Party reviewing internal election rules: you have until 21 January to send in your views

In November I blogged my suggestions for how the party’s internal election rules should be changed. In brief – fewer restrictions on candidates and voters being able to talk about the contests and who they support, more leeway for online campaigning and a series of steps to encourage more debate and discussion within the party about the elections and merits of candidates. The last point was fuelled by my experience of standing (successfully) for the Interim Peers Panel – and being asked almost no policy questions by voters in the process.

Following the federal committee, interim peers panel and Presidential elections, feedback from candidates and other participants is being gathered with a report and (potentially) recommendations for change going to the Federal Executive in March. Most likely recommendations would then in turn require a vote at party conference, probably in the autumn, though some changes (particularly those of administrative detail) the FE could approve without needing to go to conference.

If you have views and have not yet sent them in, now is the time to do so. Having checked with David Allworthy, if you send them in by 21 January then there is time for them to be included in the process. David can be contacted at david.allworthy AT or 4 Cowley Street, London, SW1P 3NB.

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in Party policy and internal matters.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url for Twitter and emails.


  • One chnage should be thjat anyone standing as part of an organised slate – ie Liberal Vision or Social Liberal Forum should have to state that they are part of that slate.

  • Jonathan Fryer 13th Jan '11 - 3:38pm

    It is worth bearing in mind that apllying to be a GLA candidate, unlike standing for internal party elections, is like applying for a job, and should be treated with the same degree of seriousness and commitment. An indeterminate number of successful applicants (probably between 3 and 5) were guaranteed a job at the end of the process — actually a far higher sucess rate than proportionately one would find on the normal job market!

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • User Avatarexpats 30th Nov - 11:24am
    ............................... we Lib Dems spent five years sacrificing our party for the good of the country................... Do you really believe that a Tory minority government...
  • User AvatarJayne Mansfield 30th Nov - 11:12am
    @Little Jackie Paper, Of course the public can weigh up the issues and reach a decision in good faith, but are the public in receipt...
  • User AvatarConor McGovern 30th Nov - 11:11am
    @Roger Lake - Careful, you don't want Big Brother reading that ;) I completely agree that buying into the polarised black-vs-white concept pushed by the...
  • User AvatarSteve 30th Nov - 11:00am
    The rape clause is ridiculous, no question. Not providing encouragement, in situations where there is a lack of affordability to decently raise additional children, is...
  • User AvatarGillian Douglass 30th Nov - 10:38am
    Adding to Richard's comments, we also campaigned for a wider variation in flight paths in Tunbridge Wells. This would have the effect of spreading noise...
  • User AvatarMick Taylor 30th Nov - 10:36am
    Some of the people advocating airstrikes should really stand back and look at reality. The UK - and others - have been involved in dropping...