Ahead of next month’s Liberal Democrat Conference, the Independent has a few superlatives on the party’s biggest gathering yet:
One thousand extra pass applications are being processed for next month’s conference in Liverpool. Security controls are being tightened and hotels in the city have experienced a rush in bookings.
More than 7,000 delegates, members of the media and commercial attendees are expected to travel to the conference, compared with its usual attendance of about 6,000. The number of journalists attending is likely to leap from 1,000 last year to more than 1,500.
The number of organisations, including firms, unions and charities, taking stands in the conference exhibition hall is increasing from 67 in 2009 to 90 this year. Record numbers of fringe meetings are also being organised.
The speculation that David Cameron might address Conference seems to have gone since I blogged last week that he wouldn’t be doing so. Instead the Independent reports “alarm”, “fear” and “disquiet” that party members’ debates will “boil over” and “lay bare” dissent over coalition policies.
So, about this alarm: Party members will relish the lively debate and increased media interest as a result of the Coalition. Lib Dem conference will be the best attended of the main parties’ conferences, as a proportion of its membership. Will the feeling be markedly different from that at Special Conference back in May, where party members overwhelmingly approved the coalition agreement?
Read the full piece in the Independent, get your conference registration in here, keep an eye out for the conference agenda here and follow Lib Dem Voice throughout, both here and on Twitter.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Sue Gray: Beware of beat-sweeteners and source-greasers
Is Kemi Badenoch still in the lead? - The Week in Polls
Belljar
England urged to bring in minimum unit price on alcohol as deaths rise 10% a year
John Waller
Peter Martin
Katharine Pindar
Mary Reid
19 Comments
Shame that young Nicholas is absent from so much ot it though.
My expectation is that whatever happens, the media will choose a line to take at the start, and stick with it. That’s been how it’s gone every other conference. Doesn’t matter what we do, the media will focus on what they decide is ‘interesting’. That and I don’t expect them to suddenly understand that we rather like arguing over everything at conference, and they’ll continue to report this as division within the party.
On a side note, has LDV thought of introducing a voluntary login scheme that allows the possibility of individuals blocking trolls who keep posting from view?
I am astonished to read that previously 1000 journos attended. They always make it sound like Andrew Neill just attended on his lonesome… 😉
@Rich – wonderful idea!
The 1000 journalists must have indeed been hiding well. I do recall running into rather a lot in the late/early hours of the day though, when everyone around is rather merry. Some friends and I were rather good at giving very sensible responses despite reduced mental capacity at the time. They journalists never seemed happy with that and tried goading us into saying something that made it obvious a massive split existed in the party. Reporting the news indeed.
A lot of “journalists” at conferences (anywhere) are from small or student papers and getting cheap entertainment. They’re fairly invisible.
I thought they were all going to be slavish obedience to the Tory masters? Or was that last week?
It amuses me how journalists have apparently no comprehension of what happens at Lib Dem conferences.
Suspect that figure for journalists includes a lot who just attended for one day, editors and presenters who only come to speak at a fringe meeting, plus photographers, technicians and the like. The number actually writing up stories on the conference will have been fewer than 100 I suspect.
I think we need to be relaxed about ‘dissent’. Even if we had a majority Lib Dem govt there would be plenty of people unhappy with various things we would be doing – especially the spending cuts. I’m not enthusiastic about them myself but they are grimly necessary.
However I do hope that we will focus on ideas and policy development at our conferences over the next few years (being proactive rather than just reacting to proposals people don’t like). We have traditionally been ahead of the game in all sorts of areas. Now we actually have a chance to implement some of our proposals this is more important than ever. Not least because we will have to produce a manifesto in a few years time.
I haven’t seen the agenda yet – and I realise it will have been tricky to develop much in the way of policy ideas in the short time since the election – but I hope it will allow plenty of opportunity for debate on new policy ideas and direction.
The thing is that, if the Indie reports that this conference is more or less lively or controversial than previous conferences, none of the other papers will be entitled to have an opinion on the matter, having stayed away in droves!
I can remember thoroughly enjoying previous conferences, only to find them being reported in a way that suggests we were at war with each other. Journalists always seem to go to a different conference than the one that actually takes place.
That said I do have some questions I would like to ask, on housing benefit and whether unemployed people will get evicted for example, whether we still subscribe to Keynesian economics, and whether we still welcome the publication of the Stern report which recommended a couple of years ago that we should devote 1% of GNP to tackling global warming (so why are we now doing the opposite and cutting back?), why are we not being more robust in opposing Trident?
I agree that this will be the biggest and most Liberal reform policy framing Conference ever but too many journalists attend to report another event.
One indelible fact is that it will take 5-10 years of `Coalition Government’ to turn back the tide of Labour`s mess.
Labour legacy of presiding over the greatest divide in equalities in modern history whilst claiming they represented the best aspirations of the working classes is now a `busted flush’.
But there are social alarm bells ringing out and for example there is a torrid legacy of 13 year`s of increase in an underclass of youth in our schools.
