Category Archives: Op-eds

Liberals are leading in calling out Beijing’s distortions in UN Resolution 2758

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has sidelined Taiwan from participating in the United Nations and the related NGOs since UN resolution 2758 was adopted in 1971. China claims the legitimacy of its actions based on the resolution and its distortion of the actual meaning of the UN resolution. In recent years, parliaments in the free world took a tougher stance in calling out Beijing’s distortions in the Resolution’s actual wording. This included The Canadian House of Commons, where the Liberals hold a majority, passing a motion on November 2024 stating that UN Resolution 2758 does not establish the People’s Republic China’s (PRC) sovereignty over Taiwan and that UN2758 has not determined Taiwan’s future participation in the UN or other international organisations.

In my opinion, it is beyond doubt that the PRC mischaracterised the meaning of UN resolution 2758. Through these distortions, Beijing holds the view to legitimise its expansionism into Taiwan.

The resolution reads as:

Tagged and | 1 Comment

Labour has abandoned disabled people – the new nasty party has arrived

The Labour Party has officially abandoned disabled people. Worse still, they are trying to spin it as a success story, framing cuts to vital support as an increase in employment. But we see through it. This is not a genuine attempt to support disabled people into work. It is a cold, calculated attempt to cut costs at the expense of those who rely on support to live independently and contribute to society.

For years, the Conservative Party earned the title of the “nasty party” when it came to welfare reform. Their cuts to benefits, their cruel and arbitrary assessments, and their obsession with slashing support for the most vulnerable have caused immense suffering. Yet now, Labour has stolen their clothes. Keir Starmer’s party, which once promised to stand up for working people and the most vulnerable, has become indistinguishable from the Tories when it comes to welfare.

Tagged and | 6 Comments

Trump’s steal deal with Russia on Ukraine

This weekend, the party will be debating the F14 motion “The UK’s Response to Trump” at conference.

Recent statements by our party and the motion itself pretty much encapsulate the UK public’s feeling about the Trumpist revolution in the United States. The Lib Dems, as an opposition party, can more easily be the voice of reality, saying what the UK government dares not to say as it seeks in vain to seek some shred of common ground with Washington, especially over the future of Ukraine.

The reason for Trump’s partiality towards Putin is simply that the business opportunities are too tempting for making money for his family, associates and MAGA agenda.

Here Trump’s model is a reflection of Putin’s, with his entourage of compliant oligarchs. The US context however makes Trump’s oligarchs not quite as beholden to him, having mostly made their own money rather than looted it.

Trump’s long business relations with Russia are well-documented.  That they are alive and well was recently reinforced by the reported presence of long time Trump associate Russian oligarch Dmitry Rybolovlev acting as a go-between at the US-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia.

Tagged , and | 6 Comments

The best democracy money can buy

To take just a few recent examples: Musk offering $100 million to Reform, a Health Minister supported by substantial funding from private health companies, and – not quite so recent – millions wasted in Covid contracts given to party donors. The influence of big money on our politics is greater than ever.

Yet `The majority of the public support stringent measures to crack down on the perception that political influence can be bought, including capping, or even banning political donations. Politicians are out of step with the electorate on this issue.’

So says a recent report on Money and Democracy from the
Institute for Constitutional and Democratic Research (an offshoot of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Democracy and the Constitution).

Liberal Democrats could reasonably protest that we are in step with the electorate on this – our 2024 Manifesto included a commitment to `Take big money out of politics by capping donations to political parties’. But what the ICDR report offers is a clear analysis of the fundamental problem, and some simple principled solutions. As they say ` The existing rules on political finance are excessively complex and fail to address the core problem’.

Tagged and | 9 Comments

We can solve the housing crisis without creating rural sprawl

The two biggest issues that concern young voters are housing and climate change. Housing is the more hands-on challenge, as plenty of young adults just can’t get on the property ladder, whether buying or renting. The traditional rite of passage of children fleeing the nest when school ends now unravels three or four years later when they return to their parental home as their only financially viable living option – which can remain their home for several frustrating years. So if we want to be taken seriously by the youngest voters, we have to have a credible housing policy.

The option all political parties have chosen to tackle the housing crisis at the last few elections is to promise mass housebuilding. It has led to unseemly and meaningless auctions – one party promises 200,000 new dwellings a year, another raises that to 250,000, another to 300,000 – plus antagonistic debates about housebuilding targets at Lib Dem conferences. The developers love it, but the numbers of houses being built don’t really change. And anyway, do we really need to build our way out of trouble?

With the Liberal Democrats holding 72 MPs, many seats in the kind of small towns whose peripheries are threatened by the surge in housebuilding promised by Starmer’s government, we have something of a dilemma. We don’t want to be Nimbyist, but at the same time we don’t want our rural towns to become sprawling car-dependent suburbia.

The implicit assumption behind mass housebuilding is that there isn’t enough residential property. Yet for years suggestions have abounded that we do have enough living space – we just don’t use it well. Even if that’s technically true, to be ultra-efficient would result in a loss of freedom as the state would have to order people to live in others’ houses to maximise residential space. That would be a hard pill for Liberals to swallow, let alone the rest of society that remembers the centralised residential diktats of the Soviet bloc.

Tagged | 8 Comments

F10: the right means to a desirable end?

As a veteran of the Party’s candidates process – Returning Officer, candidate assessor, member of Regional and State Candidates Committees – over more than thirty years, you might not be surprised to find that I’ve been following the debate on this ornate, detailed constitution proposal with some interest.

And, whilst the General Election review published in January was, whether inadvertently or by design, somewhat bruising towards those who have been at the heart of running selection and approval processes over past years, what it stated as desirable outcomes had a lot of merit. Getting candidates in place earlier, finding and developing more Returning Officers and candidate assessors, and increasing transparency and consistency across the piece, are all obviously sensible.

