rationalskepticism.org

As Gordon Brown gathered with his praetorian guard of New Labour inside No 10 this afternoon, there was an intense frustration – with the Liberal Democrats, with sections of his own party and, lastly, with the Queen. Brown knew his premiership was at an end, and had wanted for some hours to go to Buckingham Palace to see her to tender his resignation.

But the palace said No. Protocol suggested that he must wait for the call from Nick Clegg, telling him he had struck a deal with the Conservative party.

One minister inside the bunker in the final hours said: "I'm annoyed, relieved and I want to clear off. We are just waiting for Nick Clegg to stop dicking around."

The remarks were a reflection of the bitter recriminations that broke out as Labour negotiators with the Lib Dems accused Clegg's team of proposing ludicrous spending pledges, and Clegg himself of obstructing talks.

They claimed that an effort to open direct discussions this morning between the more sympathetic Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, and Alistair Darling, the Labour chancellor for three years, had been vetoed by the Lib Dem leader.

Some Labour negotiators involved in two rounds of talks on Monday afternoon and this morning said they had not thought that any insurmountable policy difference was going to block agreement between the two sides.

Instead, they believe the growing opposition inside the Labour party, including from vocal former ministers and some MPs angry at what they regarded as the lack of consultation, confirmed Clegg in his view that a Lib Dem-Labour coalition would be not just be illegitimate, but instable.

In what may turn into a vicious political battle between Labour and Lib Dems in the weeks ahead, some were pinning the blame entirely on Clegg, calling him "a Tory in all but name".

One Labour negotiator hotly denied that there had been divisions within the Labour negotiating team, or that they had displayed bad body language.

Ed Balls said the Liberal Democrats had switched position on whether an emergency budget should be introduced this year. "We tried to negotiate in good faith. David Laws said he wanted to go with deficit reduction and cuts in spending this year, and that is not something we could agree with.

"If we had gone to the cabinet and to the parliamentary party and said cut spending now – which is contrary to our manifesto – they would have said no".

Cable denied this account.

But tonight that was certainly the Labour view of why a day that had started with such high hopes of a Lib Dem-Labour coalition had ended with David Cameron in Downing Street.

According to Labour, there were other key sticking points, and demands from the Liberal Democrats that simply could not be met.

The Lib Dems had apparently asked for an extra £2.5bn to spend on the school pupil premium to be spent on poorer children. Labour argued that it was not against the idea, but asked how it could be funded.

There were also divisions over electoral reform.

On Monday, the Lib Dems had demanded that the alternative vote system for electing MPs be passed by parliament – and that if an election occurred before a referendum, the election would be held under AV.

They also wanted a fully proportional system to be offered in a referendum. Labour flatly refused to introduce AV without a referendum, saying it would be illegitimate.

On the environment, the Lib Dems wanted no new nuclear power stations and to increase the proportion of energy from renewables from 15% to 40% by 2020. Labour also eventually agreed to drop the third runway at Heathrow being agreed in the next parliament and any hint of compulsory identity cards.

Labour said it was even willing to look at Cable's pet idea of taking people earning less than £10,000 out of tax altogether, but said a way had to be found to fund a tax switch that might cost £17bn and anyway not help the poorest the most.

Exasperated by the demands, Labour claimed that the total spending pledges being sought by the Liberal Democrats amounted to £20bn.

A Labour negotiator said: "The body language and mood was fine. The idea being put about by the Liberal Democrats that Ed Balls was sneering or not serious is simply not true.

"I am not sure there was any single policy show-stopper, but they just wanted to go in with the Conservatives in the end. I think they are too relaxed about the consequences of that alliance for them. I would not like to be a Liberal Democrat activist on the doorstep explaining what his leadership has done."