Category Archives: Op-eds

Jean-François Burford

One Hub, Two Services: Why Police and Healthcare Should Share the Same Front Door

By Jean-François Burford | Tue 17th March 2026 - 10:31 am

Across the United Kingdom, the role of the local high street is changing. Many of the civic buildings that once anchored communities, such as local police stations, small health centres, and council offices, are gradually disappearing as services modernise and budgets tighten. While change is inevitable, it raises an important question: how can we keep public services visible, accessible, and connected to the communities they serve?

One promising answer is the Integrated Community Hub. This would be a shared public building where Community Minor Injury Units (MIUs) and Neighbourhood Police Teams operate under the same roof. Rather than maintaining separate facilities scattered across towns and cities, a hub creates a single, welcoming location where residents can access help, advice, and care.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 5 Comments
Mathew Hulbert

Mathew on Monday: Serious Times Demand Serious Leadership – Ed Davey needs to stop with the clowning around

By Mathew Hulbert | Mon 16th March 2026 - 5:00 pm

These are not normal political times. These are not easy times. And they are certainly not times when large swathes of the electorate is crying out for gimmicks, distractions, or anything that looks remotely unserious. They are times of international instability, economic uncertainty, pressure on public services, and a deep distrust in politics. In moments like these, what voters are looking for above all else is seriousness, serious ideas. Serious tone, serious leadership.

Which is why, for many of us watching Ed Davey’s speech at Spring Conference in York yesterday, there was such deep frustration. Because there were good things in what he said. There were important themes about Britain’s place in the world, about security, and about the values we champion as Liberal Democrats.

But all of that was immediately overshadowed by what came next. The dancing.

At best it looked tone-deaf. At worst it looked profoundly inappropriate given the gravity of the times we are living through. To say it was inappropriate is an understatement.

Politics is about judgement. And leadership is about understanding the mood of the country. Voters who are worried about paying their bills, worried about the NHS, worried about global instability, are not asking whether politicians can dance (in Portcullis House or, indeed, the floor of Conference). They are asking whether they can lead.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , and | 48 Comments
Rob Parsons

Nuclear deterrent?

By Rob Parsons | Mon 16th March 2026 - 2:48 pm

It’s the wrong time for any serious party leader to advocate getting rid of our nuclear weapons. Yesterday, Ed probably said the most sensible thing anyone could say. If we’re going to keep nuclear weapons, there is now a pressing need for them to be British.

It’s been said that it might be possible to jailbreak an F35. It’s also been said it doesn’t work like that. I don’t know if you can jailbreak a nuclear missile, but maybe we should have somebody working on it.*

But there is a substantial argument that our nuclear weapons will soon be useless – if they aren’t already – and the massive amounts of money spent on them prevents us from building up arms and capacity that we could actually use. And in my view we need to have a serious discussion about that.

Firstly, the unique characteristic of our deterrent is that it hides. Nobody knows where it is. Within a few years, I think five at most, that feature will be lost. Seagoing drones are already being used effectively. It will not be long before someone litters the oceans with drones. One will sit outside Faslane, watch as our nuclear sub sets sail, and hand it off to its mate as the sub gets out of range. And then everybody will know where HMS Vengeance is all the time, and our deterrent will be worthless.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 4 Comments
Gareth McAleer

Reuniting with Europe: Rebuilding What Brexit Broke

By Gareth McAleer | Mon 16th March 2026 - 12:04 pm

Six years after Britain left the European Union, the promise that we would “take back control” rings hollow. The truth is painful: Brexit has weakened our country. It has diminished our prosperity, our standing, and our confidence. What was sold as liberation has instead become a slow estrangement from our closest allies and from the European identity that once helped define us as an open, confident nation.

For Liberal Democrats, the damage goes deeper than trade or economics. Brexit was a rejection of something essential: our belief that Britain’s strength lies in cooperation and shared purpose. It narrowed our horizons and encouraged a politics of resentment and blame. For millions who see themselves as both British and European, it felt like being written out of the story of our own nation.

The Damage Done

Brexit has left marks on every part of our national life. Small firms struggle with new border checks that slow exports and drain their budgets. Farmers face endless forms and higher costs. Musicians and creative workers have lost easy access to European tours. Investment has slumped, and the “global trade revolution” we were told to expect has produced little reward.

Yet the damage is not only economic. It is emotional, generational, and cultural. For young people, the Continent is no longer a place of effortless study, work, and discovery. The loss of Erasmus+ was not a policy detail but a breaking of connection. Freedom of movement, once taken for granted, is now a memory, and many Britons are only beginning to understand what that freedom meant. Families that once moved easily between London and Lisbon or Glasgow and Athens now feel distance where closeness used to be.

Continue reading »
Also posted in Europe / International | Tagged and | 18 Comments
Caron Lindsay

All the fun of the rally

By Caron Lindsay | Sat 14th March 2026 - 10:00 am

While the Lib Dem Voice team were having delicious food in the Mason’s Arms last night, the loud and raucous Conference rally was taking place. The rally is like Glee Club and marmite and all these things you either love or don’t. I’m more on the “don’t” side because it just seems a bit like an American convention rather than a British Conference, but others love the fun and spirit and theatre of it.

I always feel like you can watch things like this later, but the chance to spend time with friends is precious so that’s what I tend to do.

So, here, for your entertainment, is all the fun of the rally.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | Leave a comment
Mark Hofman

Gas panic: Have we learnt the lessons of 2022?

By Mark Hofman | Fri 13th March 2026 - 5:16 pm

The threat of another energy crisis raises a simple question: did we actually learn the lessons from the last one?

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine triggered a surge in energy prices that drove household bills sharply higher. The shock had a profound impact on the UK economy and on household finances. Government support reportedly cost around £80 billion, and without emergency intervention typical household bills could have reached over £4,000 a year. Even now, prices remain more than a third higher than before the war.

But the crisis was not just economic. It was also a public health issue. New NHS data shows a sharp rise in cold-related illness between 2020 and 2025. Pneumonia admissions increased by 66%, hypothermia cases rose by 45%, and incidents linked to excessive cold climbed by 33%. Freedom of Information data recorded 4,701 admissions in England, with a further 1,127 cases in Scotland.

This should focus minds. Cold homes do not just affect comfort or bills. They affect health, and they place real pressure on the NHS, particularly for the most vulnerable.

Now there are warnings that rising tensions in the Middle East could trigger another spike in energy prices. If wholesale costs rise again, those pressures could return just as we approach another heating season.

So the question is whether the UK is becoming more resilient to energy shocks.

