Category Archives: Op-eds

Stephen Harte

Janey Godley’s passing and lessons in political tribalism

By Stephen Harte | Mon 4th November 2024 - 11:25 am

As many readers will have seen in mainstream and social media, we lost the much loved Scottish comedian Janey Godley to cancer on Saturday (2 November 2024). Janey has been open on social media about her struggles with cancer and everyone knew that she was in her final days. Across public life in Scotland and the wider UK, figures from the world of entertainment and politics were quick to post glowing, and very fitting, tributes.

Many ordinary people posted tributes to social media too. I was one of them. In posting to Twitter (it will always be Twitter even after Musk finally forces me to give up using it), I noticed that I was quick to point out that that our “politics didn’t always coincide”. While true, I have been thinking since why I felt it necessary to use this form of words.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 2 Comments
Mark Valladares

Welcome to my day: 4 November 2024 – “I’ve got a ticket to ride”

By Mark Valladares | Mon 4th November 2024 - 7:30 am

I found myself enjoying some free bus rides yesterday. And no, I don’t have a concessionary bus pass – I’m not that old… yet – but our local Transport Museum here in Ipswich was having a vintage running day, with a collection of vintage buses operating three routes around the town. It all seemed somehow appropriate given the controversy over bus fares this week.

In choosing to freeze fuel duty whilst partially removing the fare cap on bus journeys, Rachel Reeves made a curious choice. Whilst yes, it will be popular with motorists, cheaper bus fares have been a boon to those outside major cities where the fare cap had little or no impact – in London, for example, the flat fare is £1.75. And, by shifting the financial incentives further towards cars, it hardly sends out a message that the Government is taking Net Zero seriously.

But it’s just another clumsy move by a a government which seems capable of little else, at least as far as the media are concerned. Even setting aside the inherent bias of much of the mainstream media though, an administration which came into power offering competence and integrity has burnt through quite a lot of credibility remarkably early in the piece. And, whilst the levels of incompetence and “sleaze” are minor compared to the chaotic shambles that was the Conservative government post-2019, expectations were rather higher.

Continue reading »
5 Comments
Caron Lindsay

A scary week ahead

By Caron Lindsay | Sun 3rd November 2024 - 11:59 am

American presidential elections in days of yore were pretty simple. We all went to bed at our usual time and then when we woke up in the morning, we knew who was going to be President.

And then Bush v Gore 2000 happened and it all took a bit longer as we learned about things like “Hanging Chads” and how they affected the vote counts in Florida. It took until 12 December until the Supreme Court stopped the recount and Gore conceded the next day.

In 2020, we spent four long nights and three and a half long days constantly refreshing CNN and agonising in WhatsApp chats before it was clear to everyone except Donald Trump and his followers that Joe Biden had won.

This year I’m not sure I have a big enough cushion to hide behind as the results come in. But before we get too absorbed in the details, take a minute to have a good laugh at Kamala’s appearance on last night’s Saturday Night Live. Pitch perfect:

We are probably not going to know for a while after the polls close whether the US will have a President who will respect women’s rights, put more money back in the hands of the poorest and grow the economy, or someone who will give to his billionaire mates, pursue policies that see more women die because they can’t get medical treatment if they have a miscarriage, and threaten US democracy itself.

The conventional wisdom amongst commentators at the moment is that Donald Trump will get his second term in the White House. Let’s hope they have it as wrong as they had it in 2016 when they all thought Hillary was going to win. We have to remember that part of the reason for the Democrats losing back then was because they were so convinced they were going to win that they stopped spending money in the swing states while Donald Trump spent a fortune on wall to wall advertising.

The Democrats are not making that mistake again. The Harris/Walz campaign has been concentrating on the swing states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Nevada and Arizona. The election will likely be decided on tens of thousands of votes in those places. It’s a bit like how our elections are decided in 100 or so marginal seats across the country except on a bigger scale.

She’s had some help in the past week from Scottish Lib Dem Leader who went out there with some friends (at their own expense) to knock on doors. It’s not the first time he has been out. He turned out to be a good luck charm for Obama in Virginia in 2008. He made some observations on Twitter this week about his trip an the prospects in the election:

The field campaign team there are exceptional but they are utterly exhausted and driving hard for the finish line, I’m proud to know them. They certainly put me to work in getting out the vote.

With over 1k doors knocked across 9 communities in Lackawanna county, PA, I got to see a lot of the Scranton area in stunning autumnal beauty. These are warm, resilient communities, but in many ways they have cause to feel left behind.

This is an exceptionally tight election, everyone knows that, but I’ve never seen tribalism run quite so deep before. Those houses without partisan lawn signs are in the minority and this election is dividing communities and even families, like never before.

A standout highlight for me was getting to meet Tim Walz in person, but above that I will never forget the warmth of the people I met on the doors of Pennsylvania.

My assessment? She can absolutely do it, but turnout is everything.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , , and | 4 Comments
Tom Arms

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 3rd November 2024 - 9:36 am

Georgia

If you have a fortune of $5 billion-plus in a country with a GDP of £$24.6 billion you will be a whale in a puddle. Such is the fate of Georgia Dream Party founder and chief backer Bidzina Ivanishvili.

And, if you are willing to part with some of your fortune, you can bend the political structure and electoral systems to your will. Ivanishvili is accused of doing just that in the recent Georgian parliamentary elections which the Dream Party won with 53 percent of the vote,

Bidshina Ivanishvili was born into humble beginnings in 1958 but when the Soviet Union collapsed he moved to Russia to grab what he could in the great Russian carve-up. He ended up with a multinational conglomerate encompassing banking, real estate and heavy industry. He returned to Georgia and in 2011 decided to try his hand at politics by forming the centrist, pro-EU Georgia Dream Party.