The “solution”, however, appears to be to take responsibility from the structures that currently exist and replace them with a new Federal one, in the expectation that it will do a better job.

This may or may not be true. It does rather depend on who takes on the new responsibilities, how well they are resourced and how well they work with a core group of volunteers who will still be relied upon to do the “grunt work”. For very few people act as Returning Officers and candidate assessors “because it’s fun”. They do it predominantly because someone has to do it, and they fit in it around a range of other commitments.

Also posted in Conference and Party policy and internal matters | Tagged | 5 Comments

Welcome to my day: 17 March 2025 – still hazy after all these years…

Regular readers might have noticed that I’ve been a bit quiet of late. The regular Monday morning columns where I touch upon things that have caught my eye, or that I simply want to get off of my chest, have been absent, and as the Day Editor, I’ve struggled to do much more than post articles that have come in. This is, perhaps, because politics, and the world generally, have become a bit depressing. With an American administration that sets examples that trouble me philosophically, and an increasingly unpeaceful world, it is often difficult to lift your eyes to the …

3 Comments

What next for Councillor remuneration? 

I remember it so well. In July 2024, at our Handside Residents’ Forum, we looked at the Council finances. A rather interesting topic! I must say that even today, I am quite surprised how many people are unaware of the actual “wage” Councillors earn. First, I have to explain to people that we don’t get paid but we receive a small monthly allowance, which of course varies from District to District. The allowance, which is taxed, helps to cover some of our duties, which are associated with our roles; traveling, petrol, or even booking venues for some meetings as other elements of the budgets have been cut e.g. Community Chest funding in our case. I get paid just over £400. I receive only a basic allowance as I don’t hold any senior positions within the Council and I don’t Chair any of the remunerated Committees.

Although the Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel reviews our allowance, I always struggle when this topic is being discussed at our Full Council meeting. The last one took place on 12th March.

We all had a civic debate about this subject and it was important to listen to what my fellow colleagues had to say. Some were lucky enough not to rely on the Councillor allowance and asked whether they could reject the increased allowance. Others were saying that due to their personal or financial circumstances, they actually rely on it. Yes, every little helps as one famous advert says, especially if you are a student Councillor. Given the ongoing cost of living crisis, the immediate increase of NI and other pressures on public finances meant that the actual debate on the increase of the Councillor allowance was at times uncomfortable.

Tagged , and | 5 Comments

Fewer committees, more diversity – why I’m backing F10

I want us – as Liberal Democrats – to select great candidates, improve diversity in the party and empower our local parties to elect the best candidates to represent them. That’s why I’m backing motion F10 at conference – the one that seeks to implement the recommendations of the General Election Review around Westminster candidates. 

I am doing so for two reasons:

  • By reducing three committees to one it makes it easier to address the problems in our current candidates system;
  • By creating a place on the committee for the Vice President responsible for increasing engagement with ethnic minority communities, candidate diversity finally becomes a keystone in our Westminster candidate system.

Now, I am sure many in the party can give you verbatim – in probably the most intricate of detail – the constitutional intricacies and implications of the motion. However, I wanted to share with you my personal story of my journey to becoming a candidate and how this has led me to strongly support real reform of our candidates system.

From the top, I wish to say that none of this is criticism of individuals involved in the process. This is criticism of the process itself that volunteers spend hours dedicating their time to administer and deliver. I am truly grateful to them for this, but I want the system -those volunteers have to work with -to be better for them and for candidates.

I am in the incredible position of writing this post as the first Liberal Democrat MP of East and South East Asian origin, and the first MP for the newly formed seat of Harpenden and Berkhamsted. When my mother arrived from Malaysia 50 years ago, I don’t think she could have imagined that such a thing was possible. And yet here I am.  

Becoming a candidate is not easy. I should quickly add that nor should it be. It is right that we are put through our paces. But becoming a candidate shouldn’t be made harder by the inadequacies of our own systems and processes, inadequacies which frankly stand in the way of us improving our candidate diversity. 

Tagged , , and | 17 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

Ukraine

The Ukraine ball has bounced from Ukraine’s court to Russia’s court and now back into America’s court.

Donald Trump has always claimed a special relationship with Vladimir Putin– “He listens to me…the war would never have started if I had been in office…I can stop this war in 24 hours.”

Not if Vladimir can help it. As I write this Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff is flying back to Washington after exhausting talks in the Kremlin. He went asking Putin to agree to a 30-day ceasefire. Ukraine had already—under pressure from Trump—said yes.

Putin said…I’ll think about it. Actually he was a bit more diplomatic. He prefaced his hesitation with the normal flattery that must precede any exchange with the American president. He said that he is “aligned” with Trump and “expressed solidarity” with the man in the White House.

Then the Russian leader said: “I need more information,”which is another way of saying “I’ll think about it,”which is another way of stalling.

Putin is stalling because at the moment he is on the offensive. It looks as if he might soon push the Ukrainians out of their Kursk salient. He continues to inch forward in the Donbas and every captured inch improves his negotiating position.

That negotiating position has not changed for three years: Ukraine out of NATO and EU and demilitarised. International recognition for the annexation of the Donbas and Crimea. Sanctions lifted. Zelensky replaced by a Russian puppet.

Trump, however, is not focused on Putin’s long-term aims. He wants a ceasefire now. He has demanded it and has threatened renewed sanctions if his ultimatum is not met. It hasn’t been and Trump’s next move will reveal more about his role as honest broker.

Trump’s tariff rollercoaster

Tariffs up, down, off, on. Markets crave certainty. They fear uncertainty and they panic at chaos.

Trump’s muddled tariff policy is causing the stock market to dive. And according to Trump’s past statements, the stock market is the best judge of his economic policies.