The government has brought forward around £15 billion through the Warm Homes Plan to 2030 to help households reduce their dependence on gas and improve energy efficiency. That works out at less than £3 billion a year. Given the scale and cost of the last crisis, it is unlikely to be enough on its own, particularly when awareness of the support available remains low among both households and policymakers.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 7 Comments
Roz Savage MP

Trust the people: the Liberal politics of human potential

By Roz Savage MP | Fri 13th March 2026 - 2:14 pm

There is a deep fault line running through politics today. On one side are those who believe people should be empowered – free to learn, question, create and fulfil their potential. On the other are those who believe society functions best when people are compliant – guided from above and discouraged from asking too many questions.

For Liberal Democrats, that divide goes to the heart of our philosophy. Our commitment to liberty, equality and democracy begins with a belief in people. Liberalism assumes that individuals, when given freedom, opportunity and a meaningful voice, are capable of shaping their own lives and contributing to the common good.

But history shows that every increase in human freedom has been contested.

  • The right to vote.
  • The right to education.
  • The right to organise politically.
  • The right of women to participate fully in public life.
  • The right to speak freely, worship freely and live openly.

Each advance faced fierce resistance from those who feared what might happen if ordinary people gained greater agency over their own lives. That tension continues today. Across the world we see governments concentrating authority, narrowing the space for dissent and tightening control over information. Even in long-established democracies, many citizens feel decisions affecting their lives are drifting further away from them.

The deeper question behind these trends is philosophical rather than procedural: what do we believe human beings are capable of? Do we trust people to think, deliberate and take responsibility? Or do we assume most people need to be managed – even controlled?

Taiwan’s digital minister Audrey Tang captured this when she said:

It’s not about whether people trust the government. It’s about whether government trusts the people.

Taiwan’s Covid response demonstrates what that philosophy looks like in practice. The government released public data and invited civic technologists to help design solutions. Hackathons brought together volunteers to build tools such as the now-famous “mask map”, showing real-time availability of masks across pharmacies. Citizens were not treated as passive recipients of policy. They became collaborators in solving the problem. Because information was shared openly, trust grew rather than eroded. Mask wearing became a widely accepted social norm rather than a political battleground.

Continue reading »
Leave a comment

Lib Dem policies on Israel/ Palestine: hidden in plain sight

By Ruvi Ziegler and Matan Rosenstauch | Fri 13th March 2026 - 12:02 pm

As we gather in York for Spring conference, and the Middle East is in turmoil, we must not let the war with Iran and its proxies shift our focus away from the need to take concrete steps towards resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The policy motion on ‘Trump and the wider world’ rightly reiterates existing Liberal Democrat proposals adopted in conference motions ‘The UK’s Response to Trump’ (Spring 2025) and ‘The Israel-Gaza Conflict – an immediate bilateral ceasefire and securing two states’ (Autumn 2024). Indeed, as far back as Autumn 2021, the party acknowledged ‘that illegal settlements represent a breach of international law, and that any UK trade which bolsters such activity is sustaining this breach, by legislating to cease trade with illegal settlements, unless and until a negotiated peace settlement is reached.’ As one of us argued on LDV in July 2024, following the ICJ advisory opinion, banning trade with Israeli settlements is not a policy choice, but a legal requirement. The 2021 motion has also sought to ensure ‘that there is equality of treatment for Israelis and Palestinians in the rules for visa free travel to the UK’. Following the recent recognition of Palestine, the notion that Palestinian inhabitants of that territory continue to be subjected to a different visa regime than its Israeli inhabitants is all the more troubling. These are all sensible, international law respecting policies. Yet how many people outside close Lib Dem circles are aware of them?

When the Labour government recognised the state of Palestine last September, it was following in the footsteps of longstanding Liberal Democrat policies, though political parties are not known to give credit to others (marriage equality anyone?). Unprincipled as it often is, Labour turned a corner when the British public did: polling suggested 44% of Britons supported recognition, and only 13% disagreed. However, a thumping 41% believe it won’t make any difference – a gesture, perhaps, that is unlikely to be followed by actions. Interestingly, last Autumn Labour conference passed a unions-backed emergency motion which stipulated that “to be more than a gesture, recognition must be accompanied by concrete measures” which included “fully suspend the arms trade with Israel and the UK-Israel trade” and “ban trade with the illegal settlements”. Yet, unlike Lib Dem motions, Labour conference motions do not appear to bind their party leadership – otherwise we would have had proportional representation by now…

Continue reading »
3 Comments
Mark Corner

A Radical Proposal from The Spectator?

By Mark Corner | Thu 12th March 2026 - 8:32 pm

Tanya Park had an excellent article recently in LibDem Voice on the decline of The Telegraph and The Spectator, each displaying what she brilliantly describes as ‘permanent performative outrage’. But I’d like to suggest that occasionally an article comes along in The Spectator that is…. well, a bit radical!

Take the recent article by Michael Simmons, The Spectator’s Economics Editor, entitled ‘It’s a Faustian Pact: Rachel Reeves is giving bankers what they want’.  It begins with Peter Mandelson’s advice to the Chief Executive of the investment bank JPMorgan in 2009, that if he was worried about a pending tax on bankers’ bonuses he should ‘mildly threaten’ the UK government.

Sixteen years on and in Simmons’ view nothing has changed. Last November Rachel Reeves was considering how to plug a gap in the public finances, and the then deputy leader, Angela Raynor, proposed a windfall tax on the banks. Nothing doing. It was small businesses that got taxed instead. Simmons concludes by saying that ‘Peter Mandelson may now be an outcast for this Labour government, but his spirit still haunts the Treasury.’

Why is Reeves so tied to Treasury thinking? Partly because Labour came to power deeply conscious of the Liz Truss debacle. It appeared sensible to keep financial institutions reassured so that they could send the right signals to international markets and ensure that the Labour Party had financial credibility. Otherwise, Reeves might end up as another lettuce, destined to wilt like her predecessor.

As a result the stamp of ‘official’ approval remains intact, but the room for manoeuvre is closed off. Reeves is trapped in her Treasury cage while the radical thinking comes from elsewhere. Think of Daisy Cooper’s proposal to replace the treasury with a growth department.  ‘For too long political parties have allowed the Treasury tail to wag the political dog,’ she wrote. Cue howls of outrage from some within Labour, but this is precisely what Michael Simmons was saying. Think also of the Green resurgence. Yes, much of the ‘eco-populist’ blah-blah that comes from the Greens continues to annoy, but they have ceased focusing on their ‘core’ issues and have focused instead on increasing levels of inequality. The jibe of middle-class self-indulgence about the Greens ceased to resonate in the recent by-election. Hannah the Plumber managed to have an aura of authenticity that Keir the Toolmaker’s son could only dream of.

Continue reading »
12 Comments
Darryl Smalley

Local Government Matters – a dedicated place for a Lib Dem Councillor on the conference committee

By Darryl Smalley | Thu 12th March 2026 - 6:54 pm

“Conference, this is just a tidying up amendment”. Well I hope this may be true.