Backed with Ivanishvili’s fortune, the Georgia Dream Party won a landslide victory in 2012 elections and Ivanishvili became prime minister. He stepped down a year later saying that he had achieved all his goals and wanted to private life.

But Ivanishvili’s money insured that he remained the power behind the throne. And from that position he subtly tilted the Dream Party towards Russia. At the same time he sought membership with the EU. His behind the scenes influence led critics to brand Ivanishvili the “shadow leader.”

As the years passed it became increasingly difficult to walk the political tightrope between the goal of EU membership and the looming shadow of the bear. To keep Russia happy Georgia Dream introduced anti LGBTQ laws and a Foreign Agents Act. Both laws closely mirrored Russia’s laws on both issues. They also breached EU human rights provisions. As a result the EU broke off negotiations with Georgia.

Georgia Dream’s tilt to Russia was unpopular. Polls showed that 80 percent of Georgians wanted to move closer to the EU as protection from Moscow. All the indications. All the opinion polls, were that after three terms in office, Georgia Dream Party, would lose last week’s election, especially when they campaigned on a promise to ban opposition parties.

They won with 54 percent of the vote. The Opposition, EU election observers, President Biden, and even Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili, called foul. They claimed that Ivanishvili’s Dream Party was guilty of “bribery, intimidation and ballot-stuffing.”

The allegations were rejected by Ivanishvili and Dream Party Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze. They were welcomed by Hungary’s Vilktor Orban who hopes that eventually Georgia will become another “illiberal democratic” member of the EU. And the Russian bear? It stopped being silent and cheered.

Japan

Japan is a different democratic country. That is the reason for the lack of excitement in the wake of the long-ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s failure to win a majority in the recent election.

The Japanese political system did not evolve over centuries like its Western counterparts. It was imposed on a socially conservative society with a strong respect for traditions, authority and seniority.

The result is a deeply Japanese political foundation with a democratic veneer, but a veneer which Japanese have come to treasure as much as their traditions.

The big word in Japanese politics is “wan” which is defined as being focused on consensus building and group harmony. It contrasts with the adversarial nature of Western politics

The electoral system reflects this consensus building nature. It is a mixed first past the post constituency-based system and proportional representation. The result is that quite often elections lead to a disparity between percentage of votes received and the percentage of seats in the Diet (the Japanese parliament).

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 1 Comment
Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: Foreign Policy Impact of US elections

By Tom Arms | Sat 2nd November 2024 - 10:02 am

A Kamala Harris win this week is not good news for the UK and Europe. A Trump win is much, much worse.

Trump’s “America First” campaigns has fed a latent US isolationism which has forced the Democrats to adopt some of his policies, because, like it or not, America is a democracy and the president elected to represent all Americans.

According to one poll, only 22 percent of young Americans support involvement in the Middle East. Half of Republicans think that the US is supplying too much aid to Ukraine and only 44 percent of Republicans think that the US should play a leading role in the world. Democrats are more internationally minded with 65 percent in favour of an active foreign policy. The good news is that NATO has popular support with a bipartisan 70 percent approval rating. The fact is, however, that America is moving into its shell at one of the most dangerous periods for the world since the end of World War Two.

America’s diplomatic corps would be hard put to meet expectations even if there was a swell of opinion in favour of increased global involvement. It is still reeling from the Trump years when budgets were cut by 30 percent, ambassadorial posts were left empty and 60% of the diplomatic corps left either in protest or cutbacks. Biden has increased budgets but the damage done by Donald Trump will take years to repair.

Trump, of course, regularly threatens to withdraw from NATO. Biden and Kamala Harris have recommitted to the alliance but it was a Democratic president—Barack Obama—who first attacked NATO allies for failing to spend at least two percent of their GDP on defense. He also unveiled the “Asia Pivot” which shifts the military focus from Europe and the Middle East to East Asia. Trump, Biden and Harris have embraced the Asia Pivot.

Defense costs money and the policies of Trump, Biden and Harris are undermining the economies of UK and Europe. Trump, again is the worst. His tariffs on all imports—possibly as much as 20 percent on British and EU exports will hit exports. It will, of course, also lead to a tit for tat tariff war in which everybody loses—especially the consumer.

Kamala Harris will continue Biden’s $738 billion Inflation Reduction Act” which is peppered with isolationist policies. The IRA includes such things as a $7,500 handout for the purchase of US-made-only electric vehicles, and tax credits only for products made in America. The EU has protested and threatened to take America to the World Trade Organisation. But the WTO has been rendered useless by America’s 7-year refusal to agree to new judges for its appellate body.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 3 Comments
Jack Wilkin

A fairer budget is needed to protect family farms and keep them out of the hands of corporations

By Jack Wilkin | Fri 1st November 2024 - 2:21 pm

I want to start on a positive. The new budget has some good stuff. The cut to draft duty on beers in pubs, the implication of 10-year financial forecasts to end short-termism, boast to defence spending and support for Ukraine against a fascist invasion, and more small businesses are now exempt from NI will help rejuvenate the economy. Likewise, many of the proposals in Rayner’s worker’s rights bill are positive.

However, I do have some concerns regarding the budget and its potential impact on farming communities.

I understand that large corporations and wealthy individuals purchase farmland to avoid taxes, which is an issue that needs addressing. However, Reeve’s comment about setting a £1 million limit to protect small farmers may be effective in areas with lower agricultural land prices. Unfortunately, farmland in Cornwall, especially in the Truro-Falmouth area, is very expensive. Implementing this price limit based on a “federal” standard will significantly harm rural communities where land prices are higher.

