Category Archives: Op-eds

Vince, Strictly and Brexit

The clocks have gone back and it’s going to be dark by 5pm tonight. I hate Winter and darkness with a passion. I therefore reserve the right to post things that cheer me up. One of those things is Vince’s appearance on the Strictly Christmas special back in 2010. If you want to see his graceful and elegant Foxtrot, it’s in the BBC post linked to below.

There’s a serious reason to refer to it, though. This week, Vince suggested that Strictly dancers like Aljaz, Giovanni, Grazziano and Gorka, who come from EU countries, could be affected by Brexit.

He told The Telegraph:

Afterwards at a meeting at the European Commission, he urged Michel Barnier, the European Union’s chief negotiator, to make emergency plans to give Britain time to hold a second referendum before the Brexit deadline of March 29 2019.

“As British society falls apart it could pose a risk to Strictly,” he said, “If we have a cack handed immigration policy like what we have for non-EU citizens all kinds of perverse decisions could be made.”

Millions of people watch Strictly so he’s right to try and attract their attention by suggesting that there could be a threat to some of their favourite dancers. While the Government gave a predictably sneering retort, Vince makes a serious point. As Christine Jardine pointed out in an article earlier this year, Brexit poses a massive threat to the creative industries.

Tagged , , and | 3 Comments

Brexiteers jump the shark again with high treason jibe

I was quite surprised by the newspapers on Friday. After Vince Cable along with representatives from Plaid Cymru, the SNP and Greens met Michel Barnier, I wouldn’t have been surprised if we’d had more “enemies of the people” nonsense from the more excitable right wing tabloids.

They were quiet, but this weekend, Leave EU jumped that particular shark, accusing Vince Cable of High Treason. Layla Moran retorted on Twitter that this was a badge of honour.

Tagged and | 25 Comments

What do you want to see in the Budget?

I learned pretty soon after Margaret Thatcher came to power in 1979 that Conservative budgets were things to be feared. Tax cuts for the rich paid for by paring public services back to the bone was the order of the day.  I’ve never yet met a Tory budget that I liked. There were some mitigating factors during the coalition years, but we only managed to stop the cruellest of Tory policies. Some of the ones we let through, like the Bedroom Tax, should never have seen the light of day.

My expectations of Philip Hammond tomorrow are therefore pretty low. I’ve …

Tagged | 25 Comments

Tribal politics and liberalism – the fight to the death

I have a slightly irrational aversion to holding up diamonds, wearing rosettes and beginning sentences with the phrase “Only the Liberal Democrats”. In fact I canvass now with a badge I had made which says on it against a yellow background “Bloody Politicians”. 

I really,really do get the importance of branding etc but I do think that the future of Liberalism depends on the death of tribal politics.

We are living in strange times where political discourse is often reduced to the exchange of insults, declaration of tribal belief and parodying of alternative perspectives. As Nick Robinson tweeted<

Much but not all of this is done through social media. Political debate ,as opposed to the political exchange of fire, is harder now to engage in. Voters are increasingly endorsing populist-right and left- politicians who offer simple solutions, ignore complexity and play successfully on emotions and fears.

Polarised politics though has certain key definable features we need to understand and as importantly worry about emulating.

It characterises political opposition in terms of a moral gulf. Those who back a different position are knaves, fools or both. They are not just people who have arrived at a different opinion. There can be no dalliance with the enemy not just because they are wrong but because they are necessarily evil. So we have the coarsening of political discourse, mindless abuse of opponents etc 

A second key characteristic is to deny or minimise the possibility of shared truths between political opponents. One side has to have got all the facts right and the other side all the facts wrong.Intelligence is only ever used by opponents to mislead and confound. 

These two key characteristics act to reinforce each other. It cannot possibly be the case that one’s political opponents have looked at the same facts one sees and arrived at different conclusions, possibly sharing some similar core values to oneself. That’s a liberal mirage.

Tagged , , , and | 20 Comments

Observations of an ex pat: Enemies of the people

The murder of Jamal Khashoggi is not an isolated incident. It is part of a worldwide concerted effort by criminals threatened by exposure; power-hungry politicians frightened of truth and criticism and ideologues seeking to manipulate public opinion.

Khashoggi hit the headlines because he was murdered by agents of one of the world’s most oppressive regimes which is also supported by countries who claim freedom of speech as a bedrock of their system of government.

A total of 46 journalists around the world were killed in 2017. Two thirds were murder victims. More than 2,500 have been killed since 1990. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, 262 journalists languished in the world’s prisons at the end of 2017. Turkey—whose president is taking the lead in condemning Saudi Arabia—leads the pack with 73 journalists behind bars.

We tend to think of freedom of speech as a product of the Age of Enlightenment. Yes and no.  It was a key element in The Golden Age of Athens and was enshrined in Roman law. In common with most laws and freedoms, freedom of speech dwindled to the point of extinction in the Middle Ages. It was revived in the 17th century. Leading the way was English poet, philosopher and statesman John Milton who passionately argued for the right to seek information and ideas, receive information and ideas and impart information and ideas.

By 1689 Freedom of Speech was enshrined in the English Bill of Rights. It was the First Amendment in the US constitution along with freedom of the press, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly and the freedom to petition the government. Freedom of Speech was declared an inalienable right in the French Revolution’s Rights of Man. The protection of free speech can be found in almost every written constitution as well as in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and EU Law.

