The BBC are reporting that the Liberal Democrat projected national vote is 18%, up 7 points compared to 2015. The Lib Dems are just 9 points behind Labour. The Conservatives are up by just 3 points. This is confirmed by Professor John Curtice and Britain Elects:
Projection national vote share:
CON: 38% (+3)
LAB: 27% (-2)
LDEM: 18% (+7)
UKIP: 5% (-8)(via John Curtice)
Chgs. w/ 2015.— Britain Elects (@BritainElects) May 5, 2017
A party press release reads:
The party is on course to make scores of gains at the general election and establish themselves as the real opposition to the Conservatives, based on the local election results in so far.
Seats as diverse as Bath, Cambridge, Cardiff Central, Cheltenham, Eastleigh, Eastbourne, Edinburgh West, St Albans and Watford would fall to the Liberal Democrats on the basis of the results so far. This would more than double the size of the Liberal Democrat parliamentary party.
The Liberal Democrats topped the polls in Eastbourne despite Theresa May’s visit, and early signs are they are surging ahead in Scottish seats such as East Dunbartonshire and NE Fife.
Leader Time Farron commented:
These results tell a clear and stark message. Labour has collapsed. They cannot win the General Election.
If you want a strong opposition to this government, we are the party for you.
A strong opposition can change Britain’s future. A strong opposition to stand up to Theresa May’s divisive Brexit plans that will cost jobs and put up prices. A strong opposition to keep us in the Single Market. A strong opposition to rescue the NHS from Conservative neglect. A strong opposition to stop Theresa May cutting schools to the bone. A strong opposition to fight for you and your community.
Labour has failed as an opposition and handed Theresa May a blank cheque to do as she pleases. The voters have delivered their verdict on Jeremy Corbyn.
The Liberal Democrats are the only party that can challenge Theresa May. We will be the strong opposition that will stand up for you.
* Newshound: bringing you the best Lib Dem commentary in print, on air or online.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Lord Bonkers: "Something less terrible than the truth"
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Reform under water
Tom Reeve
paul barker
Neil Hickman
Tom Bailey
expats
55 Comments
We have to be very careful about that 18%, we consistently do better in Local Elections, compared to Westminster. My estimate is that 18% today means 14% on June 8th, unless something big happens before then. We could double our number of MPs to 18 or we might only get a Dozen.
We are on the right path but its a long one, uphill all the way.
18% was my personally prediction for the 2017 GE before these results. We should get more air time over the next few weeks and I suspect these results are unlike normal council elections as they don’t normally take place during a GE. The challenge now is to concentrate on our key battlegrounds whilst also having a focused line of attack that isn’t just about Brexit
Well, which is it ? Are we going to make “scores of gains” (which means at least 40 gains) or will we “double the size of the Liberal democratic Parliamentary Party (which means 9 gains).
I prefer Paul Barkers more sober assessment of where we are.
Even the Guardian have given up on the Lib Dems:
“Despite aligning themselves with the 48%, Tim Farron’s party underwhelmed at the local elections. Labour is now all that can stop the Tories”
“on course to make scores of gains”
Well, it’d be nice, but …
Some of us have been around long enough to see how often local election results flatter to deceive.
I remember the optimism pre 2015…A prominent member (no pun intended) even promised to run naked if we won less than 25 seats….
Sky have produced their prediction that a repeat of yesterday’s showing would still give us only 9 seats…(Labour 215, Tory 349)….Any late entries in the ‘bare bum’ handicap?
malc: that Grauniad article is based on flawed logic. The Lib Dem vote increased, but not by as much as some of the less realistic expectations, and because of the collapse of another party’s vote (UKIP) it translated into a small net loss of Council seats. And therefore people should vote for the party that lost the most seats??!?!Really?!!!?
@ Malc “Even the Guardian have given up on the Lib Dems”
Well, not exactly the Guardian – you are referring to an Opinion column by freelance journalist Abi Wilkinson
While The Labour vote was down almost everywhere, it was the Lib Dems who put on 7%. True, that is not enough to translate into many gains, but more than enough to galvanise members to pile into those target seats where we have a real chance to limit the Tory advance
Slow change is the solution to revive Lib Dem fortunes. Again, we are in tough negotiations with the EU and we need to stand up for Britain. Standing up for Britain involves much more than criticising brexit or hard brexit.
