Category Archives: Op-eds

Lib Dems adopting re-join would cause Johnson to rejoice

I am passionately pro-European. I wish we were still part of the EU. I want our party to remain the most pro-European in the House of Commons. Most of all, however, I want us to actually win the argument over Europe, because if we see a future for Britain in Europe, we need to create one that ordinary people feel meets their hopes and dreams, not one that tells them how wrong they are for not supporting us.

The phrase “politics is about winning hearts and minds” means the hearts and minds of those with whom we initially disagree. It’s …

Tagged | 67 Comments

Europe and democratic consent

Although the text is yet to be chosen there will be a policy debate at our virtual conference (have you registered yet) on our Europe policy going forward.

The question is whether to adopt an immediate ‘rejoin’ policy, in the spirit of our ‘revoke’ policy at the last election on the simple grounds that we regret leaving the EU and would like to rejoin it, or whether it is a better idea to seek a closer relationship with the EU as a short term goal and to leave rejoining for a time when the prospects of success are better.

I …

Tagged and | 42 Comments

How you can help save the Au Pair programme

Spending a year as an au pair in Berlin was one of the best years of my life. I made lasting friendships, learned a language and gained a lot of sympathy for the challenges of parenting. 

The experience of au pairing abroad at a young age has been enjoyed by young people for hundreds of years. Long before the Erasmus student exchange program was born, Europe’s youth have been swapping their home for a year in Rome, Paris or London. At the same time, thousands of families benefit from the au pair program with affordable childcare and the opportunity to exchange cultures and languages. 

German au pairs will continue to spend a life changing year in Paris, and Polish au pairs can enjoy a summer as an au pair in Dublin. In the UK, this is all about the come to a stop because of Brexit. 

According to the British Au Pair Agencies Association (BAPAA), the number of au pairs coming to the UK has already plummeted by seventy-percent

This is because au pairs from EU member states have been able to arrive in the UK without a visa under the rule of free movement of people. As the Tory government is hellbent on putting a stop to free movement, the centuries old au pair program is collateral damage. 

Tagged , , and | 6 Comments

Observations of an expat: Shifting Arabian sands

Embed from Getty Images

The recent establishment of diplomatic relations and business ties between Israel and the United Arab Emirates raises a host of questions, hopes, problems, issues and consequences.

Is it good or bad?  In the constant shifting sands of the Middle East where tribal loyalties overlap with religious and ethnic rivalries it is probably best to say that it is a bit of both, and the need for a supreme balancing act will continue to be the order of the day.

The UAE has at least partially opened the diplomatic floodgates and other Arab countries are expected to soon follow. It is reckoned that the next Arab country to establish links with Israeli will be the Gulf island kingdom of Bahrain. King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa was among the first to congratulate both Israel and the UAE on their bold move. The reason? Sunni king Al Khalifa is terrified of Iran. The Persians have long claimed the island as part of their territory, and 60 percent of the population is Shia.

Next on the likely list is Oman. The late Sultan Qaboos regularly acted as a mediator between Arab and Israeli interests. In 2018 he hosted a visit to Muscat by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Omanis have been praised for their regional diplomacy, not only between Israel and the Arab world, but also between Iran and Arabia.

Tagged , , , , , and | 26 Comments

Fighting a losing battle: why Lib Dems should back the Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill

Embed from Getty Images

On Wednesday, Caroline Lucas, the sole Green Party MP at Westminster, did what she does best. She tabled a private members bill.

The Climate and Ecological Emergency Bill would mandate that the UK:

  • goes further in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, reflecting our historic emissions and relative capacity to rapidly decarbonise;
  • takes steps to protect and restore biodiversity and soil;
  • accounts for overseas activity (e.g. in supply chains) in emissions accounting;
  • acts on the basis of currently available technology, rather than hypothetical future solutions;
  • establishes a citizen’s assembly to build consensus around specific policy actions.

These provisions are the price we must pay if we are to bear our full responsibility for the climate change. We cannot rely on sci-fi ideas which may never be realised, or ask those least responsible to bear the greatest burden. We may have devoted little attention to biodiversity, habitats and soil in the past, but these have profound importance, supporting food chains and acting as carbon sinks, not to mention being intrinsically valuable.

Even the citizen’s assembly, which I am temperamentally averse to as it allows government to abdicate their responsibility to lead, here serves only an advisory function, helping to build consensus without the usual risks of direct democracy.

There’s much to support and little to criticise.

Tagged , and | 21 Comments

Take heart: this time it will be different

In the year and a bit I have been involved in the Lib Dems, I have noticed one particular train of thought that percolates in the minds of many members. In their eyes Paddy Ashdown is a now legendary leader of almost Arthurian stature, who led us in a golden era as we swept back to relevance in local and national politics. Whilst there is much truth in this, this train of thought often doesn’t stop there, but evolves in a secondary, more negative direction.

“If Paddy couldn’t do it nobody can,” goes the refrain. In other words, under Paddy we had strong leadership, a world class organisation and growing numbers in the polls, but we still failed to get the key political reforms that would have allowed us our fair place at the table of national life. In 1997 we broke through in terms of seat numbers, but the dreaded First Past The Post system delivered an oversized majority to the party we thought we could be going into coalition with, and they ignored a report they had commissioned recommending electoral reform. Then, when a chance for Government did come round, it was with our traditional enemies, and nearly destroyed us, a calamity from which we have yet to recover.

