Category Archives: Op-eds

Mark Valladares

So, what does being an English Liberal mean?

By Mark Valladares | Mon 23rd April 2018 - 8:43 am

One of the things about being an Englishman by birth, but not by parentage, is that your perspective of what it means to be English can be slightly different from that of those whose English heritage can be traced back through generations.

For me, at least, with an Indian father and a Scots mother, there is a desire to fit in to some extent, and that manifests itself in a generalised belief that people are broadly reasonable, given the opportunity to be so, and that the eccentricities of life here – queuing, cricket, …

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 22 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Scottish Liberal Democrats back abortion clinic exclusion zones and decriminalisation

By Caron Lindsay | Sun 22nd April 2018 - 1:55 pm

When I first saw that a motion on decriminalising abortion had been put on the agenda for Scottish Conference, I was delighted, but unsure that it would pass. We’ve tended to shy away from what many people feel are issues of conscience, although the Scottish Party has form for leading the way on equal marriage before the 2010 election. The issue of abortion is an emotive one, though and was bound to provoke more controversy.

The motion was written and presented by Jess Insall, the 15 year old activist who persuaded us to adopt policy calling for gender neutral school uniforms 

Jess’s motion called for the Scottish Government to do five things

  • remove all criminal sanctions for receiving an abortion.
  • remove all criminal sanctions for appropriately registered and regulated medical professionals providing a safe abortion.
  • provide funding so that users of reproductive healthcare services are provided with enough specialist advice to make fully informed decisions.
  • enforce safe zones around abortion service providers so that those visiting can travel to them free of any harassment or pressure on their decision, and to make intimidation or harassment of abortion service users outside clinics, or on common transport routes to these services, illegal.
  • provide funding to enable abortion clinics to provide their services free of charge to service users regardless of country of nationality or residency.

It’s worth reading her entire proposing speech which was sensitive, authoritative and persuasive:

Conference, our world is changing. The 21st century has brought great new ideas, innovations, and inspirations. But now, more than ever, we know of the threats that new technology can create. The anonymous trolls of Twitter and Facebook spout misogyny, racism, and transphobia from every orifice. The corrupt practices of Cambridge Analytica are a real threat to our democracy, and the online purchase of illegal abortion pills is on a very worrying rise.

In 2013, just 5 doses of illegal abortifacients were seized being delivered to UK addresses, but this sharply increased to 180 doses in 2014. The rise continued, with 270 doses seized in 2015, and in 2016, the government seized 375 doses of unregulated, unreliable, illegal abortion medication. Despite the fact that self-induced abortion is punishable by life imprisonment, many women are driven to take this dangerous decision because current abortion legislation is outdated and ineffective. These women are not criminals worthy of life sentences, they are vulnerable individuals who have been let down by the system. This is only one of the many reasons we need to make abortion fair, legal, and free from judgement. We need to establish a real freedom of choice.

Leaving abortion in the criminal justice system is not fair. Unnecessary appointments are needed just to jump through legal hoops such as the requirement that two doctors authorise an abortion. These are mere inconveniences for women on higher incomes who have the time, money, and resources to attend them, and for women who have supportive partners or families. But for women on low incomes who can’t afford to miss work, can’t afford care costs for existing children or ill relatives, and can’t afford travel to and from clinics, it can realistically seem easier to seek dangerous illegal alternatives. This is also true for women trying to hide an abortion from unsupportive family, or victims of domestic violence who may well be carrying an unwanted pregnancy as a result of rape.

These vulnerable groups of women are even harder hit by the outrageous postcode lottery that Scottish abortion provision currently is. Although the legal late term limit on abortion is 24 weeks, providers in Scotland will normally only authorise abortion before 18-20 weeks, and some providers won’t authorise abortions as early as 16 weeks. This means approximately 200 Scottish women every single year have to travel to England just to access a legal abortion.

Scotland, that is unacceptable.

Our wonderful NHS is already stretched to breaking point, and the unnecessary criminalisation of abortion is wasting time, money, and resources that could be used to save lives. Doctors are apprehensive to specialise in abortion out of fear of prosecution simply for doing their job. Contrary to some beliefs,decriminalisation does not mean deregulation. Abortions will still be regulated to the exceptionally high standards that other medical procedures are, and we can trust our incredible NHS staff to maintain these standards.

Continue reading »
8 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Don’t be fooled by Labour’s posturing on #peoplesvote

By Caron Lindsay | Sun 22nd April 2018 - 12:46 pm

In the last few days we’ve had some tantalising hints that Labour may be willing to support a public vote on the Brexit deal. John McDonnell said on Friday that Labour weren’t ruling it out. Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry said on Marr that if there were sufficient public demand, Labour might think again.

So should we all breathe a sigh of relief and think that this might happen any time soon?

Not a chance.

