This week, Cherwell spoke exclusively to Nick Clegg about a range of issues in the run up to the election. 

On attracting the student vote…

We’ve consistently defended the student community, and the simple principle that a university education should be based on ability, not ability to pay. I also think that young people are naturally inclined to question the traditional two-party system. Young men and women today have grown up with the unprecedented choice in their lives that we’ve now all become accustomed to, over where we shop, what mobile phone we have, where we travel, and so on, so the idea that there are only two choices in our politics just doesn’t sit right, at least not with a lot of the students I talk to. The old parties want people to believe that there are only two answers to every question, and that it’s just not possible to do things differently. That’s nonsense, and young people aren’t taken in by it.

On scrapping student fees…

It simply isn’t right that graduates are leaving university saddled with tens of thousands of pounds of debt. Starting out in your careers is hard enough, especially with the job market as it is. And what I find extremely worrying is that it looks increasingly likely that either a Labour or Conservative government would raise the cap on fees, which could see them rise to £7000, meaning students graduating up to £44,000 in debt within five years. That’s outrageous. The Liberal Democrats are the only party with a plan to abolish fees. You’re right that the economic crisis makes it more difficult, and we’ve been very honest about saying fees have to be phased out over the course of six years rather than scrapped immediately. But, and this is the crucial point, we can start straight away, with students going into their final years, before extending it out to everyone else. That way anyone at university in August will, under our plans, have their debt slashed by at least £3000.

On the presidential style of politics and the TV debates…

I don’t think the debates have made it more presidential particularly. The truth is that a British Prime Minister with a majority in Parliament already wields much more power than many presidents. And when a lot of people go to the polls, what they’ll be thinking about is which of their local candidates will deliver for their neighbourhood. The debates have, in my view, had a hugely positive effect on this election. It’s very natural that people want to know more about those who aspire to lead the country, and having millions of people tune in for 90 minutes at a time to watch the parties have it out on policy is good for our democracy. They’re an overdue addition to British politics, and I hope they’re here to stay.

On scrapping Trident….

We are not advocating unilateral disarmament. What we’re saying is that we no longer need to replace Trident on a like-for-like basis. It’s a Cold War missile system, designed to flatten Moscow at the touch of a button, that no longer best protects us against modern threats and that will cost £100bn over the course of its lifetime. There are plenty of alternatives that allow us to retain a nuclear capability but that also free up the resources we need to provide our troops in Afghanistan with the equipment they need. Plenty of military experts agree we need to look at this again, yet Labour and the Conservatives want to exclude Trident from the next Strategic Defence Review. It’s wrongheaded to exclude our most expensive weapons system from that review. We will make sure alternatives are properly considered.

On ‘Cleggism’…

It’s not a word I’ve come across before, I think you’re the first to coin it! My basic philosophy is about power; how it has to be fairly dispersed. I wrote a pamphlet called The Liberal Moment last October which goes into some depth if you’re interested. But in short: in our society it is clear that power – and thereby freedom – is unfairly distributed. Power has its own gravitational pull; it accumulates among elites – political, social and corporate – and they each exercise that power in their own interests, acting against the interests of, and thereby diminishing the freedom of, others. The job of a liberal government is to disperse power fairly to all. That’s why at this election we’re fighting for ordinary people against the tyranny of vested interests. Our priorities – giving children and young people the best start in life, introducing fair taxes, creating jobs that last, and bringing in honest, decent politics – are all about opening up opportunities to everyone.

On coalitions, and the importance of electoral reform…

I think electoral reform is urgent, and given the events of the last few weeks it’s astonishing that there’s anyone left who doesn’t agree. We’ve seen some crazy predictions of what’s going to happen at this election, everything from another majority government with less than a third of the public supporting it, to the party which comes third getting more seats than anyone else! If no party wins a majority on Thursday, I think it’s an instruction from voters to politicians to talk to each other. What people can be sure of is that the priorities I set out in our manifesto – fair taxes, a fair start for children at school, economic reform and political renewal – are what the Liberal Democrats will be fighting to deliver whatever happens.

Cherwell has learned that many students illegally voted twice in yesterday’s general election.

Speaking anonymously, students admitted they had already cast a vote for the general election in their home constituency by post before voting in person in Oxford.