Tagged | 5 Comments

The changing will of the people

Nothing could be simpler than changing your Will. You simply alter it to take account of a new situation, including your new grandchildren perhaps, and it’s done. Nobody objects that you have betrayed your first Will by making another, and if they did, you would think it mighty strange.

Not so with the will of the people. The decision of 2016, corrupted and flawed though it certainly was, must stand forever, or for at least 20 years in Nigel Farage’s opinion. Why should that be? After all, it was only supposed to be an advisory result to be considered by parliament. Primarily because David Cameron promised that whatever the people decided, the government would carry out. And that promise rapidly attained the force of a biblical commandment, to be implemented come hell or high water. 

A second Brexit referendum will not be sanctioned “under any circumstances” insists Theresa May, because the 2016 decision was sacrosanct: any deviance is betrayal. 

Underlying this apparently high minded devotion to democracy one senses a certain punitive element, like the strict parent who says “I told you once, and I’m not telling you again”. Across the channel, the translation is more like “The Brits have made their bed, and now they must lie on it”.

Tagged and | 9 Comments

In full: Vince Cable’s speech on universal credit – how the Lib Dems would tackle poverty

Yesterday Vince Cable gave a speech on tackling poverty to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. He addressed the growing poverty faced by working families and called for changes to Universal Credit – including putting back the £3 billion a year that George Osborne took out with indecent haste the minute we Lib Dems were out of the picture.

He said that the principles behind UC were right, but the implementation was wrong and called for its rollout to be halted until the problems were fixed.

Universal Credit hits Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen at the end of November. This means that thousands of people face a miserable Christmas as the first payments will be made (or not) the week before the holidays.To put people in the position where they can’t afford to pay their rent, heat their homes or put food on the table at the coldest time of the year is cruel.

Vince addressed the issue of a Universal Basic Income. He is sceptical although he can see the attractions. This is something I really want to believe in as so many people that I normally agree with are big fans of the idea. My worry is that it might entrench other forms of inequality as it doesn’t take into account needs of sick and disabled people and couldn’t be set at a high enough level to properly get everyone out of poverty. If someone can show me how that can be done, then I’d be really open to it.

Anyway, here is Vince’s speech in full:

Tagged , and | 11 Comments

Catherine Bearder MEP writes…Government misses opportunities on wildlife

Last week I attend the Illegal Wildlife Trade Conference (IWT) in London. The optics were every bit as impressive as you would imagine for such an occasion. In attendance, there was a star-studded line-up of celebrities such as Ben Fogle and Nicky Campbell, UK cabinet ministers Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove, African presidents and even the Duke of Cambridge himself. It felt like the grand opening for the international fight back against wildlife crime and was a great marker for real action on this criminal activity.

The flagship policy launched at the conference was the ‘Ivory Alliance 2024’, which will link the UK with international partners to introduce domestic ivory bans globally by the end of 2020.  Again, the list of partners is really quite impressive: The Prime Minister of New Zealand, MPs from Hong Kong and the Philippines, and a Tourism Minister from Uganda. The UK is absolutely right to work with a range of different international actors, but there was something lacking, something so obvious: the European Union. 

Where was the French Government who just introduced one of the toughest ivory bans on the planet? Where was Europol who have been providing cutting-edge police intelligence to help national police forces catch wildlife traffickers? Where was the European Commission to explain how Member States are progressing with the 2015 EU Action Plan against Wildlife Trafficking?  This plan not only addresses the crimes in Europe, but also works with countries across the world to take real action in the fight to protect biodiversity. This deliberate sidelining of the EU’s work on wildlife trafficking is very counterproductive. Surely, if we are to win this fight, we need to work collaboratively with partners, a point that was made in numerous sessions at the conference.  

1 Comment

Parliament must restore national unity

700,000+ marched Saturday in London to ask for a second vote concerning Brexit. They marched for many more who could not come. How many is a guess but probably several million. The nation is hence divided and it is the duty of the government, if not most likely Her Majesty’s wish, for the UK to recover national unity. Every learned politician knows of its importance and what history shows to happen sooner or later when there is a lack of it.

Independently of its prospects, positive or negative, a consensus for Brexit is required before proceeding, as the project now shows itself offering dangers greater than the economic arguments at its origin. A programme not only putting civic peace at risk but now even threatening the very unity of the Kingdom.

The problem is that Mrs May’s cabinet is more interested in implementing a divisive Brexit than preserving national unity. It hence falls logically to Parliament to walk in and seek it.

Parliament is sovereign and could declare that it is in the supreme interest of national sovereignty and unity that Brexit be abandoned. With the position of First Minister Nicola Sturgeon to consider Scottish independence if the UK would leave the European Union or the statement of some Irish politicians that Ireland would unite under the same circumstances, I have asked myself if Brexit could now be anticonstitutional as threatening territorial integrity and hence national security.

Tagged , and | 21 Comments

Layla Moran MP writes…From Belfast with love

I’m not an expert on Northern Irish politics. In fact, until a few weeks ago I’d never been to the province.

But when I was asked a few months ago if I would sponsor a cross-party Bill in Westminster that would introduce the right for same-sex couples in Northern Ireland to get married it was a no-brainer.