Amendments to the Lib Dem constitution may not be the most exciting thing to discuss on the doorstep – but it is important that we recognise and value the hard work of our councillors at all levels of the party. This includes ensuring the party’s voice in local government is heard when planning the Federal conferences.

At the moment there is an inconsistency in representation on the FCC (Federal Conference Committee). Other sections of the party have places on the FCC guaranteed, for example the parliamentary party, the state parties of England, Scotland and Wales – so it is only right that our councillors have the same representation and profile.

For example there is a councillor representative on the Federal Policy Committee, so it is logical that the Federal Conference Committee should have a similar arrangement. While we currently have councillors on the FCC, this is very different from a guaranteed place. The role of a councillor representative is also different – they are speaking on behalf of the Liberal Democrat local government family, liaising with ALDC and our group at the LGA whilst doing so.

We now have over 3,200 Lib Dem Councillors and lead 75 councils across the country. As well as being the Party’s “ambassadors” on the ground in communities ranging from the Scottish Highlands over to Cornwall, our councillors contribute approximately £2.5 million every year to the party in tithes and other financial support.

Continue reading »
Tagged | Leave a comment
Tanya Park

The missing half of the beyond-GDP conversation

By Tanya Park | Thu 12th March 2026 - 2:19 pm

There is a welcome conversation happening in our party right now about the limits of GDP as a measure of success. As our Thriving Economy working group develops the policies that will take us into the next general election, colleagues are rightly asking whether we should measure what actually matters for people and the planet rather than treating growth as the ultimate aim.

I am firmly in the “measure what matters” camp. But I want to push this conversation somewhere it too often fails to go. Because the history of beyond-GDP thinking is littered with beautifully designed frameworks that changed nothing. The reason they changed nothing is not that policymakers hadn’t heard of them. It is that GDP supremacy serves powerful interests, and moving beyond it requires confronting those interests directly.

Let me put it bluntly. You cannot build a wellbeing economy without redistribution. New metrics are necessary but they are not sufficient. If we stop at dashboards and frameworks, we will have a more sophisticated way of describing the same broken system.

What the plans actually look like

Wales has shown that this is not abstract. The Well-being of Future Generations Act, passed in 2015, places a legal duty on public bodies to pursue wellbeing objectives across four dimensions: economic, social, environmental and cultural. It created a Future Generations Commissioner who can conduct formal reviews of public bodies and make recommendations they must respond to publicly. It is a genuine institutional innovation, but its limits are instructive too: the Commissioner’s powers remain largely advisory, and critics in the Senedd have called for stronger enforcement.

A UK-wide Wellbeing of Future Generations Act should learn from Wales and go further. It should embed wellbeing impact assessments into Treasury rules alongside traditional cost-benefit analysis, require departments to quantify outcomes using recognised measures like life satisfaction, mental health and social connectedness, and create an independent Future Generations Commissioner with the power to issue compatibility notices when legislation conflicts with wellbeing objectives, triggering mandatory parliamentary debate. Quarterly regional wellbeing dashboards, published by an expanded ONS, would give every community a clear picture of whether policy is actually working for them.

This is the institutional architecture that makes “beyond GDP” real rather than rhetorical. But architecture without funding is just a blueprint. The history of wellbeing frameworks, from the Stiglitz Commission to the UN’s own Sustainable Development Goals, confirms this: without the resources and political will to act on what the metrics reveal, measurement becomes an end in itself.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 25 Comments
Steve Wotton

Lib Dems for Growth

By Steve Wotton | Thu 12th March 2026 - 12:14 pm

Last year, I wrote about the lack of a Lib Dem vision for economic growth here.

Since then, we have started to sketch out some ideas. Last month, in a speech encouragingly entitled “Get Britain Growing Again” Daisy Cooper, our Treasury Spokesperson, announced a new policy to establish a Department for Growth that would seek to de-fang the “anti-growth” Treasury. While this headline (and a move to Birmingham) got most of the attention, Daisy also clearly stated that “Getting Britain Growing Again must be any government’s number one goal”.

I agree with this and, in my earlier article, I rather unabashedly declared that “fixing the UK’s growth problem underpins EVERYTHING”. Without growth, we cannot fix the issues we campaign on and care about, whether that is adult social care, SEND, the NHS, defence and inequality. Many commentators on LDV disagreed with my point at the time, but it seems Daisy, at least, agrees.

The policy announcement on reforms to the Treasury were a welcome acknowledgement that the UK has a wildly over-powered and centralised department that focuses, above all else, on short term spending control and arbitrary targets. Reforming the Treasury will be difficult. If we are to succeed, then I think local authorities and mayoralties need to be set free. We need meaningful fiscal devolution to allow local government to invest and build infrastructure – a tram for Leeds anyone?

While a welcome announcement, I feel that we need to go further to have a meaningful and eye catching vision for growth for the UK. I am hopeful that the Thriving Economy working group can help build out such a vision. They have published a consultation paper ahead of Spring Conference and are due to host a session on their paper on Friday.

Crucially, a meaningful vision for growth has the power to really set the Liberal Democrat message apart. Right now, the electorate has a choice of a lacklustre government that, notwithstanding their intermittent references to growth being their “number one mission”, they just appear to be a continuation of the incompetence of the previous Conservative administration. Reform are a grab bag of scape-goating, wild promises of tax cuts with a dose of quasi-Thatcherism. The resurgent Greens appear to be re-inventing themselves as Momentum style left populists.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 3 Comments
Rees Southern

The hidden epidemic among our young men that nobody is talking about

By Rees Southern | Thu 12th March 2026 - 9:57 am

Young men in this country are in crisis. An increasing number are disengaged from work, education and society. An increasing number are being radicalised into the far right through social media. And an increasing number are being signed off on mental health grounds.

There are many factors behind these trends. But there is one that is barely discussed in mainstream politics, one that connects all three. It is a drug. It is not illegal to possess. It can cost as little as £3.50 per week, often purchased through apps such as WhatsApp or Telegram, and posted through Royal Mail. It is incredibly accessible and insanely cheap. It is being promoted to boys as young as 12 by influencers with tens of millions of followers. And almost nobody in our politics is talking about it. That drug is anabolic steroids.

The growth in use is being driven by an online philosophy known as the “blackpill”, promoted through TikTok under terms like “looksmaxing”. This is a part of the wider online manosphere. The blackpill claims that physical appearance is the ultimate form of status, that your looks should be your main, or only, priority, and that your appearance is the reason you lack friends, sexual relationships, financial opportunities and a more fulfilled life. It preys on the insecurities of young men and boys. One of the methods it promotes is anabolic steroids: not just to accelerate muscle growth, but on false claims that artificially elevated testosterone levels can reshape your facial structure. Google searches for “looksmax” are up 300% in the UK since 2023, with steroid-related searches up 30% over the same period.

