Category Archives: Op-eds

“Liberal” means “radical” now. Embrace it.

By Doctor North | Wed 16th November 2016 - 10:04 am

I am a Millennial and I am a Liberal. The former just happened to me, like my skin colour, place of birth and shoe size; I take no pride in it, nor do I feel shame. The latter fact is something I chose for myself, and I am immensely proud of it. I reject hatred and violence as political tools. Why, then, am I writing anonymously?

I teach in a university. In the past few years I have seen more and more of my colleagues deliver lectures in which “liberalism” (not neoliberalism) is used as shorthand for exploitation and racism. Fewer …

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 32 Comments
Pete Shallcross

“Don’t forget the congregation…”

By Pete Shallcross | Wed 16th November 2016 - 7:41 am

As a long time supporter of the party, through good times and bad, I was, like thousands of others, finally spurred to join the party on 8 May 2015. My contact with the party had, until this point, been limited to the odd email initiated by donations made during the 2011 and 2014 referenda. The tone of these communications was correctly pitched and gave potential and actual supporters plenty of good reasons to lend the party their vote – I can’t say the same about the (particularly electronic) communication with party members.

Confession time; I haven’t been at all active since …

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 24 Comments
Joe Otten

It’s not about inequality

By Joe Otten | Tue 15th November 2016 - 5:06 pm

I recall after the financial crisis of 2008 everybody with an unconventional opinion on banking and monetary policy felt confirmed that this showed they had been right all along. Whether they believed in more regulation of banks or less, or in the superficially plausible but ultimately wrong-headed notion of banning bank lending altogether and making up the money supply by having the government print a lot extra – they felt proven right by events.

We are in danger of doing the same with Donald Trump’s victory. Last week Helen Flynn argued that it was about inequality. Thus the solution …

Continue reading »
37 Comments
Arnold Kiel

A populist Parliament

By Arnold Kiel | Mon 14th November 2016 - 4:31 pm

 

I am a German citizen and UK resident. I am also a fan, but not a member of the Liberal Democrats.

I appreciate your party’s stance on Brexit, but I urge you to go further:

Stop expressing misguided respect for a misguided referendum result. People want and deserve a better life, and you know Brexit will give them the opposite: Brexit impoverishes, endangers, brutalizes, and kills.

An MP voting with the Government on triggering Article 50 against his or her conscience is worse than Johnson or Farage, because he or she will not only be a populist, but will irreversibly go down in history as a legislating populist. MPs must protect the country and its people from harm, also and especially if self-inflicted.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 62 Comments
Chris Key

Liberal Democrats need to play smart on immigration and border controls

By Chris Key | Mon 14th November 2016 - 2:45 pm

If we are to learn from the lessons of Trump becoming President and the EU referendum, we progressive politicians must play smarter in the area of immigration. This does not mean aping Mr Trump or Nigel Farage but working out where the real blame lies for failures in our border controls and who has accountability for fixing them.

The current government has decided landlords and schools are suddenly  quasi immigration officers. Even the Daily Mail noted that the government pilot project to require landlords to check tenants rights to live in the UK had been an abject failure. Many parents at my own children’s school complained about the need to audit the nationalities of their children and where their parents were from. Parents were not even told this was optional and that they could refuse to complete the census. The head teacher complained of the administrative burden of this new dictat. Quite rightly so, given no extra resources were given to schools to carry out this work.

This brings me back to where I think we as Liberal politicians should be looking to do more around border controls. The introduction of proper exit checks last year was long overdue and the Lib Dems contributed to this in the Coalition. Yet individual landlords and schools are being asked to mop up the mess created by previous governments. Technology initiatives from the Labour government on immigration control during the 2000s cost up to £1 billion and were not fit for purpose.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 35 Comments
Ben Andrew

The Language of the Left – and how it alienates progressives from their own causes

By Ben Andrew | Mon 14th November 2016 - 12:17 pm

 

“Privilege”, “trigger warnings”, “safe spaces”, “mansplaining”, “tone policing” and “cultural appropriation”. These terms are the Language of the Left. Anyone who has talked politics with lefties will be familiar with the way that they are thrown around in discussions willy-nilly. And each of them describes a problem which should be taken seriously.

