In government, the Liberal Democrats say they offered to grant the required money resolution for Bob Neill's PMB (the EU Referendum Bill) in return for them agreeing to a money resolution for Andrew George's PMB (the Affordable Homes Bill). This is standard practice in government. George's Bill is first on the list of PMB's and Neill's is third. Michael Moore's PMB on international aid is second.
In response, the Conservatives proposed that in return for them providing George's PMB with a money resolution, the Liberal Democrats would grant them both a money resolution and government time for Neill's PMB. This is not an equitable deal. The LDs have been more than willing to sign up to a fair deal that is the same for both sides - i.e. a money bill being granted for both George's PMB (a LD backbencher) and for Neill's PMB (a Tory backbencher).
The refusal to grant a money bill to a PMB is a extremely unusual move - by precedent, PMBs that get as far as a Second Reading in the House of Commons is automatically granted a money bill. It is even more unusual in that George's PMB is already being discussed at Committee stage but members on the Committee cannot discuss matters relating to money, as it does not have a money resolution to go with it.
Liberal Democrat Deputy Leader Malcolm Bruce said: "There is a completely reasonable deal on the table here - each party gets a money bill for a Private Member's Bill they feel strongly about. The Liberal Democrats were never going to block their referendum bill. We were happy to allow them to try and get it passed in the House of Commons. But the truth is they have folded like a cheap deck chair and are trying to make us take the blame by adding ridiculous conditions they knew we would not and could not accept. It is amazing that the Tories are prepared to sacrifice a bill they say they care about for some short-term tactical distinction from UKIP. They clearly never wanted the referendum bill to pass."
A senior Liberal Democrat source added: "The Tories put forward a proposal they know for certain will be turned down by the Lib Dems - a completely unfair deal. They know we are not about to sign up to their bill being given government time when it is neither the Liberal Democrats position, nor the Coalition Government's, especially when they are not prepared to offer anything in return. The Coalition Governm"ent is a two-way street.
"The only logical conclusion that can be reached is that the Tories don't really want their bill to pass and are trying to set the Lib Dems up as the scapegoats. Why else would they put forward a proposal they know cannot be agreed? We can only assume they would prefer it hadn't become law by the time of the General Election. They would prefer not to be talking about their bottom lines in their proposed grand renegotiation and instead try and deal with UKIP by saying the only way to get a referendum is to vote Tory. They couldn't do the latter if their bill had become law."
On the claim of the cost of the Spare Room Subsidy/Bedroom tax, the senior Liberal Democrat source added:
"The Tories have been involved in these negotiations, so they know they are being particularly disingenuous. Even according to their own original estimates, reforming the spare room subsidy would cost £500m. And they have seen the same official advice that we have which suggests because the policy is affecting fewer people than they planned, our policy to reform it would cost around £300m. Andrew George and the Liberal Democrats are happy to amend his bill to reflect that but cannot without a money resolution."
On the claim of the cost of the Spare Room Subsidy/Bedroom tax, the senior Liberal Democrat source added:
"The Tories have been involved in these negotiations, so they know they are being particularly disingenuous. Even according to their own original estimates, reforming the spare room subsidy would cost £500m. And they have seen the same official advice that we have which suggests because the policy is affecting fewer people than they planned, our policy to reform it would cost around £300m. Andrew George and the Liberal Democrats are happy to amend his bill to reflect that but cannot without a money resolution."
