Today’s Call Clegg was another lively affair. A bit of froideur towards a Lib Dem peer, a lot of distance put between Nick and David Ward and, of course, those debates.
The first question was about freedom of speech. The caller asked if there wasn’t a double standard between people getting away with insulting Mohammed but Muslims burning poppies were convicted. Nick was right to pick up that the second case was not the same thing. It was more causing a disturbance at an event and getting in the way of others expressing their views.
He made an interesting little barb about Alex Carlile the Lib Dem peer who was the independent overseer of terrorism laws under Labour governments over the snoopers’ charter .”He hasn’t agreed with the Lib Dems on this for years and years and years,” said Nick, “He’s not the touchstone of liberal thinking.” Ouch.
The same party members who will have been punching the air at those comments will have their heads in their hands over his condemnation of David Ward. The Lib Dem MP’s tweets criticising Benjamin Netanyahu for his appearance in Paris on Sunday, Nick said, were crass but not racist.
On the debates, Nick had a good laugh at David Cameron’s expense, saying that he found the PM’s “teary eyed compassion for the Greens” to be “the most specious excuse” he’d heard in a long time. He said he’d love to see Cameron take part because “I quite enjoyed debating him last time.” He was therefore touching on the key issue – David Cameron isn’t very good at debating.
You can watch it in full here:
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Full slate of Lib Dems in council by-elections
Getting things done - West Port #dundeewestend
Payback time
The Joy of Six 1274
Gasping Local Government.
The Chagos Islands, Mauritius and the ICJ
Honouring the Real Thing and launching Black History Month in Liverpool
Peter Davies
Dave Tate
David Evans
Freddie
Peter Martin
14 Comments
Hughester, Cleggster??
Has someone been at the pop?
“The same party members who will have been punching the air at those comments will have their heads in their hands over his condemnation of David Ward.”
Why ?
Simon McGrath
If we treat these two tweets in isolation then I do not see what he has done so badly
Netanyahu seems to have appointed himself head of the Jewish People – not sure when that happened – and just because Jewish people were killed does not necessarily mean he should be there, especially seeing his actions play no small part in increasing tensions in the Middle East. Perhaps the Israeli President would have been a better choice
I would not have used the same terms as David Ward but I share his sentiment about this particular individual
‘Je suis Palestian’ needs no apology does it?
David Ward’s torrid little effort to highjack the protests in Paris against extremism to suit his own anti-Israeli agenda; an agenda all too often tinged with anti-semitism; are the sort of thing we as a party should laugh out of the room. The Member for Bradford East is a horrific embarrasment to this party, and to suggest that those who disliked his comments are somehow out of touch with Liberal sentiment is a ridiculous position, LDV. I suggest you re-think that squalid little assertion.
I have to admit I have not studied in detail David Ward’s recent comments. However, to be anti – the activities of the Israeli state over the years would, I would have thought, be an admirable liberal position. The way they have broken UN resolutions with impunity (because protected by the Americans), exercised what amounts to a discriminatory regime at home between citizens of different racial and religious origins, made no provision for refugees caused by their actions, acted cruelly with no proportionality against citizens, in say, Gaza. And to cap it all, they now seem to have a vice-like grip on media comment (certainly in this country). This derives mainly from their ability to accuse those who would criticise them very heavily for their actions of anti-semitism. Tim Oliver, you seem to be falling for that trap. There are, of course, many honourable Jewish people, here, in Israel, and around the world, who also have scathing criticism of successive Israeli regimes, so it is difficult to logically make any such accusation stick.
Unfortunately, the real thing (anti-semitism) seems to be coming over the parapet now, and very ugly it is too. I hope it is not now too late for the international community to enforce compliance by Israel with UN resolutions instead of the mealy-mouthed “we must negotiate any peace process” (the assumption being that Israel has carte blanche to decide what is on the negotiating agenda).
Tim Oliver 15th Jan ’15 – 9:30pm
Am I correct that you wrote these words on your Blog ? —
“.. Leadership is a crucial factor in politics. I would define it as being the ability to have others follow your direction without needing to coerce them. ….
Someone with this quality is attractive to others, who will spread their message and carry out deeds on their behalf in the belief that what they are doing is right. ”
If you did, I am surprised that you do not fully endorse David Ward’s admirable leadership qualities.
You might not agree with what he says but I assume you will defend his right to say it?
Or are you one of those people who do not really get what all this ‘Je Suis Charlie’ stuff is all about?
Like Simon McGrath, I am perplexed at the link made between approving of a libertarian line on the ‘snoopers’ charter’ and being dismayed by condemnation of David Ward.
I see nothing strange or inconsistent in this: indeed, given Ward’s well documented ‘form’ on issues of Israel and Jews, I would expect Clegg to be extremely wary of lending him support or defending him even when this latest tweet was mild by his standards.
Often, condemnation of David Ward’s effusions on these issues has been the only appropriate stance of anyone purporting to be a decent and enlightened, let alone a liberal, political leader (irrespective of one’s views on Israeli political leadership and policy).