He started off well. His election in November was followed by big rises. Nasdaq and the Dow Jones reached record highs in December. The S&P 500 two months later. American business was anticipating an economic boom fuelled by a bonfire of government regulations. It didn’t believe that Trump would actually follow through with threats of tariffs.

Tagged , , , and | 11 Comments

Observations of an Ex Pat : Development Bonds

It’s all about timing, and in my case the time may have arrived for an idea that I first mooted 25 years ago. In 2018 it was shortlisted for a prize in honour of the late Paddy Ashdown.

It if won first prize the idea might have progressed. But instead it has sat on my computer hard drive waiting for the right moment to be pulled out.

The idea concerns foreign aid. Trump has slashed US aid by 80 percent, Britain by 40 percent, France by a third and Germany and Japan by a to-be-announced amount. On top of that, the liberal bastion “The Economist” this week sounded “The Death of Foreign Aid.”

The result will be that literally billions of people will suffer. They will have less money for education, military protection, health and investment in infrastructure projects that can lift their countries out of poverty and create markets for the developed world. Many will die. Many already have.

The Economist argues that the cuts could be silver-lined clouds. That many developing countries have become aid-dependent and the dramatic cutbacks could force governments in the developing world to reorganize and pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

If so, development bonds, might be worth considering by both the developed and developing world. The concept of development bonds had its genesis in Renaissance Italy where bonds were sold to wealthy merchants to fund local building projects. The idea was unearthed by New York to finance the Erie Canal and over the years has become a financial pillar for America’s infrastructure finance. In 2023, $456 billion was raised in municipal bonds. It is estimated that $4.5 trillion is currently outstanding.

The structure is simple. Wealthy individuals invest in a bond issued by a state or local authority. The bondholders receive regular interest payments which they can deduct from federal income tax. When the bond matures they receive the principal which they invested. This also is untaxed.

My development bond proposal would extend the US system to the developing world. Wealthy individuals, banks, pension funds and others would invest in bonds to build infrastructure projects in the developing world. The investors would deduct the interest payments from taxes due in their country of residence.

Tagged | 14 Comments

ALDC’s By-Election report – 13 March 2025

We take a breather this week as there are only 2 principal council by-elections held across England and Scotland. Both seats are held by their respective parties: Lib Dems the seat in Devon and Cornwall and the SNP in Scotland. 

In the Lib Dem defence, Cllr Fabian King stood out from the four candidates as the clear first choice for residents in Exe Valley, East Devon DC. The seat in was last contested in by only us and the Tories in the 2023 locals, but when compared to 2021, similarly a 4-way race, our vote share actually grew by over 7%. Congrats to Cllr Fabian and the team for holding the seat!

East Devon DC, Exe Valley
Liberal Democrat (Fabian King): 256 (44.0%, -26.5%)
Conservative: 137 (23.5%, -6.0%)
Reform: 135 (23.2%, new)
Labour: 54 (9.3%, new)

For the Scottish by-election, Oliver Ferrario stood in the Broxburn, Uphall & Winchburgh and managed to grow the Lib Dem first preference votes. The SNP was elected at stage 7 of counting, who beat second place Labour by 22 votes. Thank you to Oliver for flying the Lib Dem flag.

Tagged , and | Leave a comment

Avoiding an end of history

As a dedicated Liberal I’ve always vaguely subscribed to the Whig view of history, defined roughly that, by and large, on the whole and in the main, things are gradually getting better.  Improvements are due to the gradual progress made in the development of democracy, increases in individual liberty, and advances in science and technology.  There are, of course, occasional steps backwards, but the direction is generally onwards and upwards.

To take each in turn, since 1945 in the UK we’ve seen the increase in women’s and minority representation in parliament, and the creation of effective specialist committees; we no longer hang people, racial discrimination is illegal, gays, lesbians, and unmarried mothers get a better deal, and couples can live together respectably without formal ties if they prefer things that way; and science and technology have made astonishing strides, especially n the fields and medicine and communications.

On the downsides, we still don’t have a fair election system, turnout at elections has fallen, local government has been enfeebled  and the executive’s control over parliament has increased intolerably; individual and institutional racism and suspicion of “the other” endure and have become a campaigning tools for mainstream parities as well as the extreme right; some scientific “advances” (eg plastics) are polluting the planet or contribute to climate change, improvements in communications have made it much easier to disseminate misinformation as well as enlightenment –  and nuclear weapons,  could bring an end to most life on the planet, except for microbes.

But by and large (again) Britain is a much better place to live in now than it was 80 years ago, and much the same can certainly be said of most of Europe and probably most parts of the rest of the world (exceptions being such as Tibet, Myanmar, parts of China, and, of course, the areas where “minor”  wars persist.)

However the election and actions of President Trump very clearly thrown a spanner in this cosy view of steady progress.

But we’ve been there before.

Consider the world at the turn of the last century, say 1900 to 1910.  A Liberal government with a massive majority set about taxing the rich to establish the welfare state, reducing the powers of the aristocracy in the House of Lords, amid growing recognition of the right for women to participate in  politics; there hadn’t been a major  war in Europe for 80+ years; the Royal Navy “ruled the waves,” we were on friendly terms with Germany, which already had a welfare state and Edward VII established the Entente Cordiale with France; the British Empire ruled about two thirds of the World’s ’s population and thought it was doing them a favour by  bringing “Civilisation, Christianity and Commerce” to  primitive lands and peoples; railways were taking the workers away for holidays at the seaside, cars, radio and cinema were  being invented, and the Americans were keeping themselves to themselves at the other side of the world.

What was not to like?

Yet for no apparent reason other than international rivalry which appeared at first to be no more than school sport-day style enthusiasm, by 1914 the world entered into the most devastating war it had experienced to that date, which continued for four years through a combination of pride and obstinacy.

