Ballots for the Liberal Democrat leadership hit members’ doorsteps from tomorrow.
With that in mind, both camps have unveiled big name endorsements. From the Lamb campaign, he kind of unveiled it himself in his inimitable style:
Like many #libdems i’ve found it hard to choose from 2 great Leader candidates. But now decision time. I’ve told Norman I will vote for him
— Paddy Ashdown (@paddyashdown) June 24, 2015
It isn’t the biggest surprise in the whole world. During our Spring conference, he was pretty critical of Tim. Paddy becomes the latest party establishment figure to support Norman Lamb.
At the start of the campaign, Tim Farron unveiled a list of over 100 parliamentary candidates who had supported him. On Monday he announced the support of over 200 councillors, council group leaders and elected mayors like Dorothy Thornhill and Dave Hodgson. The Westminster Bubble may have gravitated towards Norman, but Tim has significant grassroots support.
Tonight he announced the backing of five former MPs: Steve Webb, Annette Brooke, Dan Rogerson, Richard Younger-Ross and Stephen Lloyd all gave him their support.
Steve Webb said:
Tim Farron is a principled liberal who has the ability to speak in plain language that is understood by people who live outside the Westminster bubble. We need someone who can motivate not only our own party members but also the wider public to join the campaign for the liberal cause, and I believe Tim has the passion and enthusiasm to do this.
Stephen Lloyd, whose passion for business and jobs was so clear during his time as MP for Eastbourne said:
It is also very important that we as a Party connect with business and are seen as the rational voice of aspiration. A liberal, free-trade, internationalist alternative to conservatism which encompasses the desire for equality of opportunity in a way the Conservatives never can, will or even want to! In my opinion Tim Farron grasps this and has the ability to communicate that crucial vision clearly and with passion, which is why I am supporting him as our new Leader.
Ballots have to arrive back at LDHQ on 15th July and the result will be announced the following day.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Endometriosis and acetylation
Reform makes first gain from Conservatives in this by-election cycle
How Chancellor Reeves torpedoed the economy
The Disneyfication of Hayley Mills
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Daniel Walker
Peter Martin
Chris Cory
Ruth Bright
34 Comments
As caron says Paddy’s endorsement of Norman is no surprise. I think it reflects certain personal issues he has with Tim more than anything and lets hope members are not swayed by the Chair of our 2015 General Election campaign.
Sorry, Paddy, but a former Leader should have kept out of this one. That has been the tradition (in the Liberal Party & Lib Dems) to my knowledge since at least 1956 and it’s disappointing to see the convention broken now – just as it was disappointing to see those intemperate comments at the Spring Conference.
A bit less eating of hats and and a bit more sound judgement as to the way the press will treat this – especially should Tim win – would have been welcome ?
David – I agree, but, to be fair to Paddy, 2 other former leaders have endorsed them – David Steel for Tim and Ming Campbell for Norman according to http://www.markpack.org.uk/132585/libdem-leadership-2015-endorsements/
What I can’t tell from that is when and how public those were.
Quite right about Steel (definitely) & Campbell (possibly) ….. Mea culpa, Daniel, and all that……
Having said that Paddy should have a thought a bit about the long term consequences when he’s tempted to pontificate with ex-cathedra statements.
So, the people responsible for our greatest massive electoral loss in history are coming out for Norman. This cannot be very helpful for him. Is it allowed for him to publicly disown their support?
Perhaps Paddy would describe Tim as ‘someone to keep a (wary) eye on.’.
In the 1988 leaderhip election, it was he who was the Tim Farron of the campaign.
Here is how the author of the Wikipediea entry into that election describes him,
” Once elected (to Parliament), he quickly made aname for himself as someone who was not scared to say what he thought, frequently got into trouble as a result of indiscreet conversations with the press, and displayed boundless, indefatigable energy. He was widely recognised within and outwith the party as someone to keep a (wary) eye on.”
“judgement is not his strong suit” is how Ashdown described Tim Farron just a few months ago. Now he refers to him as a “great leader candidate”. I wonder what he really thinks, either way I think Paddy’s retirement is long overdue.
“The Westminster Bubble may have gravitated towards Norman, but Tim has significant grassroots support.”
Not really a fair comment- it’s just a cheap attempt at the old “evil establishment figure vs man of the people” trick. I can’t help but feel increasingly disappointed at the blatant anti-Lamb bias of Lib Dem Voice. It’s pretty obvious Farron will end up winning, but the way this campaign is being conducted is going to risk causing a significant number of members being alienated and potentially leaving.
