The Federal Conference Committee met on Saturday to run through a number of items leading up to the Autumn Conference in Bournemouth, which is being held from 23 to 26 September. If you have not yet registered for the conference you can do so via this link. As in Spring we also have an online registration option, which includes streaming of the auditorium and online voting.
Just jumping a little ahead as well, the Federal Conference Committee has announced the 2024 dates and venues for Spring and Autumn Conferences.
Spring Conference
15 to 17 March 2024 to be held in York
Autumn Conference
14-17 September 2024 to be held in Brighton
At our meeting this Saturday we discussed a number of items relating to the upcoming and future conferences, including the agenda selection (which I will come onto shortly), and also set-piece speeches and the structure and format of conference. We also reviewed some of the options for future conferences as well and will be announcing more on this once we have confirmed venues and options.
As part of the agenda selection process, we also reviewed a number of standing order amendments that the Federal Conference Committee will be submitting ourselves, as part of our Constitution and Standing Orders Tidy Up Working Group. This initial round is based on feedback from members and also the Committee.
Aside from this meeting, the FCC’s Innovation Working Group will be meeting in the next few weeks to start preliminary works on ideas and concepts that will then be introduced at the Conferences in 2024 and onwards. One of the areas the Working Group will most certainly consider will be further enhancements to the hybridisation at Conference.
Conference is an excellent opportunity to engage with members from all across the country, to influence the party policy and strategy, and to a huge array of fringe and training events, which I recommend those attending to take full advantage of.
The agenda for conference, including the text of motions, policy papers and timings, will be published soon. As per usual, the Conference will include a range of different and interesting policy motions and debates, the Leader’s Speech, various committee and parliamentary reports, the Leader’s Q&A, plus a couple of policy consultations and a few set-piece speeches. As confirmed earlier this year, Kira Rudik (Leader of our sister party in Ukraine, member of the Ukrainian Parliament, and Vice President of ALDE) will be speaking at Conference, and also taking part in a Q&A fringe session as well.
It is possible that this is the last Autumn Conference in advance of a General Election, we have also asked the Chair of the Federal Elections and Campaigns Committee, Baroness Kath Pinnock, Director of Field Campaigns, David McCobb, and the Party CEO, Mike Dixon, to provide a General Election Briefing as an auditorium session.
We received a large number of motions from across the party, and are extremely grateful for the time and effort that members make in formulating policy motions and ideas for debate at Conference. We really wish that we could select so many more that ended up on the final list, but as always time at conference is at a premium and a large number of motions, although selected in the first round, did not make it through the second round when we then started to look at reducing timings.
In total, we received 54 policy motions, two constitutional amendments, five standing order amendments, and three business motions. As regularly mentioned, time is tight at conference, and we are unable to take all motions submitted to Conference. Regarding the motions which were not selected, we have provided a summary of reasons why motions have not been submitted, and have provided further information to those people whose motions were not selected. I have tried to keep this succinct for the purposes of the list of motions. In some instances there are Working Groups established by the Federal Policy Committee which will cover similar topics in the near future, so we would recommend reaching out to those working groups to engage in those discussions.
Furthermore, I would also like to mention the drafting advice service that the Federal Conference Committee offers. This service is provided by the Committee to offer drafting and language advice on motions submitted to conference and cannot always cover advice on policy matters; I would, in these instances, recommend reaching out to members of the Federal Policy Committee, spokespeople, and party AOs, who may have people within the their groups with specific policy expertise and would be able to assist with formulating policy. If you also want to find out more about how to write policy, the FCC will be undertaking a training session at Conference on how to write a good conference, and this information will be published in the Conference Directory.
From the submitted motions we selected nineteen policy motions, one business motion, one constitutional amendment, and three standing order amendments. The committee went through various rounds of selection, and it is always a very challenging decision to select which motions should or should not be added to the agenda. I would like to thank the staff who attended the full-day meeting and also the members of the committee for their contributions and hard work.
We have selected an Ukraine motion; due to the continual changes in the situation in Ukraine the FCC has agreed a later deadline for amendments to this motion. The amendments deadline for this motion will be 21 September at 13:00.
I have included A23 Motions Selections (PDF), including the names of the motions and if selected/not selected and the brief reasons for non-selection. Please note that some of the names of motions may vary between now and the publishing of the agenda.
We are looking forward seeing you at Conference, and if you have not yet had a chance to register, please do so here.
* Nick Da Costa is Chair of the Federal Conference Committee
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
If Enid Blyton was the Beatles then Malcolm Saville was the Kinks
Local election predictions for May 2025
Multicultural working
Street surgeries tonight #dundeewestend
Throwing in the towel
Taking a goat to the library
Andy Daer
Steve Trevethan
J
Anthony Durham
Simon McGrath
15 Comments
Yet another tepid agenda with no real chance of any close debates. I can see myself being in disagreement with just 1 resolution and I will be very much in the minority.
Where is the radical agenda for changing Britain? Where are the new ideas to challenge the establishment? What distinguishes us from the other 2 parties?
We could be challenging the status quo on the economy, leading a campaign to change Britain’s outmoded and outdated constitution to give people a real say and we could be hammering away at the futility and follies of Brexit.
A year out from an election and we continue to play it safe. How disappointing.
@ Mick Taylor. Agree, Mick, but it’s nothing new.