In other words the system proved too strong for us to take on, and our attack on it left us in pieces on the floor. So why do we continue to bother trying?

To me, this line of thinking is a very valid analysis of what happened to us from 1988 to 2015. We did indeed try and fail to take on a system that proved too robust to conquer. However it leaves out one crucial thing- and on this point we should take comfort and get ready to fight again, and this time win.

8 Comments

Constitutional reform: a coherent national policy or not?  – Part 2

Embed from Getty Images

In 2014 the Liberal Democrats endorsed Policy Paper 117 calling for a federal United Kingdom. It said that having an English Parliament would create a terribly imbalanced federation. It must follow that English Regions would be the constituent parts alongside Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. There can be no part-federalised England: if one understands the West Lothian Question, one must appreciate the absurdity of replicating it any number of times and ways within England itself. The remaining alternative is not to propose federalism, in which case the party would have wasted six years, abandoning its aims and objectives.

Unfortunately, Paper 117 was circumspect in proposing the regionalism it implied was necessary. The proposed devolution-on-demand is neither a route to structural coherence nor fair to anyone other than those who are first to grab the powers they want. It is a purely locally-led, “bottom-up” free-for-all which sits at the opposite end of the spectrum to a “top-down” imposed solution. However, it is not a Liberal answer, it is a chaotic libertarian one. Furthermore, devolution is becoming a dirty word, characterised by successive governments creating or abolishing local government structures on a whim. It is therefore time to stop talking about devolution altogether. We need federalism and we therefore need a process to regionalise England – fully and rationally.

Federalism motions (based on English regionalism) were twice submitted to Federal Conference in 2016, to no avail. These followed co-ordinated motions passed by NW England and East of England regional conferences in 2015, decrying chaotic, arbitrary devolution and calling on the party to make progress on a model for a federal UK. Subsequent calls to get Policy Paper 130 to cover regionalism more extensively fell on deaf ears. The meagre 400 words on devolution-on-demand seemed more laissez-faire than the proposals of Paper 117, arguably a backwards step.

Tagged , , , and | 56 Comments

Leadership

Embed from Getty Images

I received my first message since his election from Ed last Thursday. It was an appeal for money so no change there! It also used this very annoying computer program which inserts my first name at various places. If it is supposed to make me feel that the leader has composed a letter personally for me, it fails miserably. No doubt every one of the 118,000 members knows full well that it is a standard letter to all of them from a computer programmed to add first names. I wish our headquarters would stop treating us as infants and stop this practice. I shall simply delete every such missive in future.

I intend, of course, to support Ed fully in his immense task but, like a number of other contributors to Liberal Democrat Voice, I have my concerns having watched his acceptance speech. I felt that Caron Lindsay’s posting on Sunday hit the nail on the head. A new leader’s acceptance speech is a huge opportunity to make his or her political position and agenda clear in a few pithy well prepared sentences. It will always be carried by the news media. Ed missed the opportunity and his speech was extremely trite and mundane.

Tagged | 15 Comments

The road map to 2024

We are all heartily fed up with this government but unfortunately we are likely to have to put up with them for some while yet. When we do get the chance to kick them out which will probably be sometime in 2024 and we need to be in the best possible shape to do so.

Right at the top of the list has to be some level of cooperation with the Labour Party. Having spoken to hundreds of members during the recent leadership election I can testify that there is overwhelming support for this regardless of which candidate was being supported. Both Ed and Layla set out a similar vision as to how this could work and that needs to be put into action ASAP. It doesn’t mean the withdrawal of candidates anywhere – that would be counterproductive – but it does mean trying to re-employ the approach so successfully deployed by Paddy Ashdown in the run up to the 1997 General Election. Of course the price for us must be a firm commitment to electoral reform.

The other lesson we must learn is that building any relationship will take time, so we need to unite behind our new leader and give him time. I appreciate that many fellow Liberals found the result personally devastating. As an enthusiastic supporter of Layla I was disappointed but I am determined to put it behind for the greater good; millions of our fellow citizens are suffering under this cruel government and we need to get them out.

Tagged | 16 Comments

Join our team fighting for LGBT+ Rights

The new Exec of LGBT+ Lib Dems is now entering its second month. We’ve got an exciting mix of returning experts and new voices, and I’m very lucky to have the opportunity to Chair the team. One of the key objectives that many Exec members discussed in their manifestos back in July, was the need for us to open up and reach out. That’s a priority for me for the rest of our term – and that’s why I’m writing in Lib Dem Voice today.

In our first month we’ve made a good start on the important work that needs to be done, from reviewing our systems and constitution, to getting ourselves organised for Federal Conference in September. We’ve also run our first Pride Inside to commemorate Manchester Pride and Pride Cymru, where we hosted a panel on how the Lib Dems can win back trust amongst LGBT+ voters, followed by an absolutely hilarious quiz.