Take “mansplaining” for example: when men explain things in a patronizing way to women, because of an imagined authority on a certain subject. This happens all the time. It happens in offices; at dinner tables; on television; in politics. If you haven’t seen this in action you’re just not looking hard enough. And “trigger warnings” serve an important purpose as well. People who suffer from PTSD after sexual assault can be severely distressed when reading descriptions of rape, for example. Flagging this up to avoid aggravating their condition is no different from warning epileptics when there will be flashing images on TV. It’s completely sensible.

But once these terms become trump cards which can automatically win arguments and shut down discussions, then mission creep seeps in, as people use them more and more lazily. People don’t just use trigger warnings to flag up distressing content any more. They splash them in front of any Daily Mail article which they disagree with, and claim they are triggered every time they hear an opinion which they don’t like.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 145 Comments
Nigel Lindsay

Joint working with other parties – or leadership by silverbacks?

By Nigel Lindsay | Mon 14th November 2016 - 10:11 am

 

It seems as if the more we talk about gender equality, the less we achieve – at least in Scotland.

The Scottish Spring LibDem conference passed an exhaustive motion on the subject, but just a few weeks later the party saw its female representation in the Scottish Parliament fall from 20% to zero. Those who had proposed and supported the motion offered no visible resistance when the wonderful Alison McInnes MSP (who had been the only MSP to hold Police Scotland effectively to account for its many failings) was replaced as candidate by a male former MSP who has made little or no impact since then.

Yesterday, at the party’s autumn conference, a motion on Scotland in Europe was proposed by former MEP Elspeth Attwooll, and by Christine Jardine who fought Alex Salmond with distinction at the General Election. The motion called for a future for Scotland which retains the advantages of the EU “without the limitations of the unthinking Unionism of the Conservatives or the ideological drive towards independence of the SNP”. Nothing too controversial there, you may think – but you’d be wrong: to attack the Conservatives is to stand on dangerous ground nowadays, it seems.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 37 Comments
The Voice

WATCH: Willie Rennie’s speech to Scottish Liberal Democrat conference “Liberals are not quitters”

By The Voice | Sun 13th November 2016 - 11:55 am

Yesterday, Scottish Liberal Democrats had their Autumn Conference in Dunfermline. Here is Willie Rennie’s leaders’ speech. The text is below.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 1 Comment
Chris Bowers

Can we build in an extra question, please?

By Chris Bowers | Sun 13th November 2016 - 10:29 am

Maybe it’s just my own predisposition, but I seem to be seeing the phrase ‘more candidates’ all the time in Lib Dem literature. Mark Pack’s excellent pamphlet ‘How to Rebuild the Liberal Democrats’ talks about ‘more candiates’, Tim Farron has used the phrase, and my regional chair has just asked me to contribute to a by-election fund so we can stand ‘more candidates’.

All of which is good stuff, especially if more candidates lead to better quality candidates and increased diversity of candidates because more candidates are applying to fly the Lib Dem flag. But I’d also like to encourage the idea of ‘smarter candidates’, which requires asking the question: is this the right election for the Lib Dems to stand a candidate at all?

Cynics may point out that my current hobby horse is cross-party cooperation, and it is. But I’m still a Liberal Democrat who wants to see liberalism – especially social liberalism – enacted in this country. And for that to happen, we need the cooperation of other like-minded people who aren’t necessarily Lib Dems, people who Caroline Lucas, Lisa Nandy and I called ‘progressives’ in our recent book ‘The Alternative’.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 30 Comments
The Voice

Why we build the wall

By The Voice | Sat 12th November 2016 - 5:00 pm

One of our contributors has drawn our attention to this video, which we happily share with you.

Continue reading »
Leave a comment
Michael Berwick-Gooding

According to Article 50, once it has been triggered there is no way back

By Michael Berwick-Gooding | Sat 12th November 2016 - 3:00 pm

treatyIt is Liberal Democrat policy to hold a referendum on the terms of Brexit, but I think it is clear from reading Article 50 and the High Court judgment that once we have notified the European Council that we are leaving there is no method to stop us leaving.

Article 50 of the Treaty reads:

  1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
  2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
  3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
Continue reading »
Tagged and | 42 Comments
Emanuel Andjelic

Why I joined the Lib Dems and stood for election

By Emanuel Andjelic | Fri 11th November 2016 - 10:36 am

 

emanuel-andjelic-family

I’ve supported the Lib Dems for as long as I can remember, but until now, only ever from the comfort of my sofa. I’ve always been interested in politics, I studied the subject at college and university, but never felt compelled to get involved.

