If you are a registered member of the Liberal Democrat Voice forum - and any paid-up party member is welcome to join - then you now have the opportunity to make your views known on a range of issues in our October members’ survey. Topics we are asking your opinion on include:

- what you thought of the Labour and Tory party conferences;
- whether you believe Gordon Brown will survive, and what you really think of David Cameron;
- if you think it’s time for a Lib Dem shadow cabinet reshuffle, and which of the party’s ‘Big Beasts’ you’d choose to bring back;
- what you think of Nick Clegg’s leadership and the performance of the shadow cabinet; and
- who you would vote for in the Lib Dem party president race.

It should take no longer than 5-10 minutes to fill in. All registered members of the Forum should by now have been emailed with a link to take you to the survey. If you haven’t been yet, or if you are signing up to the Forum now, please drop Ryan Cullen a line at

We’ll publish the results within the next week or so.

All last week, Lib Dem Voice published the results of our survey of party members registered for the LDV private members’ forum asking for your views on the Lib Dem conference. For those who missed it, all the results of this and previous surveys are available here. But there was one question right at the end of the survey, concerning the future of the LDV members’ surveys, which we’re publishing not on the public blog, but within the private members’ forum itself: the link is here.

Last weekend, Lib Dem Voice emailed the members of our private forum (open to all Lib Dem members) inviting them to take part in a survey, conducted via Liberty Research, asking a number of questions arising from last week’s party conference in Bournemouth. Many thanks to the 187 of you who completed it; we’ve publishing the results all this week on LDV.

In today’s final instalment we look at what impact you think the party conference had on Nick Clegg’s leadership. LDV asked: Nick Clegg’s leadership of the party has come in for some criticism from some sections of the media. Do you think his performance over the past week has strengthened or weakened his position as leader?

Here’s what you said:

> Strengthened it – 77.%%
> Weakened it – 10.7%
> Don’t know / No opinion – 11.8%

A resounding result, and one with which Nick has reason to feel pretty pleased. That doesn’t mean there was no criticism, though, not least of his pensions gaffe (one which Nick has fully ‘fessed up to). Here’s a sample of your comments: Read more »

Over the weekend, Lib Dem Voice emailed the members of our private forum (open to all Lib Dem members) inviting them to take part in a survey, conducted via Liberty Research, asking a number of questions arising from last week’s party conference in Bournemouth. Many thanks to the 187 of you who completed it; we’re publishing the results this week on LDV.

The big issue of this year’s Bournemouth conference was undoubtedly the party’s Make It Happen policy document, and specifically it’s tax-cutting message. So LDV asked: The party conference voted by a wide margin to endorse Make it Happen, including the line: “If there’s money to spare [after meeting party policy commitments], we won’t simply spend it. We’re looking for ways to cut Britain’s overall tax burden, so ordinary families have more of their money to help themselves.” This was opposed by some in the party, who said the Lib Dems should not place tax cuts ahead of public spending. Did you agree with the conference decision to endorse Make it Happen’s tax-cutting approach?

Here’s what you said:

> Yes - 61.9%
> No - 29.1%
> Don’t know / no opinion - 4.2%
> Other (please state) - 4.8%

A convincing vote, then, in favour of the leadership’s tax-cutting position, though a little less overwhelmingly so than the actual party conference vote (which was nearer to 3:1). Comments, as you might expect, divided into three categories: those passionately in favour of the new emphasis on tax-cuts those passionately against; and those either inbetween, or who thought the differences between the two positions had been rather exaggerated. Here’s a handful:

“Yes, public services cost money. But Labour’s doubled taxes in the last ten years, and everyone knows a lot of what they’ve done’s a fuck-up. If we can’t be at least 3% different to Labour, what are we all in politics for?”
“In fact, I don’t think there was a lot of difference between the two positions, a mere £5bn a year. It was the symbolism that was important.”
“I was quite happy with the fifty pence rate in 2005, but I think that the changes proposed are also a good way to deliver our objectives.”
“Old fashioned radical Liberal, not happy with the economic liberal slant”
“Your gloss is incorrect. We were concerned about the loss of help specifically to those who are too poor to pay income tax. Can two ex-Directors of Policy (Duncan Brack and Richard Grayson) really be wrong?”
“sensible, Liberal and popular (rare that any policy can tick all 3 of those boxes!)”
“Wrong policy, and defintely wrong time. Dosen’t add up either numerically or intellectually.”
“The best reasons to vote Lib Dem at the moment”