This is not a niche corner of the internet. The hashtag “looksmax” is associated with over 500,000 videos on TikTok. “Tren” (Trenbolone), one of the most potent compounds, first developed in the 1960s to bulk up cattle, is associated with over 10.3 million videos on TikTok. Arguably the most prominent creator in this space, Clavicular (real name Braden Peters, aged 20), has accumulated 27 million likes on TikTok and earns over $110,000 per month from live streaming alone, before revenue from TikTok, YouTube, sponsorships or his paid looksmaxing course. He says he started injecting testosterone at 14. Any teenager who can navigate social media can source anabolic steroids within minutes.

Continue reading »
2 Comments
Josh Matthews

The Lib Dems must challenge the economic system – but with the plans to match

By Josh Matthews | Wed 11th March 2026 - 4:55 pm

The Lib Dems recently announced plans for a Department for Growth. I can agree with splitting the Treasury into finance and “strategic economy” departments. But the messaging doesn’t suggest that our party is that keen on challenging (or being seen to challenge) the economic status quo: an economic system which is not working for too many people nor the environment. 

Challenging the economic system does NOT mean de-growth. It does mean challenging and moving away from GDP and growth – regardless of what, where, and for who – being the ultimate aims. “Growth agnostic” is the technical term. But more clearly, it means that it shouldn’t matter if we grow GDP or not, because we measure our success based on what genuinely matters for people and nature. GDP becomes one of many metrics and levers, but not the overarching objective.

What separates us from the Greens in the minds of the many sustainability professionals I meet is that we have vision AND the plans to match. We’re at risk, not least because we have so many current MPs facing the conservative party, of limiting those visions and plans for what society could be. 

There is a (personally conflicting and valid) conversation to be had as to whether stopping Reform, the Conservatives, and their hate-filled divisive politics is so important that we ensure we win, where we currently get our best results, with more cautious politics – enough to make sure there’re enough Lib Dem MPs to group with Labour and the Greens after the next election. 

But for the sake of this article, and in hope that we can do better than cautious, let’s be ambitious enough to manage these conflicts and nail the best of all worlds. Especially as our “Thriving Economy” working group comes up with our new economic policies that will take us into the next general election and might very well make it into some form of government.

I’ve written recently that two things must happen in 2026 to accelerate the move away from GDP and growth-at-all-costs toward judging society based on what matters for people and the environment.

  1. Clarity on the end point and principles of a new economic vision: which we have, in so many different forms that I discuss in the articles linked throughout this piece, like Natural Capital (alongside Human and Produced Capital), Doughnut Economics, Missions (I know…), SDGs, GEP, and countless other frameworks, metrics, and philosophies. We need to align. The promising UN High Level Expert Group on Beyond GDP is working on this right now. 
  2. A transition plan for that new economic vision: How do we unpick the current economic system from inside itself? And build a step-by-step path from now to that end point. With core principles that allow continuous improvement even after the economy is measured differently. Principles that allow flexibility far beyond a rigid plan. An approach that also wins the political conversation, as well as proving that a new economic approach can work for people and the environment, as well as working within the current system. We have gotten this roadmapping approach right before, for example in our 2024 EU policy and 2019 decarbonization plan. (The latter, alongside the people, was a big reassurance that I’d joined the right party in 2019!)

For a longer read on the indicators, frameworks, philosophy, liberalism, tipping points ahead, communication challenge, see again this Critical Mass for Sustainability piece and broader article library.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 10 Comments
Hina Bokhari

Hina Bokhari writes… After years of delay, the Government’s Islamophobia definition still misses the mark

By Hina Bokhari | Wed 11th March 2026 - 12:55 pm

It’s finally here.

After years of campaigning by Muslim organisations and communities, against the backdrop of record levels of hate crime, the government has finally chosen the holiest time of Ramadan to publish its definition of what it calls “anti-Muslim hostility”.

And what do we have to show for all that waiting?

A watered-down version of a definition we already had.

The 2018 All-Party Parliamentary Group definition of Islamophobia was endorsed by more than 800 community organisations, over 100 academics, and every major political party except the then-governing Conservatives. It was the result of genuine consultation and rooted in the lived experience of Muslim communities.

So why has it taken this government years to deliver something that appears deliberately diluted? Why was the recommendation of its own independent working group seemingly not good enough? And why, throughout this entire process, were grassroots Muslim organisations largely excluded from meaningful engagement?

This isn’t just about the wording of the definition – though many have already raised serious concerns about what was diluted and why. This is about the process that produced it.

The Macpherson Inquiry established a clear principle: communities must play a central role in defining the racism they experience. Yet that lesson appears to have been ignored.

The process has been marked by exclusion, by hand-picked representatives replacing genuine grassroots engagement, and by a government seemingly more concerned with managing political optics than listening to the communities it claims to protect.
And perhaps the most telling failure of yesterday’s announcement was what the government chose not to say.

In 2016, the UK government adopted the IHRA working definition of antisemitism. That decision was taken quickly and with broad political consensus. Yesterday’s announcement could have been an opportunity to say clearly: we are doing for Muslim communities what we already did for Jewish communities nearly a decade ago.
Instead, that comparison went unspoken.

That matters because bad-faith actors, including much of the British media, have spent years spreading the lie that recognising Islamophobia somehow gives Muslims “special treatment”. The truth is the opposite. British Muslims are not asking for something extraordinary. We are asking for the same recognition and seriousness that other forms of racism rightly receive.

Fairness, not favours.

The key question is where we go from here. Organisations like the Muslim Council of Britain and the Islamophobia Response Unit are not endorsing this definition at the present time. They are reserving judgement, recognising that a definition is merely a starting point.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 2 Comments

The Cry of a British-Iranian Lib Dem Woman

By Sahar Irani | Tue 10th March 2026 - 8:37 am

“I’ll call you once I get changed,” I told my sister. “Got absolutely soaked.” She said she was sorry I’d got cold and wet. “It was water, not bullets,” I replied. She cried.

That afternoon in Munich, I had joined over one million Iranians and their supporters worldwide to remember the tens of thousands massacred by the Islamic Republic on 8 and 9 January this year. Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi had called on all who stand with Iranians to come together on a Global Action Day for Iran on Valentine’s Day, which also fell on the 40th day after the massacre. In Iranian culture, the 40th day after a death is a solemn threshold, when family and friends gather to mourn. This time, Iranians danced in defiance, sang instead of weeping, and told each other that freedom is closer than it has ever been.