I believe a fairer solution would be to redefine what constitutes a “small farm.” Instead of basing this definition on land value, which is influenced by geography and external market forces beyond the control of individual agribusinesses, it should focus on the amount of money the farm/business makes. For example, a farm that earned an average of £1.5 million in profits (some of the larger corporate-owned ones do) over the previous 5 years could pay 20% above £1million. At least then you’ll be protecting genuine small businesses.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 14 Comments
Mo Waqas

A Vision for Change: embracing the political middle ground

By Mo Waqas | Fri 1st November 2024 - 9:52 am

In today’s political landscape, many feel disillusioned. Labour seems unable to fulfill its promises, while the Conservative Party’s long tenure has left a bitter taste. This climate presents a unique opportunity for the Liberal Democrats to step forward and appeal to those who feel politically homeless.

Our approach must prioritize practical, common-sense policies that harness the power of logic over divisive rhetoric. We must address the pressing concerns facing the UK today—ones that impact the everyday lives of the working class. From the increasing cost of living to the scarcity of high-quality jobs, we need to offer solutions that resonate with those who feel left behind by the political establishment. It’s crucial that we don’t simply offer critiques of other parties but provide a grounded, realistic alternative that people can truly believe in.

Addressing the Rise of Far-Right Sentiment

Across Europe and the US, we’ve seen the dangers of far-right movements gaining traction by preying on people’s frustrations. Far-right ideologies often thrive in environments where individuals feel their voices aren’t heard, especially as they contend with economic hardship or lack of opportunities. In the UK, recent protests and social movements indicate a rising frustration and a void in representation for moderate and rational perspectives.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 20 Comments
John Armah

The Commonwealth, reparations and a Liberal Democrat approach

By John Armah | Thu 31st October 2024 - 12:00 pm

As we come to the end of Black History Month, it seems an appropriate time to discuss our party’s policy on the Commonwealth, reparations and the Climate Emergency. With the election of Ghana’s Foreign Minister Shirley Ayorkor Botchwey as the new Secretary-General of the Commonwealth,the subject of reparations has risen to the top of the agenda. We should take this time to think about what a Liberal Democrat policy should be.

We should vigorously and vociferously make the case for the Commonwealth.This is personal, my late father served as Ghana’s High Commissioner (Ambassador) to the UK and was charged with removing the newly declared republic from the Commonwealth. He like many others then and now viewed it as a colonial hangover. However, he was persuaded by the Indian Prime Minister and Pakistani President that the body was the only forum where the West and Global South met as equals.

He was persuaded and went on to persuade newly independent countries across the West Indies, Asia and Africa of the merits of joining. He became a leading advocate, opening the Commonwealth Institute in London with the late Queen and co-founding the Africa Centre. It influenced his thinking when he helped establish the African Union. If a man born in a British Colony, who’s grandparents could remember being subjects of an Asante and then a British Emperor believed in the potential of the Commonwealth, we need to think about what it should look like in the twenty-first century.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 14 Comments
Ken Westmoreland

Falling between two stools: the British Overseas Territories

By Ken Westmoreland | Thu 31st October 2024 - 9:59 am

Unlike the Conservatives and Labour, which both made mention of the British Overseas Territories (BOTs) in their recent election manifestos, the Liberal Democrats made none at all in theirs.

The last time they were mentioned in any detail in a policy document was in 2019, and only then as two pages in ‘Modernising the relationship between Britain and its citizens living abroad’, a symptom of how they fall between two stools, under British sovereignty, unlike the wider British diaspora, but outside the United Kingdom, despite often being called a part of a ‘UK family’.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 4 Comments
Vince Cable

Vince Cable on the budget: manifesto folly

By Vince Cable | Tue 29th October 2024 - 10:59 am

Embed from Getty Images

‘Read my lips: no new taxes’; ‘we will reduce net immigration to the tens of thousands’; ‘we pledge not to increase tuition fees’. Promises easily made in an election campaign. A source of endless regret in government.

There will be endless regret from Labour’s manifesto commitment not to raise tax rates on taxes accounting for three quarters of tax revenue.  There is an urgent and compelling need to raise taxes in the coming budget for reasons of fiscal prudence and to stem the decline in public services. Yet, despite having an enormous parliamentary majority, the government has denied itself a mandate properly to address these fundamental problems.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 16 Comments
Tom Sutton

It’s not about moving left or right; it’s about sticking to our Liberal values: A reply to Buddy Anderson

By Tom Sutton | Mon 28th October 2024 - 12:48 pm

As much as I disagreed with it, I actually read Buddy Anderson’s recent article with significant intrigue. I am glad that the conversation of “Where do we go now?” has appeared so suddenly after the election, cementing our position now rather than to fight the next election and all preceding contests in local government on the proverbial hop. I am also glad that we can do this with respect and candour, as it shows our better nature as a party. So, now I have had time to think about it, I wanted to respond with my opinion that a tacit suggestion of moving the fiscal dial one or two notches to the right would be a misstep, both nationally and locally for our party. It’s not what the electorate wants of us, and it would not do us much good, and I shall seek to explain why.

What led to the reward of 72 seats, mostly at Conservative expense, and most crucially how do we continue that into the future? That is the main question of this debate. Ultimately the 2024 manifesto was quite “economics-lite” to criticism from some quarters, but what was there was unquestionably progressive: shifting the tax burden from workers onto wealth and big business, meaningful action on the cost of living and the same on green investment. We are a party of market economics, yes. But I am reminded of something Tim Farron told John Harris from The Guardian in 2010: “No market is genuinely free unless it’s fair”. I don’t really see that as a centre-right statement, but it sums up the essence of our philosophy.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 13 Comments
Samuel Jackson

Could sortition help to address voter apathy and public distrust in politics?

By Samuel Jackson | Mon 28th October 2024 - 10:12 am

The theme of the 2024 General Election was meant to be change. Apart from the end of the chaotic Conservative government and its replacement by a Labour one, the course seems to have been stayed in many ways. Labour is pursuing austerity measures similar to those carried out by the Conservatives, and seems to have become mired in scandal, notably over freebies such as football and concert tickets. And Starmer has abandoned many positions which he endorsed as a Labour leadership candidate now that he is Prime Minister.