For a start, Emily Thornberry’s threshold to determine what might be a suitable level of public demand to get them to change their minds was 80-90%. You don’t get 80-90% of people backing anything. Even the Monarchy at the height of the much loved Queen’s 90th birthday celebrations  was only getting 75% support.

So let’s not hold our breath waiting for the Labour leadership to back a vote on the deal. But why are they doing this? It’s all part of their deliberate tactic of making their policy as ambiguous as possible. This is exactly what the Leave campaign did, too. Nobody understood what Brexit would mean because they tried to make sure that the details were as non-existent as possible.

The reason they’re drip-feeding it all now is because there are some important local elections coming up. A lot of them are in Remain voting metropolitan areas in places like London and Manchester. They must be getting some indication that their stance on Brexit is costing them so they are trying to make it sound like they might just go for the vote on the deal.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 19 Comments
Rachel Palma-Randle

My first year as Director for People

By Rachel Palma-Randle | Sun 22nd April 2018 - 9:23 am

It’s been just over one year since the Snap General Election was called on my first day e as Director for People. It was one heck of a start and it’s been a heck of a year. Out of the window immediately went my careful plan for membership development, training for volunteers, online fundraising and candidates. The roadmap to 2020 was suddenly obsolete. It was terrifying, but fast paced and fun.

This job is not dull. Working for the party is challenging and can be frustrating but ultimately rewarding.

One year in and …

Continue reading »
Tagged , , , , , and | 5 Comments
Paul Walter

Brexit: No cake, but let’s welcome the prospect of a nice big bit of fudge!

By Paul Walter | Sat 21st April 2018 - 1:45 pm

Embed from Getty Images

Along, I’m sure, with many LDV readers, I’ve read hundreds of articles on the subject of Brexit over the last couple of years.

But one piece of writing has finally encapsulated a precise sensible solution to the whole sordid, messy business.

David Shariatmadari is a writer and editor for the Guardian in London. In a post yesterday entitled “On Brexit, the views of the 48% must be respected too. That’s democracy”, he argued that:

Given that the UK is split, it’s only fair if the government delivers ‘Brexit in name only’, as is looking increasingly likely.

After explaining that the Irish impasse will probably lead to the UK “both in a customs union and closely, if not entirely, aligned with the single market”, he concludes:

Continue reading »
50 Comments
Ian Sanderson

Let this be the last first past the post election in London Boroughs

By Ian Sanderson | Fri 20th April 2018 - 12:00 pm

On 3rd May all the Borough Council seats in Greater London are up for election, which happens every four years. The Borough I live in is typical and has 18 3-member wards. Each voter votes by putting up to 3 Xs on the ballot paper. In each of these wards the top three candidates in terms of Xs on the ballot win. Hence F3PTP rather than FPTP (First Past The Post).

So what’s wrong with that? Five national parties are contesting the borough election, plus around four parties with Residents’ Association in their name, who are active in their own patches. Usually, a party sees its whole slate of three elected, but sometimes one candidate impacts more on the electorate, positively or negatively, and the result is a ‘split ward’. But I have seen nine candidates from three parties having each around 30% of the vote, but only one party gets the councillor seats. Natural justice suggests that they should have had one councillor each. With three councillors of one party, we KNOW that they were NOT the first choice of 70% of the electorate; at worst, the three victors could be the LEAST favoured candidates of 70% of the voters.

It gets worse. Some parties are so entrenched in certain seats that the others have given up. A friend of mine expressed it as ’If you put up a feather duster for XXXX party in YYYY ward, it would get elected.’ Two national parties contest all 54 seats, but the presence of the parents, spouses and children of local party worthies on the ballot papers gives a strong hint of what they think. The voters in such wards show what they think by not turning up to vote for the council, which, more than any other body, delivers government services to them.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 29 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an ex pat: The Commonwealth

By Tom Arms | Fri 20th April 2018 - 10:00 am

Ten years ago a Commonwealth-wide poll revealed that support for the political descendant of the British Empire was highest among the developing countries.

Not surprising, they had the most to gain from aid and trade. Support from the developed Commonwealth countries was half of that of the developing world. Britain was at the bottom.

That is changing. Brexiteers have conveniently rediscovered their imperial roots and are now pushing for a revival of the Commonwealth as a replacement for lost European markets. It is, after all, the home for a third of the world’s population and a total GDP of $17 trillion. This may seem like a lot until you compared it to the $60 trillion GDP of the EU.

Nevertheless, the British government gas rolled outLondon’s red carpet for this week’s biennial Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting—usually referred to by the inelegant acronym CHOGM.

But the Brexiteers will find that the former colonies may be reluctant to jump back onto the British wagon.   They have long memories. Many still lodge bitter resentment  at being left in the lurch when Britain was lured away by the siren call of Brussels.

All of the countries have adjusted to a life without Commonwealth trade preferences. Canada has increased its business with the United States. Australia and New Zealand are now focused on China, Japan and other Asian countries. Singapore has become a Far Eastern entrepot. The developing countries in Africa, the Caribbean and Pacific have gained access to EU aid and trade.