Tagged | 7 Comments

New New Labour: a choice of poverty or work

A philosophy of cynicism and cruelty

As a country, we have a very long and complex history when it comes to how we treat our most vulnerable. In recent years, it is abundantly clear that our country has failed to treat these people with dignity. From the Elizabethan Poor Laws to the introduction of austerity, we have a pattern of taking one step forward, followed by two steps back — and this Labour government is no exception to the rule.

We have a government that solely values its citizens based on how much income tax they pay, disregarding the many other ways they may contribute to our society — whether through intellectual, creative work, or contributions to their communities. To believe that the value of a person is derived from economic output alone is simply cynical and callous, although the Treasury does not share that worldview.

Ideology above basic economic sense

Upon hearing the recent announcements regarding the incoming welfare cuts, I took it upon myself to research the harms that will be inflicted, beyond increased food insecurity and squalor. On the surface, one might think that if welfare spending is likely to spiral out of control, it would make sense to make cuts to rein it in. However, once you consider the harms of doing so, you will arrive at a very different conclusion.

Rachel Reeves and Liz Kendall would have you believe that welfare cuts will encourage people to enter the workforce and that our benefits are too ‘generous’ — even though the Resolution Foundation disproved this. Making our most vulnerable poorer will only make them sicker, not more inclined towards employment.

However, it doesn’t stop there — as we all know, bad policy leads to a domino effect of even worse outcomes. Whether you agree that current welfare spending is unsustainable or not, you cannot fail to recognize that making people poorer and sicker often comes with self-compounding economic harms:

  • Cutting benefits will inevitably lead to deeper poverty, increased NHS spending, and a reduction in employment figures — you won’t make people find a job by making them sicker.
  • Many claimants rely upon these benefits to afford care, whether that be social care or even from the private healthcare sector due to waiting lists. However, cuts to benefits such as PIP would distort both supply and demand in health and social care, due to reduced affordability, increased costs for local authorities, and unmet care needs — leading to inflationary pressure.
  • Health and social care won’t be the only sectors affected — it will reduce demand in retail and local business, as lower-income households tend to spend most of their income on essentials. Additionally, this could risk cost-push inflation.
  • We will see increased reliance on credit, as claimants will be left out of pocket by these cuts, leading to rising interest rates — a contributing factor to inflationary pressure.

Benefits such as Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment have a stimulus effect, because recipients have a high marginal propensity to consume, which leads to higher spending in local economies, a fiscal multiplier effect, and increased employment and productivity. Cancelling that effect with cuts will affect everyone.

Tagged , , and | 13 Comments

The quest for liberal democratic capitalism

It’s easy to argue that today’s failures – public services, low investment, poor productivity, decaying infrastructure, environmental degradation, etc – are the result of 10-15 years of economic policies pursued by a government pandering to selfish interests. But what if the problem is wider than those policies and ideology? What if our underlying economic system is actually working against the interests of liberal democracy, and contributing to the rise of populism and authoritarianism?

This is the core argument of one of the seminal texts to be published in the last two years, Martin Wolf’s The Crisis of Democratic Capitalism. The Financial Times’ chief economics commentator charts how today’s form of capitalism is actively undermining democracy, which it sees as getting in its way: interfering with its single-minded focus on money for shareholders and executives, regardless of the consequences for the wider economy, society and the environment. The result is that inequalities are growing, whilst those with money are retreating from society and criticising governments for money spent on public services. Wolf argues for reviving faith in the common good, and says citizenship has a vital role to play.

This presents an opportunity for Lib Dems to develop a different approach to the economy as a whole, building on the thinking of those economists who have been challenging the prevailing orthodoxy – not just Wolf but the eight who signed September’s letter to the FT, including Gus O’Donnell and the former Goldman Sachs chief economist Jim O’Neill. Their letter said it was so vital to invest in restoring Britain’s crumbling public services that they urged Rachel Reeves not to cut public spending (unfortunately, Reeves seems to have opted for austerity-lite, growing steadily heavier by the week.)

I’m not suggesting I have the perfect oven-ready new economic model to hand, but that’s deliberate. To gain widespread support, such a model needs to reflect the interests of a wide section of society, including the environment. There are countries which already have successful models that differ from the Anglo-Saxon version, notably in Scandinavia.

Such a model has to place a much greater emphasis on sustainability – not just environmental, but social and economic as well.  Economic policy must question the current roles of the Treasury and the Bank of England, which currently reflect the interests of finance rather than the wider economy, society, and sustainability. Business/industry policy must tackle underinvestment; it must look at the role of the City and finance in driving short termism and excessive rewards for a few; it must toughen regulation on monopolies and those firms and sectors that act against the country’s social, economic, and environmental interests; and it must act as a catalyst for publicly desirable activities, like the growth of renewables and improvements to quality of life. The aim is wealth creation for the whole country, not just wealth extraction to benefit a small minority.

Tagged | 8 Comments

The SNP’s Defence delusions: A fantasy that puts Scotland at risk

The Scottish National Party has long promoted an unrealistic vision of Scotland’s defence in the event of independence. Their incoherent and reckless approach, outlined in the deeply flawed 2014 White Paper, demonstrates an alarming lack of seriousness in dealing with modern security threats. With a resurgent Russia invading Ukraine and probing NATO’s defences, the world becoming increasingly unstable and Donald Trump back in the White House openly questioning America’s commitment to NATO, the SNP’s defence policies are not just inadequate, they are dangerous.