The 2024 General Election proved to be one of the most disproportionate in UK history. Voter turnout fell below 60%, Labour won over 400 seats with a lower share of the vote than they won at the two previous elections, and the two major parties won their lowest combined vote share since 1918. Such election outcomes and such behaviour by politicians have brought public trust in politics to record lows. This and resulting voter apathy can create a negative feedback loop where lower turnout can diminish the legitimacy of decision-making, leading to great distrust in politics.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 8 Comments
Tom Arms

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 27th October 2024 - 9:23 am

North Korea at al

China is unhappy. So is Belarus. Both countries are worried about North Korea sending troops to Russia in the middle of the Ukraine war.

President Xi Jinping is worried that the move will de-stabilise the Korean Peninsula, escalate and complicate the Ukraine War, increase Russian influence in the Far East and potentially drag China into a head-on conflict with NATO.

Alexander Lukashenko is concerned that the appearance of non-Russian troops in Ukraine will increase pressure on him to send Belarussian soldiers in support of the Kremlin.

Xi hates uncertainty. He likes his foreign policy to run along diplomatic railway lines painted bright red so that others know not to cross them. If there are going to be any spanners to be thrown, he wants to toss them and control their flight and consequences.

He does not like North Korea’s Kim Jong-un. He is uneasy about the hereditary communist dictator’s nuclear arsenal. He supplies the regime with just enough aid and trade to keep them going, but not enough to threaten the status quo. This is because for the past 74 years one of the chief aims of China is to keep Korea divided and to maintain North Korea as a buffer state between the Chinese border and 25,000 American soldiers in South Korea. Anything which threatens to disrupt that policy is bad news in Beijing.

The bromance between Vladimir Putin and Kim threatens to upset this delicately balanced apple cart. Kim will want something in return for his troops. It will almost certainly include Russian military help which will embolden the mercurial North Korean leader and increase the threat to South Korea and Japan.

Belarus is on the frontline in the Ukraine War. The initial attack in 2022 was launched from its territory. Lukashenko is closely allied with Russia and continues to provide bases and logistical support. But Lukashenko knows he is unpopular. He clings to power with the help of the Belarussian KGB (yes, they retained the name of the old Soviet organisation). Committing his small military force of 50,000 to the Ukraine War would be unpopular and threaten his rule.

By the way, just everyone else is also unhappy about North Korean troops fighting in Ukraine.  It adds a new and dangerous dimension by internationalising the conflict.

Russia

Russia is unhappy too. The recent referendum in Moldova on closer ties with the European Union did not go the way the Kremlin wanted. It was extremely close: 50.46 percent in favour of closer ties and 49.54 percent against.

The Russians did everything they could to push the vote the other way. They played fast and loose with bribery, intimidation and misinformation. A BBC reporter was filmed being approached by a voter asking for the payment she had been promised.

The misinformation focused on an expensive advertising campaign which claimed the EU planned to brainwash Moldovan children to turn gay or transgender. The gay community is generally unpopular throughout Eastern Europe.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , , , and | 5 Comments
Michael Berwick-Gooding

What a Liberal Democrat budget could look like

By Michael Berwick-Gooding | Fri 25th October 2024 - 1:57 pm

The budget less than a week away will be a Labour budget, but what would a Liberal Democrat budget look like?

Jeremy Hunt’s last budget was expansionary (£13.875 billion) with cuts to national insurance contributions to boost the economy, as was his earlier financial statement (£13.73 billion) which also included cuts to national insurance contributions. These measures to some extent did work with growth of 0.7% January to March and 0.6% April to June. But growth has fallen away with no growth in July and only 0.2% in August. There is therefore a need for an expansionary budget.

A Liberal Democrat Chancellor of the Exchequer should start with reversing the cuts to the Winter Fuel Payment (costing £1.4bn), followed by ending the two-child benefit cap (costing about £3.4bn).

During the General Election we talked about the cost-of-living crisis. Therefore, we should provide financial assistance for pensioners and people on benefits as the Conservative Government had done. The Energy Cap from October is £100 less than last year, so the cost-of-living payments should be set at £200 which would be a one-off cost of about £3bn.

We also talked about the Conservatives putting up taxes for struggling families and pensioners by freezing income tax thresholds. Does this mean that we should expect a Liberal Democrat Chancellor of the Exchequer to unfreeze the income tax and national insurance thresholds by the rate of inflation (costing about £3bn)?

It was reported on Channel 4 News that according to the JRF households on benefits are £690 a year worse off in August this year compared to January 2021. We might expect that a Liberal Democrat Chancellor of the Exchequer would increase Universal Credit and the legacy benefits by £20 a week (costing about £7 billion over a full year), to begin to implement our policy ending deep poverty within a decade, but as it didn’t appear in the Manifesto this is unlikely in the present circumstances. However, a Liberal Democrat Chancellor might well implement our policies on Carer’s Allowance including increasing it by £20 a week (costing £1.45bn).

Continue reading »
Tagged | 16 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Daisy’s PMQs Debut

By Caron Lindsay | Wed 23rd October 2024 - 8:12 pm

With Keir Starmer out of the country, it was down to the deputies to take the stage at Prime Minister’s Questions. Angela Rayner and Daisy Cooper put in their first appearance of the new Parliament in their new roles. For Conservative Oliver Dowden, it was his last in the role. There was very funny love in with menaces between him and Rayner in their exchanges. It was a bit like a seaside comedy show. The serious stuff came when Daisy asked her two questions.

 

May I associate myself and the Liberal Democrats with the Deputy Prime Minister’s remarks about Chris Hoy, and about all those involved in the train crash?

Our NHS is bracing itself for a winter crisis. One of the causes of the winter crisis every year is that there are thousands of people in hospitals who are fit to go home, but who cannot be discharged because there are not the care workers in place to enable people to recover at home or in a care home. Will the Deputy Prime Minister consider the Liberal Democrats’ idea of an NHS winter taskforce to winter-proof our NHS, end the cycle of the winter crisis, and put to an end the scandal of hospital patients paying the price of the social care crisis left by the Conservatives?