We’ve also got our first members Pizza and Politics in the diary for 7th September, and are hosting a series of Forums with LGBT+ Councillors (these will initially take place on 3rd and 7th September). I’m deeply interested in what we can practically do to support LGBT+ representatives, candidates and activists, and I hope that these sessions will give us more items for our to-do list!

Tagged | 1 Comment

The radical centre needs a new story

You only need to read the comments on any news coverage that we happen to get to see the problem. We’re so used to the jokes that we are often the first to make them, pre-empting the inevitable. “The Lib Dems are wishy-washy centrists. They sit on the fence, stand for nothing, and betray their principles at the first hint of power. They’re irrelevant. Being a Lib Dem is just a marginally more socially acceptable front to being a Tory.”

We are not good at selling the story of liberalism.

Shocking as it may seem to some of us, voters don’t go through manifestos with a fine-toothed comb, weighing up to merits of each and every policy before coming to a decision. People vote based on ideas. The left owns equality, health and social care and education. The right is the home of the economy, of business, of the free-market. If we call ourselves left-wing social liberals, why aren’t we Labour?  If we find ourselves more to the right, why aren’t we Conservatives?

And at both extremes, we find politicians willing to listen to our anger and our concerns and provide us with people to blame. It’s a simple, attractive narrative; you’ve lost your job because there are too many immigrants. If we send them ‘home’, then everything will be okay again. Alternatively, maybe it’s big business at fault?

Both the left and the right offer solutions offer visions of a better future. We need to find out who we are, and communicate to voters what we want from the world. To a certain extent, ‘Stop Brexit’ did this. We were offering something distinct from the other parties, and at least for a while, polling rewarded us for it (remember when we were above Labour?). Yet defining ourselves on a single issue like Brexit will never work as a long-term recruitment strategy.

Tagged | 21 Comments

Constitutional reform: a coherent national policy or not?  – Part 1

Embed from Getty Images

I have voted Liberal or Liberal Democrat since my first opportunity in 1987, having seen as a teenager the emergence of the SDP and the Alliance and having understood the need to reform British politics. I then became more and more aware of the many flaws of our anachronistic, dysfunctional and increasingly corruptible political system and I clamoured for a sea-change in our political landscape. It was never “just PR” for me.

In many walks of life it is the structure of our governance that holds the country back – the stultifying straitjacket placed on England by the unitary state and the increasing polarisation of Scottish politics producing division, not progress. I grew to believe that a more diverse political landscape, with power taken wholesale from Westminster and exercised at the lowest practicable level, would foster an evolution and reinvigoration of political attitudes as well as a better distribution of wealth, culture and well-being. This evolution should benefit every corner of the kingdom equally, not be one of increasing constitutional asymmetry, unfair distribution of empowerment and more disengagement by the electorate.

I was shocked when becoming a more engaged party member 25 years later, to find our policies were incomplete and failed to portray us as the torch-bearers for far-reaching constitutional reforms. Six years after a divisive independence referendum in Scotland, we still have no fully-formed vision for a new United Kingdom fit for the 21st Century or to inspire wavering Scottish voters away from separatism. Such ideas – a federal union and all the structural reforms and constitutional guarantees that would accompany it – should have existed before 2014. The national party leaders Cameron, Clegg and Miliband should not have been scrabbling around for votes at the last minute with the great Vow, necessitating further constitutional bodges such as English Votes for English Laws.

Tagged , , , and | 10 Comments

Reformation – without a security and defence policy the Lib Dems are toast

Embed from Getty Images

Uncomfortable as it is for people of a liberal and democratic disposition to face the harsh realities of a rough and tumble world, the government must deal with the bully who disregards the norms of international rule-based peaceful co-existence. The same applies within the nation-state; it is the government which polices the law of the land and in both cases is there to provide the secure infrastructure which supports the well-being of the citizen and society.

In a globalised world, how on earth (literally) as liberals can we perpetuate the emotive implication of them and us? Citizens everywhere belong to the global village, and we need to contribute to the policing of the village rules for co-existence. As a nation-state, we should focus on our contribution outside, or external to, our part of our village.

From an international standpoint, and we are internationalist, aren’t we? The first sacred cow which has to be scrapped is the concept of foreign policy with its implicit narrative of “foreigners”. The second sacred cow for slaughter is to replace the Foreign and Commonwealth Office with a Ministry of External Affairs. Oh dear, I see the massacre turning into a blood bath!

Tagged , and | 9 Comments

Backwards or forwards but no stagnation?

Perhaps the leadership election is time for reflections on our party’s aspirations, policies, practices and assessments thereof?

The “Preamble to our Constitution” presents our aspirations. Perhaps it is a statement of the need for and achievability of justice for the individual, the group, the nation and the World?

It could be a compass for the creation and management of policies, policy implementation and their monitoring. We could then monitor the policies of others too. Thus we could develop ourselves as a party of service, information, transparency and reliability.

Preamble paragraph 1 refers to the state’s role in enabling citizens, and, presumably, their children, to flourish, make the most of themselves and be active and positive members of their communities. To achieve this, people need surpluses of time, energy, wealth etc. So this set of apparently social objectives has a large, possibly dominant, component of economics.