In Munich alone, police estimated that 250,000 people had gathered to demand the fall of the regime. The following Monday, Iranian lawmaker Javad Hosseinikia called on the Foreign Ministry to expel Germany’s ambassador in Tehran in retaliation. The regime’s fury only confirmed that these demonstrations are working.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 6 Comments
Mathew Hulbert

Mathew on Monday – ‘Patriotism’ should build communities- not police them

By Mathew Hulbert | Mon 9th March 2026 - 5:20 pm

The government has today announced plans for a “patriotic renewal” of Britain’s communities. Ministers say the policy is about strengthening social cohesion and promoting the “shared values” that unite us as a nation.

Fine words, for sure. But what exactly does it mean in practice? Because when politicians start talking about patriotism in this context, it can sometimes feel worryingly close to the language of the populist Right. Too often “patriotic renewal” becomes shorthand for cultural suspicion – a politics that encourages people to look sideways at their neighbours and ask whether they quite belong.

That isn’t renewal. It’s division.

If the government truly wants to renew our communities, the starting point should be far more practical-and far less rhetorical. For over a decade before the last election, Britain experienced the hollowing-out of local life. Libraries closed. Youth clubs disappeared (something I have consistently rallied against, in speeches at Lib Dem Conferences, meetings at Parliament, and so on). SureStart centres were stripped away. Community centres were sold off. High streets declined. The public spaces where people naturally come together were slowly dismantled.

That is where the real damage to community happened. Because communities are not built by speeches about national identity. They are built in the everyday spaces where people meet one another as neighbours and citizens. The library where children discover books and older residents escape loneliness. The youth club where teenagers find friendship, guidance, and opportunity. The SureStart centre where struggling parents receive the support that helps families to thrive.

Continue reading »
Tagged , and | 6 Comments
Mills Dyer

Green Party members be warned, after the party comes the hangover

By Mills Dyer | Mon 9th March 2026 - 1:12 pm

One by-election win does not a government make.

As a queer millennial living in East London, I am surrounded by Green Party Members. To paraphrase Derry Girls, ‘It’s wall to wall Green Party Members, sure you cannot move for Green Party Members round here’. Never has this been more obvious than in the last few days; conversations with friends and my social media have been filled with, quite frankly, sickenly gleeful Green Party activists & supporters, saying things like, ‘a left wing government is just around the corner!’ and ‘this is the chance we have to change our country!

Now don’t get me wrong. The day after we won the 2016 Richmond Park by-election, I walked into work with a smile that only really comes with a very pleasurable night. For the first couple of parliamentary by-elections that I fought and won, I too was an insufferable git that bored everyone with tales of the campaign trail. This was before I realised a devastating fact:

Winning parliamentary by-elections does not matter at all.

Word count forbids me from turning this argument into a 3,000 word essay; however, here are three reasons why the Green Party’s win in Gorton & Denton means absolutely nothing:

1. You won’t hold onto the seat.

Between 2001-2019, 13 seats moved from one political party to another, 6 of those MPs held onto those seats at the next general election. In each of those 6 cases, the party that held the set was either a good 2nd place before the by-election occurred, or had a reasonable local government base (and thus a track record of winning in the consistency). Neither of those are true in this case. The Green Party currently has no councillors that represent any of the wards in the constituency.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 48 Comments
Tony Vickers

Pensioners are a Deadweight Loss

By Tony Vickers | Mon 9th March 2026 - 11:35 am

And I’m one of them: sitting in a Band E 4-bed house worth £600k.

Yet all we get at York this week is another “hand wringing” motion on local government finance (F19), same as we got two years ago. It’s pathetic. It’s not “making policy”, which is what I always thought Conference was for. Sure enough what was then called a crisis in local government funding is now an emergency. We seem no closer to publicly declaring we have a solution.

Yet the Party has a solution waiting in the wings. In 2013, our policy paper “Fairer Taxes” included a promise to “Launch a consultation to determine how to implement Land Value Taxation”(LVT), which would be completed in the next Parliament. Not “whether” but “how”.

Subsequently, Andrew Dixon, ALTER member and founder of the Party’s Business Forum, steered our policy to reform Business Rates onto a land value base through conference in 2018. The next year, his similar proposal to replace council tax failed to pass FPC/FCC scrutiny. Businesses don’t vote. Home-owners do.

Continue reading »
Also posted in Conference | Tagged and | 16 Comments
Mo Waqas

Rebuilding Britain’s defences

By Mo Waqas | Mon 9th March 2026 - 9:25 am

Britain cannot rely solely on others for its defence. Recent events in the Middle East have shown how quickly the world can spiral into conflict. When powers such as the United States, Israel and Iran exchange military strikes and deploy significant force, it reminds us that global stability can never be taken for granted. If Britain wants security, resilience and prosperity, we must rebuild our industrial strength particularly in the North of England and Scotland while maintaining close cooperation with our European partners.

Watching the escalation in the Middle East has been deeply unsettling. The region has seen missile strikes, drone warfare and major military mobilisation. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, global military spending reached $2.4 trillion in 2023, the highest level ever recorded. In an increasingly volatile world, it is worth asking a difficult question: if a major global conflict were to erupt, how prepared would Britain actually be?

The answer is uncomfortable.

For decades Britain has allowed its industrial base to decline. In the 1970s, manufacturing accounted for around a quarter of the UK economy. Today it represents roughly 9–10% of GDP. Entire regions that once powered the British economy have been hollowed out. Towns such as Middlesbrough, Hartlepool, Bolton, Burnley and Huddersfield were once major centres of British industry from steel and shipbuilding to textiles and heavy engineering.

Today many of these communities face fewer industrial jobs and slower economic growth than the national average.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 13 Comments
Caron Lindsay

It’s International Women’s Day!

By Caron Lindsay | Sun 8th March 2026 - 7:48 pm

It’s International Women’s Day today and this year’s theme is Give to Gain. From the IWD website:

Give To Gain emphasizes the power of reciprocity and support. When people, organizations, and communities give generously, opportunities and support for women increase. Giving is not a subtraction, it’s intentional multiplication. When women thrive, we all rise.

Whether through donations, knowledge, resources, infrastructure, visibility, advocacy, education, training, mentoring, or time, contributing to women’s advancement helps create a more supportive and interconnected world.

What will you Give to Gain gender equality?

What does Give to Gain mean to you?

Lib Dem Women, the official organisation representing women in the Liberal Democrats, held an International Women’s Day event at the National Liberal Club in London last week:

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Liberal Democrat Women (@libdemwomen)

Ed Davey has put out a statement supporting IWD:

International Women’s Day is a chance to recognise the extraordinary contribution women make every day. While there has been progress towards equality, there is still a long way to go, and the Liberal Democrats will keep pushing for a fairer future.