Too many young persons turning to violence and self harm from alcohol abuse, from the relaxed stance to its ease of access and 24 hour drinking culture.
The rise of youth unemployment between 18-24 years and dearth of apprenticeships has been emblematic too of the frequent building and construction industry site closures where new housing and jobs for skilled workers should be acquired.
Youth inactivity and loss of self esteem is the worst inheritance that the `Coalition Government’ is still to fully address.
I believe that we need to prioritise job creation policies and remain confident that Vince Cable will do his part to lead Britain out of potential economic bankruptcy under Labour.
I am convinced that all the `Coalition’ policies will depend upon good steer from our talented top table Liberal Democrat leadership under Nick Clegg.
I predict that Nick Clegg will become an international statesman and take the message in German and French and Spanish to the EU.
The liberal progressive beliefs of placing the people at the heart of Government to create the openness and AV reform will make a Fairer Britain.
Finally,it is important for local residents to see evidence of how our `Coalition Government’ will put more powers into their hands over planning and new housing projects and new fairer local tax raising.
It is ordinary families who will yet have their say on the important referendum on AV and in this our constitutional lodestar will taken to the people.
I agree with George C – lets keep up open debate and concentrate on putting together a strong platform of policies for the 2015 election.
On a related subject, I’m still wondering why Newsnight was deemed to be a more important part of the Liberal Democrats than party members are. That is, they were told about the motion against free schools and seemingly given its contents days ago while we “mere” members have still not seen the conference papers or been allowed to glimpse the text. Helpfully, the form for submitting amendments is available but no one can write an amendment to a motion they haven’t seen!
Was this an unofficial leak or has the Conference Committee adopted a policy of telling journalists about all the interesting motions before delegates and members get to see them?
Thoroughly looking forward to conference and spending time with all my fellow activists once again.
If any journalists are curious I’d like to pass on a little wisdom from my past years of attending – at Lib Dem conference all debates follow the format of 2-3 hours of extensive disagreement followed by a conference hall full of representatives voting unanimously to agree; it really is quite important to stay and pay attention to the vote.
our chance to reach out to the public and to talk about our “destinations” as well as our ‘”steps”. ‘Destinations’ such as STV, free education and doubling our representation and influence. Of course we will debate the ‘steps’ such as AV, graduate tax, and our organisation and campaigning.
Steps! Destination! Be clear to attract the support we need!
@JohnM The only ‘step’ the introduction of a graduate tax would be is one where I would take a ‘step’ out of party membership!
Nick Clegg.
Liberal coward number 1.
Cuse – thank you for that thought provoking comment, however, it is clear that you obviously don’t know the meaning of the word ‘Liberal’
It is years since I attended a conference, and I won’t be attending this one, mainly because I have a living to earn.
This conference will be eerie, because Lib Dem MPs will not be promoting Liberal Democrat policies, they will be pormoting Conservative policies. At the national level, the Lib Dem case is not being put, and won’t be for another five years, in the unlikely event that the Coalition lasts beyond Cameron getting his new boundaries.
Members need to ask themselves the following questions:
(1) Should the party have entered into the Coalition in the first place? (Read Matthew Huntbach’s posts for a cogent explanation as to why the party had Hobson’s choice.)
(2) Should the party have agreed to the arrangement lasting a full five years? (It was supposed to be necessary for dealing with the deficit, remember.)
(3) Should the party remain in Coalition now that Cameron has reneged on the Coalition Agreement (on the NHS, long-term size of the public sector, etc)?
(4) If the answer to (3) is negative, how to we effect our exit?
Thus far, dissent from within the Parliamentary Party has been limited. Tony Greaves has spoken out against “Equity & Excellence” (and has said some rude things about Lansley, Gove and Pickles), and Simon Hughes has expressed opposition to Cameron’s on-the-hoof social housing proposal. There have also been two rebellions (on VAT and foundation schools).
If Tony or Simon, or any other Parliamentarian, would stand at the rostrum and ask the questions listed above, the Conference really would be brought to life – and democracy would be the winner.
@Sesenco
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. The question is flawed
4. N/A
Stuart,
In what way is my question flawed?
By reneging on the Coalition Agreement, I mean the adoption of radical Thatcherite policies that are not part of that Agreement. For instance, Equity and Excellence, aspects of the education reforms, and the permanent reduction in the size of the public sector. One would have expected Cameron to wait until he had consolidated his position before launching out into the breaking up of the public sector, but no, he is so outrageously brazen that he goes ahead with it at the earliest possible opportunity, showing utter contempt for his Coalition “partners”. Cameron is a touchy-feely liberal when talking to Nick Clegg, but a radical Thatcherite with his own backbenchers. Exactly what one expects of a “mendacious creep”.
Stuart, are you a freemarket entryist (eg, Liberal Vision), a casuist who will defend anything Nick Clegg does, or a mainstream Liberal Democrat who cannot conscientiously support the downsizing of the public sector and creeping privatisation of essential public services? Which is it?
David Cameron is a Tory. We are Liberal Democrats. There is a difference. And it shows.