The 2014 White Paper proposed a budget of just £2.5 billion for Scotland’s armed forces barely enough to maintain a credible defence structure. It assumed Scotland would inherit assets from the UK Armed Forces, despite no legal mechanism ensuring this. It envisioned a ‘Scottish Defence Force’ with a handful of frigates, a small army, and a limited air force, all while rejecting the very defence arrangements that currently protect Scotland. The reality of setting up a military from scratch was entirely ignored. Where would personnel be trained? How would equipment be procured? What alliances would Scotland rely on, given that SNP membership remains broadly opposed to NATO? These are fundamental questions that remain unanswered.

The SNP has no serious plan for dealing with the threats Scotland faces. Russian military aircraft routinely test the UK’s air defences, often requiring RAF jets to intercept them as they approach Scottish-UK airspace. Currently these intrusions are swiftly dealt with by highly trained personnel operating from Lossiemouth. An independent Scotland, with a small air force and no serious defence infrastructure, would struggle to respond adequately. If the SNP still intends to pursue another independence referendum in the next Scottish Parliament, they must be forced to explain how they would protect Scotland from these threats. The UK’s integrated defence network, intelligence-sharing agreements, and military alliances provide Scotland with essential security. An independent Scotland would be left exposed.

Tagged and | 7 Comments

We can start to improve social care by tackling attitudes towards migrants

If ever there’s an issue – or a sub-section of a broader issue – that sums up the sense that the UK is broken, even eight months after a new government was supposed to set a new direction, it’s social care.

The crisis in social care has been recognised for decades, but successive governments have failed to tackle it, and it’s getting rapidly worse. This is bad enough on its own, but it has two serious knock-on effects: it reduces the effectiveness of the NHS as it cannot release from hospitals some patients who are fit to leave but have nowhere to go; and it further drags down the reputation of local government, which doesn’t have the resources to deal with social care and sinks ever lower in the public’s estimation. Add the effects of Brexit, Covid, the cost-of-living crisis and a toxic debate on immigration, and you see why the situation with social care is worse now than it has ever been.

So what do we do? Well, a lot of money would help – most solutions to the social care problem require money, but, let’s face it, the kind of public spending that just isn’t feasible at the moment. So we have to look in other directions.

There have been four major shocks to the social care system in recent years: Covid, the cost-of-living crisis, Brexit, and Britain’s attitude towards immigration. The first two are factors largely outside our control. We can’t undo the loss of so many NHS and care staff due to the impact of Covid, and the cost of living crisis, coupled with repeated rises to the Real Living Wage and NI rates for employers, has sent the cost of staff rocketing, with many care companies struggling to compete for permanent staff and often forced to pay high wages to agency personnel.

Tagged , , and | 14 Comments

PIP: A lifeline for disabled people to work and live independently

PIP (Personal Independence Payment) isn’t just another welfare benefit. It’s absolutely essential for disabled people who want to work and remain part of society. For so many, it’s the key to overcoming barriers and being able to lead the lives they choose, despite the many challenges they face. PIP helps cover the extra costs associated with disabilities, from getting to work to needing a carer to assist them throughout the day. It’s not just a handout, but a vital tool that allows disabled individuals to live with dignity and independence.

The importance of PIP cannot be overstated. It enables people to get into work, stay there, and contribute to society, instead of being stuck on the sidelines. It’s about providing an equal opportunity for disabled people to engage in the workforce, despite the physical and financial obstacles they might encounter. Without PIP, many disabled people simply wouldn’t be able to work, or would struggle to stay in employment. PIP helps level the playing field, enabling disabled people to live more independently and participate fully in society, just like everyone else.

Tagged and | 7 Comments

Sick man of Europe, again: welfare, work and Britain’s dilemma

In the 1970s, Britain was called the sick man of Europe. Years later, that sick man has returned; with its withered cane. This time, however, it comes to us in sickness benefits (a cruel irony); having ballooned 25% since 2019. Some chalk it up to COVID’s long shadow. However, our European counterparts, who also endured the pandemic and post-recovery, have not seen the same rise in welfare. This suggests why some circles are calling it a “British disease”.

Rachel Reeves’, boxed in by her fiscal rules, is staring down a £9bn hole. A hole that might come from welfare cuts. Labour ministers are proclaiming that people are “gaming the system”.

Now, bad actors exist. I’ve no doubt there are people who cheat the system – I saw this as a Housing Officer. But also during that period, I saw the vast majority of sickness benefit claims were done in good faith. A recent example, I recently spoke to a man who had worked for decades as a Health & Safety Lead and Warehouse Operator for a supermarket. The stroke took that away from him. His employer, despite years of service, couldn’t make meaningful adjustments to keep him on. But he still had his Personal Independence Payment (PIP) to shelter him. If it was not for PIP, the stroke would have been the least of his problems – he remarked. This is why we have a safety net. It suggests to me that businesses aren’t doing enough in making adjustments. If we are going to win on Social Security then we need to also win on Job Security.

Tagged and | 21 Comments

How can Town Twinning be “resurrected” in the UK?

As a Polish born Councillor, I have always wanted to show my beautiful nation to some of my Council colleagues. Although Poland has become a popular tourist or a city-break destination, I think that still many of us have incorrect perceptions of the country of my birth. Since 1989 and the collapse of the Berlin Wall, and in particular since the beginning of the centre, Poland has changed beyond recognition. Membership of the EU since 2004, high levels of growth, investment and productivity, and a strong economy helped Poland to establish itself as a key decision maker in Europe, and a country that many look up to.

At the end of February, I was absolutely delighted that, thanks to an invitation from Mr Łukasz Kuźmicz, the Mayor of Syców, the Mayor of Welwyn Hatfield, Councillor Frank Marsh, and I had an amazing opportunity to visit the South-West part of Poland.

It is fair to say that we were truly overwhelmed with our trip so far; incredible hospitality, well run and organised Council, fantastic staff at local primary and secondary schools, and students with fluent English. The list goes on! I was so impressed with the Polish “can-do” attitude, willingness to cooperate and just constant drive to make things happen.

