It remains to be seen what the general public make of events (and particularly the 10% or so who have been supporting the Liberal Democrats in recent polls).

Anyone who was going to give up on the Lib Dems, because of Conservative elements in coalition policies, has probably already done so.

Clegg cursed his party by entering the coalition, so why shouldn't he curse everyone else?  The Lib-Dems will be a rump after the next election, with defectors going both directions.  I wonder if both Tory and Labour radicals will be emboldened, knowing that the moderates have no viable alternative to defect to.

Ceebs, I shall be interested to read your views.

I find it difficult to estimate the potential Liberal Democrat seats after the next election, particularly given the uncertainty about the boundaries.

My best guess is that the Liberal Democrats will retain at least between 6-14 seats, which was the range of the number of constituencies the Liberal Party won in elections between 1945 and 1974. The current party is still significantly stronger and better organised than the Liberal Party was in the mid-twentieth century, so I may be underestimating its capacity to win seats in the next general election.

Trying to estimate precisely which seats may be retained, on present boundaries, will need some work but I have looked at Scotland.

Orkney and Shetland (a Liberal/Lib Dem seat continuously since 1950 and composed of two Scottish Parliament seats which went Lib Dem last year) is the safest Liberal Democrat seat. Alistair Carmichael, the Lib Dem Chief Whip (and government deputy chief whip) is well placed to be re-elected.

There would be a chance of Charles Kennedy retaining his seat (Ross, Skye and Lochaber), although probably no others could be held in mainland Scotland particularly if Ming Campbell retires.

In the longer term, a near-wipeout in the next election tells us little about their prospects after that. There will be a large number of electorates where they will be second (to Lab or Con, depending on region). And after a term of a Labour government with a large majority, they will probably flip a large number of Lib/Lab seats. And Labour's strategic interest will no doubt to have disaffected Lab voters going to Lib not Con.

_{It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II}

Because you can't get there from here.

FPP politics, in a country as conservative as Britain at least, requires historical incumbency. The libs aren't going away : on balance, it suits the two bigger parties to have a buffer between them.

The inertia in FFP is huge. The historical precedent of the emergence of Labour, pushing the libs into third party status, was only possible because it coincided with the introduction of universal suffrage.

_{It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II}

England is not Europe™.

The Green Party has a few patches of support. It has, at least, managed to win one parliamentary seat. This suggests that the Greens have got a better idea than UKIP, that you need to concentrate efforts to win seats in a first past the post system.

However the Green Party has not, so far at least, demonstrated any major increase in support since the coalition was formed. They are not challenging for the status of the English third (and Welsh fourth) party.

I would have thought that UKIP have wider, but thinly spread, support. They also do not seem to be mounting a serious challenge, at the UK Parliament level, to the Liberal Democrats third placed party status.