Conference debates open thread: Tuesday 20th September 2016

Whether you are physically in Brighton or are following what is happening from home, this is your place to talk about the public face of the Conference – in other words, all the debates and speeches that are going on in the main auditorium.  Please use the comments below to add your reports on policy and constitutional debates or to draw readers’ attention to ones in the pipeline.

You can read the agenda in full, including the text of amendments, here.

We will be running a similar thread each day, so please confine your comments today to what is actually happening today, the last day of this year’s event.

We will also be running a thread each day on fringes, so use that one for anything going on outside the main show.

So what is happening today at Conference?

Morning Session

09.00–09.45 F35 Emergency motion or topical issue

09.45–10.35 F36 Constitutional amendments: Committees

10.35–10.50 F37 Standing order amendments

10.50–11.30 F38 Report: Parliamentary Party

11.30–11.50 F39 Speech: Baroness Brinton

11.50–12.50 F40 Policy motion: Future Transport

12.50–14.10 Lunch

Afternoon Session

14.10–15.30 F41 Speech: Tim Farron MP

* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in Conference.


  • Eddie Sammon 20th Sep '16 - 7:40am

    Try to find time to discuss the news that Assad has bombed a UN aid convoy. Hospitals, aid convoys, enough is enough. Helping refugees is no longer enough, we need to be looking at penetrating Assad’s airspace and telling Russia their planes might be targeted.

  • I have been watching on the Parliament Channel , as there is very little coverage elsewhere, and everything seems so dark and even a little dismal. Do they have lights there? Just been listening to another long interview with Labour people about their shadow cabinet elections on radio 4 . No mention of the liberal Dems in Brighton. Can someone please post up contacts for the main media outlets so we can complain?

  • Eddie Sammon, Perhaps we also should take our government and the US to task for killing Syrian soldiers and breaking the hard won ceasefire…
    Oh, I forgot; all such incidents (including repeated attacks on hospitals) are ‘Accidents’, whereas the Russians???????

  • Yeah, great, Eddie Sammon. Seven of my relatives lost their lives in the First World War. Pardon me if I’m not keen on people who are trying to start a third one.

    I was banned from commenting on this site because of my comments on the Syria vote. Pleased with yourselves now, eh? US and British bombs killed people because of bad intelligence and our leaders have shown not the slightest remorse for what happened or the slightest understanding of the complexities of what’s going on in there. The Russians have then deliberately attacked an aid convoy to pretend it was an accident and highlight the hypocrisy of the US/British. Putin is despicable, but who gave him the opportunity to do this?

  • Eddie Sammon 20th Sep '16 - 10:01am

    I’m pro-caution, but many Muslims won’t forget if we continue to not do much over bombing hospitals and aid targets. Better late than never.

  • Eddie

    The real problem was a couple of years ago when Assad crossed Obama’s red lines with the use of chemical weapons and the cowardly Obama just ran away.

  • @Eddie Sammon

    We killed a few dozen Muslims the other day because we didn’t check whether they were fighting for or against ISIS. In retaliation, Putin has killed some more Muslims. We have now stopped aid convoys which will cause the death of more Muslims. The result is lots of dead Muslims because we didn’t care about who we were bombing as long as it satisfies voters who feel the need (for someone else) to do some bombing.

    Tell me how you think that more bombing will solve the situation caused by us bombing?

  • Jayne Mansfield 20th Sep '16 - 10:40am

    @Eddie Sammon,
    Eddie, perhaps we should stop trying to intervene to bring about regime change in the name of liberal interventionism. Iraq, Libya, and the tragedy of Syria. And perhaps those who keep making the same mistake over and over again at the cost of so many innocent lives should hang heir head in shame that they cannot learn from their mistakes.

    It is better not to create a situation where there aren’t so many desperate refugees don’t you think? I didn’t particularly want to make any further comment on this site but I get regular updates on what is happening from aid workers and I am incoherent with anger.

