Author Archives: Dorothy Thornhill

Dorothy Thornhill writes: We need to modernise our approach to candidate selection

People who know me well know I always say it as it is. So I won’t mess about.

For me, there is some unfinished business at conference this weekend – and that’s why I’m asking you to support Motion F10 on Saturday.

How many more reports do we need before we modernise the party’s approach to candidates?

The 2015 General Election Review called for serious changes to candidate selection and support. And so did the 2019 General Election Review that I chaired.

And three years ago yet another report by my colleague Alison Suttie spelt out the real changes that needed to happen.

Yet here we are. A decade later, three major reports on – and there are still people arguing we don’t have a problem, and there’s no need for change.

I know that a lack of change is wrong – and so do many members up and down the country.

The need for speed

There has been a lot of information flying around about F10 over recent days, some of it not always completely accurate.  We need to face facts. What we’re currently doing on candidates isn’t working. For a start, it’s just not fast enough. In the last parliament we had virtually no candidates selected for two years. In the end, time ran out to run member ballots – with only just over 200 candidates in place.

That meant members in over 400 constituencies didn’t get to choose their candidate. They were all appointed, many right at the very last minute. It also meant that there was no time to train and support those candidates properly after selection, and no time for them to grow their constituencies.

Any campaigner worth their salt knows that having a candidate in place, building a team and showing leadership, drives up campaigning activity. That’s just common sense, and we have clear stats to prove it.

Yet we insist on sticking with a system that delivers too few candidates, and too late on in the election cycle.

Clarity and diversity

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged and | 7 Comments

Dorothy Thornhill writes: A community-led vision to tackle the housing crisis

Housing and planning policy continues to provoke controversy across the country. The UK desperately needs more homes, particularly decent, affordable homes. But instead, too many politicians are only interested in point-scoring, attacking their opponents as either NIMBYs who will block any housebuilding, or in the pocket of developers who want to concrete over the countryside.

For years this Conservative government has paid lip-service to increasing housebuilding, but then repeatedly u-turned under pressure from their backbenchers, who simply don’t want new homes built.

It is in this context that the Liberal Democrats, at conference, will be discussing our new policy paper: Tackling the Housing Crisis. Our attempt to find a positive way forward in the face of a dysfunctional national debate.

The paper is positive about the need for new homes. It makes clear that councils should have  well-evidenced 15-year housing targets – ensuring that there is no backsliding from building homes. Yet it also goes further encouraging the expansion and strengthening of Neighbourhood Plans, including genuine engagement with local communities in finding innovative ways of providing more homes and the sustainable expansion of existing towns.

As the former Mayor of Watford I’m well aware of how urban renewal and bringing back residential communities to town and city centres can be a sustainable housing solution that drives regeneration. But this development can only work if it’s combined with investment in infrastructure too. The government’s controversial new infrastructure levy is said to address this, but it will take a decade to be fully implemented.

We also need to ensure that we deliver homes that people can genuinely afford. Affordability is the major issue that no one is addressing. That’s why our paper is positive about delivering more social housing. It doesn’t shy away from setting a target for these homes, empowering councils with more powers to borrow in order to build. It is scandalous that the delivery of social homes has been given such a low priority.

In England’s beauty spots the issue of second homes and holiday lets is also not helping. This paper tackles that tricky question. People are entitled to buy properties from themselves or as a way of generating an income, but in some areas the market is so seriously skewed it prices out local people. So where councils can demonstrate that these homes are having a negative effect on their communities then they should have powers to address this including new planning classes to limit their numbers if needed.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged and | 12 Comments

Dorothy Thornhill writes: What we must do next to learn the lessons of 2019

The headline “two new MPs so far in this Parliament” is a welcome one. Winning, especially winning with record swings, is what we all want. 

Underneath the headline is a lot of hard work, plenty of tough decisions, and a drive to improve. We should all be thankful to our activists, staff and supporters. 

It is clear to me that the diagnosis and recommendations my team and I set out after the 2019 disaster were right, and that they are being taken seriously. Not least among them was that a Federal Board of 41 members cannot, and should not, be the clear leadership team we need to steer our party and help us all win elections. Something of that size is a talking shop, and talking shops are neither democratic nor effective. 

I therefore welcome the Federal Board’s motion to Spring Conference setting out options for reforming the structure of the Board.

My thanks to those who took part in the supporting consultation, collectively you have been clear that it is time for change. The feedback was crucial in helping the Board refine our options to a sensible number for consideration. With limited time, not all ideas could be brought to the floor. 

Conference is being asked to choose between three options for change, and then finally between reform and the status quo. 

As you can see (below) from the proposed set-up of a new Board, the options deliberately ensure key voices from across the party – geographically, demographically and in other respects – are built in. 

I am pleased that the reform options presented address the concerns highlighted in my review. The options provide for a smaller, more nimble leadership team.

They also retain the democratic selection we cherish while clarifying responsibilities, individual and collective. 

I see in these options a chance to better encourage cooperation. To build a real leadership team. Only when we have that team can our leaders be held collectively accountable by members: currently a missing ingredient. 

That accountability makes for a better democracy for members. Too much power, now, is wielded outside of our official structures, and so outside of accountability. 

I look forward to a rigorous, healthy debate at Conference. This is a complex question and I will be listening hard to colleagues and friends to help make my own decision. My principles will be democracy, accountability, electability, and not letting the best be the enemy of the good.

Organisational change is not easy. For us, though, it is necessary. 

Do see below for a quick summary of the options coming, in more detail, to Spring Conference.

Posted in Party policy and internal matters | Tagged and | 10 Comments

Dorothy Thornhill review update

We published the 2019 Election Review as the pandemic swept the UK and, sadly, I write this update during an even harder third wave. We are reminded every day of the failures of this government and the pressing need for convincing alternatives.

I am encouraged by the steps that have already been taken within the party and the plans ahead for reform. In terrible circumstances, activists, volunteers and staff have stepped up to the challenge my review posed.

We identified three overarching themes in the review, all of which needed profound improvement: re-building campaigning excellence, clarity of leadership and decision making, and …

Posted in News and Op-eds | Tagged and | 110 Comments

Why Liberal Democrats should change their tune on elected mayors

There is something double-edged about being an elected mayor in the Liberal Democrats. At one level it has involved being a bit of a mini-celebrity within the party and I have been touched by the pleasure which colleagues across the country show in our success in Watford. Yet, I’m always aware that I hold a post that many Lib Dems believe should not exist and would strongly resist being adopted in their own area.

Liberals are rightly suspicious of the cult of personality and fearful of conferring too much power in one person’s hands. There may have been an element of self-interest too. Traditionally, Lib Dems built up their presence on councils by strict targeting, but could not hope to fight an election across a whole local authority area.

I want to suggest that colleagues should think again. For me, elected mayors are the key to achieving decentralisation of power – a Liberal goal that remains as elusive as ever, despite the government paying lip-service to the idea of localism.

Posted in Local government and Op-eds | 25 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Stephen Harte
    Powerful words! We stand with you in solidarity....
  • Michael BG
    Simon R, “it’s not at all clear to me how deliberately making wealthy people poorer in the name of equality can improve anything. That seems to me ver...
  • Jenny Barnes
    Baroness Falkner's maximalist interpretation of the ruling makes the Gender Recognition Act, which was a LibDem triumph, a dead letter....
  • Jennie
    🫂...
  • Peter Wrigley
    I'm pleased to see that Simon R is going to buy a copy of "The Spirit Level" but disappointed to note that he is to purchase it via Amazon. I have never bought...