Part of the controversy of Make It Happen’s tax-cuts has been generated by the fact that the party does not, as yet, have firm, public proposals detailing how the £20 billion reduction in public spending to fund policy commitments and tax-cuts will be found. So the LDV survey next asked: As yet, the party has not spelled out the precise measures which will enable the party to cut public expenditure by £20 billion, and this has attracted some criticism within the Lib Dems and among sections of the media. Which of these statements comes closest to your view:

Here’s what you told us:

> It is not necessary or possible up to 18 months before a general election to spell out how this £20bn will be cut. It is therefore perfectly responsible for the party to state clearly its direction of travel - that it will reduce taxes and cut public expenditure – and to publish details before an election. - 47.6%

> The party needs to spell out far more precisely how it intends to find £20bn of spending cuts. If it does not the Lib Dems cannot expect to be taken seriously by the media or by the voters, and will deserve to be attacked as irresponsible by our political opponents. - 47.6%

> Don’t know / no opinion - 4.8%

That’s right - an exact tie! Here’s a little of what you said: Read more »

Over the weekend, Lib Dem Voice emailed the members of our private forum (open to all Lib Dem members) inviting them to take part in a survey, conducted via Liberty Research, asking a number of questions arising from last week’s party conference in Bournemouth. Many thanks to the 187 of you who completed it; we’re publishing the results this week on LDV.

Today we’re looking at the Lib Dem presidency. Simon Hughes’s second term as party president expires at the end of 2008, and there will be a contested election to determine who his successor will be within the next six weeks. We asked about the presidency in September’s monthly LDV members’ survey, when we included all three of the candidates who had been touted as in the running, though only Ros Scott had at that point officially declared: Ros was then by some way the top choice, with two-thirds of the vote, with Lembit trailing well behind with just under 20%. But has the last three weeks changed your minds, and in particular the official declaration of Lembit’s intention to stand? That’s what LDV wanted to know. (The survey took place before the news that Chandila Fernando intended to throw his hat into the ring.)

LDV asked: Two candidates for the presidency of the Liberal Democrats have now officially announced their intention to stand: Lembit Opik MP, and Baroness Ros Scott. Who do you intend to vote for?

Here’s what you told us:

> Lembit Opik - 12.2%
> Ros Scott - 57.1%
> I don’t know yet, but will definitely vote - 26.5%
> I won’t be voting - 4.2%

At this point, then, there seems little doubt that Ros Scott is the front-runner as far as LDV members are concerned. Though her vote has slipped slightly since our September poll, this is primarily due to the inclusion of a ‘Don’t know yet’ option; and in any case Lembit’s support has slipped even further.

There are two unknowables: first, will the entry of a third, unexpected candidate (Chandila Fernando) shake up the race?; and, secondly, will Lembit’s notoriety/popularity with armchair members sway the final result (though activists will form a greater proportion of voting members in the presidential poll than for the leadership)?

LDV post-conference members’ survey (1): why you did – and didn’t – attend the Lib Dem conference.
LDV post-conference members’ survey (2): what you thought of the media coverage of the Lib Dem conference

Over the weekend, Lib Dem Voice emailed the members of our private forum (open to all Lib Dem members) inviting them to take part in a survey, conducted via Liberty Research, asking a number of questions arising from last week’s party conference in Bournemouth. Many thanks to the 187 of you who completed it; we’re be publishing the results this week on LDV.

Today we look at how the media did its job. LDV asked: It is a common complaint of those who attend party conferences that the media distorts – if it covers at all – what is happening there. The media respond that it is their job to see past how party members view proceedings, and that public interest in conferences is minimal. How accurate and balanced do you think media coverage of the Lib Dem conference has been in general?

Here’s what you told us:

* Accurate and balanced – the media has done its job well and given over about the right amount of space – 3%
* Okay – there was reasonable coverage and it was generally accurate – 49%
* Inaccurate and unbalanced – the media largely ignored what was happening, and distorted much of what they did report – 34%
* Don’t know / no opinion – 14%

So, although a significant minority of you were unhappy with the quality of coverage – regarding it as “inaccurate and unbalanced” – a majority of you (52%) thought the media did an okay job, or better. I think the media will (insofar as they care) view that as a pretty good result, coming as it does from party members and activists.