As one Commonwealth head of government told me: “When the British want us we are expected to jump. When we want them they are too busy to bother.”

Trade will not be the only issue on the table. Climate change, Syria, plastic pollution, cyber security and the election of a new titular head are all on the agenda.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 11 Comments
Ryan Priest

Airstrikes Alone Will Not Solve the Syrian Crisis

By Ryan Priest | Thu 19th April 2018 - 1:06 pm

Given the last two decades of failed interventions it is easy to understand why the majority of Britain is opposed to the recent intervention in Syria.

As liberals we must do all we can, as internationalists, to maintain peace around the globe. But also as liberals we cannot allow such abhorrent crimes to continue to be committed by the Assad regime. The silence of our inaction would have been deafening; five years of ignoring the conflict has led us to where we are today.

The scars of the Libyan intervention are still in the recent memories of the West, and conflict still plagues the nation, but our failures there cannot deter us from upholding our moral commitment to prevent war crimes and holding those who commit them to account. The Pro-Assad propaganda, backed by Russia and elements of the Labour party, are toxic: they stand in the way of any meaningful resolution in Syria, and more civilians will die if their interpretation of the war enters the mainstream of political thought.

We must look to our past if we are to make sure that we leave Syria a better place than it is now. The airstrikes are a short term solution, but they are only limiting Assad’s ability to launch another chemical attack, a noble cause but not a path to peace.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 17 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Let’s not forget that the Gender Pay Gap reporting requirement is Jo’s Law

By Caron Lindsay | Wed 18th April 2018 - 10:02 pm

There was an urgent question in the House of Commons today about the Gender Pay Gap. Harriet Harman asked the Government what it was doing to close the gender pay gap after companies with more than 250 employees were required to report for the first time.

The minister Victoria Atkins was very supportive of the legislation. If you didn’t know better, you might be inclined to think that the Tories had introduced it:

It is unacceptable that in 2018 there are still differences in how men and women are paid in business and in industries. That is why this Government introduced new regulations, which came into force in 2017, requiring all employers with 250 or more employees to report their gender pay gap. I am delighted that as of yesterday 10,055 employers, covering all sectors of the economy, have reported their gender pay gap. These new regulations have shone a light on the injustice that has existed for too long and created a new conversation on the need for a step change in gender equality.

This is all very well, except the truth of the matter is that in the dying days of the Coalition Government, the Tories had to be dragged kicking and screaming to agree to the Liberal Democrats’ plan. Jo Swinson was the Liberal Democrat Minister who introduced the legislation and she reminded the Commons of that today:

The reason why I fought so hard as a Minister in the coalition Government to win the battle to introduce gender pay gap reporting—despite the Minister’s obvious commitment to this today, my goodness it was a battle with No.10 at the time—is that the visibility and transparency of hard numbers help to pierce the bubble of complacency in boardrooms, in newsrooms and in our living rooms where some people still think that we live in a world of gender equality. What concrete action are the Government taking to help employers understand that the gender pay gap is about unequal pay and so much more? It is about the fact that jobs in care and other roles are undervalued and low paid because they are predominantly done by women. It is about the 54,000 women a year who lose their job because they have a baby. It is about the toxic workplace cultures where the boys’ clubs make the decisions and sexual harassment is endemic. Time is up on pathetic excuses. It is time that organisations got serious about action.

Ms Atkins was forced to admit Jo’s role:

Continue reading »
Tagged and | Leave a comment
Caron Lindsay

Three important aspects of Barbara Bush’s legacy

By Caron Lindsay | Wed 18th April 2018 - 6:55 pm

My fascination with the White House and all its incumbents has been a constant feature but was at its peak in the late 80s and 90s as the long Republican incumbency gave way to the optimism of the Clinton era. I hoovered up every book I could find on the subject.

I always had a huge amount of time for Barbara Bush. She had an authenticity and candour that both got her into and helped extricate herself from trouble at times.

The powerful images of her scooping up and kissing children with HIV were an important part in busting the myths of that time.

I bought her memoirs as soon as they came out in 1994. In it she wrote about her spell of Depression in the mid 70s. She talked of how she learned through that to be more sympathetic and understanding to others. I read that at a time when I was going through a particularly suffocating visit from the Black Dog. People didn’t really talk about that stuff back then and it really helped to read that she had got through such an experience. She also said that although she had hid it at the time, she wouldn’t think twice about seeking professional help if it happened again.

She also understood the importance of education and particularly literacy and made that a lifelong campaign.   She was motivated to make sure that people learned to read and write to give them the chance to get on in life and set up the Barbara Bush Literacy Foundation which is still going strong today.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 1 Comment
Paul Tyler

Paul Tyler writes…Was the Brexit poll compromised?