Of course we can and should criticise these things, but criticise EU officials too, when it is fair to do so.
Frankly I’d be happy with a national result of 18% in the GE. What matters is the targets and defences. The stronger we are in the next parliament, the higher chance we have of overtaking Labour at the next GE.
malc,
If you’ve given up on the Lib Dems that’s fine, trot over to Conservative Home they’ll love you there.
I wonder what the leaders of Deadkip will do, form an orderly queue to join the Tories?
Please treat us like grown-ups and give us credible analysis – not this delusional nonsense.
18% in locals will surely translate into a lower figure in the General.
While yesterday’s results suggest a few places such as Cambridge are winnable any Tory seat (or even LD held seat) with a large 2015 UKIP vote will prove very tough to crack.
I would like to see what this portends in Lewes where we have a Brexit head -banger with a tuneful dog whistle facing the Lib Dems in Norman Baker`s old seat
There are only a thousand votes in it.
Btw – Until Brexit and the whole spirit of Brexit arrived I was a Conservative. It took some agonising to actually join the Lib Dems but I am out campaigning each weekend and feeling happier about it all the time ullo ……
I hope that these results do mean that if repeated in the general election we will win the nine seats lists in the OP.
@ Paul Barker
“My estimate is that 18% today means 14% on June 8th”
This is a much better prediction than your earlier prediction for 4th May – 22% or 24%. 14% is possible but so is 12%. I am still hoping for 14% or more. We should achieve third in the popular vote.
18% would be good. But now we need to go on the attack and ask the public to do the country a favour and decapitate Jeremy Corbyns leadership of the Labour Party by voting Lib Dem instead
‘Scores of gains’
Back to reality.
Robert Hayward forecast + 100
Railings & Thrasher + 85
Actual result – 37
@ Christian – you think the problem for the country is Corbyn? That the LibDems should spend the next 2-4 years attacking Labour? For what purpose? Even if the LibDem could double or treble their MP’s at the entire expense of Labour, which is highly unlikely, what then? Their numbers will still be significantly less than Labour. Just what is that going to achieve? Or are we going to be treated to more nonsense by Tim Farron, or the next LibDem leader, to fantasy headline about LibDems being the real opposition. It just isn’t credible.
What sort of opposition spend their time targeting the other opposition parties rather than trying to hold the Government to account? I realise it may provide some comfort from the doom and gloom t attack Labour but I just do not see what that would achieve. My hope is that all opposition parties do their best to focus on the Government and their nasty policies that disproportionally attack the vulnerable and trash our public services.
Yes, I am biased. But I prefer Corbyn’s positive approach to politics. He doesn’t descend into attacking personalities and he promotes and campaigns for actual polices he believes would make the UK a better place. What have the LibDems offered so far in the General Election? No manifesto, no policies, nothing beyond a confused slogan re Brexit and now only four weeks to go. What sort of competent leadership is that?
The words “scores of seats” came from a party press release. Sorry that I didn’t originally make this clear – I have now clarified that above.
The results today are not quite what we were hoping for, but I tend to go against the over pessimistic and over Optimistic outlooks
I think the Railings & Thresher prediction was made some weeks ago, and had a General Election not been called, I think the result might have been halfway to that…
I think we have to face facts that Theresa May’s current rhetoric – come to me and I’ll give you the Brexit you want – is having the effect that she wants it to, and recent events… or rather the reporting of those events – such as on the reporting of Junker/May meeting is for now playing into her hands to whip up feeling against an ‘enemy’ her support can identify… I’m not sure that is sustainable on her part. Sooner or later the UK electorate will realise turning our back on the EU, even making enemies of them, will hit them in their pockets.
When that happens, the tide will turn. I just want the Lib Dems to be ready for that
@ DaveOrbison None of the parties have published their manifesto yet… and a confused stance on Brexit? The Lib Dem’s couldn’t be much clearer on that issue, whereas we get a different message each day.
