Two Peter's Pontfiticate

The Tanned One (AKA) Peter Hain probably wishing to see his name in the paper again has been musing about the next General Election.

In Tuesdays Western Mail he said  that

"Labour will struggle to win the next general election outright and should be ready to go into coalition with Liberal Democrat"s,

Even though he says.....

“That assumes, of course, that there are sufficient Lib Dem MPs remaining after a probable battering in 2015.”-

Quite what the public might think of Labour forming a coalition with a Party that could lose half it's parliamentary seats he doesn't elaborate

Though his statement may have more intent on trying to divide the Liberal Democrats he says...

“The question then is: with whom? It seems likely that the ’Orange Book’ Lib Dem leadership – which hijacked their Party and took it into bed with the Tories – will be rejected by a membership desperate to restore the tradition of Asquith, Lloyd George, Keynes, Beveridge, Jo Grimond, David Steel, Paddy Ashdown, Charles Kennedy and Ming Campbell.

The  Orange Book was written largely by  Liberal Democrats who adhere more strongly to economic and personal liberal principles and therefore more  identifiable with the Tories , compared to those who more strongly identify with left-wing beliefs, such as members of the Social Liberal Forum or the Beveridge Group. Many "Orange Bookers" are currently in key leadership roles within the Liberal Democrats, including Leader and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg  and David Laws.

The Tanned One musing was not welcomed by the other Peter (Black) who in his Blog  wrote

"He may well be right, but if he is I hope that Labour are more prepared to negotiate as equals than they have been in the past"

How does Peter Black expect the Labour Party with say 300 MP's treat the Liberal Democrats with sat 25 MP's as equals particularly as the latter ha d been heavily rejected in the polls?

Peter number two also makes a bizarre attack on Hain's reading of Hstory when he writes.

Hain's political analysis and understanding of history is a bit one dimensional and he struggles with the history of the Liberal Party, which he was once a member of. For example he says: 
"It seems likely that the ’Orange Book’ Lib Dem leadership – which hijacked their Party and took it into bed with the Tories – will be rejected by a membership desperate to restore the tradition of ... Lloyd George"
Perhaps Mr. Hain has overlooked the fact that Lloyd George also took his party into a coalition with the Tories. 

Black is selective in Hain Statement see it in full above where he  includes many prominent Liberals besides LG.

 Lloyd George firstly was Prime Minister as part of a "War Time Coalition" and then due to the coupon election of 1918  which saw his Coalition Liberals dominated by the Tories the result of which damaged his party to the extent that it was excluded from power until the events of 2010.

 Both Peter's seem to think that the electorate will accept a Labour/ Lib Dem government  in 2015: but if such an event should occur. Which would see a Lib Dem leader (Not Clegg presumably) being Deputy Prime Minister even though the electorate had rejected them even more heavily than the Tories would make many more cynical about politics than they are now,

Why are tow of our most ridiculous Welsh Politicians called Peter?

.