By Paul Tyler | Wed 18th April 2018 - 8:55 am

That is the question the Conservative Chair of the investigating Commons Select Committee asked last weekend.  Hitherto, his Ministerial colleagues have seemed determined to turn a blind eye to all the recent revelations of possible illegality by Leave campaigners.

Will they be more forthcoming this afternoon ?     My Question to be discussed in the Lords reads as follows:

“Lord Tyler to ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they are satisfied that current electoral law adequately prevents the misuse of personal data in United Kingdom elections and referendum campaigns”

The HOUSE magazine has published some background for this mini debate:

The revelations come thick and fast.   Daily – sometimes it seems like hourly – we learn that our personal data may have been misused in ever more controversial ways.  In particular, ingenious development of Facebook material appears to have played a key role in targeting both positive messages and contrived attacks in the Trump election campaign AND to secure the Brexit result of our own 2016 EU Referendum.

So far Ministers have hidden behind a reassuring report from the Electoral Commission about the conduct of that referendum.  However, that was issued months ago, long before the detailed analysis from Carole Cadwalladr of The Observer began to gain traction, and the whistleblowers from Cambridge Analytica, AIQ and the Leave campaigns emerged to give their evidence.   Since the turn of the year the alleged network of illicit collaboration has caused the Electoral Commission, the Information Commissioner and the House of Commons Culture Media & Sport Select Committee to open new investigations.  The latter, led by Conservative MP Damian Collins, is being especially pro-active, and their witness list in the next few days is itself an indication of the vital role Parliamentary Select Committees can now play.

Despite apparent BBC attempts to minimise the significance of all this increasing weight of evidence (presumably because other media have provided the investigative journalism) there are signs of growing public unease.   Have we as nation been conned, just like so many in the US ?    Has our personal data been “scraped” for this purpose ?   Are our very strict laws, which seek to protect our elections and referendum campaigns from being bought by billionaires and foreign governments, up to the job?

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 11 Comments
Caron Lindsay

The cruelty and insensitivity of the Home Office summed up in a single booklet

By Caron Lindsay | Tue 17th April 2018 - 7:17 pm

I had a bit of a sleepless night last night. The coughing started up again before I could take any more medicine so I had to try and distract myself with Twitter. I assumed that the screenshots of an alleged guide for deported people to help them settle in Jamaica had to be fake. Seriously, what human being could come up with this?

But I followed the link and, sure enough, it did actually lead to a gov.uk website. The advice on mental health was even more crass.

When you return, you may face a number of challenges, such as separation from family, friends, personal possessions and property; problems locating family members and friends; difficulties in finding suitable and safe housing; and general difficulties in adjusting to your new environment. Most people adjust fairly well but some people may experience mental health problems. Signs to watch out for are:  difficulty in sleeping, or sleeping too much  feeling sad  being irritable or short tempered  having no interest in the pleasures of life  loss of appetite  difficulty in concentrating or making decisions  feelings of hopelessness or helplessness  thoughts that life is not worth living  suicidal thoughts. If you experience mental health problems, you should:  develop supportive relationships where you can: contact family members and friends and establish supportive and healthy relationships;

If you are one of the Windrush Generation and have just been deported thousands of miles from your children to a place that you haven’t seen in half a century, the advice to contact family members could not be more hurtful and insensitive. This booklet isn’t new. It’s been around for about as long as Theresa May’s “hostile environment.” I really do feel ashamed of my Government sometimes. As Ed Davey writes on the Ad Lib blog, the Windrush scandal exposes the brutality of the Home Office:

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 34 Comments
Caron Lindsay

WATCH: People’s Vote campaign launch

By Caron Lindsay | Sun 15th April 2018 - 7:01 pm

1200 people gathered in London today for the launch of a new campaign to give the British people a final vote on the Brexit deal. The Cross-Party campaign heard speeches from the actor who played one of my favourite fictional characters – Captain Jean-Luc Picard, Sir Patrick Stewart and from MPs Anna Soubry, Chuka Umunna, Caroline Lucas and our own Layla Moran.

Mock the Week’s Andy Parsons kicked off the proceedings in very funny style. Patrick Stewart was so passionate and emotional about what being part of the EU meant to him. He was born in 1940 as the Battle of Britain was going on. War was to ravage Europe for the first five years of his life and its consequences were felt long after it. Brexit, he said, was hurting the economy, our public services and the life chances of our future generation. Now that we are learning the real cost, he said, he said the people should have the chance to make their feelings felt.

The event was so big that even the BBC couldn’t ignore it.

You can watch the whole thing here:

Continue reading »
8 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Scottish Lib Dems highlight “destructive” short prison sentences for pregnant women

By Caron Lindsay | Sun 15th April 2018 - 9:50 am

Scottish Liberal Democrat justice spokesperson Liam McArthur MSP has today revealed that dozens of pregnant women have served destructive short-term prison sentences in the last five years. He says that this einforces the need for the Scottish Government to press ahead with a presumption against jail sentences of less than 12 months.