So what prompted me aged 36 to join the party? Well, on the face of it, it’s easy: Brexit. The referendum result was my call to arms. Like many others I joined the party a few days after the vote, realising that it was time for apathetic liberals (small l) like myself to stand up and fight back.

Most of my adult life was spent in a political system dominated by the centre ground. As a second generation East European, I was proud to be part of a tolerant and generous society that welcomed everyone. Brexit woke me up to how quickly things can change. It was a stark reminder of how xenophobia and intolerance could become prevalent. All those history lessons about the 1930s suddenly began to make sense.

On reflection, the reason I didn’t didn’t get into politics earlier, was probably because I didn’t think I needed to. My views were mainstream and pretty well represented in politics. I joined the fight when I saw this change. The Liberal Democrats were the only party I could see that would be able to revive a fair and tolerant centre ground.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 9 Comments
Dan Whitehead

What can we learn from the US election?

By Dan Whitehead | Thu 10th November 2016 - 6:51 pm

 

There are few feelings worse than those that follow losing an election. The crippling sense of disappointment; the frustration of finding out that your vision for the future is not shared by the majority of the electorate. As liberals we have had to become accustomed to this over the past two years, but the Trump victory feels of greater significance to the geopolitical order than anything that has come before it – even Brexit.

It is vital that our anger is channelled into learning from the mistakes that become retrospectively apparent in our defeat. So what can we learn from the US election that can be applied to our campaigns? Here are a few of my initial thoughts:

Movements win elections

The strength of the Clinton campaign’s state-by-state ground game was long acknowledged as a major advantage that the Democrats would hold over the Republicans on election day. Whilst Clinton had millions of volunteers, thousands of field offices and huge financial strength, Trump’s campaign was an operation regularly accused of amateurishness.

Yet no party’s get-out-the-vote strategy can compete with the enthusiasm of a cause. Trump’s supporters were inspired by his anti-establishment appeal and promise to “Make America Great Again”. The Clinton camp, by comparison, struggled to find a consistent message that was memorable and of mass-appeal to the electorate. Instead her stump speeches were filled with technocratic policy ideas and often felt unfocused.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 24 Comments
Matthew Campbell

Electoral reform, Donald Trump … and Theresa May

By Matthew Campbell | Thu 10th November 2016 - 5:30 pm

 

For years, it was said that there was a threat to western democracies from far-right parties with extremist or populist opinions. The BNP were, in the 2000s, supposed to be ‘our’ version of this phenomenon, before they collapsed and – arguably – their vote went elsewhere.

But, still, the possibility of a small extremist nationalist party gaining undue influence was held to be a convincing argument against electoral reform. I think it may now be possible to say with great certainty that this was either a fallacy or a lie.

Why? Because there are two countries where, this year, populist/nationalist agendas have upset the existing political order: Firstly, the USA (in the person of Mr Trump); and secondly, this country (in the shape of Brexit). That is to say, two countries with plurality voting, who have historically rejected voting reform and proportionality as alien to their political culture.

And why might this have come to pass?

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 10 Comments
Chris Key

An Economics lesson for Trump voters

By Chris Key | Thu 10th November 2016 - 4:19 pm

 

No doubt the millions of Americans who voted for Trump will claim he will be the economic saviour of the United States bringing back millions of jobs from Mexico and Asia. For anyone who has studied even a basic level of Economics knows that this false promise will only bring disappointment to those who voted for him.

Argentina is a classic example of what happens when a country takes a protectionist and nationalistic approach. During the years of its former President Cristina Kirchner, it gorged on a diet of economic populism including ridiculous import restrictions in the vain hope that everything would be suddenly mass produced by “Industria Argentina”. Things got so bad that at one point women could not even by tampons because they could not be imported and prices sky rocketed with inflation hitting 40%.

Americans would do well to realise that slapping a tariff of 45%, as Trump wants to do on Mexican imports, will not encourage US industry to become more efficient as it will simply isolate them from competition. Moving car production back to the US will simply serve to raise prices, and reduce demand which will lead to less demand for employees. Furthermore all the tariffs in the world will not help prevent technology from replacing humans in producing everything from I-phones to Electric cars.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 9 Comments
Stuart Bonar

EU citizenship?

