Tag Archives: Ming Campbell

Lib Dems respond to US air strikes on Syria

It was quite disconcerting to wake up this morning to see that Donald Trump had launched air strikes. There is no question that Syria needs to be dealt with. You just can’t have any government getting away with gassing its own people. I just feel uneasy about Donald Trump being in charge of this. Does he even have a proper strategy? I also feel uneasy about our Government just slipping into line behind him.

On Question Time last night, Tim Farron was talking about the importance of establishing no fly zones and of humanitarian aid, but made clear that doing nothing was not an option in the face of an attack as horrific as the one we saw earlier this week.

He has since described Trump’s action as “proportionate” but went on to say that our Government’s response was not sufficient:

The attack by American forces was a proportionate response to the barbarous attack by the Syrian government on its own people.

The British government rather than just putting out a bland statement welcoming this should now follow it up and call an emergency meeting of the Nato alliance to see what else can be done, be that more surgical strikes or no fly zones.

Evil happens when good people do nothing, we cannot sit by while a dictator gasses his own people. We cannot stand by, we must act.

I don’t always agree with what they say, but in situations like this, I always look for the views of three people: Paddy, Ming and Julie Smith

On Twitter, Paddy said:

I also had a conversation with Julie on Twitter:

Posted in News | Also tagged , , and | 71 Comments

Wow – a Liberal Democrat on Question Time tonight

Good news. We have a Lib Dem on Question Time tonight.

It may actually be worth watching.

Although there is a downside.

Posted in News | Also tagged | 12 Comments

Lib Dem Lords vs the Article 50 Bill: Ming Campbell: The public deserves the chance to change its mind

The Lib Dem Lords have made some cracking contributions to the debate on the Article 50 Bill. Ahead of its next Lords stages, we’re bringing you all the Lib Dem contributions over the course of this weekend. That’s no mean feat. There were 32 of them and cover more than 30,000 words. You are not expected to read every single one of them as they appear. Nobody’s going to be testing you or anything. However, they will be there to refer to in the future. 

Our Lords excelled themselves. Their contributions were thoughtful, individual, well-researched and wide-ranging and it’s right that we present them in full on this site to help the historian of the future. 

Ming Campbell was the first Lib Dem peer to bring up the status of EU nationals. It was, he said, extraordinary that the Government has not assured them of their right to stay given that they are so beneficial to our economy, academia and family life. He went on to talk about the right of the public to change its mind as the consequences of Brexit become clear.

My Lords, I am the 16th speaker in this debate, and I am already reminded of the explanation why the conventions of the Republican and Democrat parties in the United States last for four days, when two would be sufficient. The answer is that because usually, after two days, everything has been said but not everyone has said it. By the time we come to close of play tomorrow evening, that may be even more obvious.

In a moment or two, I shall talk about the role of your Lordships in this most serious matter, but before I do that, I support the remarks made by the noble Lord, Lord Patel, about the position of EU nationals living in the United Kingdom. It is extraordinary that the Government have not yet made any concession in respect of their future. It is extraordinary that they have not recognised that those citizens are an essential part of our economy and, indeed, of our academic life. It is extraordinary that they have not accepted that they are husbands and wives, mothers and fathers of United Kingdom citizens. Are we really and truly contemplating even the remote possibility that we will be prepared to start knocking on their doors, whether at midnight or midday, expelling them from the United Kingdom? The fact is—in a debate in which we have referred to public opinion—all tests of public opinion say that these individuals are entitled to the protection that so many of your Lordships argued for in this House.

The central question for me and for others is: what is our role in this most difficult and complicated issue? Is it to accept without demur the Bill before us, and indeed to put aside the very idea of amendment? Some have exhorted and encouraged us, and even attempted to bully us into doing so. But I rather thought, when I had the privilege of being introduced to your Lordships’ House, that I was expected to use my judgment and experience and to exercise responsibility. In the circumstances in which we meet today, are not these qualities as important now as they have ever been?

Posted in Parliament | Also tagged | 1 Comment

Alex Cole-Hamilton and Ming Campbell honoured at Scottish Politician of the Year Awards

New Lib Dem Edinburgh Western MSP Alex Cole-Hamilton won the “One to watch” award at the Scottish Politician of the Year Awards, presented at a glittering awards ceremony in Edinburgh.

He was also praised by his predecessor, Margaret Smith:

From The Herald:

With one third of MSPs new to Holyrood this year, the largest field was in the One to Watch category, sponsored by ScottishPower Renewables, with the judges impressed by the breadth and depth of talent being attracted to the Parliament as its powers increase.

The winner was the LibDem health spokesman Alex Cole-Hamilton, who gained the Edinburgh Western seat from the SNP and is already tipped as his party’s next leader.