I thank the hon. Lady for her comments, and I share her desire to ensure that care workers are given the respect and importance that they deserve. They are critical to solving the problems in our national health service. The Labour party will create a national care service, and we are launching our first ever fair pay agreement for care professionals to boost recruitment and retention. We must get the NHS back on its feet after the disaster of the Conservatives, and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will have more to say on that in the Budget.

Daisy kept to the same theme for the second question, talking of the dangers to the care sector of increasing employers’ National Insurance contributions, something she had mentioned in her Sky News interview on Sunday:

I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for her answer. We stand ready, as a party of constructive opposition, to work with the Government to fix our social care system. However, a measure that could make it harder for us to keep the carers that we so desperately need would be an increase in employers’ national insurance contributions. Were that measure to go ahead, it would affect millions of small businesses, including 18,000 small care providers. Will the Deputy Prime Minister assure the House that nothing in the Budget will make it harder for vulnerable people to access the care workers and the care that they desperately need?

A bit of flannel from Rayner in return, but at least the job of setting out our position had been done:

Again, I will not speculate on the Budget, not least with the Chancellor sat beside me. To reiterate what the Chancellor and the Prime Minister have said, this Budget will recognise that working people of this country and enterprise in this country have been hard-hit by 14 years of the Conservatives. We will rebuild Britain, and we will grow our economy to pay for our public services.

Rayner had to face another three Lib Dems in the session. This is great to see, and likely to be more commonplace now that we make up more than 10% of the House.

First up was Monica Harding who had a heartbreaking story of a young boy in her constituency who has been out of school for a year because they don’t have the right special needs provision for him.

Charlie from my constituency is an eight-year-old boy with an autism diagnosis who has been out of school for almost a year. He is one of 1,800 children in Surrey missing school because of a lack of appropriate special educational needs provision. Will the Government commit to ending this scandal by properly funding special educational needs provision in next week’s Budget, so that children like Charlie, in my constituency of Esher and Walton and beyond, are no longer let down?

Angela Rayner was sympathetic but had nothing concrete to offer:

Continue reading »
Also posted in News and Parliament | Tagged , , , , and | Leave a comment
Lord William Wallace

Are we ready for US election chaos, or for President Trump?

By Lord William Wallace | Wed 23rd October 2024 - 2:22 pm

Liberal Democrats will be hoping that the nightmare of the US presidential campaign will be over on November 5th, with a clear win for Kamala Harris, accepted by Donald Trump, leading Republicans and state and federal courts.  But at present that looks the least likely outcome.  More likely by far will be either a contested result, after chaotic events during the voting and state counts, or a narrow Trump victory with chaotic consequences for US politics and foreign policy.  Either will have major implications for British politics and foreign policy.

The continuing rumble of opinion polls suggests a virtual tie between Harris and Trump, with the outcome dependent on who turns out among the small minority of undecideds.  Challenges to names on voting registers are under way in several states.  Counting may well be disrupted; there were some assaults on election counts four years ago, and the atmosphere has become more fraught since then.  Republican local organisations are ready to use the courts to challenge any contestable declaration or hint of malpractice.  We may not be sure who has won for some time.  And the consequences of a Trump win are as uncertain as the candidate’s utterances have become.  So how should we react to what will be an assault on the principles of liberal democracy and on the transatlantic partnership which has been at the core of the UK’s position in the world since 1941?   

One Liberal Democratic theme, I suggest, must be to remind disillusioned citizens in this country of the importance of constitutional institutions and limited government, and the dangers of sliding down the road towards populist rule.  Britain has just emerged from several years of chaotic government, with a populist prime minister attempting to prevent Parliament from returning from a recess when he had been in office himself for only s few months.  We have witnessed right-wing attacks on our supreme court, an Elections Act that lifted constraints on political donations and restricted the autonomy of the Electoral Commission, and Conservative ministers supporting conspiracy theories about ‘liberal elites’.  We now have a Labour government which has won the most disproportional parliamentary majority since 1832: 63.4% of MPs from 33.7% of the votes cast, on a worryingly low turnout of 58%.  Public trust in ‘Westminster politics’ has sunk to the lowest recorded point since opinion surveys began.  The potential for an anti-democratic backlash, if this government fails to improve both economic growth and public services, is high.

Continue reading »
Also posted in Europe / International | Tagged , , and | 8 Comments
Ben Wood

What we need is not constant ‘growth’ or complete ‘degrowth’ but intelligent economic development

By Ben Wood | Tue 22nd October 2024 - 5:21 pm

In his recent article, John Hills offers some helpful reflections about the political future of the LibDems. As John writes: ‘It is necessary to go beyond individual policies and good ideas, to find our narrative; not just of what we believe, but more tangibly, what we stand for.’ I couldn’t agree more. The most intriguing aspect of John’s piece is his suggestion that while we have recently focused on disillusioned Conservatives, we would be wise to reach out to other political tribes, particularly Green-facing voters. John is right to say that LibDems continue to tell a good story about the environment (see our recent campaigning on the state of the UK’s rivers). He is also right that we should focus on what is distinctive in our offering; a kind of pivot and diverge strategy. But we have to be careful concerning the divergence aspect of the equation.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 15 Comments
Leon Duveen

Assisted Dying and Palliative Care; it isn’t a choice, we need both.

By Leon Duveen | Mon 21st October 2024 - 11:04 am

With Kim Leadbeater’s Private Members Bill on Assisted Dying comes up for its Second Reading at the end of next month, now is a good time for us to be talking about the issues involved and why it should never be a choice for those facing a diagnosis of a fatal illness between giving them a choice when and how they die if they wish or providing them the best quality palliative care to allow them to live as long as possible. Both are needed and the debate about the bill must not be about choosing between the two.