As debates rage over Brexit, the border and the backstop we hear that the Government’s confidence and supply the partners, the DUP, don’t want Northern Ireland to be treated differently to the rest of the UK.

But when it comes to LGBT+ rights Northern Ireland is years behind England, Scotland, Wales and, now, the Republic of Ireland too.

Of course, people originally from Northern Ireland who now live in my Oxford West and Abingdon constituency and across Great Britain can marry the person they love here – but if that person is someone of the same sex then when they step off the plane in Belfast their marriage isn’t recognised.

When I visited Belfast recently, I met with Amnesty International NI, representatives from the LGBT branch of the cross-community Alliance Party and with campaigners from Here NI and The Rainbow Project. We discussed the campaign for love equality for people in Northern Ireland and what MPs in Westminster could and should be doing.

For me, the biggest take-away from these meetings was the intense feeling of frustration. As they see friends and family members in the Republic of Ireland and across the water getting married and being treated as equals, progress in Northern Ireland is non-existent.

Tagged , and | 10 Comments

Woolly Hat Lib Dem or Not

I am what you might call an armchair Lib Dem. Rather like most football fans in this country. So far, I have not attended a local match let alone a national one. Although this year I did put the Brighton Conference in my diary, house selling, family and friends, the Boat Show and my other writing took precedence.

On a positive note, my left hand has signed many cheques, and my right hand has pressed the carriage return key on many Lib Dem pages and surveys. It also sent an email to my local Chair apologising for not being able to attend the one local meeting I had planned, due to a bad cold.

However, am I not the mass of people the recent consultancy paper is aimed at!

So why have I not managed to get out of my armchair?

Well, it’s for two key reasons. I have been busy sailing my boat to the Mediterranean and writing books and blogs, so I have not been around at the right time. However, I think my motivation has not been 100%, and I am still not sure the Lib Dems reflect my beliefs.

My schoolmate of 60 plus years says I have grown into a woolly hat liberal.

Also posted in News | 10 Comments

2019: The ALDC Year of MORE

There are over 8,000 wards to fight in the 2019 local elections and we have the potential to make a lot of gains.

To help us make Thursday 2 May 2019 a resounding success we have set up a campaign – 2019: The ALDC year of MORE. We have four aims:

  1. More campaigners
  2. More candidates
  3. More councillors
  4. More councils

To wake up on Friday 3 May to a great set of results, as a Party, we need to be actively campaigning now.

We have a section on our website where we’ve been listing things that campaigners should be doing throughout the autumn. These …

Also posted in Campaign Corner, Council by-elections and News | Tagged | 1 Comment

Theresa May – Austerity is Over

Austerity wasn’t because of economic necessity but a political choice. The economic argument was that if you save your money/reduce your spend, you can clear your debt otherwise we were told we would end up like Greece. This view was accepted by Osborne resulting in this long period of austerity. It should be noted that in 2012 a report by IMF said that austerity had been a mistake. A better approach would have been to reflate the economy which would have left it in a better place to pay off the deficit. The report also said that the UK couldn’t end up like Greece because the debt was in its currency. The UK could raise loans through UK bonds (the problem with Greece is that they are in the Eurozone and share their currency with a number of countries, but there isn’t a euro bond. Each of the Eurozone countries still uses their own market to raise loans from bonds. External institutions who want to buy eurozone currency bonds are attracted to countries like Germany (although the interest rates are very low) while Greece has to significantly increase their interest rates to attract investors to buy their bonds, although it’s for the same currency.  The consequence of this is that Greece has youth unemployment near 50 per cent and Germany has youth unemployment close to 3 per cent because the bonds have to be serviced and interest paid on them).

This has been the most prolonged period of austerity post-war. The UK’s deficit peaked at 10% of GDP and Osborne in 2010 unveiled cuts of  £110 billions of fiscal cuts – public service cuts and tax increases (VAT). It wasn’t wholly a success as growth stagnated and unemployment rose. The Bank of England couldn’t reduce interest rates any further to stimulate the economy. Austerity measures did what austerity does, it contracted the economy, and this was the choice accepted by Osborne.

Also posted in News | Tagged | 54 Comments

Women and Equalities Committee report on sexual harassment of women and girls

Three cheers for the Women and Equalities Committee report on sexual harassment of women and girls. Action must follow at least along the lines suggested by them.

In the 21st century, it cannot be right that as a society we fail to act to control behaviours that are unacceptable because of the fear, anxiety and restriction they place on others. Yobbish, bullying and intimidator behaviour, whether in the House of Commons or in the street should not be tolerated.

The report proposes a range of measures that the Committee believes will begin to address the problem, with seven key recommendations:

  • Force train and bus operators to take tougher action against sexual harassment and block the viewing of pornography on public transport;
  • Ban all non-consensual sharing of intimate images;
  • Publish a new “Violence Against Women and Girls” strategy;
  • Create a public campaign to change attitudes;
  • Take an evidence-based approach to address the harms of pornography, along the lines of road safety or anti-smoking campaigns;
  • Tougher laws to ensure pub landlords act on sexual harassment – and make local authorities consult women’s groups before licensing strip clubs;
  • Make it a legal obligation for universities to have policies outlawing sexual harassment;

It says something about our society that this type of action is seen to be necessary. The question is, does it go far enough?

