Author Archives: Adam Gillett

Adam Gillett

Opinion: Keeping our voice – restating our democratic structure on fees and beyond

By Adam Gillett | Tue 9th November 2010 - 2:25 pm

I have no natural will to oppose the party leadership – I am, above all, a Liberal Democrat because of our unique party structure and the balance of opinion that allows it through its democratic structure to express a comprehensive view through its representatives. I am one of us because I believe in our ability to hold these representatives to account.

But even internal democracy is difficult to manage – occasionally we don’t work our structure well, and in some recent moves our natural process of internal compromise/external compromise seems to have been reversed. While the technology exists to carry out rapid-fire online and telephone membership votes on party policy, we have not yet built such a system and as such we rely on our Executive and representatives to listen to branches and party organisations and take their views as mandate for or opposition to a given policy.

Now that we are in a position of power, this sensitivity must take on a more concrete form than simple quelling emails or the occasional LDV article. Our problem is that reinvigoration through power of the party at parliamentary level has not been translated into a reinvigorated sense of democracy and power extended to all parts of the party. Conference is simply not regular enough to do us service in our bold new position.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds and Party policy and internal matters | 4 Comments
Adam Gillett

Opinion: Why vote Liberal?

By Adam Gillett | Sat 24th October 2009 - 3:30 pm

There is an election approaching and, as ever, the British electorate will make a binary decision when it arrives at the ballot box.

But what decision will it be? This is something of a lateral thinking test, and the wrong answers include several schools: the Marxist ‘people vs. elite’ and the Old School Tie ‘posh anarchy vs. taxation’. Both views are simplistic and dated, but will inevitably dominate the debate.

Those taking a more modern approach will face a different choice – one between progression and decay. This is more difficult to qualify, but the nature of the main parties makes for a clear choice – Labour and the Conservatives on one side, the Liberals on the other.

This is not a rash delineation. It is the vastly different and advocative nature of the Liberal Democrats which places them, with consummate ease, onto an entirely different plane from their larger cousins. And it is this advocative heart which must be the focus of the thinking voters. It is a heart which is, frighteningly, missing from the two largest political parties in Britain.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | 24 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • David Blake
    Well worth subscribing....
  • David Blake
    I've never thought of us as a low tax party. If we need to do something and it requires additional taxation, then a higher tax is one of the ways to do it. I ...
  • Roland
    But what are "low taxes" other than just a sound-bite? With hindsight we can see focusing on "low-taxes" - like the tories have for many decades, has only re...
  • nigel hunter
    We cannot fund the needs of the people and country if we are a low tax party....
  • Jonathan Calder
    Do we want to be a low-tax party? It seems the leadership wants to fight the next election on that basis, but I detect no great enthusiasm for the idea among th...