    My strong reservations about the EU even though I eventually voted remain, were based on the inability / unwillingness, of the leaders to deal humanely with a humanitarian crisis that we are involved in. The deal with Turkey was shameful, but it seems that we do not want to be faced with the consequences of our actions, the devastation of whole societies the mass death of innocents and the desperation to escape.

    I am of course, no longer a supporter of the Liberal Democrat Party. In fact I have developed a strong antipathy towards it.

    Angry Steve sounds like my sort of guy.

  • Eddie Sammon…
    If your idea of “pro-caution” is “telling Russia their planes might be targeted” then I’d hate to read your definition of an aggressive position..

  • Eddie Sammon 20th Sep '16 - 11:14am

    By pro-caution I mean I don’t want to flatten Damascus or send the RAF on a suicide mission. We need to consider the intelligence. I was against bombing Assad in 2013.

  • We need to consider the intelligence!

    Our ‘intelligence’ caused this.

  • George Stephenson Jr 20th Sep '16 - 11:38am

    Turning to transport, accepting that any changes to the railway industry structure will be disruptive (probably true) seems very timid. Let’s review if the current structure does work, or if there are better alternatives. There does seem to be an appetite for change, but let’s base any policy on evidence and consideration!

  • paul barker 20th Sep '16 - 1:17pm

    On the campaign for more money for The NHS, this needs a slogan. How about “£350 Million for The NHS”. Its already popoular in some quarters.

  • Lorenzo Cherin 20th Sep '16 - 1:46pm

    David, you mention the parliament channel , and radio 4, one of my strongest reasons for being against the BBC in its present form , but for public broadcasting very staunchly, is the example of the parliament channel of the BBC.That is public broadcasting , so much of their output , bake off a current one , no pun intended, is not.At their best they are excellent , but rarely at their best these days in many ways.

    Their coverage of our party is a lousy, basing it on specifically one election result. This week is not the Labour conference , yet lots of programmes on different channels about Labour . Why , are they trying to get involved in the leadership election ?!

    Do complain to the BBC, we all should ,and to other channels where appropriate, and we should see the organisation that is the public broadcaster as, alas, as it is , no different to any other , merely often interested in the status quo and ratings. If people think the EU is a monolith, count me in describing our so called auntie as one often !

  • Tell me, Lorenzo, which one would you prefer to run the BBC – Rupert Murdoch or Richard Desmond ? And what on earth do you have against Radio 4 ? You really do puzzle me.

    I’ve just listened to a fascinating review of a new biography of Neville Chamberlain followed by the excellent PM programme and the six o’clock news complete with Big Ben – then there’s the saga of Helen Archer and domestic abuse to listen to just after seven.

    On a more serious note, I’m old enough to know what comfort the BBC gave to the country in the Second World War. I’ll never forget Mum sobbing with joy and holding me when she heard about VE Day in 1945. Don’t be like the Tories and mess about with something that is part of the social fabric of our country.

    PS. If you watch Sky TV I understand the going rate is about £ 45 per month….. four times more than a TV licence….. and no doubt used to subsidise the over gross earnings of such charmers as Wayne Rooney. No doubt under dear Rupert the TV licence would probably follow the same trajectory and you’d be subjected to four minutes of inane advertising every ten minutes.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Nonconformistradical
    @John Marriott 16th Jun '21 - 4:51pm It would be better if you were comparing like with like. As it is, it seems to me you are muddying the waters. Israel ...
  • Peter Watson
    If the Conservatives lose this by-election - or even come close to losing it - what will they learn? That they need to change tack because the country (or at l...
  • theakes
    Perhaps of more interest is the SUN news story suggesting Cons HQ think they may lose....
  • Barry Lofty
    As I have said before the chances of a Lib Dem win in Chesham and Amersham are likely remote but would It not be superb to give this abysmal government the kick...
  • Brad Barrows
    I hope the Liberal Democrats can take this seat off the Tories and keep it for a generation. However, this will be entirely pointless if the Liberal Democrats r...