The individual comments we received broke down into three camps: those who lamented the fact that the Lib Dem conference co-incided with turmoil in the financial markets and the Labour leadership; those who blamed the media four-square for belittling the party; and those (only a handful of you) who felt the party got all it deserved. Here’s a selection: Read more »

Over the weekend, Lib Dem Voice emailed the members of our private forum (open to all Lib Dem members) inviting them to take part in a survey, conducted via Liberty Research, asking a number of questions arising from last week’s party conference in Bournemouth. Many thanks to the 187 of you who completed it; we’ll be publishing the results this week on LDV.

First up, we asked how many of you had actually attended conference. LDV forum members are more likely than most, of course, to be party activists – so it was little surprise that 60% of those responding to the survey were in Bournemouth last week (compared with just under 10% of party members nationally).

Of those who didn’t attend, we asked what the main reason was for not going to conference. Here’s what you told us:

It is too expensive – 20%
It was too far away – 12%
I couldn’t take time off work – 31%
I don’t feel the need to be actively involved in national party policy-making – 8%
I think party conferences are pointless – 1%
Other – 28%

Of those who selected ‘Other’ the most recurring issues were family commitments, poor health, or holiday/work taking you abroad. Those who considered expense the main deterrent did not mention the cost of registering as a delegate; rather it was the cost of accommodation in a B&B/hotel for up to five nights.

Of those who did attend, we asked what your main motivation for going to Bournemouth was. Here’s what you told us:

To participate and vote in the party’s policy debates – 34%
To attend training and/or fringe events – 26%
To meet up socially with other party members – 16%
Other – 24%

Those who selected ‘Other’ were, on the whole, stressing the importance of two or all three of these options in motivating them to attend conference. There were a handful of folk who answered their main reason for attending was that they worked for the party, or were running a stall, or involved in stewarding at conference.

Finally for today, we asked the same question to both groups: From all that you have watched and read over the past week, how successful do you think the Lib Dem conference was in terms of showing the party in a positive light?

Here’s what those who didn’t attend (and so were more reliant on media reporting) said:

Very successful – 19%
Quite successful – 44%
Okay – 24%
Quite unsuccessful – 11%
Very unsuccessful – 3%

And here’s what those who did attend, and so witnessed conference for themselves, thought:

Very successful – 30%
Quite successful – 55%
Okay – 12%
Quite unsuccessful – 3%
Very unsuccessful – 0%

The difference is significant: 85% of those who attended thought the conference was successful or very successful at showing the Lib Dems in a positive light, compared with 63% of those who didn’t attend. Some might argue this shows the danger of conferences in promoting a distorted group-think. More positively, we can see it as fairly convincing evidence of the morale-boosting fillip which surrounding yourself with thousands of other like-minded souls has on party activists.

The overwhelming impression from these findings, though, is that the vast majority of you believe the party conference was, to one degree or another, pretty good for the party as a whole (and the weekend opinion polls would tend to back up that view).

If you are a registered member of the Liberal Democrat Voice forum - and any paid-up party member is welcome to join - then you now have the opportunity to make your views known on a range of issues in our special post-conference members’ survey. Topics we are asking your opinion on include:

- why you did - or didn’t attend - conference;
- whether you agreed with the conference decision to back Make it Happen’s tax-cuts;
- what you thought of the media’s reporting;
- whether the past week has strengthened or weakened Nick Clegg’s leadership; and
- who you would vote for in the Lib Dem party president race.

It should take no longer than 5-10 minutes to fill in. All registered members of the Forum should by now have been emailed with a link to take you to the survey. If you haven’t been yet, or if you are signing up to the Forum now, please drop Ryan Cullen a line at

In addition, we are currently asking in the Forum for your feedback on LDV’s conference coverage. So tell us there what worked, what didn’t, what would you like to see more/less of, etc.

All this week, Lib Dem Voice is publishing the results of our September survey of party members conducted through Liberty Research via our private members’ forum. This is the second of our monthly surveys – if you have ideas for future survey questions, please email me at .

Today we turn our attention to the performance of the Liberal Democrat shadow cabinet. Reproduced below, in alphabetical order, are the full results of our survey, which shows how effective each member is felt by members to be, together with a net satisfaction rating (those who think they’re effective minus those think they’re ineffective). The list is a long one, so here’s the skinny:

Top 5

Vince Cable +96.9%
Norman Baker +63.6%
Chris Huhne +62.5%
David Laws +41.8%
Steve Webb +32.2%

Unsurprisingly, Vince tops the table with a Stalinist 97% approval rating. Norman Baker and Chris Huhne continue to show their popularity among party activists, both topping 60%, while David Laws and Steve Webb have (though probably perceived as being on opposite ‘wings’ of the party) both demonstrated a firm and popular grip on their respective portfolios which has earned widespread respect.