Anti-Lamb bias?
Sounds like the Tories and the BBC! I certainly don’t see any bias in that article.. Norman has rather more support amongst ex-MP’s. Tim has rather more support amongst activists… No-one knows how the membership will vote – most of them will not have been to a hustings or read Lib Dem Voice I imagine!
I agree with malc- Paddy’s judgement itself has been going awry over recent years as it becomes increasingly cosy with being part of the political establishment and ‘realpolitik’ thinking rather than having the air of the challenging insurgent he managed to maintain until the late 90s.
In 1998 Paddy chose exactly the right time to step down from the leadership as probably felt himself starting to go off the boil, and recognised a time for new opportunities. His elder statesman role is not a good fit as his judgement is off-key.
I wonder if Paddy was one of those advising Clegg a year ago that Clegg should not resign after the EU election wipeout and had to ‘shoulder the burden’ towards a far deadlier wipeout this year…
Tim Farron is engaging on the media, where as Norman Lamb…. is doubtless excellent chairing a parliamentary scrutiny committee .
Definition of ANCIEN RÉGIME
: a system or mode no longer prevailing
Paddy Ashdown was excellent in the late 1970s and 1980s.
‘Paddy becomes the latest party establishment figure to support Norman Lamb’.
Cheap shot from LDV which seems to have shown a Tim Farron bias from the start.
Would that be the same Paddy Ashdown who led the campaign that saw our numbers in the Commons reduced from 57 MPs to 8?
The one whose “judgement” led him to conclude that the BBC exit poll was wrong?
I disagree with Paddy, and though I stuck out the Coalition, I will probably leave the party if Tim is not elected.
We need to signal a change of direction, and Norman is not that signal.
I find many of the comments on this thread from Team Tim people disspiriting.
Paddy has thought about it and thinks Norman would be a better leader of the party than Tim. But he’s also been clear he likes both candidates.
It’s a perfectly fair judgment call to make. Norman has many merits as a potential leader. He’s an excellent campaigner (there are many parallels between North Norfolk and Westmoreland). He’s an authentic and consistent liberal (including on issues like assisted dying where some liberals are concerned about Tim’s position). He was an excellent minister (his legacy of changing NHS attitudes to mental health will really live on).
There are reasons to like Tim too, but I’ve seen this awful tendency amongst some in Team Tim to take support for Norman deeply personally and to think it’s all about Tim. Some of us just really like Norman and think he’d be a great leader, you know! This attitude manifests itself in the above attempts to discredit Paddy for expressing his preference, threats to leave the party and so on. Come on, all, this isn’t what democracy is about!
Let’s wish that the third of the party who are new members vote for our future in a wise way. Whoever is elected must steer us away from the rocks of one last catastrophy which could end the party. I don’t know if we will be steered to more of the centre or more towards activism. But I feel more concerned every day that we could make the wrong choice and do not survive because we failed the voters’ expectations yet again.
The party needs someone who didn’t betray the voters and vote for tuition fees and the bedroom tax. Norman isn’t that person, he was part of the coalition that decimated the party.
Paddy was great in his day, but his judgement has gone awry over recent years and I think it’s awry now. Vote for Tim.
Paddy Ashdown and Shirley Williams represent a past era. We have to move on. The party establishments preference has been obvious for a long time. They are responsible for the trouble we are in. Ashdown led the party to humiliation. It is time for a new direction and that requires a leader who can appear more distant from the coalition and with a clean conscience on Tuition Fees. As with most things over the past couple of years Ashdown appears to have got it wrong, again.
George – I agree with you that we shouldn’t have voted for tuition fees, and that Tim made the right call.
Where I’d strongly challenge you, however, is on the remark that Norman was “part of the coalition that decimated the party” whereas Tim was not. Factually, that is wrong, and practically it will not play with the electorate in the way Team Tim seem to think.
Tim agreed to the Coalition Agreement in 2010, and warmed the same benches as his colleagues and Tory MPs for five years, regularly voting for Coalition policy and not calling for dissolution of the Coalition. The fact that he chose not to take ministerial office doesn’t mean he was not part of the Coalition.