Also posted in Local government | Tagged | 2 Comments

Why Labour’s council reorganisation threatens young people’s representation in politics

Local government reorganisation is happening. That’s the reality.

As a current district councillor, I could debate the pros and (many) cons of this all day – but one topic I’ve heard worryingly little about is how these reforms could destroy what little representation young people have in local government.

Currently, young people in local government are a rarity. According to 2022 data from the Local Government Association, just 16% of councillors are under the age of 45 – despite the same group accounting for over 40% of the population.

The same dataset found that just 1.2% of councillors were aged under 25 – around 200 in total across England.

There’s currently half as many under-25s who are councillors than players in the Premier League.

This isn’t a surprise. The role on paper just doesn’t work for young people. Whilst being a councillor is intended to sit on top of a full time role, the reality is very different, with meetings easily spilling over into the daytimes, ever-growing casework piles, huge time pressures, and residents’ needs to meet. On top of this, councillors with special responsibilities face even greater challenges.

This blind spot is a huge problem. Our councils need to reflect our whole communities, not just a subset of them. Councils need councillors with a range of experience and backgrounds to make good decisions – and councils that lack young voices (and voices from other underrepresented backgrounds) lack views from the whole community. Whilst a good councillor is capable and able to represent the views of their whole community, it’s still absolutely vital to have young people around the table.

Unitarisation makes these problems worse. It raises the barrier to entry significantly, and higher barriers to entry can often lead to worse representation of underrepresented groups – placing the already dire representation of young people further at risk.

Tagged , and | 11 Comments

A distinctive defence niche for the Lib Dems to seize

In the last couple of weeks, policy on defence has suddenly moved centre-stage – to the point where even Lib Dem Voice has an article about it! The support given to Ukraine by our parliamentary party is no less than one would expect, but perhaps we should look a little deeper, as there’s an idea for making defence spending more effective which the Liberal Democrats are ideally placed to champion.

Much political and media attention is focused on the need to spend more on defence as a percentage of GDP. Starmer realised the significance of this and the need to act urgently ahead of his visit to the White House. He shifted from his 2024 manifesto position of 2.5 per cent ‘when resources allow’ to 2.5 per cent from 2027, with funding coming from reductions in international development assistance. 

But we need to be clear on what the money will buy. What capabilities does the UK need? Also, how do we ensure value for money – maximising the benefit from each pound, both in terms of defence capability but also as a contribution to UK jobs and economic growth, rather than US imports?

Currently the UK’s defence, intelligence and security arrangements are effectively joined at the hip with the US. Our nuclear deterrent is supplied by the US. Our intelligence comes largely from the US through the Five Eyes network, led by the US. Much of our kit is purchased from the US and our command and control is dependent on US technology. 

So a pressing question is whether we now need to establish our own defence capability independent of the US. In the short term, this may be difficult – hence the need to maintain a relationship with President Trump. But in the medium term, and particularly in how the UK uses its increased defence budget, there is an urgent need to move away from US dependence, as the last few weeks have underlined.

We could attempt to do this on a UK-only basis. Or we could attempt it through much greater cooperation and integration across Europe. While grateful for European support, the Ukrainians have experienced at first hand the difficulties of fighting a war using what they have described as a ‘military zoo’. The EU has 12 types of battle tank, while the US has one.

This, then, is the opportunity. At a time when the UK and its European partners need to step up expenditure on defence when resources are limited, it is vital that the extra money is spent as efficiently and effectively as possible. Crucially, if the UK is to realise economies of scale and interoperability and have the ability to act without relying on the US, then Europe’s military capabilities must be integrated much more closely. We need to create a single European defence industry capable of supplying our needs, ensuring European control of the technology, and ensuring that the economic benefits, including jobs, are shared fairly with our partners on this side of the Atlantic.

Tagged , , and | 12 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

Germany

Friedrich Merz is steaming ahead—and he hasn’t even formed his government.

The string bean leader of Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) is certain to be chancellor as soon as he has formed his coalition with the Social Democrats. But that will take several weeks of political haggling and the fast moving and fast deteriorating international scene dictates that the power house of Europe must be involved NOW.

So, next week the German parliament is being recalled to amend the federal constitution to allow the government to increase borrowing to boost the economy by investing in infrastructure and to pay for a bigger defense establishment. This means that when the new government is sworn in on March 25th it will have the financial means to hit the ground running.

Up until the election of Donald Trump Merz was a firm Atlanticist. But on election night he he spun 180 degrees. “My absolute priority,” he told supporters, “will be to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that, step by step, we can really achieve independence from the USA.”

And for those who worry about Trump pulling out of NATO, Merz strongly hinted that Europe may be the ones to leave the alliance.

United States

The US Department of Defense recently published a manual on counter-insurgency called Joint Publication 3-24 (JP3-24). It argued that the lessons over the past 60 years show that in the 21st century the only way that one country can successfully occupy another is through total annihilation.

“To hold countries,” wrote the American planners, “you need to impose order. To impose order you need to control populations. To control populations you need to use violence. Violence leads to violence, which is inherently antithetical to order.”

American forces have discovered in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan that, even with the support of local governments, tiny pockets of resistance can make chaos more or less permanent. Attempts to quell that chaos are counterproductive as they only result in reactive violence.

The days of colonial empires imposing their rule on near-docile populations is over. In the post-colonial world populations demand the right to rule. If occupiers want to usurp that right they have to impose draconian anti-insurgent measures and each new imposition undermines their control.

What the US has found to its cost, the Russians should have concluded after the failure of their Ukrainian puppet Viktor Yanukovych and will discover again if they succeed in ousting Volodomyr Zelensky and installing a stooge in Kyiv. Vladimir Putin will certainly discover the truth of JP3-24 if he goes onto re-establish the Russian empire and conquers Georgia, Moldova, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and others.