Bottom 5

Sarah Teather -14.6%
Roger Williams -14.6%
Michael Moore -20.8%
Nick Harvey -23.9%
Lembit Opik -35.4%

No real surprises here, either. Lembit, while he has his fans, is felt by many to distract from his housing role even when he is making very good points, while Nick Harvey’s defence of retaining Trident has marked him out among many. Michael Moore, though he shone briefly as Ming’s deputy at foreign affairs hasn’t quite found his shadow cabinet niche since. Roger Williams suffers from a low national profile, while Sarah Teather – though highly talented – seems oddly misplaced in her Business and Enterprise role.

Full results below. Read more »

All this week, Lib Dem Voice is publishing the results of our September survey of party members conducted through Liberty Research via our private members’ forum. This is the second of our monthly surveys – if you have ideas for future survey questions, please email me at .

Today we turn our attention to the performance of Nick Clegg as leader, and whether party members think the Lib Dems are on the right/wrong track.

To try and gauge how representative LDV’s online community might be of the wider membership we first asked: How did you vote in the 2007 Lib Dem leadership contest? You told us:

For Nick Clegg: 46.9%
For Chris Huhne: 46.9%
I didn’t vote / wasn’t a party member at the time / can’t remember etc: 6.3%

An exact tie! And one which reflects the extreme closeness of last year’s leadership contest, when Nick edged Chris by just over 500 votes.

LDV then asked: Do you regret how you voted? The answer was an overwhelming ‘No’: just one person said they regretted their vote; and s/he had voted for neither Nick nor Chris.

And then on to Nick’s performance as leader over the last eight months. LDV asked: Regardless of how you voted, what is your view of Nick Clegg’s performance as Lib Dem leader now?

Here’s what you told us:

Very effective: 13.5%
Quite effective: 51.0%
Quite ineffective: 24.0%
Very ineffective: 9.4%
Don’t know / No opinion: 2.1%

In total, then, 64.5% of party members in LDV’s survey are satisfied with Nick’s performance, compared with 33.4% who are not: a net satisfaction rating of +31%. Given the tendency of party members to be critical – and the more so, it seems, if they are hooked-up to the internet – Nick can probably feel pretty relaxed about this result.

And, finally for today, LDV asked: Do you think, as a whole, the Liberal Democrats are on the right course or on the wrong track?

You said:

The right course: 60.4%
The wrong track: 28.1%
Don’t know / No opinion: 11.5%

This represents a net satisfaction rating of +32%, a significantly positive shift from last month’s +25%, and a welcome sign for the party leadership ahead of next week’s Bournemouth conference.

All this week, Lib Dem Voice is publishing the results of our September survey of party members conducted through Liberty Research via our private members’ forum. This is the second of our monthly surveys – if you have ideas for future survey questions, please email me at .

Today we look at party members’ expectations of the result of the next general election, which has to be called within the next 18 months or so. According to LDV’s most recent polling analysis the current state of the parties is this: Tories, 46%; Labour, 26%; Lib Dems 17%.

LDV asked: What is your view of the most likely result of the next general election?

Here’s what you said:

A Conservative landslide: 21.9%
A working Conservative majority: 60.4%
Conservatives largest single party, but no majority: 14.6%
Labour largest single party, but no majority: 0%
A working Labour majority: 0%
Don’t know / No opinion: 3.1%

So a whopping 82% of LDV-reading party members believe the Tories will form the next government; and not a single respondent predicted a Labour victory of any sort. This is quite a turnaround even from last May, when we ran a poll open to all LDV readers – then, only 50% reckoned the Tories would win a majority at the next general election.

We then turned our attention to the Lib Dems. Party leader Nick Clegg has declared it his aim to double the number of Lib Dem MPs over the course of the next two general elections – which would mean the party having some 125 MPs within the next seven years.

LDV asked: The Lib Dems currently number 63 MPs. How many MPs do you think the Lib Dems will have after the next general election?

Over 100: 3.1%
75-100: 9.4%
63-75: 33.3%
50-63: 36.5%
30-50: 15.6%
Fewer than 30: 2.1%

So 46% of you predict that the Lib Dems will make gains on the party’s current position, and end up with more than 63 MPs. And, in total, 82% of party members in this survey believe the Lib Dems will have at least 50 MPs after the next general election. Those parts of the media which still imagine a Lib Dem wipe-out is possible should take note of this internal confidence in the party’s future prospects.