It’s not difficult to see why he won when you see the quality of his debut speech on the European Union

Posted in News | Also tagged , , , and | 1 Comment

Ming Campbell on Chilcot: “My ally right or wrong is not sustainable”

The House of Lords has been debating Chilcot this week.

Ming Campbell, our foreign affairs spokesperson at the time, spoke in the debate. Here’s his speech:

Contrary to popular belief, I have never believed that what we were presented with was a false premise—implying that there was some effort at deception—but I have always believed that it was flawed, and the distinction is important. But it is clear that throughout these events Mr Blair thought that it was the right thing to do—and he still does. That was inevitably a moral judgment, but the strength of it gave rise to the error of making the evidence fit the judgment rather than the judgment fit the evidence.

The belief that the United Kingdom should be with the United States “whatever” was a flawed belief. Indeed, some would say that that single word reveals all that lay at the heart of the disastrous decision to go to war against Saddam Hussein. On reflection, there seems to have been a complete misunderstanding of the position of the United States. George W Bush always wanted regime change—it was no secret—but why was that? It was because around him was a cluster of influential neocons who thought that his father had made a fatal error in not instructing American forces to go to Baghdad at the end of the first Gulf War. If anyone doubts the good reasons for that decision, I suggest they read the memoirs of Sir John Major, who sets out with great clarity his support for that decision.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 1 Comment

Ming Campbell talks EU democracy, security, sovereignty in BBC Big Debate

Yesterday, I went to Glasgow to take part in Radio Scotland’s Big Debate as part of the Remain contingent. As they did during the election, the BBC invited a delicately balanced audience.

I almost combusted on the spot when I saw that there was to be an all-male panel. Then I looked at the Leave contingent, all but one of whom were men and only men spoke. The Remain contingent, however, were almost perfectly balanced and it was the women who actually spoke the most during the hour.

It still feels strange to hear Ming Campbell introduced as Lord Campbell of Pittenweem. His partner on the remain side was the very able SNP MEP Alyn Smith. Both of them were very good at making the positive case for the EU and busting a lot of Leave myths. The Leave panellists were Tory Brian Monteith, who lives in France and is a former Conservative MEP. George Laird is from Labour Leave.

Posted in News | Also tagged , and | 7 Comments

Lords’ Maiden Speeches: Ming Campbell on the Scotland Bill and the F word

Lord Campbell of Pittenweem (a very pretty fishing village in North East Fife) made his maiden speech unexpectedly early. I had been taking to him a few weeks ago and he had said it probably wouldn’t be till January. He couldn’t resist the temptation to come in on the Scotland Bill, especially as he’d chaired two commissions on how more power could be devolved to and beyond the Scottish Parliament.

Here is his speech in full:

My Lords, I am not entirely clear how to respond to that but I think that the good people of Pittenweem will make their own judgment.

I hope that it will not be thought presumptuous of me to suggest that we should be loath to draw any parallels between the Schleswig-Holstein question and any of the contents of the Bill. It will be remembered that one of those who claimed to understand the question went mad, and it may be thought an unfortunate omen.

Contrary to expectation, this is not the first time that I have spoken in your Lordships’ House. The last occasion was more than 30 years ago but I have good cause to remember it well. Outside, there was a most Indian of Indian summers; inside, being after 1 October, the central heating was going full bore, and I was dressed in full court dress and wearing the necessary full-bottomed wig when appearing before the judicial committee in the Chamber. Notwithstanding that ordeal, worse was to be suffered. I spent a whole day being eviscerated by Lord Bridge of Harwich, whom some of your Lordships will remember for his robust interventions on the judicial committee. It is only very recently, and reluctantly, that I have come to the view that perhaps he did not care for my argument.

Posted in News | Also tagged and | Leave a comment
Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarDavid Evershed 27th Apr - 1:32am
    A history of election opponents to the Speaker is set out by David Boothroyd at http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/1007/speakers-opponents?page=3#page=1 In February 1974 and October 1974 both the Liberal...
  • User AvatarMary Reid 27th Apr - 1:03am
    Thank you, Nigel. The odd thing was that I had been deep in election campaigning all day and when Radio Wales rang I hadn't seen...
  • User AvatarOld Liberal 27th Apr - 1:00am
    What on earth is going on? Do the young generation not understand that being a real Lib Dem candidate is a commitment to a local...
  • User AvatarDavid Pocock 27th Apr - 12:39am
    Can the party pls get on with the election and stop scoring own goals. Thanks.
  • User AvatarDavid Evershed 27th Apr - 12:13am
    Note that this Lib Dem Voice article was originally attributed to Paul Walter. Paul denies writing the article and it is now been changed to...
  • User AvatarDavid Evershed 27th Apr - 12:06am
    At the instigation of the local Buckingham party the Lib Dem spokesperson for the constitution in the Lords arranged for a reformed Speaker arrangement to...