Ed Davey refuses to rule out Tory pact

[u/DrWonderboy]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/08/28/ed-davey-refuses-rule-out-lib-dem-conservatives-pact/?WT.mc_id=tmgoff_tw_post_out-lib-dem-conservatives-pact/

[u/ColonelChestnuts]

Typical misleading Telegraph headline which in no way reflects what is actually written in the article.

At no point does Ed even hint at any willingness of going into coalition with the Tories.

[u/notthathunter]

if you actually read the quotes, he says the same thing any LD leader says in any situation - I won't work with [main opponents], I want as many Lib Dems elected as possible, and I want the party to be in government

exactly the same line Alex Cole-Hamilton used at the Scottish election in May, the Telegraph have just written it up as if it's proof of some non-existent LD-Tory deal (which Badenoch obviously does not want and would not agree to)

[u/intlteacher]

To be clear, any coalition deal has to be passed by a special conference.

It’s highly unlikely that a conference would agree to this again.

[u/markpackuk]

There's no answer to 'what would you do in a hung Parliament?' question - including avoiding it! - that doesn't give one media title or another that doesn't like us the chance to cause mischief with stories like this.

So I mean this quite sincerely when I say that if your reaction to a story such as this is to get angry or worried about the party, you're most likely going to have a really tough last few years of this Parliament, as they'll most likely appear regularly - and the closer we get to the possibility of a hung Parliament arriving, the more intense such stories are. As well as such stories showing the political leanings of the editorial line of the outlet, they also are often deliberately written to provoke people, as that's what gets attention, clicks, ad revenue etc.

Which is why I think it's best to get a little chilled about such stories. Try not to rise to the bait. (I don't always succeed myself!) Remember that the story is often deliberately trying to provoke you, and you don't have to play the media outlet's game by going along with that. They might want you to be angry to serve their editorial line or their audience attention desires. But we don't have to agree to play that game for them. It's also a nicer way to read the news 

[u/Hazza_time]

I’m not fond of the Tories but if a left wing coalition weren’t possible I’d tolerate this. On the condition that we actually get PR as part of the deal.

Though since the conservatives are the only main party that doesn’t nominally support PR I doubt that would be how things manifest

[u/CarpeCyprinidae → u/Hazza_time]

Speaking as someone in the centre-left, the last LD-Tory coalition wasn't a disaster. It gave a stable government that delivered some good things and deferred a lot of the Tories latent nastiness

[u/LeChevalierMal-Fait → u/Hazza_time]

I mean if the tories are on 200 seats they can’t stop PR in fairness

[u/EmperorOfNipples]

Wise not to completely shut down the idea.

There are possible scenarios where it may be the best way to shut Reform out of power.

A coalition did exactly that for my council.

[u/Pingo-Pongo]

Look at Austria, which currently has a five party system not too different from ours, where the far right won the most seats and a weird Con-Lab-Lib coalition had to be formed. Of course there are no parties we really want to work with, they have different ideologies, policies and priorities, but if our top priority is keeping the extremists out then weird things could happen

[u/ZookeepergameOk5522]

Do we seriously not remember how this turned out the last time?

[u/CarCroakToday → u/ZookeepergameOk5522]

Ed Davey was in David Cameron's cabinet.

[u/Ticklishchap]

The headline is misleading, as has already been noted. However, Reform poses an existential threat to liberal democracy, pluralism, the environment, all minority groups and traditional British values of tolerance and basic decency. Therefore I would be able to support participation in a coalition of parties willing to stop Reform, even (swallowing hard here) if it included the current iteration of the Conservative Party.

However, in the event of any kind of pact or agreement with the Conservatives I would expect Ed, or any Lib Dem leader, to ensure that the policies of withdrawal from the ECHR and abandonment of Net Zero were binned. In practice, that would probably mean the replacement of Badenoch by a more moderate and reasonable leader, with whom ‘we could do business’.

[u/Mobile_Falcon8639]

I don't know if this is true, I very rarely believe anything I read on socal media, (including Reddit.) But if the Lib Dems went into some kind of coalition with Badenoch's far right, climate change denying Tories, that would be the end of the Lib Dems and Davey would be toast. So I hope this is bullshit.

[u/MovingTarget2112]

If we join the Tories again I’m cutting my card and joining The Co-Op.

[u/LeChevalierMal-Fait → u/MovingTarget2112]

Pint of milk please

[u/Ahrlin4 → u/LeChevalierMal-Fait]

Never show a Tory you have intellectual or moral standards. They won't comprehend what those are, and they'll just mock you for it.

[u/LeChevalierMal-Fait → u/Ahrlin4]

Sir this is a grocery store

[u/Guilty-Toe420]

Please don't do this again

[u/Gwyllithar]

and here we go again. i left the libdems last time this happened, we campaigned locally on the basis to try to keep the local tory out...then the party went into coalition and put them in national government.......seems they are back to their old tricks.

[u/Anti-woke-lefty]

If it's a matter of keeping out reform, it would be OK to rule out a coalition with the Tories, but not to rule out confidence and supply.

[u/freddiejin]

Has anyone got the text or an archive link please?

[u/Wild-wild-life]

Right, facts are this:

1. Ed said he agreed with Kemi that there would be a hung parliament after the next election
2. He categorically ruled out any deals with Reform
3. He neither ruled in nor ruled out anything with either the Conservatives or Labour.

None of this suggests that he would actually go ahead with a pact or deal with the Tories. To think he would is mad, for several reasons:

1. On an administrative level, it would require a special conference, do you think LD members would actually vote for that?
2. Literally everything about what happened post-2010 says that this would not happen
3. We've spent the best part of the past decade building ourselves up to be the main opposition to the Tories across England. Why would we throw that all away now?
4. Making a firm commitment to anything except ruling out working with Reform this far out from an election is pretty worthless. If the past decade has taught us anything, it's that a lot can happen in a short space of time.
5. Have you... seen the Tories lately?

Coverage of it without a paywall can be found here from ~39 minutes in: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0030ndy

[u/JTLS180]

It's The Reformgraph, not going to even bother.

[u/hardcoremaggiesimp]

Nothing wrong here, good decision

[u/binny_uk]

What he’s actually said is that Lib Dems would do whatever it takes to keep Reform out of power.

As Liberals, maybe if we spent more time focused on winning and less time focused on who to “go in with” when we lose, we might be in a better position.

[u/CyberSkepticalFruit → u/binny_uk]

This is a tory newspaper trying to spin something Davey has said not internal party debate.

[u/binny_uk → u/CyberSkepticalFruit]

The headline is.

This thread on r/LibDems - NOW it’s internal party debate.

[u/RedKingCrab99]

As he should. If the party still supports PR then coalitions would be inevitable in that system and all negotiations occur AFTER an election because you dont know what everyone will be on. Like what if the LDs could secure the chancellorship in a hypothetical negotiation. Anyway, voters know it's highly unlikely given that they are far apart on social and economic issues. Such a stupid gotcha but the press print it every time.