Tagged and | 10 Comments

Education prospects worsen for UK children in poverty

As most children go back to school this week, fears that disadvantaged children will have fallen behind in their schoolwork in the months of COVID lockdown seem confirmed by interviews conducted with more than 3000 teachers and heads at about 2000 schools in England and Wales by the National Foundation for Educational Research. Their study, reported yesterday, found that, while the average learning lost was reckoned to be about three months for all pupils, teachers expect that more than half of pupils in schools in the most deprived areas have lost four months or more.

But the educational outlook was sadly worsening anyway for around four million children who now, according to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation are living in poverty in the UK (jrf.org.uk/report/uk-poverty-2019-20). A new report has found worsening educational inequality already, stating that “there is disturbing new evidence that the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers has stopped closing for the first time in five years.” This report, from the Education Policy Institute (epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/education-in-england-annual-report-2020), finds that disadvantaged pupils in England are 18.1 months of learning in English and Maths behind their peers by the time they finish their GCSEs. This is the same gap as five years ago, and the gap at primary school increased for the first time since 2007.

Tagged , and | 50 Comments

Paul Tyler writes…..Listening is just the start…

Once we have honed our listening skills we should surely seek to improve ways in which people are themselves empowered.  How can they make their voices and their votes more effective ?

Here are a few immediate and urgent opportunities:

Fair Votes 

Despite the Conservative manifesto promise to make sure “every vote counts the same – a cornerstone of democracy” the current inequality is outrageous.  It takes 33 times as many votes for Green Party supporters to elect an MP as for SNP supporters, with big differences for Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats in between. Voters are cheated by the First-Past-The-Post system.

Ed Davey has committed himself to the cross-party campaign.    But what should be the first priority?   Persuading the Labour leadership to wake up, and accept the strong support of their membership for reform of elections to the Commons?   Or concentrate on extending the STV success in local authority elections in Scotland – now to be repeated in Wales – to ensure voters in England do not miss out?  

If the electoral system is the bedrock of our democracy, then surely some consistency throughout the UK is essential ?

Who Votes?

Liberal Democrats have long campaigned for votes for all citizens when they reach 16.  We led national efforts to extend the franchise for the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum and were only thwarted by combined Conservative and Labour Peers when we pressed then for 16-year-olds to be able to vote in the 2016 EU Referendum.   Again, Scotland and Wales are leading the way, and the case for UK consistency is now overwhelming.

UK citizens working or living abroad are often affected by political decisions taken here – most notoriously on Brexit – but their representation is inadequate.  We want them to vote in separate constituencies so that they have MPs who are committed to looking after their particular interests.

Similarly, EU residents working and resident in the UK make a substantial contribution, not least with various local taxes, and should continue to be allowed to vote in local elections.

Subsidiarity

The imminent Devolution White Paper, we are told, will force through the amalgamation of two-tier councils to create more unitary authorities, all with the compulsory addition of elected mayors.   This looks suspiciously like centralisation rather than decentralisation, and is certainly not devolution. Whitehall retains the financial stranglehold, treating elected local representatives as simply a delivery mechanism for national policy priorities.

We have long championed subsidiarity = bringing decisions as close as possible to those who will be affected by them.  The present Government is moving in the opposite direction. 

The example of the SNP Government is also salutary.  Concentrating power at that level, with little devolution to lower tiers of governance at community levels, is no way to spread empowerment.

Transparency

Tagged , , and | 31 Comments

Working from home – better for the economy long-term?

Full disclosure – the author has been working from home since mid-March.

With increasing pressure being placed upon office workers to return to their town and city centre offices, in order to save the economy, little attention seems to have been paid to the flip side of having hundreds of thousands of workers operating from their homes. The imminent death of Pret, and of small businesses in the urban cores, is being waved at us as a means of provoking us to go back to our daily commute.

Yet, yesterday, evidence emerged that, whilst there is undoubtedly damage occurring, there have been …

Tagged and | 34 Comments

What’s the point?

In the few days since Ed Davey was announced as our new leader, I’ve been saddened to see more than a few  people, good solid liberals,  thinking about leaving the party. It’s worrying that both young people, and longstanding activists and councillors, are questioning whether the party can recover sufficiently to deliver the liberal country where no-one is enslaved by poverty ignorance and conformity, to quote the preamble to our Constitution, that we all want to see.

I’ve had many such conversations over the last few days. What has been particularly disappointing is the way in which some supporters of Ed have been so aggressive to those expressing their concerns on social media. One senior activist who should know better told another to “jog on” out of the party. The aggressors sounded more like the Brexiteers baiting Remainers in the aftermath of the EU referendum than members of a liberal party and it was really sad to see. Of course people are going to let their emotions show on social media when they’ve lost and the way to deal with it is with grace, sensitivity and kindness, not aggression and cruelty. I am pretty sure that Ed himself would not condone this behaviour and they do him no credit whatsoever.

So why is it that people are questioning their future in the party, particularly those who survived the coalition years?

It’s nothing personal about Ed. It’s more that the party has seemingly chosen a path that will lead to more of what they see as the bland managerial centrism that, let’s face it, has not done us many favours in the past 10 years. They are simply not up for more of the same and don’t believe that the party can recover if it pursues this tactic. “What’s the point?” is something I’ve heard a few times.

