November started with a ministerial resignation as Norman Baker left the Home Office, saying that he wanted to release himself from “walking through mud” of working in a Department that thought it was run by the Conservative party, not the Coalition. In his first broadcast interview, with the BBC News Channel, he had praise for Theresa May and some advice for his successor:

Be firm, be fair, be courteous, make sure you promote Lib Dem policies but don’t give in.

For Remembrance Day, Anthony Hook reminded us what was at stake in the First World War:

The war had to be won to prove that a democratic government could protect the nation from existential danger. Defeat would have been used by liberal democracy’s opponents to argue for a less democratic future. Defeat might have strengthened Communism, or very likely have led to calls for more power for the military or monarchy – anyone but elected politicians who had lost the war. British and French defeat in 1918 might well have set back democracy’s progress in Western Europe by decades.

The War was utterly terrible and if it could have been avoided should have been. But the idea that it had no important outcomes is not right.

Those who died, did not die pointlessly. They saved freedom. The horror of the Western Front gives us motivation to prevent war and democracy, which the fallen secured, gives us the means to prevent it.

Kirsty Williams had a great week in the run-up to Welsh Liberal Democrat conference with great stories in the press, expert backing for her nurse staffing levels bill and she just rocked on Question Time.

It was the month of the Casked Crusader: Greg Mulholland led a cross-party group of MPs to defeat the government’s position and thus make it easier for pub landlords to get a better deal from the pubcos. Proper, liberal stuff.

You can’t argue that this is gratuitous, either.

Sal Brinton was elected President of the Liberal Democrats and is now in office.

Our poll had Daisy Cooper in front. As the entire Lib Dem blogsophere pointed at us and laughed, Stephen Tall explained what had happened:

 Because the survey got this one wrong, does that mean there’s no purpose to LDV’s surveys in the future? Well, I’m biased clearly — so feel free to ignore / dispute my views on this! — but I don’t think so. That doesn’t mean there aren’t lessons to be learned (there are, but that’s for another post, another day). But here are three reasons I think the surveys continue to be a worthwhile part of what this site does.

 

• First, because previous surveys have produced accurate (or, at any rate, accurate enough) results. Just as past success doesn’t guarantee future success, neither does one failure mean all future surveys are flawed either.
• Secondly, even if the survey results aren’t necessarily representative of the wider Lib Dem membership, I think they are reasonably representative of activist members. The fact that up to 400 conference representatives complete each survey — not far short of the number who take part in key policy votes at the party conferences — says something.
• Thirdly, if LibDemVoice doesn’t survey party members about current issues who, independently of the party, can or will? They may be imperfect, but absent anything better they do give more than 1,500 of us the chance to make our voices heard on a range of issues on a regular basis.

 

Just make sure you keep that pinch of salt handy…

* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social