Liz Jarvis paid tribute to women in our armed services:

Women make a significant contribution to our Armed Forces, protecting our way of life. The 2021 Census told us that 452 women living in Eastleigh were veterans.   For International Women’s Day, I join the

@PoppyLegion

in paying tribute to their service. #IWD2026

The party itself said:

Today is International Women’s Day, a time to celebrate women’s stories and achievements.

We honour their impact and recognise the work still needed to achieve equality.

Together, may we uplift, empower, and create a world where every woman thrives.

This party is made up of brilliant women who run campaigns, who stand for Council or Parlimaent, who hold elected office and make a real difference to the lives of other women in this country.  Many of the men in this party who hold elected office are supported by women as they do so.  There is a lot of work done by women that we don’t often recognise or value.

The House of Commons is debating International Women’s Day this coming Thursday and we’ll bring you the Lib Dem contributions.

The Lords’ debate happened on Friday and our Lorely Burt took part, saying that it was her last IWD speech before her retirement. We will miss her. She said:

I was just having a little nap there—as if I could be, after all the absolutely brilliant speeches we have had today; they have been quite remarkable. I start by welcoming the newcomers to this House; it was absolutely fascinating learning about the diversity of their experience, and I am so looking forward to hearing from them when they get going. I am absolutely delighted that we have so many very clever women on the Benches now—not that there were none before, but you know what I mean.

It is just impossible to cover all the issues that we have talked about today. I am not going to have to do this again, which I am thoroughly thankful for, because this is my 11th and last speech that I shall be making in this House to celebrate International Women’s Day. I shall be retiring very soon.

I use the word “celebrate” advisedly, because over the years some issues change, but the basic premise that most women are more vulnerable and have fewer opportunities than men persists—and I am talking only about this country, where we, in the main, have far better treatment and more equal rights compared to men than in many others. We have been listening to harrowing descriptions of some actions by men in power. We do not need to look very far to see the names of those men who are making the lives of women, and men as well, all over the world, just that little bit impoverished. The sooner they go, the better, as far as I am concerned—but I should not really be saying things that are disrespectful to people with whom we are supposedly working for a better world. I look forward to the “better world” bit.

I was just thinking about the world itself and where you would go, if you were looking for explanations or ideas as to how we improve things for women. You probably have to go to the Scandinavian countries to see examples of true equality. I heard a lovely story of a young boy who was talking to his mum, and he was incredulous to discover that his country, Iceland, could have a male Prime Minister. So that is very sweet—but it illustrates the fact that we have a long, long way to go.

I do not want to patronise the House by going into the difference between what is a man and what is a woman. The noble Baroness, Lady Jenkin, was talking about the pornification of society and how it puts girls off growing up to be women. On reflection, I do not think I would want to adopt male attributes; I just want more equal rights. This is not so much the case today, but when I was little, I would have loved to have been a boy, but I have discovered that there are advantages to being a woman and being in that particular club. I kind of get why women would want to change to men, but why, oh why, would a male want to become female and accept fewer rights, unless of course they felt genuinely disembodied—that is, in the wrong body? My attitude to people who want to change sex has always been: “Come on in. Be what you want to be. We’ve got one life, so why live it in the wrong body?”

Ever since I took on this equalities role, I have been trying to figure out why some women do not want people of other sexes to join their club, as it were, but want the exclusiveness of the sex that they were born into. In my personal view, it would be better to welcome them to the ongoing fight because, as we have learned today, there is so much more that we need to fight for—there certainly is plenty. I have never understood why, and I probably never will. As a woman, I have grown to love the sisterhood that we all share. Isn’t it lovely that we can have a day when we celebrate our individuality as the sex that we are?

Anyway, let us leave aside what is happening to women who want to change. I also do not want to dwell on what is happening to women in other countries that repress women. International politics and treatment is too much to cover, and I want my outgoing speech as equalities spokesperson to be positive, just for once. I would love to take a moment to look at the other end of the telescope, as it were, and count a few of the blessings that we enjoy as women. In the UK, men and women fight together to improve the lot of women. We get a lot of support from men, and I am delighted to see the number of men who not only have attended but have taken part today. Of course there is misogyny, harassment and so on, but many improvements are in the process of being made.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , , and | 3 Comments
Tanya Park

Labour’s youth guarantee won’t fix a broken system

By Tanya Park | Sun 8th March 2026 - 2:30 pm

Imagine you’re 20 years old. You left school at 16 with a handful of GCSEs, a mother with a disability, and no money for college. You’ve worked a few zero-hours shifts at a warehouse, but the anxiety that’s been sitting on your chest since you were 14 has made regular employment feel like an impossible ask on most days. You want to do something. You’ve looked at courses. But Universal Credit requires 35 hours a week of job searching, and if you stop, the money stops. So the course stays a thought, and the job search goes nowhere, because there aren’t many jobs and the ones that exist aren’t looking for someone whose CV has a lot of gaps.

You are, in government statistics, “NEET.” Not in employment, education, or training. A data point in a rising trend.

The NEET rate is now 12.7%, up 1.2 percentage points since 2019. Youth unemployment for 16-to-24 year olds sits at 15.3%. These aren’t abstract numbers. They represent a significant share of a generation that the economy has not found a place for, and which the welfare system is actively making it harder to help itself.

Labour’s answer is the Youth Guarantee: £820 million, and a six-month paid work placement for every eligible 18-to-21 year old who has been on Universal Credit and looking for work for 18 months. It’s not nothing. But it rests on a diagnosis that doesn’t survive much scrutiny.

The government’s theory of the problem is wrong

The Youth Guarantee is an activation policy. Its underlying assumption is that NEET young people need a push: a foot in the door, a bit of experience, a coach. Get them job-ready, get them placed, job done.

This is a supply-side answer to what is partly a demand-side problem. There are currently 2.3 unemployed people for every vacancy in the UK. Vacancies have been falling for over three years, down more than half a million from their 2022 peak, and the decline began before recent rises in employer National Insurance contributions, which means it isn’t primarily a story about the cost of hiring. Something structural is happening.

You cannot activate people into jobs that don’t exist. And for young people who are NEET because of mental health difficulties, housing instability, caring responsibilities, or poverty, what they need is not a placement in month 18. It’s support in month one. The 18-month wait is the guarantee’s most revealing design flaw. By the time a young person qualifies, many have already hardened into disengagement.

What could actually change now

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 14 Comments
Anne-Marie Simpson

The UK must not become complicit in another illegal war — Nor distracted from Israel’s continued crimes in Gaza and the West Bank

By Anne-Marie Simpson | Sun 8th March 2026 - 12:30 pm

As Liberal Democrat Friends of Palestine, we unequivocally condemn the latest unilateral and unlawful US-Israeli military action in Iran and urges the UK Government not to be complicit by allowing the US to use British military bases to attack Iran. 