I do have some sympathy with that. This party is at its best when it is bold and radical and does the right thing, not necessarily the popular thing. The voters weren’t exactly clamouring for Paddy to stand up for the rights of citizens of Hong Kong, but it was the right thing to do and he enhanced his reputation by making that argument.  We forget how massive a thing it was when Charles Kennedy opposed the Iraq War. It took a huge amount of political courage to take that stance and he took absolute pelters for it at the time, but he was ultimately proved right.

It is the language we use and how it resonates with people that will be crucial in our future success. We have not been very good at articulating what we are for and telling our story. Ed Davey was right to say that we are going to concentrate on listening to voters. That part of his acceptance speech jarred with me a bit because that is our trademark in so many of our local campaigns that we actually give a damn what people think. But then, that is not the perception people have of us nationally and, let’s face it, party members were not the focus of his remarks. However, I did find the phrase “National Listening Project” more Orwellian than empathetic. They might want to fine tune that one.

I do understand why people have been thinking about leaving the party and I really hope that they don’t. Ed has his mandate now and he needs to be given the chance to show that he can deliver on what he said during the campaign. I will be staying because I strongly believe that the immense talent within the parliamentary party, within our council groups up and down the country and amongst our talented staff and volunteers up and down the country can get us back on track if we work together and co-ordinate our efforts. We need to show that we are operating on the same set of values across the whole of the UK.

If I have any anxieties it is on tactics, not values. If I thought that any of our leaders didn’t share the values in our Preamble, I’d have been out the door a long time ago. And you can see how they have been living our principles in what they have been doing in Parliament. Jamie Stone fighting for those who have excluded from government help during the pandemic. Christine Jardine trying to achieve indefinite leave to remain for NHS and care staff who have been on the Covid front line (more on that later this week when she launches her Bill on that subject), Layla leading with her Coronavirus enquiry making sensible recommendations to avoid a second wave of the virus, Munira holding the government to account for its failures on test and trace and in care homes to name many issues, Alistair pushing the government to do more to press China on their horrific treatment of the Uighurs. Daisy fighting for freelancers and for more help for the creative industries.

Tagged , and | 82 Comments

Ed’s experience can help him rebuild the Liberal Democrats

In his acceptance speech Ed Davey claimed to have been a member of our Party for 30 years. This surprised me as I worked in the same Liberal Democrat Whips’ office as Ed in 1989/90 and had assumed he was already a member.  I can’t claim to have influenced him in joining, but I can imagine some of the other great people who were in that team might have done.

My surprise was down to Ed’s keenness at the time to ensure we had a credible economic message and his enthusiasm for campaigning at the grass roots to get that message across, combined with his natural Liberal responses to the issues of the day we discussed each morning as we put the press cuttings together for our MPs. 

It was a small and effective team that saw our opinion poll rise from an asterix to near double figures thanks in part to the campaign materials we produced in association with ALDC. Known as the People First campaign it was promoted through ALDC and the tiny but talented campaigns team in Cowley Street. It was a first and much missed example of integrated campaigning the new leader might wish to remind himself of.

I also recall that it was Ed who came up with our distinct economic policy to give the Bank of England independence. This policy helped broaden the Party’s appeal beyond the inspiring leadership of Paddy Ashdown and our community campaigning. It was a policy that became one of the first things the new Labour Government did despite it not featuring in their General Election campaign.

In the run up to the 1997 election there seemed to be a wide understanding, probably learnt through the extensive local government experience within the Party, that you can have radical views and policies, but you can’t vote for them if you don’t get Liberal Democrats elected. This is where the targeting of messages and resources was developed that proved so important in helping to win seats like Twickenham and Oxford West & Abingdon for the first time since universal suffrage. 

Sadly, after the 2010 election we ignored the lessons and moved away from the tactics that had secured our bridgehead which has left Tim, Jo and now Ed with an enormous challenge to overcome. 

Tagged , , and | 12 Comments

Keeping Young People in the Liberal Democrats 

We all know losing can be disappointing. As someone who was heavily involved in the Vote Layla campaign, it might not come as a shock that I was disappointed in the result of the leadership election. It goes without saying that I will rally behind our new leader, but I will make no bones about it: addressing the biggest issue facing our party for the last 10 years will be considerably harder.

The issue we face is a mass exodus of members that are disillusioned and disenfranchised, particularly younger members. When campaigning in the leadership election, I encountered countless people who had already cancelled their membership or were about to, because they saw our party as irrelevant and uninspiring. On top of that and more specifically, over the first 24 hours of the announcement of the new leader, I witnessed a number of previously active young people in the Liberal Democrats cancel their memberships and look for other political homes. 

This trend doesn’t appear to be changing anytime soon. A poll recently showed that the Greens are ahead of us in terms of young people voting intention. As the party that used to be the home of students, of the alternative voice, of the anti-establishment and of the progressive, it is imperative that we return in some way to this narrative, or risk fizzling out of existence.

