The important thing for the Lib Dems about the shenanigans of the last few days is that it has exposed that all Liberal Democrats take the same view of Gordon Brown’s offer of ministerial jobs: no thanks, Gordon.

What was perhaps an attempt to divide us has actually emphasised how united we are, and so strengthens us.

There seem to me to be two possible interpretations of the fact that Gordon Brown has been going around offering ministerial jobs to Liberal Democrats.

The first is that it is what it says it is, that Brown wanted to make a sincere attempt to extend his government beyond simply members of his own party, in the interests of the country and of his own progressive political perspective. It seems to me that this interpretation is at least a possibility. Brown is by background a highly tribal Labour politician - but he also has a track record of dramatic unexpected annnouncements - think independence for the Bank of England (ironically a Lib Dem policy!) - and it’s quite possible to see that he might want to start his premiership doing something to make his government really different and more than just the fag-end of Blairism. And he was not, if I remember my Ashdown Diaries right, one of the senior Labour cabinet figures in the 1997-8 phase who actively opposed Blair’s closer working Project.

Additionally he can presumably see that one of the key challenges of becoming PM after ten years already in government is that the Government’s popularity will continue to decline. One of the key beneficiaries of that is likely to be the Liberal Democrats, and having them in government with him makes it much more difficult for them to benefit from that.

The second interpretation is that Brown has been altogether more clever: that he knew Lib Dems would say no but that by leaking the fact that it was even being talked about, he could get the media to focus on whether and under what circumstances the Lib Dems might support another party in coalition, which as we know from the past is an environment that the Lib Dems find it hard to flourish in.

I find it all too easy to imagine Gordon Brown the master-fixer, and doyenne of the strategic leak, devising the latter strategy. And in fact the two interpretations do not need to be mutually exclusive: if Ming or Paddy had said yes then he would have made his step forward and made some progress in binding in one of the major potential beneficiaries of the declining popularity of Labour, as well of course as actually bringing them into government - but even if they said no, he would get commentators focussed on the Lib Dems as a potential coalition partner.

So perhaps that was his strategy - but I think actually it shows something else about the Liberal Democrats.

It has demonstrated as clearly as could be that the Lib Dems are united in not wanting to be part of a Gordon Brown government. A man on the cusp of achieving his life’s ambition to become Prime Minister has been spurned by the third party. Even Paddy Ashdown, who ten years ago pursued this line with Blair, has rejected it. You might think that a party long starved of power, and certainly with a new ambition to be in government, would be willing to be part of this. But the important point for us is that it has emphasised our unanimity in saying no - I haven’t spoken to a single Lib Dem who wanted it any other way.

The Guardian - which has written some pretty extraordinary things about all this over the last few days - in fact manages to say completely the opposite of the case this morning, saying that “Sir Menzies Campbell put his authority as Liberal Democrat leader on the line” by making refusal to co-operate the party line. Nothing could be further from the truth: in fact he simply said what everyone in his party instinctively believes.

An interesting footnote to all this is the debate about constitutional reform. The Prime Minister-in-waiting has made various noises about tackling some of the unfinished business of sorting out some of Britain’s democratic and governance arrangements. The Lib Dems’ views on constitutional reform issues are very well known and established, and if Brown ends up supporting any of them, then I will be happy for us to work with him on them. They could be a major step forward for the fair governance of our country. But that’s quite different from supporting Brown in government - and it has been quite striking that none of the potential Ministers mentioned would appear to have anything to do with that agenda - Ashdown on Northern Ireland, or possibly foreign affairs/defence; Baroness Neuberger presumably on health, and Lord Oakeshott presumably on finance; Lord Lester on Human Rights and Lord Carlile presumably on human rights and terrorism.

Promoting things that we have long campaigned for is one thing: being part of Brown’s government is quite another.