Much is spoken about how palliative care can and does help those with a terminal illness deal with physical pain during their illness. In hospitals, in hospices and at home, helping those facing death live their life as fully as possible. Such care also helps those close to the patient by sharing the support needed, both physical & psychologically.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 22 Comments
Mark Valladares

Welcome to my day: 21 October 2024 – you’d wonder why anyone would be a councillor…

By Mark Valladares | Mon 21st October 2024 - 7:24 am

As I may have noted before, I’m a parish councillor in a small, but perfectly-formed, village in Suffolk’s Gipping Valley. And, generally, the role isn’t that stressful. After all, my council provides no services of a life or death nature, nor do we provide services which impact hugely on people’s lives, like education, social care or housing. But, even here, there can be contentious issues which impact on us. Planning applications for example, and whilst we have no decision making powers there either, as a statutory consultee, our residents expect us to represent their views to the powers that be. They believe, not unreasonably, that the powers that be must listen to us – if only that were true. And discussions can get a bit heated, even when party politics isn’t in play.

But I’ve been, on the whole, pretty lucky. I’ve received very little hassle, and all of that has come from outsiders. But I was reminded at the weekend that, that is increasingly not true of my fellow councillors at all tiers of local government. A report issued by the Local Government Association on Saturday noted that, in a survey of its members, 22% of respondents stated that they had received death threats or threats of violence against them.

And it’s not just the public who can make life difficult or impossible for an individual councillor. Opposition councillors and, even more depressingly, members of your own Party can be the source of behaviour that is designed to humiliate, embarrass or even frighten you. Too many of us have witnessed that, or been the victim of it.

Continue reading »
Also posted in Local government | Tagged and | Leave a comment
Jack Carter

Are we still the party of Beveridge?

By Jack Carter | Sun 20th October 2024 - 12:24 pm

The Liberal Democrats, ran on a manifesto focusing on health and social care. However upon reading it on the day of its release I was disappointed – because it actually said very little about reforming welfare. To put this in blunt terms, approximately 24 percent of the United Kingdom’s population is disabled – we had, in our manifesto, three insubstantial commitments on welfare reform for disabled people. That is not nearly good enough.

As Rachel Reeves’ first budget approaches, with new announcements on welfare “reforms” being made – including £3 billion in welfare cuts, it is a scary time to be a disabled person reliant upon the welfare state. With “workfare” being put before healthcare, it is estimated up to 500,000 people suffering from long-term sickness will be forced back into work, just so HMRC can drum up some more tax revenue. We must stand firmly against this cacophony of harmful policies, one of which includes putting job coaches on mental health wards, where vulnerable patients are receiving care for often severe mental health conditions. The Labour Party also wants to cut benefits for mentally ill people, which would imply they do not view mental health conditions to be valid as disabilities – an ableist notion.

So, I put to you, the reader, the first of two simple yet blunt questions; where is our opposition to these harmful policies which will disproportionately hurt the most vulnerable in our society? I have looked at our party’s social media pages, I have looked at the social media pages of our Members of Parliament, and I must say I am bitterly disappointed. Make no mistake, our party has not done nearly enough to regain the trust of disabled people, and I say that as someone who disabled. We have not been a voice for the disabled community, we have not stood with them nor have we acknowledged our responsibility for the policies which harmed them, during the 2010-2015 coalition government.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 25 Comments
Tom Arms

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 20th October 2024 - 10:27 am

Middle East

Every geopolitical shift offers opportunities and dangers. The escalating war in the Middle East is no exception.

At the moment the world is focused on the dangers. But the opportunities are there as the major players realise the need to step back from the brink and consider measures that were hitherto unthinkable in order to avoid a catastrophe nobody wants.

The biggest opportunity could involve Iran’s nuclear weapons programme.

There is a strong body of opinion in the US and Israel that the best way to deal with Iran’s nuclear weapons programme is to destroy it. The problem with that is three-fold:
1- You cannot destroy the know-how
2- the necessary installations are deep underground, heavily protected and would probably require direct American involvement and
3- Destruction of Iran’s nuclear installations would only increase hatred of Israel and the US.

Many Israelis and Americans also fear that a religiously-zealous Iran would use nuclear weapons against Israel—and possibly the US—as soon as they acquire them.

Rubbish. The Iranians may be religious extremists, but they are not stupid. They know that they would be wiped out in any nuclear exchange.

To them a nuclear weapon is a deterrent against an Israeli—or possibly joint US-Israeli—nuclear or overwhelming conventional attack.

However, nuclear weapons do give Iran greater flexibility in any conventional scenario as any potential enemy would think twice about attacking a nuclear-armed Iran. This would mean a serious movement in the Middle East goalposts.

So how can the US (with Israel looming large in the background) and the Mullahs avoid escalation and a nuclear Iran. From the Iranian side, Washington would expect Tehran to immediately stop refining and testing missiles and enriching U-235 and converting it to fissile material. From the US-Israeli side, Iran would expect guarantees that Iran would not be attacked by either Israel or the US.

Iran is reckoned by the CIA to be seven months away from having THE bomb. An agreement could freeze development at the current level—or slightly more advanced– so that if it was attacked, Iran could quickly move to a nuclear capable position.

The above scenario is not impossible. According to intelligence sources, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini has not given the final go-ahead for nuclear weapons. He has also told newly-elected President Masoud Pazeshkian that he can resume nuclear negotiations with the five members of the Security Council and Germany.

There are other important tangential issues including: Iranian support for Russia’s war in Ukraine; Iranian support for Hezbollah and the Houthis; Israeli attacks on Hezbollah; Saudi and UAE attacks on the Houthis; the Syrian civil war; Western sanctions against Iran and Iran and China’s growing economic co-dependency.