He uncovered figures under freedom of information which reveal that since 2013 there have been 104 pregnant women in prison, of whom 31 gave birth while serving their sentence. Of these 104 women, 37 were given sentences of less than 12 months.

In 2012, the Scottish Government commissioned a report from former Prosecutor Dame Elish Angiolini highlighted the negative impact of custodial sentences on the children of offenders, something that affects many more women than men:

More women offenders have dependant children than men and only a small proportion (17 per cent) of children with mothers in prison live with their fathers while their mother is incarcerated. Approximately 30 per cent of children with imprisoned parents will develop physical and mental health problems, and there is a higher risk of these children themselves also ending up in prison.

Liam said:

The fact that 37 expectant mothers have been given destructive short-term sentences in recent years should have alarm bells ringing.

All the evidence shows that short-term sentences don’t work and are less effective than robust community-based disposals in reducing reoffending. Rates of reoffending amongst those who have served short stints in prison are sky high. That is why Scottish Liberal Democrats have consistently urged the Scottish Government to introduce a presumption against sentences of less than 12 months, something Ministers now accept would be a positive step.

If in the process it means more pregnant women pay for any crime they have committed through robust means short of prison then that has to be in everyone’s interests.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , , , and | 2 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an ex pat: Perfect Storm

By Tom Arms | Sat 14th April 2018 - 7:54 pm

The world appears to be heading for a perfect storm.  It just needs a catalyst to blow it onshore or—hopefully—a change in the political winds to divert it.

The storm is being driven by the forces of nationalism, historic conflicts, a sense of justice and injustice, and the absence of a coherent diplomatic strategy. It is fed by ill-judged rhetorical bluster which creates political hostages to fortune.

The United States – almost certainly in conjunction with the two biggest European military powers Britain and France—is on the brink of responding to the repeated use of chemical weapons by the Russian-backed Assad regime. (Editor’s note: This was written before the attacks overnight but due to technical issues is only just being uploaded now.)

Russia has vetoed all attempts to resolve this repeated atrocity through the United Nations.

Moscow has warned that if Western forces attempt to bomb Syrian air bases, ground forces, or chemical weapons depots than it will shoot down any missiles involved in the attack. Russia’s ambassador to Lebanon, Alexander Zasypkin, ominously added:” If there is a strike by the Americans, then…the missiles will be downed and even the sources from which the missiles were fired,”

If there is a Russia attack on an American destroyer or submarine or the British sovereign airbase inCyprus… well, then the storm will have hit.

This approaching disaster did not materialise overnight in a vacuum. It has been brewing for years. Obama’s foreign policy was weak, especially in Syria where hisinfamous Red Line exposed an unwillingness or inability to act decisively.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 30 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Why is a parliamentary vote on military action necessary?

By Caron Lindsay | Sat 14th April 2018 - 6:41 pm

I have just come back from a wonderful week in the Highlands with only intermittent connection to the internet. The apologetic note from the housekeeper of our rented holiday cottage saying that the wifi was out of action was unexpected but very welcome. It was incredibly restorative to have a few days when the only thing I had to worry about (and this is not insignificant, I have to say) was the incredibly dim pheasants with no instinct of self preservation whatsoever that would blithely wander into the path of the car on the single track road to the cottage. Seriously, one of the little beasts held me up for three full minutes last night as my dinner was getting cold. Oh, and there was the irony of finding that Scottish Water, who have been delaying my commute with their roadworks in Edinburgh for nigh on half a year were also digging up the village on my twice daily route to the beach. The delays were substantially less, though.

My very grateful thanks and promises of beer and wine at a later date are due to Paul and Mary who kept the site going through mine and Kirsten’s absence this week.

Since we’ve been away, the horrific chemical attack in Syria has shocked, if not surprised, the world. When something like that happens, it’s so important to respond in a careful and considered way, with a proper plan that has the support of key international allies and, in our case, parliamentary approval. I know that we technically don’t have to have a parliamentary vote, but it sends a much stronger message if action is taken with the consent of a majority of members of Parliament. It lends a legitimacy to the proceedings.

Any Government sending our people into active service should have the democratic scrutiny of Parliament behind it. We live in a parliamentary democracy and the government shouldn’t avoid its responsibilities in that regard.

I am still not entirely sure whether I support the attack in principle. Of course anyone who gases their own people needs to be stopped and, frankly, sitting round a table and asking Assad nicely not to do it probably isn’t going to cut it. I think there is an argument for taking out the capability to produce and use these awful weapons. However, you have to be very sure that you aren’t going to make the situation worse for the people who live there.

Vince Cable’s statesmanlike approach to these issues has made me wish he were making the decisions rather than May and certainly the ever volatile Donald Trump. He has been reasonable, asking for evidence, a plan and a parliamentary vote and he’s been explaining today why he thinks that is so important:

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 18 Comments
Peter Wrigley

Letter to Vince Cable – UK military action in Syria is not justified

By Peter Wrigley | Fri 13th April 2018 - 1:10 pm

Embed from Getty Images
This letter is in response to Vince’s request for feedback on the Syrian question

Dear Vince Cable,

Thank you for giving we members an opportunity to forward our views to you on the possible military intervention by the UK in Syria.