His only hope is to replace the local majority with an ethnic Russian majority. This was a well-tried tactic of the tsars and Joseph Stalin which led to the forced removal of local populations to less equable climes such as Siberia.

Tagged , , , and | 6 Comments

My mother: my hero. A tribute on International Women’s Day

On this International Women’s Day, I want to celebrate the greatest hero in my life — my mother, Amtal.

My mother is a woman of extraordinary strength, resilience, and unwavering principles. She may stand at just 4’11”, but her presence is far greater. She carries herself with dignity, pride, and courage that inspires everyone who knows her.

Today, my mother lives a peaceful and independent life in a small village called Kotha, in the Gujrat district of Punjab, Pakistan. She spends her days tending to her small plot of land, growing her own food, nurturing her beautiful flowers, and caring for her chickens and beloved dog. After years of hardship and struggle, she now enjoys the quiet life she always deserved — a life she built through resilience and hard work.

The values that shaped me

My mother’s greatest gift to me wasn’t just her love — it was her wisdom. She believed that strength is measured not by power or status, but by how you treat others.

She taught me to stand up for those who can’t defend themselves, to never compromise on my values, and to remain humble no matter how much success I achieve.

I remember her telling me, “Never bow before small men in big offices.” She believed that respect should be earned through character, not through titles or wealth. This principle has stayed with me throughout my life — in my career, in politics, and in my relationships.

Whenever I faced tough decisions or difficult people, her voice echoed in my mind: “Do what’s right, even if you stand alone.”

Her unshakable spirit

Tagged | 4 Comments

What would Paddy do?

Image of Paddy Ashdown with words "What would Paddy do?"Bringing the party’s first leader back to life – in a modern-day cause

Six years after his premature death at age 77, Paddy Ashdown is making a comeback in the interests of the party’s immediate future.

Well, not really. But Paddy’s name does adorn a new publication from the Yorkists, a group of party activists keen for the Lib Dems to have a stronger public identity. What would Paddy do? is ostensibly a submission to the party’s policy review, the one chaired by Ed Davey and Eleanor Kelly that will report later this spring and propose motions to federal conference in September. But it’s really a discussion paper about where the Lib Dems need to go, given that the run-in to the 2029 general election is likely to take place on various shifting sands.

Despite its formulation, the title of the Yorkists’ submission is not an attempt to second-guess what Paddy Ashdown would do in the current circumstances, but to invoke the spirit of a political colossus who understood the person-in-the-street and was willing to take bold and counterintuitive stances. His stand-out policy was a penny on income tax to fund a boost to education, the tax rise deliberately ring-fenced to make it more palatable to voters (if indigestible to Treasury mandarins), but he also went against the Zeitgeist in 1989 when he called for all Hong Kong citizens with British nationality to be allowed to live here.

Consequently, what the Yorkists are feeding into the policy review addresses nine policy areas, combining immediate pragmatic proposals with thinking outside the box and challenging today’s Zeitgeist. Defence is a fast-moving topic, but the main call in What would Paddy do? is for cooperation among Europe’s states so money spent on defence goes further. It also urges efforts to tackle housing shortages to focus not simply on new building targets but on a package of measures that includes stipulating the right kind of dwellings to be built and accompanying land and taxation measures to stop starter homes becoming boltholes for the urban rich.

Tagged , , , and | 8 Comments

The Independent View: Why Lib Dems should support the Employment Rights Bill

When people think of the priorities of the Liberal Democrats, they may not immediately think of employment rights, compared to the focus on health and care, or on Europe. But reading last year’s manifesto, the degree of attention paid to this issue would surprise many. The manifesto that delivered such a resounding result for the party included a commitment to ensure “the highest possible standards” of labour protection, alongside individual measures on zero hours contracts, sick pay, and more.

Such language isn’t a surprise to me or to the trade union I lead. As a politically independent union, Prospect has a long history of working with Liberal Democrats, and we know that concern for worker’s rights isn’t confined to one corner of the political spectrum. That is why I am confident that the Liberal Democrats, and especially Lib Dem peers, will play a positive role in the next stages of the Employment Rights Bill.

The Bill has clearly been the subject of considerable commentary, and the number of amendments reflects the extensive discussion that has taken place between government, business and trade unions. At its heart though, the Bill remains a vehicle for tackling some of the worst abuses in our labour market, guaranteeing individual and collective rights, and setting us back on a path to a high growth and high productivity economy based on positive employment relations. All of these aims fit squarely within the Liberal Democrat tradition, as does the way that the Bill assists with the immediate challenge we face in health and care which is rightly the party’s priority.

The headlines here will of course be about the way the Bill seeks to tackle our broken sick pay system which was horribly exposed by the Covid pandemic, and the move towards solving the workforce crisis in social care by introducing a new Fair Pay Agreement. This is a necessary, though clearly not sufficient, step towards fixing this broken system and I know Lib Dems will continue to campaign on this issue.

Also posted in The Independent View | Tagged , , and | 3 Comments

Observations of an Expat: Buy American, Save Ukraine.

There is an outside, long shot chance of saving Ukraine and the Western Alliance—Buy American.

I don’t mean American cars or cereal. I mean something which really costs—American weaponry, American satellite links and American intelligence.

The money is there, $300-plus billion in frozen Russian assets that was being held back for Ukrainian reconstruction. There is not much point in saving it for reconstruction purposes if there is no country to reconstruct.

On top of that the normally frugal Germans are about to remove the EU debt brake and leap into a defense spending spree. And across Europe taxes are set to rise and welfare budgets cut to pay for what is now a defense emergency.