You and I both joined the Liberal Party in the early sixties. You probably remember a leaflet featuring images of Wilson and Heath with the slogan, “Which Twin is the Tory ?”. Photos apart, I doubt if it could be reissued soon.
Indeed Mick and David,
In addition there is nothing at all in any of the motions that will get us noticed by the media or the public (in any positive way). Our policy making process still strangles the life and passion out of everything it touches and just leaves a double dose of dull and a few of the usual niche hobby horses.
Our biggest priority has to be how do we get from conference the best publicity we possibly can. Conference hasn’t done this in a long time.
Sadly not enough time for all the motions, or whatever the other reasons for declining them, but I really would like to hear more about them.
Having a fringe has ginormous costs so out of the reach of Young Liberals to do more than one or “10 members +” to get set up, but I really would like to hear debates on some of the issues.
Too “niche” maybe (and I cannot come to conference anyway) but could some zooms outside of conference week be facilitated? I would pay to join in, or just listen. For instance I really want to hear other people discuss “decolonising our heritage” (Young Liberals), 4 day week and fast fashion (10 members). I have thoughts and views but would very much like to hear discussion and debate from fellow Lib Dem and if possible any outside the party experts.
Conference is only available for a proportion of members at any time, and one good thing that has come out of covid is the ability of having zoom meetings.
the only “activity” for someone like me in a derelict constituency that cannot get about the same is to join in zooms that I really get a lot out of (apart from the maraphones in by elections of course!!!).
Not for FCC really, they organise conferences which is quite enough, but “member engagement”?
Notable is a studious avoidance of anything to do with the consequences of Brexit and proposals to set out on the route to repairing the damage. We have the weighty policy document Rebuilding Trade and Cooperation with Europe but where is the follow up in terms of policies that implement our roadmap?
I fear that the selected agenda (in the pdf link) is pointing towards a less than distinctive manifesto for the impending general election.
There is an urgent need for a follow up article that advocates the selected agenda and makes the case for participation in the conference (which this article does not do).
@Martin good point re nothing on post brexit, that is very important indeed. not sure if anything was submitted though. If there is nothing strong in the manifesto I will be very angry indeed – will withdraw my phoning (only thing I can withdraw that would bother anyone) or even leave the party.
To all the people complaining about the Agenda:
Have you submitted motions?
Will you be submitting amendments?
If only there was a way to pass uncontentious motions in a different way. For example I can’t see anyone wanting to oppose ending period poverty. Does it really need a debate? Could we find an alternative and effective way of getting deserving “no brainer” policies such as this passed by the membership and before the media; thereby freeing up conference debate time for the perhaps less understood and more contentious topics. This would arguably be more attractive to attendees and perhaps offer more value to the party in terms of time, space and input? For example we desperately need to up our game on topics such as international human rights and the recent Gove “BDS” Bill.
It is about winning votes – of course it is – and we need to stretch ourselves, challenge each other, be more outward facing and be cutting edge too.
@Clare Cape – interesting comment. In a way just agreeing the policy papers would mean that there could be no amendments to the motion put forward, but it is very frustrating indeed that amendments taken and agreed are not incorporated into the policy paper. Some of the best bits of “Making Migration work for Britain” are in the amendments won at conference. Just for instance.
I go to Conference with low expectations of formal debates making much difference. I think I go to seek out events where new policies may be breaking into the light of day. to discover a bit more about what’s going on in the party, and, of course, to meet up with old friends, not least members of the early sixties gang, as self-identified above. For all that I’m happy to pay the Conference fee, along with exercising ingenuity in securing good deals for accommodation and train travel from the North.
Mick Taylor wants us to challenge the economic consensus. I have a simple question. What exactly is our economic policy? Could someone please enlighten me?
“What exactly is our economic policy? ”
Good question.
Have much changed since Richmal Crompton wrote: “There’s Conservatives an’ they want to make things better by keepin’ ’em jus’ like what they are now. An’ there’s Lib’rals an’ they want to make things better by alterin’ them jus’ a bit, but not so’s anyone’d notice, an’ there’s Socialists, an’ they want to make things better by takin’ everyone’s money off ’em ….”
Starmer’s Labour also doesn’t want to change anything much! So it doesn’t look like we’ll have much of a choice at the next election.
For the moaners who wonder what our policies are, the policy section on the new Web site is excellent.
Or is moaning much easier to do.
For the newbies like Big Tall Tim who appear from nowhere and then talk down to those of us who have seen things repeatedly go wrong over far too many years by calling us moaners – How Brexity is that?
No – undermining those who want improvement and are prepared to point out areas where there are problems – that is the easy thing to do.
Big Tall Tim “For the moaners who wonder what our policies are, the policy section on the new Web site is excellent”
Do you have a link to that? I couldn’t find it on the website, even after typing “policies” in the search box. The closest I could find (https://www.libdems.org.uk/members/make-policy) was a couple of decades of conference votes that I’d have to read through in order to check which ones haven’t been superseded. Presumably, I’d also have to check against manifestos for things that weren’t voted on at conference or for details that were fleshed out afterwards, and then review the news for things that a leader like Nick Clegg bounced the party into supporting that were neither in a manifesto nor a conference vote.
In particular, could you point me to the party’s policies on academic and faith-based selection of children by schools. I recall conference votes to scrap both, but those ideas seem to have been ignored ever since, so it would be reassuring to know that they are actually policies.
It would also be interesting to see the party’s policy on HS2 as the Chesham and Amersham by-election confused me a bit on that one.