Also posted in News | 3 Comments

London Brexit March Voice of the People – Heard

Brexit March in LondonI remember before the Sunderland result on the night of 23rd June 2016 (Brexit referendum) Nigel Farage was being interviewed, and he thought Leavers had lost. During the interview, he stated that because the results were so close and even though his side had lost he would continue to call for another referendum to leave the EU.  Ever since our entry into the EU in 1973 there have been increasing calls from Tories (in the main) to leave the EU regardless of election manifesto’s and commitments from party leaders to stay in the EU. What gets me is the mantra of the Leavers who repeatedly say that they won the referendum, the people have spoken, and now we have no right to dispute the will of the people. They forget their hypnotical stand, when they stood against the will of the people, on the issue over the decades.

On Saturday the will of the people was on display (see photo above right). Leavers had a march, on Saturday, where at best about a 1000 people attended, on the same day Remainers had a demonstration in London where about 700,000 people participated from all parties and people from all walks of life.

So, what are the facts at the moment and why did so many people come out on a march. The simple answer is that Brexit negotiations are a shamble. After the failure of Theresa May to put a deal together for the EU to vote on by 24th October she hinted at an increase to the transition period; whether it’s 18 months or a year. However, before that, we need to get a withdrawal agreement. We need to get a technical separation of the UK from the EU which involves:

Also posted in News | Tagged and | 13 Comments

Sal Brinton writes…The next steps on the supporters’ scheme

Following the all member survey and consultation on setting up a registered supporter scheme the Federal Board met on 15 and 22 October. At the first meeting we saw the results of the survey, and at the second the rapporteur notes of the various consultation events around the country. We discussed these results and your comments and queries and considered the next steps.

The Board asked me to thank all those who responded to the online survey, and who came to ask questions and raise comments at the various events, including the two webinars. Many of the issues you have raised are similar to those that have been raised by members of the Board themselves. It’s never possible in the first consultation documents to cover all those issues, but the Board are clear as part of our next steps we will publish a document that responds to them – more details below.

Firstly, the overall headlines of the survey responses. Over 10,000 of you replied: this includes those who answered the Federal People Development Committee (FPDC) survey that went out in mid-August, before Vince Cable’s speech and his subsequent survey. Over 75% of all those who responded said that you supported the creation of a registered supporter group. Within that, more than half said that you supported the proposals that a registered supporter should have a vote in the election of a Leader of the party, and also for the broadening of the pool of those who can stand for Leader beyond the MPs.

There was overwhelming support for registered supporters campaigning and being asked what their priorities are for the party in policy terms, and finally, there was substantial support for the removal of the current rule that you have to be a member for twelve months before you can be selected as a candidate for election to Parliament in Westminster. The concerns were mainly around ensuring that there are clear benefits for members that supporters would not have (ie members being able to nominate candidates for Leader, and voting for policy motions at Conference).

In Vince’s proposals he had urged us to move forward swiftly, now that we had some momentum amongst those who are already supporters or who vote for us, which would include taking the elements of the proposals to a Conference so that members can debate and vote on it. Your Board discussed and decided that we should:-

Tagged , and | 32 Comments

95% done is not enough if you’re missing the stuff that keeps you alive

The party has put up this uplifting video of Saturday’s march. For those of us who were there it’s great to remember that time when you were in the same place as 700,000 like-minded people. For those who weren’t, and who either have always felt nervous or are starting to feel nervous about Brexit, it’s encouraging to see so many people out there winning the argument.

Since the march, we’ve seen Dominic Raab go on Marr and effectively say that the extremist wing of his party are more important than peace in Northern Ireland. I mean, how on earth can any minister abdicate his responsibility to the country quite so brazenly?

Then yesterday, Theresa May said we were 95% there as far as a deal was concerned. Well, your brain is only 3% or so of your bodyweight, your heart is less than half a percent and your eyes don’t weigh very much at all – but if you are missing all three, you’re pretty stuffed. What we do know about this deal so far is that it sells out our service based economy, it will kick a lot of stuff into the long grass, so we are effectively flying blind, and there is no agreement on the Northern Irish border which is pretty fundamental to the future of the UK.

Tagged , and | 7 Comments

The Importance of Liberal Values in Defeating Brexit

On 20th October, there was the “People’s Vote” march in London. Whilst I support the march, it’s important to remember that 700,000 people showing up on Parliament Square and then going back to their keyboards just isn’t going to shift the political landscape or change anyone’s mind. The overwhelming majority of people who took part in the march will have voted or supported Remain in the referendum in 2016, including a huge number of young people and EU citizens who were denied a vote at the time.

Don’t get me wrong – if you went on the march, you have exercised …

Tagged | 30 Comments

No Vince, I don’t want a “Gina Miller-type figure” parachuted in to be our leader (and it’s not worth a special conference)

Norbreck Castle hotel (northern section), Blackpool - DSC06518
The Norbreck Castle Hotel, Blackpool. It was here in 1988 that a special Liberal party conference was held to decide to merge the party with the SDP*

One of the frustrating things about the debate over Vince’s two constitutional proposals** is that I am yet to hear Vince come out and actually outline why they are needed. This is maddening. It is especially maddening because I greatly respect Vince and normally he is very good at articulating ideas and proposals.