By Stuart Bonar | Thu 10th November 2016 - 3:00 pm

 

Since the vote to leave the European Union back in June, many of my friends have suddenly developed a keen interest in their Irish ancestry. Others have already bagged a German passport, a Cypriot passport, and permanent residency in Belgium. Everywhere, anyone with a parent or grandparent from elsewhere in Europe is clambering aboard a lifeboat out of Brexit Britain. Some of us however aren’t able to contribute to the big, post-referendum spike in applications to become new Danes, Italians and Swedes.

I was giving this a lot of thought last month. Sure, I want to keep my right to live, work, travel, study, retire, even start a business across the EU with the minimum of bureaucratic fuss and bother, but it’s more than that. I am a European. I feel it in my bones. I don’t want my EU citizenship ripped from my hands. I want to keep it.

A thought popped into my head. A solution that would allow those who wanted to leave to do so, whilst allowing those who feel they are EU citizens as much as British citizens to remain.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 36 Comments
Paul Carroll

“What part of ‘Leave’ don’t you understand?”

By Paul Carroll | Thu 10th November 2016 - 1:25 pm

gina-miller-on-andrew-marr

When Nigel Farage asked this of Gina Miller on the Andrew Marr show on Sunday she was far too polite and politically unseasoned to respond in kind to this patronising and arrogant question.

Well, Mr Farage, I would like to ask you what part of ‘Advisory’, ‘Parliamentary Democracy’ and ‘Independent Judiciary’, don’t you understand. Moreover I think your question should be directed more at the people who you persuaded to vote Leave in the referendum.

To the old man in the queue in front of me, the day before the referendum who said he “was voting leave because we were going to get a new hospital every week”. Don’t you understand that you were being lied to?  In fact there is probably going to be less money for the NHS as the economy ails.

To the pensioners: the government is already making noises about abandoning the triple lock in favour of linking pensions to earning only.  With inflation predicted at 2.7% next year and rising in following years. What you  don’t understand is that your pension could be worth 10% less in real terms in four years time.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 51 Comments
Paul Walter

Enough with the flagellation of the “liberal elite” – Hillary Clinton actually got the most votes!

By Paul Walter | Thu 10th November 2016 - 12:00 pm

In the wake of the US election, there’s been a lot of sneering condemnation of the “sneering metropolitan liberal elite” including under posts on this very site.

Perhaps just hold the horses on this condemnation for a second, eh?

What is the objective of a candidate in an election?

Go on.

Try it.

Ah yes, you say – to win the most votes.

Well Hillary Clinton won the most votes in the US election: 59.8 million to Trump’s 59.6 million.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 25 Comments
Dani Tougher

A dirty word

By Dani Tougher | Thu 10th November 2016 - 10:00 am

 

There has been an upswing in certain sections of the press of the condemnation of a particular demographic: the ‘liberal, metropolitan elite’.

When did ‘liberal’ become a dirty word? Why is it being used as a word to mock, or incite loathing? It is defined by the OED as a willingness “to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different to one’s own…” and as someone who is “open to new ideas“. That all sounds great. Perfectly reasonable.

It’s concerning, then, that the word is being twisted to suit an agenda that runs on stoking fear and hatred. When it becomes disgraceful to show empathy with those who are suffering, just because those people are not from your country of origin, that is scary. When people who have gained positions of responsibility are told that it is because they are part of the ‘system’ (alright, sometimes that’s correct!) rather than because of their own merits and work ethic, that’s disturbing. And when a politics of scaremongering, scapegoating and ‘other-ing’ becomes acceptable, and electable, rather than a politics of understanding, rationality and inclusivity, then I worry for the future of the world.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 31 Comments
Mark Valladares

Theresa May went to India, and all I got was a lousy T-shirt…

By Mark Valladares | Wed 9th November 2016 - 3:52 pm

I am one of those people who have often wondered why British governments pay relatively little attention to India. After all, it’s a big country, with an emerging middle class who want to travel, buy luxury goods and send their children to good universities overseas. Why wouldn’t we want to build stronger links with a Commonwealth country that is likely to be one of the world’s largest economies before too long? And yet, the attention of our politicians and diplomats often seems biased towards China.

