Clegg has shown he is just a lying, hypocritical, nasty little self-serving scumbag

Before the 2010 election, in a September 2009 policy document A Better Politics for Less, Nick Clegg said he would cut the cost of politics.

�But once in government,� Mr Clegg forgot his promise. In 2010, he had two special advisers, by 2012 this had risen to fourteen, costing us almost �1 million a year. Though, given Mr Clegg�s ever-increasing unpopularity, it�s not obvious that these advisers� advice has been that great. Moreover, it seems we�re quite generous with the salaries we pay to Mr Clegg�s many advisers. His chief of staff gets �98,000 a year and three others are on �80,000 a year. These include one who made an �88,000 donation to the Liberal Democrats. Cynics might see this donation as a pretty good investment, giving returns of almost a hundred per cent a year.�

Mr Clegg has also honourably/shamefully (delete as appropriate) tried to change our voting systems to either �make Britain more democratic� or to �make sure he got more Liberal Democrats into power� (delete as appropriate). First was the House of Commons. Clegg managed to get the Coalition to hold a referendum on introducing the alternative vote (AV) voting system. We spent about �80m of our money on Mr Clegg�s referendum. This �80m could have paid for five hundred police officers or nurses for five years, perhaps a better use of our money than increasing the number of Liberal Democrats in Westminster. Luckily for us, this proposal got rejected by the electorate and has now hopefully sunk without trace. Had Clegg succeeded, AV would have hugely complicated our voting system and necessitated at least �100m of our taxes being spent on a new electronic vote-counting system.

Clegg clearly learnt something from this setback – that British voters are fairly conservative with a small �c� when it comes to changing our electoral system. So, if he wanted to make other changes, the worst thing he could do would be to consult the electorate again. Sure enough, when Clegg came up with new proposals to supposedly make the House of Lords more democratic by having the majority of peers elected rather than appointed – again a proposal likely to increase the number of Liberal Democrats in positions of power – he passionately argued that there was no need for a referendum. Clegg�s proposal for between 300 and 450 elected peers, all in position for up to fifteen years and all receiving a full salary from our taxes, would have hugely increased the cost of the House of Lords from about �130m to �300m a year.�

Now that the Tories have blocked Clegg’s Lords reform,�Clegg�will block Cameron�s proposal to reduce the number of MPs to six hundred � something which would have slightly reduced the cost of politics.

Once again, Mr �Better Politics for Less� Clegg seemed totally and selfishly unconcerned about how much of our money he would spend on his political cronies. Clegg�s various attempts to squander huge quantities of our tax money on his efforts to change voting systems for the Commons and Lords for the benefit of himself and his party seem to sit slightly uncomfortably with Clegg�s vision of A Better Politics for Less.