This is an extremely difficult problem which seems to place us in a lose-lose situation. If we do not intervene we appear to stand by impotently whilst terrible wickedness takes place, including the internationally illegal use of chemical weapons. If we do intervene there is a strong possibility of making a bad situation worse, as has already happened in similar circumstances in Iraq and Libya.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 36 Comments
Steve Trevethan

Wars are rackets – some more than others?

By Steve Trevethan | Fri 13th April 2018 - 11:00 am

War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. – – – It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

Smedley D. Butler

Major General Smedley knew what he was talking about. He achieved the highest rank possible in the US Marines and was the most decorated marine.
He said the only two reasons for armed conflict were the defence of our homes and of basic laws and rights. One is an external threat and the other is an internal threat. Currently we face the second.

The defence of one’s homes comes as a result of existential conflict. All other wars are optional.

Perhaps, there is more than one type of optional war.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 9 Comments
David Thorpe

Taking action against Syria is not liberal interventionism

By David Thorpe | Thu 12th April 2018 - 12:13 pm

Embed from Getty Images

Watching the scenes of devastation and anarchy beamed at us nightly from Syria, the instant, understandable reaction is to demand that something must be done, and support UK military intervention in the country.

There is a debate for another time and another place about whether liberal interventionism is ever effective, even as it is often right.

The problem is taking action against Syria at this stage does not even qualify as liberal interventionism, for even if a coalition of the UK, France and the US were somehow, and against the odds, able to achieve through their military action a change in the direction in the present war in Syria, the outcome would not be liberal.

This is because if Assad falls, what will rise is either a fury of rival militia groups motivated by revenge and fuelled by the extremes of sectarianism, from such Hobbesian wars liberalism tends not to flourish.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 27 Comments
David Buxton

A new campaign to restore the political disability fund

By David Buxton | Wed 11th April 2018 - 5:08 pm

I’m taking part in a campaign launched by the cross-party group More United today, to restore the fund that supports deaf and disabled people into political office and I’m asking you to join me by sharing this video and signing the petition here​​

This campaign matters a lot to me. And this is why.

I was the first deaf British Sign Language-user elected to public office, when I was elected as a London Borough councillor in 1990 and again as a District Borough Councillor in 2007.  From 1992, I lobbied Parliament and ministers to provide greater funding for candidates with disabilities. In 1997 and 2001, I stood for Parliament on a self-funded basis, raising money to pay for BSL interpreters and support in written English.

For the 2015 General Election, I obtained a grant of £40,000 from the Access to Elected Office Fund, which I used to participate in the Liberal Democrat candidate-selection process. But I could not have participated without the Fund’s support.

And​, last year,​ I was effectively barred from standing in the 2017 General Election because of the absence of the Fund.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 3 Comments
Tahir Maher

Helping the Homeless

By Tahir Maher | Wed 11th April 2018 - 2:00 pm

A few friends and I decided about three years ago that we would raise funds to feed the homeless in Reading. Since then we have done that every Friday. I remember the first time we took food a homeless man pulled me to a side and said: “Listen, mate, I appreciate the food, but we do not do vegetables, only meat”. Over the weeks I got to know many of them and listened to their life stories, I can honestly say the difference between many of the homeless and me can be expressed by the proverb “There but for the grace of God, go I”.

From the induction on October 1980 of the right to buy the take up has been huge. In the Thatcher and Major years, the Tories sold off over 1.2 million council homes. Under the Blair and Brown years, Labour sold off over 420,000 council homes.

Continue reading »
4 Comments
John Marriott

The ‘Education battlefield’

By John Marriott | Tue 10th April 2018 - 11:02 am

It wasn’t always Tory v Labour, and it doesn’t have to be again!

State education, particularly at secondary level, is like the proverbial curate’s egg, thanks largely to mistakes made by politicians of all parties over the past sixty years – and I include the 2010-2015 coalition as well. However, much of the mess was already in place by the beginning of this decade so I suppose that we could call it a joint affair between Tories and Labour. However, much of the success of state education is down to Liberals, as were the ideas behind the Welfare State, which emerged from the 1942 Beveridge Report.