Frankly though, after Theresa May’s trip to New Delhi and Bengaluru, I almost wish that she …

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 9 Comments
Mark Argent

Opinion: the shock from across the Atlantic – the bigger picture

By Mark Argent | Wed 9th November 2016 - 1:30 pm

A few days ago Trump was describing the prospect of being “like Brexit but more”. That catches my sense of shock today — though I wouldn’t want to take the parallel as far as he does. I’ve just been exchanging emails and Facebook messages with shocked friends in the US.

Perhaps the system will right itself. Perhaps he won’t be as bad as I fear. Perhaps he will be as bad as I fear, and be forced from office (he faces a civil case arising from alleged child rape on 16 December).

People are right to say that the American political system …

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 23 Comments
Helen Flynn

Opinion: It’s the Inequality

By Helen Flynn | Wed 9th November 2016 - 12:11 pm

Gary Lineker has been coming out with some pithy, relevant comments recently on Twitter, and much like an essential feature of the game he professionally played, the result of the US election reveals a country of two halves.

Like Brexit, this result and the corresponding lurch to the right, stem from inequality. Unfortunately, and quite to the contrary of what these dispossessed people have voted for, the resulting administration now has the propensity to make their situation far worse.

It is one thing to be a demagogue and stand up and say what you think people want you to say. …

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 27 Comments
Douglas Oliver

On the other side of silence

By Douglas Oliver | Tue 8th November 2016 - 5:52 pm

If we had a keen vision and feeling of all ordinary human life, it be would be like hearing the grass grow and the squirrel’s heart beat, and we should die of that roar which lies on the other side of silence. As it is, the quickest of us walk about well wadded with stupidity.
– George Eliot, Middlemarch, Chapter 20.

With the US Presidential election upon us, there has been scant defence of the “competence” let alone the “intelligence”, of electorates around the world in 2016, but I think it needs more thought. For all that is said about the …

Continue reading »
4 Comments
The Voice

If we had a vote we would vote Clinton

By The Voice | Tue 8th November 2016 - 12:06 pm

It has become a truism of this campaign that Clinton and Trump are the two worst presidential candidates of all time. We don’t buy it.

Yes, Donald Trump is an ignorant narcissistic bully who would be an embarrassment to any self-respecting Parish Council; a serial groper, liar, and corrupt businessman whose response to these sound charges is generally to accuse his opponent of the same with no evidence. He is happy to fan the flames of racial tension for personal advantage, and as we saw with Brexit, if he wins (promising Brexit+++), supporters will feel justified by this majority in meting out hatred and violence to whoever around them doesn’t fit in.

Continue reading »
37 Comments
Teena Lashmore

BME or BAME LibDems?

By Teena Lashmore | Tue 8th November 2016 - 10:06 am

I presented this question to peers, fellow Liberal Democrats and members of EMLD (Ethnic Minority Liberal Democrats), after seeing the launch of our Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) Manifesto in 2015, and I continue to raise this debate while holding office as London Region Vice Chair – because sometimes an acronym is important.

BAME is the acronym for Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic, whereas BME is the acronym for Black and Minority Ethnic.

The intellectual argument that ‘Black’ is a socially constructed political identity – a way to challenge the racism in England – became absorbed into ethnic and cultural identity politics.  Caribbean people felt their skin was not black but shades of brown.  Their post colonial ‘classification’ had evolved through a range of terms that included ‘coloured’, arriving at the destination term ‘Black’ at a similar time as ‘Afro-Americans’, or ‘African Americans’, or ‘Black Americans’.  The battle to maintain a dual identity, such as Barbados Brits, was less successful and the internalized dislikes of our Africanness during this time made ‘Black’ the compromise that most people could sign up to: one term – serving two purposes.

‘Ethnic Minority’ is used because white-on-white hating is actually xenophobia, but that could not fit neatly into our Race Relations Act because the Act was for the protection of victims against racism.  In order to protect cultural groups like the Irish and Jewish communities from hate, we needed a noun that encapsulated the common experience of all ethnic groups and we arrived at ‘Ethnic Minority’ and with our European countries (Germany), we also arrived at ‘Hate Crime’ to define the offending behaviours.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 17 Comments
Sarah Noble

Urgent questions to our MPs regarding Article 50

By Sarah Noble | Mon 7th November 2016 - 4:31 pm

 

There was rather worrying news from the regional conferences this weekend in which several parliamentarians, including Chief Whip Tom Brake, implied that the party would not vote against an Act of Parliament triggering Article 50 and/or repealing the European Communities Act 1972.