Instead, we have vague “smoke and mirrors” mutterings about somebody out there circling the political scene with a vast shedload of money which they want to chuck at a “centre movement”. We have got to pull up our socks and be part of this “movement”. And we only have two months to do it, because otherwise we’ll miss the boat and the shedload of cash will go to someone else. We’ve got to be like Justin Trudeau and the Canadian Liberals. We need to allow someone like Gina Miller to come in and lead the party so that people see us as a new centrist movement.

Well, this is all vague nonsense. Vince, or someone, should come out and be specific about all this. Who is this person (or people) with the money? What do they want? Name the people who could be our leader outside of the House of Commons – not just now – name anyone in the last fifty years outside the Commons who could have had a shot at being our leader.

Tagged and | 37 Comments

An open letter to the Lib Dem Federal Board ahead of tomorrow night’s meeting

Dear Board Members,

In a very friendly way I am writing to suggest that you should not at this stage agree to have a special Party Conference in early January to discuss amendments to the Party Constitution.

I am saying this not only after many discussions with Lib Dems in the North West and my own City of Liverpool but also in places as far apart as Taunton and Cambridge and with fellow Leaders from Local Government.

I have some key questions for you before you make the decision. I am expecting the answers to these questions to be publicised:

Firstly, do you not think that this will interfere in our work for the biggest round of local elections in England? The idea that early January is handy because it is before we start is risible. We started our campaign for next May, last May. We have been out every weekend and a lot during the week since August. This will take activists out of the front line at just the time we need them to be fighting for us and pushing our way into more power and more influence via more votes.

Secondly, do you not think that it sends all the wrong messages. Some people may think that the UK is going to hell in a hand cart and all we can do is talk about ourselves at this crucial time. That is how it will be portrayed.

Thirdly, do you really think that there is a great thirst in the Party for all the changes? 

I personally believe that there is much support for a Supporters organisation. It builds well on what we do locally. I’d love to involve more people in our policy discussions both locally and nationally; I’d love to have a larger pool of people advocating on our behalf; I think it great to have people giving us information about local and national issues. There are some things that need sorting out but these are details. The Federal Board can make these decisions and we can get on with them. In fact, we already are!

Tagged , and | 46 Comments

Compulsory Voter ID – sensible security measure or deliberate disenfranchisement?

Did you know that the Government has a manifesto commitment to bring in compulsory ID for Parliamentary elections?  They plan to require us to show some sort of ID before we are issued with our ballot paper in a polling station. 

The idea was piloted in five Boroughs in the recent council elections, and the Government is now looking for pilot sites for next May’s elections. The Cabinet Office and the Electoral Commission have both published evaluations of the pilots. There is also an excellent report from the Electoral Reform Society setting the issue of voter ID in the context of other priorities for electoral reform.

I took part in a project, funded by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust Ltd, to find out how voters experienced these pilots.  We contacted Lib Dem and Labour campaigners in the five Boroughs and asked them to survey their residents and to give us their own views. We received responses from 21 campaigners and 329 residents from four of the five Boroughs (Woking, Bromley, Watford & Swindon). We also held a fringe meeting at Federal Conference, where Peter Taylor, the Liberal Democrat Mayor of Watford, spoke about the Watford experience.  

The Five Pilots

The five Boroughs piloted different approaches: Woking, Bromley and Gosport tested various forms of photo ID requirement, although in Bromley and Gosport two forms of non-photo ID were also allowed; Swindon and Watford piloted a requirement to bring a poll card which was electronically scanned, with Watford also allowing other ID in the absence of a polling card.

Voters Turned Away

The Electoral Commission evaluation states that, according to the Returning Officers, 1,036 people attempted to vote without the correct ID, and that between 326 and 350 did not return later in the day, an average of 0.23% of all polling station voters.  The “did not return” rate varied between councils, with 57% of those initially turned away not returning in Woking (where the ID requirements were strictest) and about 27% not returning in Bromley and Watford. 

Campaigners in our survey gave some examples: 

“A gentleman  with a Surrey Senior Bus Pass was refused a vote because his Bus Pass had two names and apparently his name on the Electoral Register contained an additional name”. (Campaigner from Woking)

“I heard of …one person turned away despite having a digital copy of a bank statement, he was told to go home and print the statement out.” (Campaigner from Bromley) 

Voters put off due to the need for ID

Tagged and | 31 Comments

New Labour ‘Brexit Fudge’ unveiled

To mark Jeremy Corbyn’s wishy-washy policy on Brexit, a new Labour ‘Brexit Fudge’ has been launched.

The Labour ‘Brexit Fudge’, which will be handed to activists at the ‘People’s Vote’ march in London today, is expected to be a bittersweet reminder of Jeremy Corbyn’s party fudging their position on giving the people a final say on Brexit.

Labour ‘Brexit Fudge’ has been described as a soft, dense sweet, handmade by the Labour leadership. The product will be on a limited release, exclusively for voters between now and March 29th 2019.

Tom Brake said:

Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour leadership have defied us all with their ‘Brexit fudge’. Inspired by Willy Wonka himself, the Labour’s opposition to Brexit is just ‘pure imagination’.

This ‘Brexit fudge’ will stick in the throat of most Labour voters. Given the damage Brexit will cause, Labour’s failure to oppose this Tory mess will be difficult to stomach.

