However, his real fear, he said, was of a worst - case scenario with the Tories and the Lib Dems going into the next election with
an even closer alliance — and Labour being «caught with its trousers down» again.
Not exact matches
It seems rather more plausible to me to say that where the Liberal Party failed to recognise its own enlightened self - interest was in failing to do more to hug
close the labour movement and perhaps Labour Party itself: had they been more able to select working - class candidates themselves, and / or been able to more forcefully develop the New Liberalism against some Gladstonian instincts, (or indeed kept the Fabian intellectuals interested: they broke with permeation only after the Liberal rejection of the 1909 Minority Report on the Poor Law,
even having helped form the Labour Party from 1900 - 06) then it may have been possible that Labour would have remained primarily a trade union pressure group within a broader progressive
alliance.
We are sabotaging our own negotiating
alliance, alienating our
closest ally, threatening the peace in Northern Ireland and risking British manufacturing and agriculture in order to sign trade deals which the secretary of state anyway admits we don't need and would be politically impossible to secure
even if we did.
Surrealism would be her
closest alliance, but
even a loose definition of this tradition fails to incorporate her intensely personal vision.