The Iranian people have a right to live free from a brutal regime; however, regime change from the skies can only unleash more bloodshed and regional mayhem – particularly when one of the instigators is an indicted war criminal like Benjamin Netanyahu. The devastating human cost is already evident, including in the killing of 165 Iranian schoolgirls and staff in a strike on a girls’ primary school in Minab.

Marco Rubio has suggested that the US was forced into attacking Iran after being informed that Israel planned to launch strikes first. Under the shadow of these attacks, Israel has stepped up its illegal activities in the State of Palestine, including by closing aid crossings into Gaza and sealing off checkpoints in the unlawfully occupied West Bank. This has been accompanied by a spike in settler violence.

Continue reading »
Tagged , , , and | 5 Comments
Eleanor Kelly

Parent? Guardian? Expecting? Tell us your thoughts on childcare at Conference

By Eleanor Kelly | Sun 8th March 2026 - 10:30 am

Parents holding baby with words Tell us your views on childcare at ConferenceI was listening to Marie Agnes Strack-Zimmerman, a German MEP answer a question on the delivery of Taurus missiles to Ukraine at a forum in Copenhagen. She was momentarily interrupted by the gurgles of a 4 month old sat on the knee of a friend from the Danish Radikale party. As Zimmerman remarked that it was good to get her interested in defence policy so young, it struck me that I had rarely, if ever, seen children so comfortably integrated into British political spaces.

We have some mums brave Lib Dem Conference with a papoose, but having spoken to even some of the most determined parents, it’s clearly harder to coordinate family life around the party than it should be. Some question whether their families are welcome at all.

I for one want to make it overwhelmingly clear that the Liberal Democrats welcomes members as they navigate family life and that we should be striving to be the best party to be a parent or carer. I want to hear from you about making conference, the nerve centre of our party, work for families.

The Federal Conference Committee’s survey for parents, guardians and anyone expecting is open for your input. If your children are grown up or you’re a professional childcare provider, please answer no to the first question and use the free-form text box to share your views.

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

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 8th March 2026 - 8:28 am

Texas is a bright red, far-right Republican, conservative state. It has not elected a Democrat to the US Senate for 37 years. That may be about to change. And if it does the repercussions will rock the White House.

Primary elections for one of the Lone Star state’s two Senate seats were held by both the Democrat and Republican parties this week. One of the recognised barometers of political success is the size of the voter turnout. The turnout for the Democrat primary was highest in the state’s history.

The winner was Texas State Representative James Talerico. A middle-of-the-road Democrat with a strong Christian background. The latter is important in bible belt Texas. Talerico won with 52.8 percent. Runner-up Jasmine Crockett (46.9 percent of the vote) conceded gracefully and immediately called on voters to support Talerico.

The Republican primary, in contrast, was a bitter contest, had a low turnout and none of the candidates won the overall majority required to win their party’s nomination. Incumbent Senator John Cornyn won 41.9 percent of the vote and state Attorney General Ken Paxton secured 40.7 percent.

There will be a run-off between the top two candidates on 26 May. Democrats hope that Paxton wins. He is an ultra-conservative MAGA man. He was a key figure in Trump’s campaign to overturn the 2020 election. He is being divorced by his wife on the grounds of desertion and has been accused of corruption, bribery, fraud, abuse of office, obstruction of justice and perjury. The Texas lower house voted to impeach Paxton, but the Senate narrowly voted to acquit, 14 to 16.

Elsewhere in America, the Democrats have flipped nine seats in state special elections (by-elections) since Trump took office. The Republicans have flipped none. The latest Democrat win was in Arkansas. Other wins have been in Georgia, Iowa, Mississippi, Pennsylvania and Texas.

Trump’s Department of Homeland Security has become synonymous with repression. Now the cabinet minister responsible for the department is no more. Kristi Noem has been sacked.

Ms Noem is the first senior figure to be sacked by President Trump in his second term. At this stage in Trump’s first term, 37 people had either been fired or had resigned.

In many ways Ms Noem was perfect for the job at Homeland Security. The former Governor of South Dakota is MAGA to her fingertips and her job involved enforcing the signature policy of the Trump Administration—deportations. Noem grasped the nettle with relish. In less than a year she has overseen a record 675,000 deportations.

Continue reading »
Leave a comment
Tom Arms

Observations of an ex pat: Iran

By Tom Arms | Sat 7th March 2026 - 7:20 pm

Iran and the US have been on a collision course since 1979 when the radical Islamic state was founded and 44 US diplomats were taken hostage.

But why now? But also, what are the who’s, what’s, how’s, when’s and where’s of the current car crash and its regional, national and global repercussions.

Who first—the US and Israel. America did not call on its traditional NATO allies. It did not go to the United Nations to seek legal sanctions. The United States did not even bother to inform the G7 countries. The United States acted unilaterally. In fact, Donald Trump acted unilaterally within the US government machine because he did not bother to consult members of Congress let alone seek congressional approval.

The only country that America allied itself with was Israel. It should be noted that this was the first time (other than the air attack in June) that US and Israeli troops have fought together. In the first and second Gulf Wars the US refused Israeli help and there was no Israeli participation in Afghanistan.

There was a very good reason for this. Arab governments may be prepared to accept Israel, but most of their populations remain implacably opposed to the existence of the state of the Jewish state. When Israeli and US forces fight side by side it alienates America from Arab public opinion and shakes the thrones of the Arab monarchies. Iran is unpopular with Arabs, but Israel is reprehensible.

The why and when are linked. Iran is the weakest it has been since the Islamic revolutionary government came to power 47 years ago. Years of sanctions have significantly weakened the economy. Economic hardship coupled with political repression has created waves of riots. Only weeks ago Iranian government shot tens of thousands of protesters demanding an end to the theocratic regime. And finally, the Iranian military has been weakened by the Gaza War and Operation Midnight Hammer which damaged—but clearly did not “obliterate” – Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities.

Continue reading »
Tagged and | 9 Comments
Lisa Smart

The Elections Bill isn’t good enough for a democracy under threat

By Lisa Smart | Fri 6th March 2026 - 7:17 pm

Our democracy is under sustained attack. Repeated scandals and corruption have hollowed out trust, while powerful men who hate our democracy – from Silicon Valley to the Kremlin – undermine our social fabric and institutions. It is nothing short of a national crisis.

It has therefore been deeply frustrating to see the litany of lost opportunities in the government’s “Representation of the People Bill”. What is called for is transformation – to restore trust and make our brittle, fragile democracy more resilient.  This bill does not meet that moment.

In all its 186 pages, it manages to avoid measures that would meaningfully improve accountability of politicians, to stamp out corruption, or to address the unfairness of our backwards, outdated voting system. The elephant in the room – of record levels of public distrust and anger with our political system –  remains, it seems, totally ignored.