Voters just won’t buy this, “I was always a bit lukewarm about things” line. And in any event, it’s the Lib Dem Party, not the Tim Farron Party. We are judged as a party – and MPs who lost there seats (who were loyalists and more dissenting voices alike) know this very well. The only tenable answer – Norman’s answer – is that we don’t regret putting country before party by going into Coalition, and we are proud of many of the achievements of our ministers. But we also got things wrong which we apologise for and have learned from. Pretending we weren’t really there 2010-15 just isn’t an option.
Sir Norman. You are talking of the past. It cannot be rehashed. Unfortunately your man represents that. We need someone who is going to be in play for three general elections, someone who can galvanise the party in the urban areas of London, (not the Richmonds), the North, Scotland, Wales, The Midlands etc where we were once strong. Lamb for Gorton, Toxteth etc, come on..
s negligible.
Sir Norfolk:
I agree with you and to repeat what I have written elsewhere, Norman’s respected experience as a former health minister is an important plus, not a negative. Norman and other former ministers are likely in the next few years to be called upon to comment on areas that are within their former briefs.
For whoever who is elected there will be a struggle to be heard and taken seriously. Ministerial experience will help as will the ability to communicate persuasively and make good use of the such opportunities that are available.
The danger is that we will no longer hear from the self-contradictory ‘nah, nah , nah voices the ‘no one is listening to us’!
Norman did some good, liberal work promoting mental health, but please, let’s keep it in perspective. He was a junior minister under Jeremy Hunt, not Secretary of State!
He was also PPS (i.e. parliamentary assistant) to Nick – a double-edged sword if ever there was one. A leader he was not! It is by no means clear how deep and long-lasting his ministerial impact has been regarding better treatment of mental health, especially in financial terms.
He was presumably, however, fully on board with the Cleggite Strategy for Improving the Party’s Overall Position!
His ex-junior minister voice will be equally, if not more valuable, as one of Tim’s Team, in my opinion, and I am glad that most Lib Dems seem to agree, according to the opinion poll on Mark Pack’s site today. Tim was a loyal and vocal backbencher, except when absolutely necessary, and is the only sensible choice, for any Liberal Democrat who does not wish to repeat the debacle of 2015.
‘Sir Norfolk Passmore’ – you are right that there are many parallels between North Norfolk and Westmoreland.
But Norman got 39%, down 16% of his vote to Tim’s 51%, down 8% in the election just gone.
GPP – Bit of a silly game to play “my majority’s bigger than yours”. These fluctuate according to various factors including the strength of other parties in the area. Plenty with big (and increased majorities) in 2010 are out of work now. The point is that both Tim and Norman built strength in unpromising areas from a low base, and held their seats in an awful election. Well done to both.
On Norman Lamb’s ministerial career, it’s a bit sad that you feel the need to denegrate colleagues’ achievements in office. If Tim had any achievements in government, rest assured I would not be doing the same 😉
Finally, on the poll reported by Mark Pack, you’ll have noted that the polling dates were 12-24 May – i.e. interviews were all more than a month ago and some more than six weeks ago. Nobody has any doubt who the front-runner was at the start of the contest. The tone of some comments emerging from Team Tim in recent days suggest the gap has been closed and some of them are somewhat rattled! #normentum
@Sir Norfolk “If Tim had any achievements in government”
Quite.
Sir Norfolk, you are a card. Talk about spinning and being in denial, both about the past and the present.
If Tim becomes leader that will finally decide whether I gracefully retire after 50 or so years.
Martin, I agree I may do the same. If we want the public to trust us again it’s a very strange thing to do…. Elect a leader that believes the world is 6,000 years old!
Richard
No doubt you have some evidence for that last statement?
These threats to resign are very childish.
Agreed, Phyllis. Perhaps “resign” could become a word that triggers the auto-m*der*t*r!
@Phyllis there was no shortage of usage of the “r” word when Clegg became leader; when the coalition was formed, when tuition fees were passed, when the extra room subsidy bill was passed … I could go on. Some of them actually did it too – withdrawing their support and/or membership.
What evidence do you have that either candidate believes this?
TCO if people, at the time, threatened to resign *IF* Clegg became leader, then that would be equally childish, as these threats to resign *IF* either Tim or Norman wins this election. Give the man a chance, then tell us why you are resigning if indeed that is what you decide to do. Nowt wrong with a principled resignation.
After the 2010 Election of course many people felt very badly let down so those threats to resign, and indeed actual resignations, were perfectly understandable in my view. And of course if I remember correctly, Nick Clegg did suggest that some of us should go away. But that is not the situation with Tim or Norman at the moment.