Luckily for us, being low in the polls gives us a chance to do exactly this. Yes, we do need to be relevant to ordinary voters by returning to speak about policies people want to hear, not just policies Liberal Democrats like to hear. But I argue that, in the long term, it is more vital we stay relevant and inspiring to young people if we ever want to be competitive to other parties.

One particular example of us doing the opposite to the above was the issue of the environment. In the 2019 GE, it was such a hot topic and such a unique moment for us to reinspire young people nationally, especially when we had caught their attention on the Brexit issue. Instead, however, we ended up looking out of touch because we had a carbon neutral target that appeared less ambitious than our rivals.

Tagged and | 51 Comments

Observations of an expat: Politics of fear and loathing

Embed from Getty Images

Fear is the major political currency of America’s Republican Party. The traditionalists are frightened of socialism. They are scared of big government. They dread the thought of a diminished suburban life style.  They are panic-stricken at the thought of losing their guns that protect from the forces of both the law and lawlessness. But most of all, in an increasingly racially divided society, the long dominant White population is terrified of becoming a minority.

Republicans will deny that they are racists. But the fact is that race issues have been a dominant theme in American politics from the arrival of the first African slaves in 1619, to the genocidal elimination of Native Americans, the Civil War, segregation, Jim Crow, the Civil Rights Act and, finally, Trump’s wall.

They are not overly concerned with constitutional rights (except perhaps their interpretation of the Second Amendment). Enforcement of the rule of law is not at the top of agenda (except as it pertains to the protection of property). Whether or not their president is a tax-evading, misogynistic, narcissistic, racist, incompetent foul-mouthed liar is of little interest. They accept that he is a bastard. But he is their bastard. Even a global pandemic which has left more Americans dead than in any other country takes a back seat to the battle to preserve the fabled American dream.

America is a largely conservative society. Donald Trump is in the White House because he has successfully managed to persuade Americans that he is their best bet for fighting off the foreign hordes and ideas that run counter to perceived American values. In this election, the American right has gone to war; and, as in any war, the first casualty is truth.

That was obvious from the Republican Convention where speaker after speaker uttered outrageous lies in pursuit of four more years of a Trump presidency. Former Army Colonel turned anti-abortionist nun, Sister Deidre Byrne, accused Joe Biden and Kamala Harris of supporting not only late-term abortion, but infanticide as well.

Tennessee Senator Marshal Blackburn warned: “If the Democrats have their way, they would keep you locked in your homes until you become dependent on the government for everything. “

Tagged , and | 26 Comments

A letter to disheartened Layla supporters

In the aftermath of our leadership election, emotions are high. I know there are people disappointed by the result. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t a little disheartened to be on the losing side. I know Ed is a great liberal, a caring person, and a hugely credible environmental campaigner and I’m still a Liberal Democrat at the end of the day no matter what.

With that said, many of you saw the need for new energy, a fresh start and a revitalisation of our party.

The leadership is only one aspect of our party and one piece of the puzzle. Please don’t give up.

Local, Scottish and Welsh elections are approaching.

We have lots of fresh faced, energetic and bright young talent in the party. People who embody what it is we loved about Layla in the first place. People like Molly Nolan in Caithness, Sutherland & Ross and Jenny Marr in the Scottish Borders.

Support them. Lift them up.

Tagged | 37 Comments

Lib Dem Mum 4: Trans rights are human rights

Do you have a problem for Lib Dem Mum? Email [email protected] or DM @lib_mum on twitter in complete confidentiality – only Lib Dem Mum sees messages to these accounts. No one in the team at LDV has access (and for the avoidance of doubt Lib Dem Mum’s views are her own and not those of the LDV team).

All correspondents will be acknowledged, and if you are published you will be given a pseudonym.

 

Dear Lib Dem Mum,

I am a feminist, and a liberal, and I think we should all have the right to live our lives as we choose. I have been watching, as an outsider, the heated discussions about trans rights. I don’t (to my knowledge) have any trans friends or relatives, and my interest in this is purely a human rights one. I do not want trans people of any gender to suffer, but nor do I want women to suffer. There are people on both sides of this debate who I find broadly credible, and there are people on both sides who seem to want to destroy the other. I want to be fair and just to everybody, and for us all to go forward to a more liberal and just society.

Help?

Confused, Lanarkshire.

 

Dear Confused,

As a peace-loving liberal mum, I generally like to try to see all sides of a debate and reach a compromise if one is possible. This is one of those instances where I do not think compromise is possible.

Those of us who are old enough to remember the 1980s have seen all this before. The discourse around trans rights is very much a warmed over version of things people used to say about gay people in the 1980s, with a thin cloak of feminism added on top to make it more superficially acceptable. Even the toilet panic is an old canard that’s been resurrected. “Men in dresses are a threat to YOUR children” is an exact copy of the scare stories that went around at that time. And yes, there were angry and unreasonable people on both sides of that debate in the 1980s, too. It didn’t stop us, as liberals, ultimately accepting that one side was in the right. The other side, I’m afraid, was a force of reactionary conservatism (even the ones who were otherwise perfectly nice people and were good at phrasing their rhetoric in respectful and reasonable language).