But for Lib Dems of the more left leaning type, like myself, when we have a go at Labour its out frustration rather than opposition to what they stand for. My Party tend to do better at times when Labour are strong (hence our growth in MP numbers in 97, 2001 and 2005). If our leader can speak of being the ‘effectual’ opposition its because Labour are not doing it… Personally I’d rather see a Lab/LD coalition (assuming I can’t have a LD government.. but all I keep hearing on the radio is poorly briefed Labour spokespersons and a quiet acquiescence on Brexit. That saddens me
Here we go again, carried away with a vision nobody else has or is most unlikely to be bought into, like the “real opposition”. Have we not learnt from 2015, keep your feet firmly on the ground, not a mile in the air. This a General Election, not a Referendum, nor is it a set of local elections.
The only thing to revive our fortunes in June is a couple of leaders debates, how on earth do we get them?
Well said Allan. When will people learn that a comment in a Guardian opinion piece does not represent the official endorsement by or editorial policy of the Guardian?
The lack of movement on seats last night was disappointing, but the upward trend in voting percent is promising, even with the caveat that local elections are different. We should use the results, where we have them, to target resources, but hopefully not ignore the new supporters we may have gained in the rest of the country. We must hope they will come in handy at the election after this one.
we get a different message each day. From Labour, that should say..
Sorry Facebook allows me to edit messages.. I should really proofread before publishing
Bye bye UKIP, bye bye Liberals.
Chris Read – Labour have announced several major policies, LibDems none agreed?
Tim Farron’s confession to being part Brexiter at the weekend befor the election was what a slip of the tongue or a cynical, some would say desperate attempt to pick up some anti EU votes.
Personal, nasty attacks on Corbyn are just unpleasant in my view. I’d prefer the LibDems try and win votes based on policies when they finally get around to telling us what they are.
Martin
Yes I see the Liberal Party lost three seats according to the BBC.
Dave Orbison
There was Spring and Summer in the DDR eh?
I find this article just a little on the overoptimistic side. I don’t see any point in denying that the results have been slightly deflating from a LibDem perspective; not awful, certainly, but not what we were looking for, either. We went into these local elections with real hopes of making real gains. Instead we’ve lost a small but not necessarily negligible (certainly not in proportional terms in Scotland and Wales) number of seats in every part of the UK. Significantly increasing our share of the vote is nice. Some of the individual gains are nice. But our real problem at the national level is the annihilation of UKIP; if UKIP voters flock to the Tories – as seems to have happened in England and Wales, then increasing our share of the vote will not help us win our Tory-held target seats. We have a different problem in Scotland; if the Unionist vote starts to coalesce behind the Tories in Scotland, we may not do well in our SNP-held targets. Our main hopes seem to picking off the occasional strongly Remain seats held by pro-Leave Tories, and some of our Labour-held marginals. Otherwise, if precisely the same principle we’ve seen in the local elections holds true in the GE – not a sure thing, but not wildly unlikely either – where we increase our share of the vote but can’t make up ground on the Tories because of Ukippers jumping ship to the blue team in England and Wales and Unionist votes drifting to the Tories in Scotland, then we’ll be lucky to break double figures of MPs in June.
A small pat on the back for vote share increases and some individual gains is fine; but the bigger picture is not, I regret, encouraging this evening. We shouldn’t totally ignore the grounds for encouragement, but we also need a hefty dose of realism after yesterday. I expect to see the betting markets considerably lowering our predicted spread of June gains now.
All of which said, I’ll still be there at my local party’s GE launch tomorrow morning despite living in a seat we don’t stand a chance of winning. I might be feeling a bit deflated, but I’m still going to help the campaign. The issues are too important to sink into apathy just because things didn’t go quite the way we hoped.
@Dave Orbison
“Personal, nasty attacks on Corbyn are just unpleasant in my view.”
And what makes you think that Lib Dems are particularly bothered with your views?
If you seriously consider that Corbyn is not both nasty and dishonest, and has not surrounded himself with some seriously nasty supporters, then simply vote for him.