When you have an Israeli PM guilty of acts of disproportionate war and repression in Israel/Palestine, of enforcing laws that suppress minorities and generally being far from liberal or democratic, why should someone (particularly an MP, seeing as MPs seem to usually be fairly sheepish on the subject) be silenced for siding against this PM? Free speech extends to MPs, or it should.
Who said he should be silenced? Having the right to say things does not mean other people should refrain from pointing out their crassness, bone-headedness and poor taste.
Whether he should be a parliamentary representative for the Liberal Democrats is another matter, but I guess that is up to the party machine and ultimately the good people of Bradford East.
Sadly, Netanyahu wasn’t the only illiberal ‘enemy of truth’ trying to hijack the Paris march. There was also the Saudi Ambassador, whose tyrranical state has used its oil riches to hijack a whole religion in the name of the vicious Wahabi sect who have just started the punishment of 1,000 lashes on a truly innocent man whose only sin was to run a blog online, and there was Putin’s representative whose Government murders journalists whose articles they don’t like. Anyone seeking to put David Ward’s arguments into context should read Andrew (Lord) Phillips in todays Independent letters page. Andrew’s letter claims he actually volunteered to fight for Isreal in 1973, but like many friends of Jews and of Isreal’s right to exist in peace, he questions Israel’s right to steal land, oppress and exploit the Palestinians.
I am one with Andrew Phillips on this.
Conor McGovern
“why should someone […] be silenced for siding against this PM?”
Who is silencing him?
To criticise Netanyahu is eminently sensible, to criticise Israel can be legitimate (provided you do it without resorting to anti-Semitic tools), to try and hijack a march following a massacre is crass and cheap. Not of these should be “banned” thought.
No one is denying his right to do it, just that it reflects poorly on him.
If he wants to sink to a lower level no one is standing in his way, and genuine free speech allows him to do so. I note several people posting on here saying “free speech, but…” over the last week or so would leave the door open to gagging Ward.
Agree, Psi. People seem to be pretty selective about offence-giving and offence-taking. People who want religious sensibilities to be somehow protected, or for those who do things as a matter of deeply held belief to be given privileged by the law or public authorities, rarely support this when they don’t share the particular sensibilities.
We saw this in the contrasting reactions of some Christians (and indeed tabloid newspapers) to the British Airways employee who was told she couldn’t wear a cross at work and Christian B&B owners turning away gay couples.
I read today about the case of a Sikh solicitor who was barred from entering Belmarsh prison to visit a client because he had pins in his turban and would not remove it. He brought a religious discrimination case against the Ministry of justice and the MoJ has now settled out of court for an undisclosed sum. This is a retrograde step in a free society that ought to insist on equality before the law.
Freedom cuts both ways. If we start giving special dispensation for particular religious reasons or sensibilities then we shall have to do it across the board. That’s not a road I want to go down.
If you have a problem with David Ward in general then fair enough – although I think the actions of the Israeli Government under his leadership are often reprehensible
If he is a racist – which is what someone is anti-semitic (and I mean genuinely anti-semitic not just anti-Israeli Government) then what he is he doing being an MP of your party? Surely that makes your party equally culpable?
If he is not racis then we have to take his tweets as they are written – please can anyone explain to be what is anti-semitic about either of them?
I think Netanyahu is a disgrace and a barrier to peace in the Middle east – I also think he could fairly be accused of war crimes (whether he is guilty is up to a review of evidence by a neutral body). An I anti-semitic too?
So, in summary it seems that either no-one is allowed to criticise Netanyahu without being anti-semitic or the Lib Dems have a genuine anti-semite as an MP – neither of them great are they -and I don’t think this thread is a particular good advertisement of your party
I agree with Tim13 – genuine anti-semitism is on the rise and it is repugnant to see it being so
I know David Ward and he is no anti-semite.
You can be a defender of Palestine and have a beef with the actions of the Israeli Government without being anti-semitic. I vehemently disagreed with pretty much everything George W Bush did but did that make me anti-american, no of course it did not.
He said “Je Suis Palestine – a show of solidarity with the Palestinian people – what is so bad about that? Unless you think that Palestine is for some reason evil and should be repressed?
He said: the sight of Netanyahu made him physically sick. I would have said the same thing if Margaret Thatcher if she’d been alive and being there. Politicians like Netanyahu bring out anger and emotions and this is not a bad thing. I think with some of his actions it’s a fair point to make that his attendance at a peace and solidarity march was a little ironic.
He said: Israel is an apartheid state – it is except pre Mandela South Africa treated black South Africans better than Israel treats Gazan’s – look at life expectancy statistics of Gaza and Israel as one example.
He said That if he was a palestinian he would probably fire a rocket. Context is important in this one it had just come art a time when Israel had just killed quite a number of school children. Expressing understanding of the motives of those firing rockets is not a bad thing.
He also made the holocaust memorial day comment which was badly worded but should have said something like Israel a nation that was formed after the horrors of the holocaust should not inflict barbarity on others. If you read the context of that tweet it was clumsy but explainable.
So why do people treat David as a pariah in this party?