From the Liberal Democrats website:
Tonight, Wednesday October 13, the Federal Policy Committee of the Liberal Democrats held their regular meeting.
During the meeting they held a special session to discuss the latest announcements following the Browne Review.
In a statement following the meeting, the committee spokesperson said: “FPC confirms the Liberal Democrat party policy remains to phase out tuition fees.
“We are now in a coalition government and we will continue during the period of discussion and consultation to work with our coalition partners towards achieving a policy that meets our key concerns and is progressive.”
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Watch interviews with former inhabitants of St Kilda from 1972
Councillor joins Lib Dems in Western Isles
Today we gave our thanks to the 999 services and other public servants
The Genome Rides on a Citric Acid Bicycle
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Tory Leadership dirty tricks?
Suzanne Fletcher
Mary Fulton
Mick Taylor
Simon R
Steve Trêvethan
17 Comments
Do we have a 24-hour resignation line set up? Preferably staffed by those people who keep phoning asking for money?
This is totally and utterly meaningless. What am I supposed to say to angry voters on the doorstep? Oh its OK Nick and Vince think Browne’s proposals for students to pay at least 7K a year in fees is “progressive” but the Lib Dem Federal Policy Committee has confirmed our party policy is to phase out tuition fees.
Do the FPC envisage some halycon days, beyond the next 5 years, when tuition fees, having been increased to who knows what level by then, will be “phased out”.
I don’t want to see any increase in tuition fees, as per our pre-election pledge but we can’t commit to this line when clearly our parliamentary leaderships plans to do something very different.
I think the reason the federal committee are doing this is because if they change their pledge, they may need to call a conference and a vote by the membership. This is a very cynical move, they say they support it for the long term so they don’t have to face a defeat by the party over the Browne report before they push it through.
The party membership can call an emergency conference if we want to. We have the numbers. We just don’t need to yet.
I’m looking at it more like FPC trying to express its displeasure at Party Policy apparently being ignored by the Party’s Leadership but maybe I am misreading things its difficult to know unless you were there
@Peter1919 – that would seem to be an interpretation that fits with Simon Hughes’ position when interviewed on Newsnight yesterday. He was (as well as looking rather miserable) very clearly holding to the line that this is party policy and that the appropriate process needs to be followed to try to bring whatever the govt does in response to Browne in line with the LD position.
A sensible statement from FPC and really all that they can do within their remit.
I’d like to know what our Federal Executive will be doing about this, and whether they have had any discussions with Vince, Nick and co on this matter. If they vote in favour of Browne they will be voting with the Government but they’ll also be voting against party policy and it could be argued against the Coalition document, which allows for abstentions on this.
The people against tuition fees and excepting reality certainly seem to have a stranglehold on the party. I am sure I am not the only one that thinks it is a good and fair way forward for now . If the economy is sorted out and starts to improve we can look at things again.
“I’d like to know what our Federal Executive will be doing about this, and whether they have had any discussions with Vince, Nick and co on this matter. If they vote in favour of Browne they will be voting with the Government but they’ll also be voting against party policy and it could be argued against the Coalition document, which allows for abstentions on this.”
The trouble is that it’s a fine old mess, because in voting for the coalition agreement the Federal Executive voted to make it impossible for the MPs to fulfil their pledges to the electorate. But of course the MPs voted for the agreement too, so they are mostly to blame for the pickle.
What is going on with fees? Here’s a look at what Simon Hughes said on Newsnight last night – http://bit.ly/cjJch9 (apolgy for cross-posting – not sure which thread is live now)
I’m at the end of the line with Nick and the leadership.
I always thought the Party’s policy on tuition fees was wrong but it’s a moot point whether Browne’s is really any better or is just another wayof kicking the can down the road. Whatever its technical merits this is first and foremost a political question. MPs who have signed the pledge must in honour vote against (not abstain) or it will be held against us for decades to come. Thank heavens that some like Ming Campbell are men and women of honour even if others are not.
And don’t for a moment this will be the the last such moment. The cuts have yet to be delivered let alone begun to bite and while other cases may not have quite the knife-in-the-ribs quality of the pledge they will collectively be far worse.
One of the key attributes necessary to lead a party is political smarts which Blair, for all his dreadful policies, had in abundance. Clegg doesn’t have what it takes and like Irfan I’m at the end of the line with him.
Elaine – no. FPC can comment on any poicy matter, as between Conferences it has the power to both set a steer on policy and to take whatever steps it feels fit in reaction to events.
It made its views known, for example, when Paddy Ashdown tried to extend areas of joint working with Tony Blair to areas beyond those where there was agreement in the general trust of policy.
It should do the same now.
Hughsie on snoozenight last night kept mentioning the final decision on Browne won’t be taken for “six to eight weeks”.
Yet the departmental spending totals are next week!
These include the HEFCE teaching grant totals earmarked for a recuction from 3.2bn to 700 million and that make fees of 7k- 12k inevitable.
Does he know something about the Osborne totals for BIS that Browne did not ??!!
Or was he just desperately trying to avoid answering Faxperson questions: with that huge foto of him and his signed ‘no to tuition fees’ pledge card as the unfortunate backdrop.
And the national party wants me to go out onto the doorstep and campaign with that line? Are you kidding me?
I flogged my backside off on the doorstep in the general election for a candidate who signed the pledge and believed in it myself. To fundamentally change our policy because “we didnt know how bad it was” is simply not good enough.
If you make a promise to the elecorate, you darn well keep to it, simple as that. To do otherwise is downright dishonest in my opinion.
I replied to Nick Clegg’s email here:
http://spiderplant88.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/why-liberal-democrats-have-to-dig-their-heels-in-over-tuition-fees/
Are there party sanctions against MPs who vote against party policy?
for years I lived in areas where my vote for Lib/Dem was considered a wasted vote, none the less I voted for them, to me their policies were fair, and I thought it was a party of integrity. This will all finish for me if the Lib Dem
MPs abstain rather than vote against higher tution fees.