There are, of course, some worthwhile measures like automatic voter registration and more support for candidates. Most significantly, the Liberal Democrats have been campaigning for votes at sixteen for decades, and we are proud to have helped secure a provision that delivers this. But as I said in my speech “As young people approach the ballot box for the first time in the next election, we must ensure that they – and everyone in our country, feel confident…. Confident that they won’t be bombarded by disinformation. Confident that their vote will count. Confident that the system they are being asked to be a part of is fit for purpose.” I can’t honestly say this bill delivers on those things.

So where does that leave our party?

Ed and I are determined that Liberal Democrats use this bill to champion the changes our democracy really needs – on which we Liberals have a unique and proud track record. Fundamental to so many problems we face as a country is that we have a system which few trust, which rewards cronyism and which is vulnerable to the whims of foreign regimes and elites.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 20 Comments
Nathan Hunt

Why is anti-youth abuse in politics getting worse?

By Nathan Hunt | Fri 6th March 2026 - 4:09 pm

I’m lucky to represent an amazing area as a district and town councillor. Since I was elected at the age of 19, becoming Huntingdonshire’s youngest ever councillor, I’ve had a huge amount of support from the community, friends, family, officers, and councillors of all parties.

At the same time, I’ve also heard every “are you old enough for big trousers?” and “did you finish college last week?” jibe you can imagine.

Let’s be honest – most of the time that’s good humour. Young people in politics are rare, people find it unusual, and people are excited to see a young person engaging with council democracy.

But at times, there is genuine abuse thrown in young people’s direction – for being young. Certain incidents over the past few weeks come to mind for me.

This isn’t anything new, nor is personal abuse in politics generally. But it is getting worse. When I think back to early 2022 when I was trying to convince people to vote for me as a fresh face, they were incredibly welcoming to me (including those who weren’t going to vote for me). Even when people were sick of politics because of the Partygate revelations, I can only remember one or two doorsteps that gave me genuine grief for being young.

Unfortunately, like a lot of stuff in Britain right now – things have gotten worse since then. I’ve faced some pretty vindictive stuff based on my age recently. Nor am I alone in this – this isn’t a localised trend.

And anti-youth abuse is just one part of the massive challenges we’re facing.

Anyone in public office or politics expects to be held to account for our decisions, positions, and actions. That’s the sign of a healthy democracy. But personal abuse, including for being young, goes past this.

I’m incredibly lucky to have a great support network around me – a great council group and local party, friends and family, and the Young Liberals. But this trend just creates an environment where good people are put off from public service because of the toll it takes on them.

So why is this the case? I don’t think we can pin it on something specific. But the political temperature being as high as it is isn’t good for anyone.

And the longer it stays high, kept there by divisive populists, more good people will be driven out of roles of public service due to the abuse they face.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 11 Comments
Victor Chamberlain

Southwark shows how the Liberal Democrats win cities again

By Victor Chamberlain | Fri 6th March 2026 - 1:01 pm

This week Southwark Liberal Democrats launched our manifesto for what will be our largest local election campaign in decades. After 16 years of Labour control, many residents feel the borough has been taken for granted.

Southwark also illustrates a wider challenge facing the Liberal Democrats: how we rebuild our presence in major cities. Much of the party’s recent growth has come in Tory-facing suburban and rural areas, but cities like London remain politically competitive and full of liberal minded voters looking for an alternative to Labour. If the Liberal Democrats are serious about becoming a national force again, we must prove we can win in places like Southwark.

We now have Labour in power at the town hall, City Hall and Whitehall. With power at every level, they can no longer blame anyone else when things go wrong.

Crime is rising, council tax continues to increase, services feel harder to access and the housing crisis is deepening.

Southwark now has the highest crime rate in South East London, yet police front counters have been closed by Labour and the number of community safety officers has been reduced. Complaints about council services are at record levels, and both the Housing Ombudsman and the national regulator have repeatedly found maladministration in Southwark’s housing service.

The housing picture is equally troubling. More than 22,000 households are on the social housing waiting list and we have 4,200 families in temporary accommodation,  yet fewer than 70 new council homes were started last year. Youth services have been cut back and seven schools have closed, leaving fewer opportunities and less support for young people and families.

After 16 years in charge, Labour have run out of excuses.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 10 Comments
Jack Meredith

Liberal populism could be our missing political language

By Jack Meredith | Fri 6th March 2026 - 9:54 am

Among liberals, “populism” is a warning sign. It brings to mind angry speeches, conspiracy theories, and politicians who promise easy answers while blaming outsiders. Many of us instinctively reject it.

That instinct is understandable. Yet it may also be a mistake.

Populism, at its core, is a simple claim. It says that power has become too concentrated in the hands of a few people, and that ordinary citizens deserve more control over the decisions that affect their lives. That idea is not automatically extreme or dangerous. In fact, it fits comfortably within the liberal tradition.

Liberals have always believed that power should be questioned. Governments should be accountable. Monopolies should not dominate markets. We believe communities should have a real voice in decisions that shape their future.

In other words, challenging concentrated power is not alien to liberalism. It is part of its foundation.

The problem is that the political right has largely captured the language of populism. Politicians such as Nigel Farage claim to speak for “ordinary people” against elites. The message is clear and emotionally powerful. They say the system is broken and someone is to blame.

Too often, liberals respond by rejecting the idea of populism outright. Politics should be calm, rational, and evidence-based. Those things matter. But when we refuse to speak about power, fairness, and frustration, we leave a vacuum. And someone else will fill it.

Many people across Britain feel that the system does not work for them. They see energy bills rising while large companies make huge profits. They see housing becoming harder to afford. They see decisions about their communities made far away in Westminster. Whether every complaint is justified or not, the feeling that the system is unfair is widespread.

If liberals cannot acknowledge that feeling, we risk sounding distant from everyday concerns.

The answer is not to copy the angry populism we see elsewhere. It is to build a different kind of populism. One that is socially liberal, democratic, and rooted in fairness.

Continue reading »
Tagged | 17 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Kira Collins
    Disappointed. The most obvious means of reducing energy bills is to remove VAT. Relatively straightforward to do and does not adversely impact on the attractive...
  • Nonconformistradical
    "As a party we are aware of the absolute disaster our country’s current benefits system has become, where so many sticking plasters have been added by well-me...
  • Tom Bailey
    I cannot believe this is a serious policy proposal. This is just amateur scribblings on the back of a fag packet....
  • Katharine Pindar
    Competence and hard work do certainly win us council seats, I suppose, David Evans, and I would suggest 'stability' and 'reliability' as partner virtues we can ...
  • paul barker
    @David Evans In London we ran on Competence & Hard Work, we made gains in places where we already ran The Council, everywhere else we went backward or went...