The purpose of the rapid rise in defense spending is to fill the huge hole left by the withdrawal of the United States from Ukraine and probably Europe as a whole. The problem is that no matter how big the budget it will take at least five—probably more—years to rebuild military forces and defense industries, and Putin is banging on Europe’s door today.

That is why British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky pressed Donald Trump for security guarantees as part of any ceasefire agreement.

The problem is that Trump does not see any advantage for him—or America—in providing such guarantees. It involves expensive aid until a ceasefire agreement is reached; commits US forces to a clash with Russia if Putin—as expected—breaks the ceasefire and potentially interferes with his plans to buddy up with fellow autocrat and would block access to Russian natural resources.

So give him a cash incentive with a bit of ego boosting thrown in for good measure. This is the kind of enticement Trump easily understands.

To start with the US gets the mineral rights deal he is demanding for past aid. Next,Trump is the recognised point man in negotiations with Vladimir Putin, but he has to consult and keep informed  European leaders and Zelensky.

Tagged , and | 13 Comments

Increasing the Liberal Democrats’ Northern Appeal

At last year’s general election, the British people voted for change following nearly a decade of chaos under the Conservatives punctuated by austerity, Brexit, mismanagement of the COVID-19 pandemic, scandal at Westminster, the mini-budget and the cost-of-living crisis. This much was shown by the twenty-point slump in their vote share in comparison to their 2019 result.

Nationwide, our party gained 57 seats to elect a total of 72 MPs to Westminster, our best performance ever and a close parliamentary reflection of our vote share of 12.2%. Because of the distortive effects of First Past the Post, a system whereby winning only one-third of votes casts gave Labour a 411-seat landslide, we had to undertake a laser-focused campaign targeting changeable seats. While our party represents constituencies throughout Great Britain from St. Ives to Orkney and Shetland, nearly 82% of our MPs represent the South of England. This is largely the result of our new MPs being elected predominantly from the dismantled Conservatives’ Blue Wall.

By contrast, there are only four MPs representing the North of England: the incumbent Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) and the newly elected Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove), Tom Morrison (Cheadle) and Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough). This is not reflective of our support in the region. Because of FPTP, we won only half of our fair share of seats in Northwest England and only a quarter in Yorkshire and Humber; in Northeast England, our 5.8% vote share won us no seats while Labour won 26 out of 27 seats on 45.4%.

The North of England has historically been considered part of Labour’s Red Wall. However, the loss of many of these seats to the Conservatives in 2019 shows that Labour’s grip on the region is slipping. With Labour now in government at Westminster and their actions and inactions earning them the ire of many, we are presented with an opportunity to make further inroads and resolve a possible North-South disparity within our own party.

1 Comment

ALDC by-election Report, 6th March

This week with its 9 principal councils saw mostly successful defences this week across all political parties, with only 2 exchanging hands. A huge gain for the Lib Dems from the Tories thanks to our consistent performance, and another for an independent councillor from a slumping Labour. The Conservatives and Labour both held their remaining 2 seats respectively, while the Lib Dems, the Green Party, and Plaid Cymru all held theirs.

Part of the only 2 gains this week, Cllr Andy Bell managed to gain the seat in Vivary Bridge, Vivary Bridge from the Conservatives, who fell to third place this time around behind Reform. Congratulations to Andy and the team for the monumental win!

Pendle BC, Vivary Bridge
Liberal Democrat (Andy Bell): 388 (34.9%, +3.5%)
Reform: 358 (32.2%, new)
Conservative: 244 (22.0%, -16.9%)
Labour: 121 (10.9%, -11.9%)

In Eastleigh BC, Cllr Prad Bains gathered over half of the vote in the Hamble & Netley ward, holding the seat. Congrats to Prad and the local team for the fabulous win, towering over second place Reform.

Eastleigh BC, Hamble & Netley
Liberal Democrat (Prad Bains): 1224 (52.1%, -6.7%)
Reform: 542 (23.1%, new)
Conservative: 421 (17.9%, +3.0%)
Labour: 164 (7.0%, +0.5%)

Tagged | 7 Comments

World Book Day! What are you reading?

It’s World Book Day today! Children all over the country are heading to school dressed up as their favourite book character. My 12 month old great niece even went to nursery in a Very Hungry Caterpillar costume.

Unfortunately, MPs don’t dress up, but some have marked the occasion. Here’s Christine Jardine on books at lunchtime in her office:

I’m not sure why Tom Gordon is reading Brave New World when he could just watch the news. He said on Twitter:

Happy World Book Day. I’m currently reading Brave New World for the first time. There’s probably a joke here about the state of the world and reading a dystopian novel.

Adam Dance, aware of the impact of Dyslexia, wrote to the Education Secretary to ask for more action to help pupils with the condition:

A very sobering thought from a bookshop owner I know who said that the free World Book Day books given to children are often, for children on free school meals, the first book they have ever owned. I loved reading as a child, I always had my nose in a book. It took me out of my own head and made me imagine. Reading is so enjoyable and really helps you learn and develop as a person and it’s so sad that reading for pleasure is on the wane.

Tagged | 12 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Joseph Bourke
    Michael Wolff in his second Trump biography claimed that Trump's business interests formed part of a "semi-criminal enterprise." He quoted the Trump confidante ...
  • Nonconformistradical
    "but is the answer to defend the status quo, preserving all aspects of the current system in aspic for all time?" I wouldn't have thought so. There will be d...
  • Tim Leunig
    There is clearly a case for improving existing housing, but how does that create new supply? There is very little derelict, unoccupied housing, particularly in ...
  • Craig Levene
    'Ukraine is taking tens of thousands of casualties to protect Europe'... Ukraine is protecting itself. Western European capitals are not under threat from the...
  • Christian de Vartava
    Division of spoils indeed. And a ruthless one to be. As to increasing the size of the British Armed Forces and it's technological abilities, now a matter of urg...