All of —or some of—these issues could be dealt with as part of nuclear talks. Or nuclear talks could open the door to separate discussions on these problems.

European Union

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy has called it the “EU Reset.” It started this week with Lammy attending a regular meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg. The Foreign Office has promised more of the same.

The talks were on big global security issues—China, Russia, Ukraine, the Middle East, US elections—all those things on which it is very easy for the UK and EU to agree. Not on the agenda was the EU-UK 2020 Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) which continues to bedevil or threaten to bedevil EU-UK relations.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 9 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: Navalny v. Putin

By Tom Arms | Sat 19th October 2024 - 10:22 am

Alexei Navalny’s memoirs are adamant: Putin’s Russia is based on corruption and “lies, nothing but lies.”

“It will,” he has written,  inevitably “crumble and collapse.”

The late Navalny’s scathing assessment is a central theme in his memoir “Patriot” which is published this coming week in 11 different languages.

Russia is a modern-day feudal state wrapped in the flag of nationalism and plagued with corruption, bribery, kleptocracy, cronyism, a crooked judicial system, and suppressed media and personal freedoms.

There are an estimated 100 oligarchs at the top of the Russian heap. Their cumulative net worth is about $500 billion. The exact number of oligarchs is constantly shifting as the man at the apex of this structure—one Vladimir Putin—likes to keep his underlings on their toes by firing, imprisoning and assassinating any oligarchs that dare to veer from fawning fidelity.

Putin himself is one of the wealthiest man in the world with estimates of his net worth ranging from $180 to $200 billion. His money is derived mainly from kickbacks and bribes from oligarchs who rely on his favour for their billions. Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index ranks Russia at 141 out of 180 countries.

A prime example of this feudal-type corruption is the 2014 Winter Olympics at Sochi. At $50 billion they were the costliest Olympics in history. They didn’t need to be. It is estimated that a third of the bill went in kickbacks and cost overruns. The contractors were childhood friends of Putin, Arkady and Boris Rotenberg. Their construction company was the only one allowed to bid for the Sochi contract. They secured the contract to build the Kerch Strait Bridge linking Russia and Crimea on the same terms.

Exposing Russian corruption is a risky business. Navalny was a leading exponent of it. He was poisoned with Novichok in 2021. After recovering in Germany, he returned to Russia to be immediately arrested and imprisoned. He died in a remote prison in February.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 4 Comments

Tell the Chancellor – don’t let the inflation rate fall be bad news for the poorest

By Michael Berwick-Gooding and Katharine Pindar | Fri 18th October 2024 - 2:29 pm

The fall in inflation to 1.7% this week from 2.2% in August should be good news for borrowers, but it could result in a blow to benefit recipients. Although the rate is expected by the Resolution Foundation to rise shortly again to 2.2%, the September inflation rate is that which determines the annual uprating of welfare benefits next April.

For all the difficult decisions facing the Chancellor as she finalises her Autumn Budget, for her to increase the annual uprating of benefits above the rate of inflation should be demanded by our party. If the increase was 2.2% instead of 1.7% this would give a couple over 25 more than £30 a month extra.

The rate of Universal Credit is already inadequate, as our party’s policies in its Fairer Society motion recognised. Now this is starkly spelt out again in a new report from the Trussell Trust, the major food bank provider, called The Cost of Hunger and Hardship. It says that record numbers of people in Britain, 9.3 million or 14% of the population, including 3 million, 20.9%, of children are facing hunger and hardship, which they define as being more than 25% below the Social Metrics Commission’s poverty line (which the SMC define as the amount ‘people actually have to have to cover daily living costs’).

Universal Credit is failing to protect people, the report asserts (p.24), ‘Almost four in ten (39%) people in families claiming Universal Credit (5.4 million) face hunger and hardship’. ‘Over half of people living in hunger and hardship – 58% – live in a working family, while 35% live in families where no-one is working, and 5% are in retired families’ (p 25).

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 58 Comments
William Francis

We should oppose any mass surveillance in Labour’s Fraud Bill

By William Francis | Fri 18th October 2024 - 8:47 am

In Citizen’s Britain Paddy Ashdown argued that despite the Conservative government’s claims of “rolling back the frontiers of the state”, they were in fact spending more and more on social control, coercion, and surveillance. The closing months of Sunak’s government echoed this aspect of the Thatcher era, with it planning to introduce mass surveillance legislation, which now could be implemented under the present Labour government.

The Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, which the Conservative’s failed to pass before this year’s general election, included surveillance provisions would have forced banks to monitor the accounts of all means-tested benefits claimants, and report every time an account went over the capital limit, or was used abroad for more than four weeks. It would have also empowered designated DWP staff to arrest claimants, search premises and seize any evidence they found without needing to use the police. Such legislation had the potential to create a Horizon-style scandal on a horrific scale, given how DWP software had wrongly flagged over 200,000 people over the last three years for investigation for suspected benefit fraud and error.

Though the details concerning Labour’s Fraud, Error and Debt Bill haven’t been made public recent comments by Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Liz Kendall worryingly indicate people on benefits would be under similar surveillance. The Fraud bill would require banks and other financial institutions to check examine their own data sets to highlight cases of potential benefit fraud, to help the DWP investigate fraud and incorrect payments. Though Kendall made assurances that “only a minimum amount of data will be accessed” and that this would be done in a “legal, proportionate and targeted” manner, groups like Big Brother Watch and Campaign for Disability Justice remain highly sceptical that the government will be so restrained. They have every right to be, given the authoritarian tendencies of the New Labour governments.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 11 Comments
Chris Adams

Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends

By Chris Adams | Thu 17th October 2024 - 10:37 am

Much of the debate against assisted dying has focused on the sanctity of life, and the need to protect vulnerable people from being pressured into giving up their lives due to the burden of being caref for, and the effect this may have on those around them.