Then as now, I find the best way to navigate claims and counterclaims is to look at evidence. Britain doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and several other countries have already implemented the reforms trans people call for – our closest comparison being Ireland. Trans people of all genders are no more likely to be a threat than any other human being – in fact the horrifying statistics show that they are far, far more likely to be threatened by other humans. Yes, some humans, cis and trans, of all genders and none, are Bad People. Yes, some humans, cis and trans, of all genders and none are “a threat to YOUR children”. This is because those individuals are a threat, not because of their gender, or sex, or lack of either.

Tagged | 19 Comments

Smells like team spirit

Now it’s all over I can write about it and what a few weeks it was. Signing up with team Layla was one of the best things I have done in a long time.

Having met Ms Moran back in 2017 at a local party AGM I had pledged to support her in the event that she decided to run for the party leadership so impressed was I by this charismatic young Liberal Democrat MP. I should say I am not easily impressed, starting out in politics aged 16 has led to a certain level of cynicism in this 50 something guy. So I signed up and over the course of the contest made my contribution which mainly consisted of watching the hustings and phoning members. The latter gave me a fascinating insight into our party in various parts of the UK. Hundreds of calls to Scotland failed to uncover another Warren. I know they are there just maybe not in the Liberal Democrats.

The campaign was good for me because after years as a family carer it gave me a purpose. Everyday I was able to make my contribution and the only thing that got put on hold was the gardening. Most evenings we had a zoom event get together organised by the excellent Jason Johnson which really helped build team spirit. We got to know each other and bonded in a way that helped us strive to achieve more in the days ahead. Relationships were built which I hope will endure and our skills were utilised in a way that led on to discussions about how a lot of us felt underused by the party. I very much hope that will change in the future.

15 Comments

On Coronavirus and finance

The UK, like USA, Japan and others, have a profound advantage with which to recover from the financial consequences of Covid, if they choose to understand and use it.

They are currency issuers, unlike countries using the euro and the dollar, which are currency users. Unlike currency users, e.g. Germany, Greece etc. financially sovereign nations can always meet future obligations: they can never run out of their money.

Increasing or decreasing “the deficit” neither makes future generations poorer nor richer. Consequently, the Government can and should, without excessive inflation, spend its currency to fully manage the problems and opportunities to maintain or increase the well-being of citizens and children. It neither needs, nor should, let the “deficit myths” restrict its management of the Coronavirus and its consequences.

The government’s ability to spend is limited by the economy’s ability to produce, not the debt.
Dean Baker

It should also be limited by care of environments which include, climate, ecology and societies.

Economics without contexts and compassion is a form of fascism
William Harris

Fiat money gains its authority through being the medium in which a government extracts taxes. Unlike commodity money, with intrinsic value and representative money, representing something with intrinsic value, it is intrinsically valueless. It is part of a government’s “spend, tax and borrow” practices. Taxation creates the demand for the government’s money and so is not a governing factor in governmental spending. Government spends first and taxes some back. The difference goes to the private sectors of the economy. Unless taxation is less than expenditure, private sectors suffer deficits and the economy under-functions. Insufficient taxation results in damaging excessive inflation.

Tagged and | 36 Comments

Why Britain should worry about Kashmir

Embed from Getty Images

Kashmir is one of those decades-long conflicts which rarely makes it into the mainstream UK media;  until recently. In June this year 20 Indian soldiers died in fighting with Chinese soldiers, on the border between Indian-administered and Chinese-administered Kashmir.

So what is the nature of the conflict and why has it become much more dangerous this year ?

Central to the recent upsurge in violence, lies China-India relations. To understand, we must start with ‘British India’.

After Indian independence following WW2, Kashmir was divided into Pakistan administered and Indian administered territory, with two smaller areas controlled by China. Both the Pakistani and Indian administered sides are majority Muslim, except (Buddhist) Ladakh, on the Chinese border.

India and Pakistan have more than once gone to war over territory, and so have India and China.

When Indian administered Kashmir was established, the spectre of future Kashmiri independence was raised, and significant autonomy provided for in Article 370 of the Indian Constitutions, later also by Article 35A.

Among these provisions were restricted involvement of the Indian state (foreign policy, defence etc). Land ownership and receipt of public services like education and health were restricted to Kashmiris. Article 370, leading potentially to independence, was a factor in the measure of acceptance by Kashmiris of Indian administration early on.

However, in the late 1980s an insurgency by Muslim Kashmiris against Indian administration started, with various forms of support, overt and covert, from Pakistan. This rise in violence against Indian rule was largely a result of gradual erosion of autonomy and democracy;  and fading prospects of independence.

Tagged , , and | 11 Comments

The most fundamental of human rights

Embed from Getty Images

I am sure that most of you will have been shocked and distressed by recent reports that, during lockdown, Many care homes were ordered to place “Do not resuscitate” orders on all their residents. In many cases, there was no discussion of this with either the residents themselves or their families. About half of these were care homes for the elderly. The other half were for younger adults with learning difficulties or other disabilities.

It is hard to find words for this violation of the most fundamental of human rights – the right to life. We thought we were going into lockdown to protect the most vulnerable, when in reality, there seems to have been a policy of leaving the most vulnerable to die. It seems to have been decided that the lives of elderly and disabled people somehow mattered less than those of the young, or of people free of disabilities.