State education, that is to say, the education of the many not the few, really began with the 1870 Elementary Education Act, and drafted by Liberal MP William Forester, which established through democratically elected School Boards, voluntary elementary education for children from 5 to 13 (raised to 14 in the 1918 Fisher Act). What Forster wanted to achieve was to retain Britain’s competitive edge in world trade. To do that, he needed an educated workforce (where have we heard that before?). This was achieved in spite of massive opposition from certain quarters, who saw no reason to educate the working classes above a certain rudimentary level. The 1901 Balfour Act, opposed largely by the Liberal Party and non conformists, replaced local School Boards with Local Education Authorities and succeeded in allowing the C of E and Catholic Churches to get on board and possibly was the main reason why the Tories were virtually annihilated at the 1906 General Election.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 29 Comments
Mark Valladares

Moldova: on the edge of the Union, looking in…

By Mark Valladares | Mon 9th April 2018 - 3:43 pm

The expansion of the European Union over the past two decades seems to have come to an end, at least for the time being, leaving the countries of the Western Balkans and the Black Sea region in a position of being accession candidates without much prospect of actual accession any time soon. It was with this in mind that I set off to find out about the situation in Moldova last week.

Moldova is a country with a unique set of challenges. First of these is its frozen conflict on the River Dnieper, where the predominantly Russian population fought, and won, …

Continue reading »
Also posted in Europe / International | Tagged , and | 1 Comment
Harry Samuels

The sugar tax is as liberal as they come

By Harry Samuels | Mon 9th April 2018 - 12:48 pm

Andy Briggs recently wrote on this blog that “any Liberal government worth its salt would repeal the sugar tax”. Certainly, the justifications that the government has given are to do with deterrence, and I agree that those are illiberal – but there is a much more compelling reason to support the principle of this policy, and one which goes right to the core of liberalism.

It is undeniable that a diet of sugary foods leads to obesity, and undeniable that obesity is one of the great killers in this country. But not only that, it’s costly – according …

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 45 Comments
Chris Bowers

We must make a passionate case for staying in the EU!

By Chris Bowers | Mon 9th April 2018 - 8:12 am

Last week I wrote an email to an actively pro-Remain party colleague. Events had led me to believe that a referendum on the Brexit deal might indeed be possible, so what I wrote was: if we do manage to secure a second referendum, are there any plans afoot for the Remain camp to fight a vastly better campaign than it did in 2016? To lose one referendum might be considered a misfortune; to lose two would be the height of carelessness.

The key to winning a referendum on the Brexit deal lies in inspiring people that the EU is worth supporting …

Continue reading »
Tagged | 86 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Young Lib Dem Councillor Ben Lawrie talks about his experience of Depression

By Caron Lindsay | Sat 7th April 2018 - 11:55 am

I feel incredibly proud to know Scottish Liberal Democrat Councillor Ben Lawrie who has talked about his experience of Depression in this short film. It takes courage to talk so openly about something so personal. Doing so helps others immeasurably.

You should be aware before you watch it that it includes his description of an attempt to take his life.

He wants to share his experience to help others going through it, which I think it will. When I was growing up experiencing the sorts of things Ben went through, it would have been useful to know that I wasn’t alone and that this was an illness not some defect in my character.

It’s also great that his friends and family share how this all was for them.

His openness drew praise from Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie who, last weekend, ran 117 miles in 3 days to raise money for a Scottish mental health charity. It’s not too late to donate to his effort.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 1 Comment
Sally Hamwee

Baroness Sally Hamwee writes: Developing a distinctly liberal policy on immigration

By Sally Hamwee | Sat 7th April 2018 - 8:00 am

If you follow the detailed development of party policy you may be aware that the deadline for written responses to the party’s current consultation papers passed yesterday although the online consultation remains open until 1pm on 12 April. As a member of the Immigration, Refugees and Identity working group I wanted to thank all of those who submitted such thorough responses to our own paper.

LDV has carried some articles about the paper and this seems a good moment to offer my own perspective on some of the criticisms that have emerged – which is by no means to dismiss comments or to attempt the final word, just another part of the process.

The group has taken evidence from a range of experts covering immigration law, the workings of the immigration system, refugees, integration and social cohesion, including attitudinal studies of those who have seen their communities evolve one way or another, due to demographic change. The approach that we have taken in the consultation paper has been informed by this.

We are seeking to develop a distinctively liberal policy on immigration, refugees and identity that is humane, treats people fairly and is effective. It is very clear to me – both from the evidence we have taken as well as any number of stories in the press over the past year and, most important, what I have heard direct from individuals and organisations working in the area – that the current system is failing on all three of these criteria.  The government actively promotes a “hostile environment”; that makes me ashamed. It is one thing to seek to establish a controlled immigration system, but quite another to set up a system which is widely perceived as xenophobic. The UK should be trying to build its reputation as open-minded, open-hearted and welcoming of migrants, for hard economic as well as simple human reasons.

One line of criticism that has come through blogs and the consultation is that the paper is not ambitious enough and is seeking only minor adjustments to existing policy. This is not how I see it: the central proposal in the introduction to the paper is that we should promote a liberal and humane attitude towards migration that will enable people more easily to come to the UK for work, to be with their families and for sanctuary. Reference to procedure is because the group wants a policy that makes the migration process much more efficient (I include accuracy in that), while making sure that this isn’t abused by people smugglers who would bring vulnerable people here illegally. 