I sympathise deeply with this perspective – it is the main logical objection I had to assisted dying for a long time: a desire to protect the vulnerable – alongside my own faith which felt like it provided a moral objection to assisted dying on principle.

Yet over recent years, seeing some elderly relatives grow ever older and more infirm, I have considered the fate of one of my grandmothers, who died quite suddenly of a heart attack in her mid-70s. As part of working through the grief, it was a comfort to know that she died quickly, in the arms of a close friend (by sheer luck), at a time when she was still able to go for long walks in the mountains. She could doubtless have gone on for a few more years, but would have struggled to remain independent for much longer.

Compare this to my other grandmother, now in her late 80s. She has been almost immobile for years – and now finally has reached a stage where my ageing grandfather is no longer able to take care of her. She is confined to a care home, and I know she prays for God to take her. She wants to die, but is instead left languishing as her body slowly gives up on her. I do not think she would want the option of assisted dying. I also know that as a family we would never countenance the idea that she should feel pressured in any way to take it up.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 10 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Don’t forget to contribute to the General Election Review

By Caron Lindsay | Wed 16th October 2024 - 4:34 pm

After every General Election, it’s become our habit to have a good look at what went well and what went badly and publish a General Election Review.

This year’s will doubtless be a lot happier than the last few. The Review team is led by Tim Farron. He is joined by

Cllr Ade Adeyemo
Paul Farthing
Cllr Donna Harris
Cllr Emma Holland-Lindsay
Mike O’Carroll
Sally Pattle

Their remit is to:

  • review the party’s performance at the general election, based on both the campaign period itself and the preparatory work and strategy through the whole Parliament.
  • particularly focus on the lessons relevant to the party’s next stages of development, including the linkages between electoral success at different levels, and make recommendations accordingly.

Time is running out to complete the online survey. The website says that it is open until 3 November – which isn’t long – but one of the review team said in a WhatsApp chat that it closed on 18 October, eg this Friday. So if you haven’t completed it yet, you’d be well advised to get a wiggle on.

I think that our campaign was perfect for the moment. But the moment was that the entire country wanted rid of the Tories. Our fun filled campaign, built on years of careful campaigning, did what it needed to.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 2 Comments
Andrew Emmerson

In praise of our MPs’ office managers

By Andrew Emmerson | Wed 16th October 2024 - 2:21 pm

Within politics, there are lots of under-appreciated groups. People who work tirelessly to ensure that the roadshow goes on, so that those front and centre can walk, run and sprint to victory. Be it the campaign organisers and their hoardes of volunteers pushing paper through letterboxes, or the tech people running important communication methods, or the spouses, partners and confidantes who prop up tired candidates ready to fall. 

Yet I want to throw my own special shout-out to another group, the MPs’ staff. I’m very privileged to have worked in one capacity or another for a number of our party’s  illustrious MPs in  both campaigns and as parliamentary staff. This is not a shout-out to me, or a self-congratulating pat on the back though. I want to pay tribute to the new Office Managers, Caseworkers, Personal Assistants and Media Officers who are now filling the offices of our newly-elected MPs. 

I am lucky that when I started in this job, there was already a set way of working that I could adapt to, and could adapt to me. Yet since the election, 57 new office managers have been hired to get MPs on their feet. Bravely taking over single-handedly where campaigns left off. They’ve been the ones wrestling with the leviathan of MPs’ inboxes, hiring staff, finding new office spaces, helping their bosses find new London accommodation, wandering lonely through the IPSA labyrinth of expenses. 

I am fortunate to help to co-ordinate (yet another) WhatsApp community bringing together caseworkers and office managers, and the battles they’ve faced to establish new MPs in their communities quickly, quietly and efficiently should be very strongly applauded. 

Continue reading »
Also posted in Parliament | Tagged , and | Leave a comment
David Green

Going for GOLD; proposals for a Global Organisation of Liberal Democracies

By David Green | Wed 16th October 2024 - 10:25 am

This is part of an individual contribution to the Government’s current Strategic Defence Review

The current Strategic Defence Review has a thankless task: with existing international conflicts and tensions threatening to degenerate into all-out war and unprecedented budget restraints at home, now is perhaps not the best time to be holding a review of our depleted armed forces.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 17 Comments
Em Dean

Conservative leaders have become allergic to excellence

By Em Dean | Tue 15th October 2024 - 1:00 pm

Love them or hate them, one of the enduring legacies of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher – the beacons of conservatism for the English-speaking world in the late 20thcentury – was the pursuit of excellence. “Hard work,” Thatcher pragmatically opined, “will not always get you to the top, but should get you pretty near.” More optimistically, Reagan claimed that “Entrepreneurs are the heroes of modern times.”

Continue reading »
11 Comments
Leslie Jones

Top of the class divide

By Leslie Jones | Tue 15th October 2024 - 11:00 am

Private education is the very antithesis of the moral arguments that can be traced back through time. The US Declaration of Independence, based largely on the writings of  John Locke, states that we  may treat basic moral and political equality as a fundamental moral truth that is self-evident. Kant argues that it is the human being’s rational nature unconditionally that leads to his famous dictum that human beings, all human beings, are ends in themselves.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 34 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Peter Martin
    @ David Allen, @ Tristan. "That’s PFI, or something like it." Absolutely. Except I'd drop the "something like it". It is PFI. PFI is esse...
  • David Garlick
    I guess we all had some idea that the picture you illustrate was there but good/worrying to see it laid out so clearly. Thank you....
  • cim
    @David Allen - Absolutely. If the best the Lib Dems have to offer is "competently managed decline" because anything else would be fiscally irresponsible, or ups...
  • cim
    So because some rich tech companies have a big marketing budget, a willingness to break national and international law, and a complete disregard for the truth ....
  • David Allen
    Tristan, You're right in the sense that you didn't specifically call for PFI. But you did say "if you can persuade private money to provide the funding on t...