Even if it could be argued that very frail elderly people often would not benefit from resuscitation, or from treatments like ventilation, this would not apply to the younger, healthy people, who happened to have a learning difficulty, who were also being condemned to die.

This horrifying situation was not confined to the care home sector. Some GP practices put pressure on elderly people, people with certain health conditions, disabled people, and in some cases autistic people, to sign “Do not resuscitate” forms for themselves, and agree that an ambulance should not be called if they were to become ill with Coronavirus. Imagine the feelings of these people, on being asked to agree that their lives were not worth saving. In many cases these were people living alone, unable to see friends and family due to lockdown, and now finding that the health service was apparently turning its back on them. They must have felt utterly abandoned. Many must have despaired. Meanwhile, their neighbours “clapped the carers” every Thursday.
How dare anyone suggest that the life of an elderly, disabled or autistic person is of less value than that of a young, able bodied, neurotypical person?

I hope every liberal believes that every life is of equal value. We must never forget that the most fundamental of human rights is the right to life itself.

Tagged and | 49 Comments

What kind of Universal Basic Income do you support?

There has been a lot of debate in the party about Universal Basic Income, but it’s not always been clear what kind of UBI is being proposed. This article is to ask you to choose from four clear options.

A key issue with UBI is how it will be funded, and if it is funded, whether other priorities will have to be dropped. In the 2019 election, Jeremy Corbyn proposed raising taxes by £80bn/yr. The Liberal Democrats proposed an extra £51bn/yr spending (this included a £14bn/yr ‘remain bonus’)

The four options below involve combinations of the cheapest of the schemes recommended by Compass and the spending from the 2019 Lib Dem manifesto.

  1. £191.9bn/yr extra taxes

Scheme 1 from the Compass paper (see below), plus the £51bn/yr spending from the 2019 Lib Dem manifesto

  1. £140.9bn/yr extra taxes

Scheme 1 from the Compass paper (see below), none of the 2019 Lib Dem manifesto implemented

  1. £61bn/yr extra taxes
  • Keep the £51bn/yr extra spending from the 2019 manifesto
  • £10bn/yr to move the UK benefits system more towards a negative income tax system
  • A UBI pilot scheme (cost very small)
  1. £51bn/yr extra taxes
  • Keep the £51bn/yr extra spending from the 2019 manifesto
  • A UBI pilot scheme (cost very small)

The UBI Scheme 1 in the above options comes from proposals in the paper written by Howard Reed and Stewart Lansley and published by Compass. It is outlined in the graphic below, along with Scheme 2, which is more expensive.

pastedGraphic.png

As well as saying which of the above four you prefer, do also give us your ideal option.

Tagged | 105 Comments

Make your mind up time: Lib Dem Women’s hustings

There are just 19 hours left in the Lib Dem Leadership election. Many of you will still be making your final decision on who to vote for.

If you are still not sure, why not watch some snippets of the 47 hustings that have taken place so far?

One event that isn’t on the website is the Lib Dem Women event that took place last month. They have recently uploaded it on to You Tube and you can watch here.

Tagged , and | Leave a comment

Ed Davey writes: I want to rebuild our party and take on the Tories

As we wrap up the Liberal Democrat leadership election, I wanted to thank the thousands of people who have taken part in hustings, sent in questions to the campaigns and engaged in this contest.

It’s absolutely right that there is a robust process that properly tests our next leader, and makes sure that whoever wins on Thursday has been put through their paces by the party. Whatever happens later this week, I know that Liberal Democrats will come together and turn our hand to doing what we do best, getting out campaigning and standing up for communities up and down the country.

If you haven’t returned your ballot yet then there is still time to vote for me so that we can rebuild our party on solid foundations, and campaign for a fairer, greener and more caring society. That’s my vision for the future of our party, and I know I’ve got the experience we need to deliver it. 

With your support, I want to rebuild our party and take on the Tories, and put more Liberal Democrats in town halls, council chambers and Parliaments right across the country.

But we have to be realistic with the challenge that we face. Even a quick glance at our election review will tell you that the next leader, whoever it is, will be taking on a big job. There are deep, structural challenges that the party faces and it will take time for us to fix the problems Dorothy Thornhill identified in her review, and put the party in the best place to get back to winning elections.

Tagged , and | 13 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Chloe
    Nonconform. How did they get to France in the first place ? They've past numerous free countries, & if I was in genuine fear of my life I'd be happy to reac...
  • Nonconformistradical
    @Jana "We should equally be clear that anyone seeking to leave France to claim asylum in the UK is not fleeing a genuine threat to their lives…they are just ...
  • Pawel Urbanski
    Thank you Sarah - this needed saying. I run high-street small beauty businesses in London, and the "wealthy London" framing misses what operators actually see. ...
  • Chloe
    Peter, we've heard a lot about the positive aspects of immigration in regards to economic benefits. We've had year on year record net migration and many people ...
  • Kevin Hawkins
    Here is my usual monthly summary of the last fifty local by-elections. Although Labour seem to have overtaken Reform in opinion polls this is not yet showing i...