But for Brexiters, Chef Corbyn’s ‘Brexit fudge’ will have them salivating. It will make their Brexit dreams that much sweeter. Indeed, it will go well with a glass of Raab’s confusing concoction and the Eton mess being served up by Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg.

While we know Corbyn likes a fudge, the number of Labour supporters marching for a People’s Vote should give him something else to chew on.

Liberal Democrats demand better. Only the Liberal Democrats are united in fighting Brexit and giving the people the final say, including the option to remain in the EU.

We’re told that the ingredients for 1kg of ‘Brexit Fudge’ include:

Tagged , and | 24 Comments

Dutch Liberal Leader tells Britain: We want you back for good

The new leader of the Dutch social liberal party D66 channelled Take That in a speech in Westminster about Brexit this week. Rob Jetten, who at 31 is the second youngest political leader in Dutch history, met MPs and peers – and impressed them too.

The speech is worth reading in full because this guy not only has some good political instincts, but he’s really funny and knows how to use sarcasm. He jokes about Theresa May’s dance moves, his habit of repeating things in speeches, his and Vince’s relative age and all sorts. But his summing up of the “epic tragedy” of Brexit is incredibly well observed communicated.

The word Brexit evokes an image of a Britain that has to endure confinement in some kind of enclosure. An enclosure from which it can escape by simply moving through an opening marked ‘exit’. It can get up and go. A simple, single act of will. You just have to say yes or no. Piece of cake. In or out. All you have to do is tick the box.

The attraction of the image the word Brexit evokes is obvious. Standing up and going for the “exit” has the flavour of decisiveness, independence, change and action. Much more attractive than being passive. Sitting on your hands. Keeping things as they are, afraid of what is outside the door. And then, of course, there is the unfortunate rubbery capacity of the word for it to be shaped into all kinds of attractive sounding derivations. Such as “brexiteer”.

Who would want to be something as stuffy and boring sounding as a “remainer” when you can be something as new-fangled and exciting as a “brexiteer”, dashing fearlessly through the exit to the great outdoors.

He explains why the process of Brexit is so bloody difficult:

There is no simple “exit” that can be taken. There is no simple separation. There is only tearing. Cutting. Destruction. Every single element, every tiny strand is connected. The mightiest riddles, such as the customs union and the Irish border, dominate the political conversation. But the truth is that it’s nitty-gritty tiny strands of fabric all the way down.

During its 45 years in the EU, Britain has imported many tens of thousands of European laws and regulations. Many thousands more have direct effect. EU law has had absolute supremacy over British law ever since British accession. A little understood legal reality. The fabric of Europe’s legal framework is the fabric of the UK’s political life.

And he reckons we can get out of this mess:

My visit here today, I’m ready to admit, is fuelled by what some might characterize as blind optimism. A blind optimism that says Britain can still escape this mess. Naturally I have no real hope of making a dent in the national discussion today. But I believe Barack Obama—one famous foreigner who unsuccessfully intervened in the Brexit debate—when he says that optimism is never blind if it is rooted in tradition.

And you do know a thing or two about tradition. You do have a tradition of escaping at the last minute. It is no coincidence Harry Houdini spent his best years in Britain. It is equally less surprising that the great escape artist Sherlock Holmes is a British literary figure.

Nor is it at all strange that the most memorable of JK Rowling’s writing involves Harry Potter escaping disaster. What is necessary for this great country to make its greatest escape? I’m no expert, which is good, because I’ve heard you’ve had quite enough of them. But I would hazard to guess that it would take a last minute miracle. And I’m here to say that we will welcome miracles as befits miracles: with biblical comprehension.

The full text of his speech is below:

Tagged , and | 10 Comments

Observations of an ex pat: Saudi quicksand

The extremely likely interrogation, torture and murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi  inside the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul is set to have far-reaching consequences.

The position of Iran, the civil war in Yemen, the Arab-Israeli conflict, reform in Saudi Arabia, the tenure of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the economic development of Saudi Arabia, US foreign policy and the credibility of President Trump will all be affected.

I should add the caveat that as of this broadcast/writing there is no body and the Saudis continue to deny, deny, deny. But so far they have failed to explain why Mr Khashoggi went into the consulate to keep a 1.15pm appointment on 2nd October and has never been seen since. Neither have they offered an explanation as to why he was preceded and followed by Saudi agents, some of whom carried what are believed to be bone cutting tools. Finally, the Saudi officials have failed to explain an audio recording which strongly indicates the interrogation and torture of Mr Khashoggi.

The onus is on the autocratic ruler of Saudi Arabia— Mohammed bin Salman (aka MBS) to either produce a live Jamal Khashoggi or a credible explanation for his disappearance. So far he has only shrugged his shoulders, arched his eyebrows and replied: “I dunno.  Nothing to do with me.”

Tagged | 11 Comments

How to join the Lib Dems at the People’s Vote march on Saturday

I will be up long before the crack of bloody dawn on Saturday to begin the long journey to London to take part in the People’s Vote march. Although make no mistake, our intention is not just to secure a vote but to stop this Brexit nonsense.

Lib Dems will be meeting at the Wellington Arch at Hyde Park at 12 noon.

This country’s membership of the European Union has brought this country so much social and economic benefit. Our sex discrimination laws, maternity leave, workers’ rights, environmental and health and safety protections started there. And we didn’t have them imposed on us – we were one of the most important voices at the table shaping them.