Incidentally, when you complain that the LibDems have failed, so far, to publish a manifesto, when exactly did the Labour Party publish one? I appeared to have missed that but maybe the biased MSM simply refused to report it.
We stand to gain more from the Tories than we will from Labour. Because the reality is our relationship with Labour is more complementary. The Tories are in power and May’s popularity will wane. As they drift ever further right, we have to position ourselves as a central party of sanity. May should be our primary target, we must expose her flipflopping and aloofness. Corbyn will be gone in 6 weeks.
John Stone
“Corbyn will be gone in 6 weeks.”
Possibly, but the way the Labour Party elects their leader means he may well be replaced by MacDonnell. They are in a terrible mess.
@ Simon Shaw “And what makes you think LibDems are bothered what you think?”
Well, Simon that works both ways surely? Do you think the LibDems will win more seats by only talking to themselves? But to answer your question clearly you do else why would you respond to my post. I understand you will be bitterly disappointed by he abysmal LibDem result in the election of a Merseyside Mayor but that’s not my fault either. Why not ask the 60% on Merseyside that voted Labour – a city that once was a Liberal stronghold why they were not interested in voting LibDem?
As for nastiness. I have yet to hear Jeremy Corbyn make a personal attack on Tim Farron or Teresa May. I happen to think this is commendable. I wish others, including those in the Labour Party would follow his example.
As for the manifesto commitments? Labour have announced 10 policy initiatives during the campaign – how many have the LibDems announced?
For the record I would prefer there to be a small majority Labour Govt and a healthy LibDem presence in the Commons. Large majorities in my mind are unhealthy. The only party I have a problem with in being in Government are the Tories well, perhaps, Orange book LibDems too as we had in 2010 – to underline my point they seemed to be one and the same.
At the 1997 election we were on 10 percent at the beginning of the election, by the time we got to polling day are rating was nearly eighteen percent, and through targeting certain seats we won forty six! If we are canny and put our resources into key seats we will do ok! In the list of target seats you forget , Twickenham, Kingston and Surbiton, Sutton and Old Southwark are within the range! Also John Hemming is well resourced in Birmingham Yardley! There will be a few supprises as well in places like Burnley!
The tactic should send your volunteers to key remain seats! Alec Cole Hamilton will take comfort that, his own Scottish Parliament seat, they gained to council seats yesterday! Clearly momentum is in Lib dem favour! Also the candidate is Christine Jardine a potential big hitter who would be a welcome addition at Westminster !
Also another factor worth considering is the Gina Miller factor, and her planned intervention to encourage best placed candidates to beat Tories and Labour in remain areas who voted to trigger article 50!
I have seen some pessimistic comments on here, about how we are going to do! Strange things can happen with a month to go! If the truth be known the Tories vote share is more likely to be between the 38 to 40 percent, allowing for three percent margin of era ! There majority would be more likely to be 30 plus!
I have been involved in General elections since popping leaflets through doors at the age of eight in 1974! If you were to ask me what this election feels like , I would say 1983, the Falklands election! Corbyn is actually worse than Micheal Foot, and does not have the debating skills and interlect that he had!
Tim is growing into the leader, and as the campaign continues he will get stronger! If the right wing press start attacking Tim we will know the Tories are rattled!
We potentially using a theological expression, as St Paul would put it! ” A Thorne in the Tory Flesh”.
As Mrs May walks through the front door of Labour and SNP seats in the North! The Liberal democrats burglars are coming through the back door and potentially will steal seats in key areas in the North South and West! We should forget our seats we had South of Manchester in Cheadle and Hazelgrove!
How much the 18% means in a GE would also depend on party policies in the upcoming manifesto. Libdem policies now must be firmly in the social liberal – Keynesian camp (even if milder than Corbyn’s 500bn plan) to be able to make a difference. Tim Farron’s own economic vision in late 2015 is a good one. The money could be raised via inheritance tax (AND policies to crack down on the trusts that help tax avoidance), LVT (of course), tax on bank non-core liabilities and even financial transaction tax. Next, departmental cutting (of course why not, this is not austerity), invest heavily in digital and automation technology in government departments to increase efficiency. Besides, expanding the British Business Bank, as well as turning state-owned RBS into something similar, and these banks would raise funds in capital markets by using state-guaranteed bonds. Finally, devolution of public service provision (this was used by Canadian Liberals during 1990s to balance the budget without Osbornomic-style cuts).