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 45 Comments
Katharine Pindar

Keep the faith: our party should not consider any merger

By Katharine Pindar | Fri 6th April 2018 - 5:30 pm

There is a lot of talk about a possible new centrist party forming, given the deep divisions in the two main parties and the lowly position of the Liberal Democrats in the opinion polls.

People can’t seem to decide whether we are more pro-Tory, on the basis of our Coalition involvement, or more pro-Labour, on the basis of our commitment to social justice and community. We have some claim to be different from either of them.

But we lack a cutting edge to seize public imagination. Is that because we don’t have any passionate commitment to good causes? What do we care most about? What makes us tick?

In switching back from demanding action on poverty and inequality to a renewed focus on fighting Brexit, I wondered, why does that seem so natural to me? What links my fervour for Europe with my concern about the increasing hardships endured by fellow citizens today?

Perhaps strangely for a social liberal, I think it is pride in my country.

I am proud of Britain being still at the centre for world affairs: a member of the UN Security Council, able to intervene militarily in the Middle East struggles against evil movements, at the same time donating 0.7% of national income to UN development projects. I am also proud that we have had a place in European history that stretches from sharing Roman civilisation to running an Empire to taking a lead in defeating Nazism and Fascism, and that we are still one of the big players in Europe at a time when the Continent needs to stand up to the big powers of the USA, Russia and China.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 271 Comments

Housing – where should it go?

By Kirsten Johnson | Fri 6th April 2018 - 4:00 pm

I’ve been doing some research into housing as it has become a hot topic in Oxfordshire where I am a county councillor.

Young people want to get on the property ladder but can’t, houses are just not affordable.

Keyworkers wish to take jobs but can’t afford to live locally.

Our social housing register in Oxford city has over 3000 people on it.

There is a housing crisis, but it won’t be solved by landowners building houses which can only be afforded by London commuters.

At the same time, government is pushing for growth in the south – we have a Growth Board in Oxfordshire which comprises all the district, city and county councils, and we have just signed a Growth Deal with government which commits us to building 96K homes in Oxfordshire up to 2031.

But shouldn’t we be growing our economy in the north? The country is already unbalanced, and it will become even more so if plans to build a million more houses along the proposed Oxford to Cambridge Arc proceed. The National Infrastructure Commission report on that proposal is here. On p. 28 there is a chart showing housing planned for 2016-2050: 130K extra houses for Oxfordshire as “additional development required to meet corridor-level housing need”, plus another 70K homes for Oxfordshire required “to reflect pressures from land constrained
markets”.

To get my head around this topic, I’ve been looking at recent government data on where houses need to go across the country as a whole. It includes economic growth and population analysis. Evidently, we don’t need as many houses in Oxfordshire as the last Strategic Housing Market Assessment of 2014 shows. However, all local plans are using the SHMA figures, not latest government figures.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 13 Comments
Andy Briggs

Any Liberal government worth its salt would repeal the sugar tax

By Andy Briggs | Fri 6th April 2018 - 1:30 pm

As the so-called ‘sugar tax’ comes into being, it’s worth remembering just how poor a piece of policy it is. The sugar tax is regressive, it is ineffective and it is illiberal; any Liberal government worth its salt would repeal it.

The pre-amble to the constitution of the Liberal Democrats commits the party to both the fundamental value of liberty and ensuring that no-one is enslaved by poverty, the sugar tax fails on both these counts.

First and foremost the sugar tax is illiberal. If we accept that philosopher John Stuart Mill’s ‘harm principle’, the idea that power should only be exerted over an individual against their will if it is to prevent harm to others, is a cornerstone of liberal thought, then quite clearly the sugar tax fails this test. The consumption of sugary drinks poses no threat of harm to others, and as such the state has no business attempting to reduce their use. Whilst you could argue that the ‘harm’ to others associated with the consumption of sugary drinks is the additional strain this may put on the health service, if you were to follow this argument through to its logical conclusion you would advocate taxing gym memberships, as injury sustained through excessive exercise would too place a strain on the NHS. Clearly, this is nonsensical.

To add to this, not only is the sugar tax illiberal but it is also regressive, as it will disproportionally affect those on the lowest incomes. This is both because they are more likely to consume non-diet soft drinks than wealthier individuals, and also because tax rises such as this will take up a larger proportion of the poorest individual’s budgets. Evidence suggests that for individuals with a high sugar diet, taxes do little to reduce their consumption, and as such the sugar tax is all cost and no benefit to those whose disposable income is already low. Far from lifting people out of poverty, the sugar tax further condemns them to it.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 49 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • cim
    @Peter Davies I'm not talking about young people in general, though - according to the polls, 10% of younger voters support the Lib Dems, same as any other age...
  • PM
    @Tom, You're not the only one who's suffered from writers block when it comes to describing the recent social unrest in France and other EU countries. No-one...
  • 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...