Being part of something larger than ourselves, something that has kept the peace on this continent for almost three quarters of a century, which has championed human rights and democracy, is such a good and healthy thing.

I don’t generally feel comfortable around national flags. I’d never wave a saltire or union jack. They symbolise selfishness and insularity and isolation to me. However, I feel completely comfortable wrapping myself from head to foot in the European Union flag because it is a symbol of togetherness and common purpose and co-operation. 

Tagged , , and | 22 Comments

Peterloo: The Manchester Massacre

On 2nd November Mike Leigh’s “Peterloo” goes on general release following its premiere today in Manchester – a first outside London. Maxine Peake, a Corbyn fan, describes it as an ensemble piece. There are no leads amongst more than 100 actors.

Liberals, especially those in the north familiar with Labour’s authoritarian underbelly, should claim the Manchester Massacre of 1819 as part of our heritage, part of the slow march to universal suffrage. I spoke about it as I wound up a Lib Dem debate on Yorkshire Devolution in Bradford Council Chamber this week I said:

This year 2018 we have marked the centenary of votes for women.

Events from 200 and 100 years ago remind us that the extension of democracy , was achieved through persistent campaigning and a long, long struggle. It did not come through spontaneous generosity on the part of governments. People demanded it and kept on demanding, and some even died for the cause.

On the Lib Dem benches we do not see devolution as simply about moving money around, whether it be through combined authority, city region or, God help us, an elected regional mayor. Power to the people, power to Yorkshire, is about the extension and enhancement of our democracy. We should demand it, we should campaign for it and we see little virtue in a celebrity based substitute for the full monty of regional devolution.

On 16th August 1819 people converged on Manchester’s St Peter’s Field from various parts of Lancashire and the West Riding of Yorkshire. The military commander for “the Northern District,” who should have been in charge of crowd control, decided that he had a pressing engagement at York Races.

People practised marching in step as a way of maintaining discipline but this was reported by Government spies to the Home Secretary as a threat to public order. On the road to Manchester many Methodist favourite hymns were sung as well as campaign songs set to hymn tunes. Many were unfamiliar with public demonstrations and as ever the avoidance of violence was crucial to getting the message across.

Tagged , , and | 6 Comments

Senior Lib Dems call on media to apologise to transgender people over hostile coverage

Senior Liberal Democrats are among the signatories to an open letter in support of transgender people and transgender rights. “Free speech does not give free reign to cause people harm,” the letter says, highlighting that the onslaught faced by trans people is not consequence free.

The letter was organised by Chippenham Lib Dem candidate Helen Belcher and the Lib Dems who have signed include Deputy Leader Jo Swinson, President Sal Brinton, Layla Moran, Lorely Burt, Brian Paddick, Liz Barker and Alex Carlile. I may have had my differences with Lord Carlile over the years, but we should remember that he …

Also posted in News | 2 Comments

Not thin enough for treatment – Wera Hobhouse highlights stigma around eating disorders

In a parliamentary debate on Tuesday, Wera Hobhouse outlined how sufferers of eating disorders are being failed by health and support services. Lack of training can mean that doctors make things worse. She told the story of a young woman in her constituency who suffered for three years and never received the help that she needed.

Her aim was to look at the stigma around eating disorders and suggest solutions – one of which was the Lib Dem policy of giving young people access to child and adolescent mental health services until the age of 25. Here’s her speech in full:

We probably all know at least one sufferer or ex-sufferer of an eating disorder. As one put it to me, eating disorders are the easiest thing to get into and the hardest to get out of. We have come a long way in recent years, but we are nowhere near to providing lasting, successful treatments for hundreds of thousands of people. Many people are suffering alone and in silence, without a support network. We are failing as a society to support people in their deeply personal battles.

This debate is about stigma. There are two stigmas around eating disorders—that from outside and that which sufferers feel themselves. The result is that people often wait a long time before asking for help.

It takes an average of 58 weeks from someone realising that they have a problem to them seeking help from a GP. That is more than a year of self-doubt, self-loathing and self-harm. On average, it is a further 27 weeks until the start of treatment. Add to that the time that the person has suffered with a disorder before admitting that there is a problem and we start to see the real picture.

Anybody who has had a close family member in such a situation will understand the hon. Gentleman’s point, but families are often pretty helpless too, if they do not really understand what can be done and how they can help their family member to get out of the problem. It is a form of addiction, and like with any other addiction, family members are co-sufferers. They want to help but do not really understand the deep-seated problems. Family members are important, but we need the professionals and their understanding to help families get through together. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that families are incredibly important.

Eating disorders define large periods of people’s lives. How can we shorten that time? We need people to be okay with saying, “I’m not okay.” We need to tackle the stigma around eating disorders, and the message needs to get through to a lot of people. More than 1 million people in the UK have an eating disorder; three quarters are women and one quarter are men. That is a very large number, plus there are the friends and family who suffer with them. So many people with conditions such as anorexia and bulimia blame themselves. It is not their fault and we need to make sure that they know that.