I and many other members are increasingly concerned about this turn of events. Less than two months ago, we passed a policy at Conference that committed the party to remain inside the European Union. Our reputation for many years has been that of a Europhile party, and nearly all of our votes are aware of this fact. So too are the thousands of new members who joined after the referendum. To not vote against would not only be betraying party members, it would be betraying our voters too. After a bruising period in coalition in which we lost the trust of many of our members, I fear that retreating from our pro-European principles poses an existential threat to the party.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 77 Comments
Joe Otten

What do you want from Parliament’s Article 50 debate?

By Joe Otten | Mon 7th November 2016 - 2:57 pm

With the issue of whether Article 50 needs parliamentary approval currently before the courts, there is some discussion of what Parliament ought to do with the process if it gets the chance.

While clearly there is no majority for simply blocking article 50, it is quite reasonable for MPs to put constructive amendments to the proposal, respectful of the mandate from June, and to vote against if those amendments are not accepted – as one would with any other bill before Parliament.

One amendment should be to give the people a vote on the final deal, so that we can choose, once …

Continue reading »
33 Comments
Rob Parsons

I want to stay in the EU

By Rob Parsons | Mon 7th November 2016 - 12:20 pm

 

There has been a bit of a sea change in British politics in the last couple of weeks.

Since June 23rd Remainers have had to put up with their lot, accept the referendum result as if it were a binding expression of democratic will and start preparing for a post Brexit world, or face howls of outrage. I guess that is still the likely outcome, despite today’s court ruling.

But it has become more possible than it has at any time since the referendum to say publicly that I want to stay in the EU, and I hope very much that we find a way to get out of the fix that the vote for Brexit has put us in. Partly it is a matter of courage. Any expression of dismay with the result has been met with a explosive mixture of nastiness, aggression, scorn and abuse ever since. The level has not abated but I have begun to summon up the courage to take it on. Partly that comes from having worked out more firmly the reasons why I stand where I stand:

Continue reading »
Tagged | 59 Comments
Joe Bourke

Donald Trump’s very liberal plan to pay off the US national debt

By Joe Bourke | Mon 7th November 2016 - 10:07 am

 

In April this year, Donald Trump was proposing to pay off the US national debt of $19 trillion over two presidential terms.

He laid out his initial proposals in an interview with Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, suggesting that he could pay off the national debt by renegotiating trade deals.

As the Washington Post explained, eliminating a trade deficit does not mean the money ends up in government coffers. The post goes on to explain that before the debt can be reduced the current budget deficit needs to be tackled. So the task is not $19 trillion, but nearly $26 trillion over eight years.

By May, Trump was backtracking on the idea of paying off the debt over 8 years and was promulgating a new plan.  The New York Times reported that this new plan was based on persuading creditors to accept something less than full payment. The Times goes on to recall the consequences of a potential default scare back in 2011, when federal borrowing costs climbed as congressional Republicans refused for a time to increase the federal government’s statutory borrowing limit, raising doubts about the government’s ability to repay its debts. The Bipartisan Policy Center calculated that the resulting higher rates cost taxpayers about $19 billion.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 9 Comments
Paul Walter

We need to stop the drift towards self-destruction

By Paul Walter | Sun 6th November 2016 - 8:48 am

It is more in sorrow than anger that I review the events of the last few days.

And if you want sorrow rather than anger done beautifully, then watch this wonderful piece of James O’Brien’s LBC show. He patiently asks why the caller asked for British law administered in Britain by British judges but is now angry about British law administered in Britain by British judges.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 126 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Jana
    “ It needs a party that will defend liberty when it is unpopular…” I’ve been thinking about this and I can’t think of examples of when liberty may ...
  • Nick Baird
    @Nigel Quinton - thank you for your kind words. @Simon Robinson - in theory, that's what happened. The Government appointed an independent team to review the...
  • Jenny Barnes
    @ simon robinson. Exactly I suspect that one threat that is concealed is that the UK will no longer be a global power. So they send a carrier battle group to ...
  • Jim Dapre
    Having a referendum before a FPTP General Election is dangerous. If the self-serving Conservatives should win a majority, we can say goodbye to electoral refor...
  • David Allen
    "London made a net transfer of £43.6bn in 22/23 and the SE £15.8bn. Every other region and nation was in deficit. I have not heard LDs complaining about that"...