LDV members’ survey (1): Simon Hughes and the Lib Dem presidency
LDV members’ survey (2): who you would elect party president

All this week, Lib Dem Voice is publishing the results of our September survey of party members conducted through Liberty Research via our private members’ forum. This is the second of our monthly surveys – if you have ideas for future survey questions, please email me at .

Today we publish the results of the first poll asking how Lib Dem members might vote in the event of a contested election for the party presidency.

LDV asked: Any member of the Liberal Democrats is eligible to stand for the Lib Dem presidency: they do not have to be a Parliamentarian. Three candidates have been mentioned as possible candidates: Lembit Opik MP, Shadow Minister for Housing; Baroness Ros Scott, Spokesperson for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister; and Cllr John Smithson, Lib Dem Deputy Leader of Kirklees Distict Council. Which of these three would you most like to be elected president?

Here’s how you voted:

Lembit Opik: 19.8%
Ros Scott: 65.6%
John Smithson: 14.6%

So, as far as LDV members are concerned, it’s a one-horse race, with almost two-thirds backing the Baroness who blogs. And herein may lie the rub. For though Ros has travelled far and wide to meet party members in constituencies across the UK, I doubt she would claim to have quite the prominent public profile that Lembit, erm, enjoys. So whether LDV’s online community will necessarily prove representative of the wider membership is debatable.

In any case, I hope this poll doesn’t for a moment deter Lembit or John Smithson from throwing their hats into the ring – not least because having three candidates representing different levels of our electoral system (the Lords, the Commons and local government) might spark a proper debate about what it is exactly members want of their president.

LDV members’ survey (1): Simon Hughes and the Lib Dem presidency

All this week, Lib Dem Voice will be publishing the results of our September survey of party members conducted through Liberty Research via our private members’ forum. This is the second of our monthly surveys – if you have ideas for future survey questions, please email me at .

We began by asking about the party presidency. Every two years, the Lib Dem party membership has the opportunity to elect a Party President, and Simon Hughes MP has been party president since 2004. His term of office ends this year, and a ballot will take place this autumn to elect his successor.

LDV asked: What do you think the main role of the President should be?

Here’s how you rated the four options on offer:

* To become a known face in the media representing the Lib Dem position on the TV and radio news. 12.5%
* To tour the country visiting constituency parties, listening to members, and representing their views to the Parliamentary party. 45.8%
* To become a senior behind-the-scenes figure, chairing key policy and organisation committees, balancing the wishes of the membership and the leadership. 33.3%
* To lead the party’s fundraising among the membership and wealthy supporters, ensuring the party is on the best possible election footing. 8.3%

Of course none of the options are mutually exclusive, and doubtless many members will be looking to the presidential candidates to spell out how they will achieve all four of them (and more) if elected. But it was interesting to note that the role felt most fitting for the president should be to ‘rally the troops’ up and down the country; though the desire of members to see the president full involved with policy formulation was not far behind. Neither the PR nor the fundraising aspects to the job were felt by members in this survey to be of prime importance.

LDV then asked: How effective do you think Simon has been as party president?

Here’s what you told us:

Very effective: 9.4%
Quite effective: 15.6%
Okay: 34.4%
Quite ineffective: 27.1%
Very ineffective: 13.5%

Simon’s tenure as Lib Dem president has attracted a fair amount of critical muttering around the blogosphere, so he may be reasonably gratified to discover that 59% of LDV members (who are a pretty hard-nosed bunch) rated his performance as okay or better. Of course, that still leaves 41% who felt his performance had been ineffective to one degree or another.

To drill-down a little further LDV then asked: What do you think has been Simon’s greatest achievement or failure during his time as party president?

Some 60% of those who completed the survey chose to answer this. Most were critical, chiefly of Simon’s unfulfilled pledge to double the Lib Dem membership – though events largely beyond his control haven’t exactly assisted him for the past three years. Here’s some of what you said: Read more »

All this week, Lib Dem Voice has been publishing the results of our first ever survey of party members. Some 133 of you accessed the survey via our private members’ forum. We don’t pretend it’s a representative sample, but that doesn’t mean it’s without value either. We hope you, LDV’s readers, find it interesting. Perhaps the wider party will, too. This is the first in what we intend to be a monthly survey – if you have ideas for future survey questions, please email me at .