When I announced on Twitter that I was holding this debate, I received a wave of emotional responses and personal stories. Yesterday, a local doctor dropped into my office a book that she had written, which described her fight with eating disorders since the age of 13. That shows how early it can start.​

I also got an email from a young woman called Lorna, who experienced serious anorexia while studying in my constituency in Bath. This is what she told me:

“I ended up with an initial diagnosis of anxiety and depression, and was started on antidepressants. I suspended my studies and worked as a carer in my local village, living at home with my mum and brother. People I’d known all my life began commenting on the weight I’d lost, and telling me how good I looked. This is when my anorexia began to take full hold.

I stopped eating completely, lying to my mum and saying I’d eaten at work, began over-exercising compulsively, and remember pacing the corridors at work to burn extra calories. I became obsessed. I weighed myself up to 12 times a day.

My mum was terrified, and didn’t know what to do. Eventually she came with me to my GP and I told him everything. I told him I was petrified of putting on weight, exercising excessively and skipping nearly every meal. His response was ‘Oh, that’ll be your antidepressants.’ He took me off a high dose, there and then. Cold turkey.

Each time…I told him how out of control I felt with my eating. He’d force me onto the scales, shaking and crying, and then tell me my BMI was ‘healthy’ and I didn’t meet the diagnostic criteria. I was devastated. I had opened up and was denied help. I never got diagnosed with anorexia, despite going from a size 16 to a size 8 in less than a year.

I went through the monthly humiliation of being dragged onto scales and told I wasn’t thin enough to be helped yet. And not having that formal diagnosis is hard. When I tell people I was anorexic, they never quite believe me, as even doctors didn’t. I think they always assume I was being dramatic, or ‘it wasn’t that bad then’. Today, I am weight-restored, although struggle with now being overweight.

It took me 3 years to recover. 3 years of misery and obsession. I was dangerously unwell, but not sick enough to get an ounce of support.”

When I read that story, I am amazed by how brave Lorna is. She was brave to ask for treatment and even braver to put her trust into the medical system a second time, even after she did not receive the treatment that she really needed. She was very brave to tell her story. Lorna has gone on to campaign for proper treatment for eating disorders. She is here in the Chamber, and I want to thank her personally for letting me share her story—Lorna, thank you. I am so sorry that you had to go through such an awful experience. I know your words will help others, and I desperately hope that together we can improve the treatment and care of those with eating disorders and end the stigma for good.

Tagged , and | 2 Comments

Backstop to the Backstop

Monday afternoon Theresa May in parliament looked like a rabbit caught in headlights because it became clear she had no answers. There was plenty of blusters, but it was also clear that she was very unsure of herself. Taking stock on some of the comments made reveals the misdirection by Tory politicians. Do you remember Liam Fox claiming that a free trade deal with the EU would be “the easiest in human history?” Alternatively, David Davis who envisaged that we would by now have signed dozens of free trade deals with many countries, in fact, they were queuing up to sign trade deals with us. The Tories have employed the tactics of smoke and mirrors while concealing how hapless they have been.

I remember May’s speech outside No. 10 after she lost the last election, I thought the tone of her speech rather than being conciliatory was aggressive and quite inappropriate for someone who had just lost the general election. I went back to look at it again, and I note this extract:

“If we don’t get the negotiation right, your economic security and prosperity will be put at risk, and the opportunities you seek for your families will simply not happen. If we do not stand up and get this negotiation right we risk the secure and well-paid jobs we want for our children and our children’s children too.”

Also posted in News | Tagged | 32 Comments

Party Leadership change at D66: Veteran Pechtold hands over to young talent Jetten

The coalition government has always been difficult for Dutch social liberals; but that never discouraged us from taking responsibility in the national interest. Both the VDB of the years 1901-1946 and my party D66 (founded 1966) have suffered electoral losses because they participated in coalition governments (and Dutch politics always have those), limiting their ability to build profiles on all possible subjects.

Another similarity is that the VDB was the first in the 1930’s to attack principle the pro-Nazi party NSB, and under the party leadership of Alexander Pechtold (2006-2018; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Pechtold ) we were and are the first, and the most insistent and principal attacker of both islamophobe Geert Wilders and Jared Taylor-racism adept Thierry Baudet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thierry_Baudet ).

In 2003-’06 we suffered in a coalition with VVD and CDA (they used opposition Populist MP’s to press rightist measures) resulting in significant losses (locally and nationally) in 2006. Former cabinet minister Pechtold became party leader and re-energised and professionalised our party organisation. He attacked Wilders and tried to get necessary but unpopular measures (raising the state pension age; environmentalism; Europeanism) through parliament. These activities resulted in a spectacular resurrection of D66 (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrats_66 ) from then on.

Also posted in News | Tagged | 2 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Kevin Hawkins
    Here is my usual monthly summary of the last fifty local by-elections. It does not include the by-election on the 5th November as I like to give summarise at m...
  • Peter Davies
    @cim You are massively over-generalising about young people. The proportion that believe we were wrong to declare war against Germany in 1939 is tiny. So is the...
  • Peter Wrigley
    If the history o Palestinian involvement in the politics of Israel has been covered in the "mainstream media" I have missed it so an very grateful for Mr Arnold...
  • Tom Arms
    Every week I rack my remaining brain cell for a new angle/story or idea which has not been fully explored/explained/reported in what is euphemistically called t...
  • cim
    @Peter Davies No, you don't get involved in the anti-capitalist movement because you're a centrist pro-capitalist party that wants it to continue (with perhaps...