Others were surprised at the ease with which they were able to, and in some cases encouraged, to vote twice.

Jack Matthews, a third-year Earth Scientist from St Peter’s, was shocked to find that he was encouraged to cast a second vote by one Polling Officer at Carfax ward yesterday morning.

He was told that voting twice was a “quirk for students” and that “no one would know”.Matthews said, “I told the Officer that I was only voting in the City Council local election.

“The Polling Officer said, quite understandably, that you can vote in the general election too. I explained I had already voted elsewhere by a postal vote.

“Her reply was ‘Well, you know, you can vote twice, it’s a quirk for students’. I replied that no, I was not allowed to vote twice as that would be illegal. She looked back at me rather confused and then said ‘Nobody will know'”.

A student from St Catherine’s admitted that she had voted three times. “Every time someone sent me a polling card I filled it in and sent it off. This happened three times, so I hope I’m not doing anything illegal.”

Yesterday, signs on the walls of polling stations around Oxford and the country read, “You are guilty of an offence if you vote more than once whether by post or in person, or as proxy and in the same electoral area. You could face imprisonment or a fine if found guilty”.

Yet some students complained that they were not made sufficiently aware of the law.One student told Cherwell she had voted twice. She said, “I applied to be given a postal vote for my home constituency, then also registered in Oxford without thinking about it when our college asked if I would like to.

“I assumed that the Council must have known what they were doing, so I sent off my postal vote, and then this morning went to the polling station in Oxford expecting to be turned away. But I wasn’t, so I went ahead and voted.”

Outside the polling station on Blue Boar Street, a student told a Cherwell reporter that although he had voted in his home constituency by postal vote, his younger siblings had also used his polling card to cast his vote in person.

A spokesperson from the Electoral Commission told Cherwell that they were not aware of any allegations made to the police concerning students voting twice since their creation in 2000.

The spokesperson stressed that “Students can vote twice at local elections, if they are registered in two different local authority areas, but not at general elections. We want to make sure that everyone who is eligible to vote can vote.

“This includes students, who have a right to be on the electoral register at their term address as well as their home address. Students are obliged to provide the correct information when making their application.

“They must choose the parliamentary constituency in which they will cast their vote. Voting in two constituencies for the general election is electoral fraud and is a matter for the police to investigate.”

A number of students told Cherwell that they had presented Polling Officers with their City Council elections polling card, only to be handed a ballot paper for the general election as well.

If officers in polling stations were offering general election voting slips to all students throughout the day, several hundred illegal votes could have been cast.

Three Magdalen students told how they cast their votes at the St Clements Family Centre on Cross Street in Oxford East without their polling cards and without being asked for any ID. “The lack of security is pretty shocking – we could have been literally anyone, as they did not ask us to prove our identity in any way.”

There were further voting problems at LMH, where 65 students found out that they had not been registered to vote by the College. Many travelled home, or managed to arrange to vote by proxy or by post in their home constituency.
JCR President Genevieve Clarke said, “The policy at LMH is that the College registers you if you live in. While the Pipe Partridge Building was being renewed, 65 students were living out in accommodation organised by LMH for students that could not live in the new building.

“Students involved are quite upset that college did not tell them or notify them, as they were still effectively living in college accommodation.”

Amelia Regan, a second-year history student at LMH, said, “We were under the impression that everyone would be registered to vote. We heard that people living out would not be, but we were still paying rent to college, so we assumed that College had sorted it all out.”

Hertford JCR has avoided the threat to their democracy posed by the motion that would establish a House of Lords composed of PPE students to rule the JCR.

The original motion was amended during this week’s meeting so that the whole JCR were made members of the new House of Lords, and endowed with the title “Lord X of Hertford JCR”.

Further amendments were that the House of Lords would agree by default with any decisions made in JCR meetings, hence removing the need ever to convene a meeting of the House of Lords.

The new motion was passed near unanimously, the only people voting against it in amended form being those who had proposed the motion in the first place.

One student, who wished to remain anonymous, said, “I think it is excellent to recognize that it is not PPE students, but the whole Hertford student body, who is truly elite”.

A follow-up motion to disenfranchise the PPEists who proposed the original motion was not submitted in time but will be discussed at the next meeting.