The final question asked members to rate out of 10 the current performance of the Lib Dem shadow cabinet members. Here’s how you scored them, in descending order:

1. Vince Cable, Deputy Leader and Shadow Chancellor = 8.8
2. Chris Huhne, Shadow Home Secretary, and Shadow Secretary for Justice = 6.6
3. Norman Baker, Shadow Secretary of State for Transport = 6.4
4. Nick Clegg, Leader = 6.3
5. Lynne Featherstone, Spokesperson for Youth and Equality = 6.2
6. Steve Webb, Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Energy, Food and Rural Affairs = 6.1
7. David Laws, Shadow Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families = 5.8
8. Julia Goldsworthy, Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government = 5.7
9. Edward Davey, Shadow Foreign Secretary, and Chair of Campaigns and Communications = 5.7
10. Norman Lamb, Shadow Health Secretary = 5.7
11. Simon Hughes, Shadow Leader of the House of Commons, and Party President = 5.5
12. Lord Tom McNally, Lib Dem Leader in the House of Lords = 5.4
13. Susan Kramer, Families Spokesperson, Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster = 5.4
Jeremy Browne, Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury = 5.4
14. Jenny Willott, Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions = 5.2
15. Danny Alexander, Chair of the Manifesto Group = 5.0
16. Don Foster, Shadow Culture, Media and Sport Secretary, and Olympics = 5.0
17. Sarah Teather, Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform = 4.9
18. Nick Harvey, Shadow Defence Secretary = 4.7
19. Michael Moore, Shadow Secretary of State for International Development, and Shadow Secretary for Scotland and Northern Ireland = 4.7
20. Roger Williams, Shadow Secretary of State for Wales = 4.6
21. Stephen Williams, Shadow Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills = 4.6
22. Lembit Opik, Shadow Minister for Housing = 3.5

LDV members’ survey, August 2008 (1): the Lib Dems and by-elections
LDV members’ survey, August 2008 (2): what you think of Make it Happen’s tax-cutting agenda
LDV members’ survey, August 2008 (3): what do you think of Nick Clegg’s leadership?
LDV members’ survey, August 2008 (4): are the Lib Dems on the right or wrong track?

All this week, Lib Dem Voice is publishing the results of our first ever survey of party members. Some 133 of you accessed the survey via our private members’ forum. We don’t pretend it’s a representative sample, but that doesn’t mean it’s without value either. We hope you, LDV’s readers, find it interesting. Perhaps the wider party will, too. This is the first in what we intend to be a monthly survey – if you have ideas for future survey questions, please email me at .

The fourth question asked about the current direction of the party.

LDV asked: Do you think, as a whole, the Liberal Democrats are on the right course or on the wrong track?

The right course 55%
The wrong track 30%
Don’t know/No opinion 14%

Here are a selection of your comments:

• The narrative is getting better, the policies need to show that narrative is, counter-intuitively for many, progressive
• Campaigning on tax cuts is all well and good - but it isn’t consistent with spokesman making spending commitments. It may also help the Tories as this is a core issue for then where they will get “brand reinforcement”
• Sense that there is a tacking to the right and feel that this will not draw on the many people who are currently disillusioned with Labour but are not ready to join the Tories.
• We’ve got the best policies in a lot of areas, but we’re failing to communicate them effectively. The Tories are a policy-free PR machine, and people are being fooled. We should stick to our guns on tax, the environment, public funding of further education, and so on.
• It’s a mixed bag. Some things (like the recent knife crime announcement) are in the wrong direction, others (like the tax cuts) in the right.
• Despite my reservations we do have positive factors going for us IF we avoid the trap of becoming starry-eyed market worshippers and make our brand image the defence of freedoms.
• A bit of both - policy-wise, it’s working, results-wise, it’s not, and that’s the deciding factor.
• Mildly drifting the right direction. We need some signature campaigns.
• The trouble is that we don’t seem to be on any track, we just have a bunch of policies that may well all be sound individually but don’t add up to a cohesive narrative, and that’s what we need. Fighting the other two parties on policies is suicidal for us, because the only time we can hope to get ours heard is straight after the other two have already had a turn, by which time no one is listening.
• but we need to up our game. In Scotland we should be more cooperative with the SNP to make things happen for Scots rather than playing silly games
• We haven’t accepted its going to be impossible to get from 60 seats to 150 until we deal with the issue of funding and profile

LDV members’ survey, August 2008 (1): the Lib Dems and by-elections
LDV members’ survey, August 2008 (2): what you think of Make it Happen’s tax-cutting agenda
LDV members’ survey, August 2008 (3): what do you think of Nick Clegg’s leadership?