties against the ever-closer Lab-Lib links he and Blair pushed hard to foster.
When he got to his feet at Prime Minister's Questions last week, scores of Labour MPs booed and baited him. Dennis Skinner raised a laugh when he shouted in Blair's direction: ''sack 'im!''. Ashdown tried to deflect these insults with sarcasm, but his anger showed through.
At his party's annual conference in Brighton last September the same frustration was apparent in unguarded moments. While he was listing and lauding the practical benefits of close co-operation with Labour, many Lib Dems - far too many for his liking - voiced opposition arguably born of the ''tribal'' mindset he wants to banish.
Whether the Lab-Lib love-in survives Ashdown's departure depends partly on who takes over. Both the leading contenders, Charles Kennedy and Simon Hughes, favour looser links. The former wants the Lib Dems to replace the Tories as Britain's main Opposition party; the latter wants to target disaffected traditional Labour voters, greens and the marginalised.
History will judge Ashdown as a superb leader of his party. When he took over, David Owen had just quit politics, the newborn SLDs were getting poor ratings and, embarrassingly, fared worse than the Greens in the European elections. Irrelevance beckoned. Now they have 46 MPs, their highest number since 1929, and, despite their support for many Government policies, still often provide a more coherent and credible Opposition than the Tories.
Under Ashdown, they scored spectacular by-election successes - including Kincardine and Deeside in 1991 - and gradually improved their representation in Parliament and in town halls across Britain. In July 1996, Ashdown even overtook Blair as the party leader with the highest public satisfaction rating. His 1992 confession of a five-month-long affair with former secretary Patricia Howard led the Sun to famously dub him ''Paddy Pantsdown'', but full disclosure ensured the scandal was short-lived.
In policy terms, Ashdown's Lib Dems affected to maintain ''equidistance'' between Labour and the Tories. But that evaporated as co-operation with Labour, already evident through the Scottish Constitutional Convention, was extended UK-wide under Blair's leadership after 1994 through the ground-breaking Robin Cook-Bob Maclennan constitutional talks.
With Blair in Downing Street, the Lib Dems practised ''constructive opposition'' and were given a rare taste of real political power through their joint membership with Labour of the unprecedented Joint Cabinet Committee. However, when Blair and Ashdown issued a surprise joint statement last November recommending widening the JCC's work far beyond constitutional issues, many Lib Dem MPs' alarm-bells rang.
Paddy was being too much the military man: leading from the front, going too far too fast, giving orders, and not explaining the mission. Hardly anyone had been consulted; hardly anyone liked it. This Indian-born, Ulster-reared ex-diplomat had got his tactics wrong.
In recent months, Lib Dem MPs have begun saying quietly that the single-mindedness with which Ashdown transformed the party's fortunes had become an arrogance. There has been growing resentment at his tendency to rely on the advice of a small coterie of confidants such as Lord Holme, Paul Tyler and Nick Harvey.
Ashdown told Tyler, his Chief Whip, of his plans before Christmas. MPs of all parties were amazed that, in the Westminster gossip factory, nobody had an inkling before yesterday afternoon's shock announcement. It was news management to perfection. It seems all those visits to 10 Downing Street and cosy chats with the PM paid off after all.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article