In addition, a mercantilist export-oriented economic strategy should be put forward as a STRONG commitment to cut trade deficits and achieve trade surplus, which would help us to reduce debts as well as support employment. As Paul Krugman said, “If you want a trade policy that helps employment, it has to be a policy that induces other countries to run bigger deficits or smaller surpluses”. No more Orange Book please, times to change.
I think we should also bring back the industrial democracy- employee co-ownership, a long-time Liberal policy in the past, to the table.
Overall, what I want from Libdem is going back to what had been their main economic strategy since post-ww1 (government intervention + industrial democracy), which was quite close to France’s Dirigisme and West Germany’ strategy post-ww2, but more mercantilist to achieve trade balance/surplus to support employment and debt reduction.
If this election is like 1983, then what happens to the equivalent of the SDP – i.e. the Liberal Democrats further down the road.
Labour will likely either go 3 ways – all of which will struggle to unite the party – they will either revert back to market / corporate friendly Blairism and effectively be puppets of US bankers and neocons and alienate the left and traditional Labour voters, they will stay with Corbyn and be a party of the cities only, or they will go for a more Kate Hoey Red UKIP feel which would alienate the metropolitan voters.
I feel the Lib Dems need to position themselves as Nordic style social democrats to remain relevent. I certainly don’t want a third Blairite style corporate party. We need to be the Charles Kennedy party we once were.
1) Getting a good share of the vote is important, even if it doesn’t translate to seats. 2) Outside the South-West we’re actually well placed to make some very useful gains. 3) We now have a strong message to wavering Labour/Green voters in places like the S-W – we’re the opposition, we need your vote to overcome the Tory/UKIP alliance. 4) Will some Tories be put off by the UKIPification of their party? 5) Even if we stand still in Scotland we should benefit from the SNP losing ground in our target seats. 6) These results didn’t include London, where we’re strongly placed to make some gains.
Obviously we all have big dreams, and it’s important we keep pushing for a bigger breakthrough, but if we’re being realistic this election is about recovering credibility and relevance – getting a clear third place in votes and pushing for 20+ seats. That would get us a lot more exposure in the future and might possibly make us a more attractive option for defectors.
@Dave Orbison
“Simon Shaw – ‘And what makes you think LibDems are bothered what you think?’
Well, Simon that works both ways surely? Do you think the LibDems will win more seats by only talking to themselves?”
No, of course not. That is very much Labour’s problem at the moment.
But you appear to misunderstand what I meant. When talking about being bothered with what you think, I didn’t mean what people think, I meant what YOU think. If you think Corbyn is great, then vote for him. Having spoken to lots of electors myself over the last month I know just how toxic he is, so he could do with your support.
“I understand you will be bitterly disappointed by he abysmal LibDem result in the election of a Merseyside Mayor but that’s not my fault either.”
I’m not in the least bit disappointed and that result was broadly predictable.
If I have any slight personal disappointment about Thursday’s results it is that we “only” secured 32% of the vote in the adjacent Lancashire County Council ward on the Merseyside boundary, where I managed the campaign and where we had not even put up a candidate in any local elections for the previous 10 years.
Had Theresa May not called her snap election (ably assisted by the idiot Corbyn) then I would have expected us to achieve a vote in the mid to upper 30s, so yes, I was slightly disappointed.
I’m sure you will be interested to know that the Labour vote there collapsed to 12.5%, and this within a parliamentary constituency (South Ribble) which was very much a Labour target seat in the last GE.
Isn’t the reason so many former UKIP supporters voted Conservative on Thursday was because they couldn’t tell the difference?
I wouldn’t write off the whole of the South West too quickly. I agree with Ashley that tactical voting will come into play much more in the GE than it did in the local. I’m upset that we lost seats in this election after our by- election wins but it seems obvious that the UKIP vote went to the Tories so we lost in seats even though our vote went up. We hadn’t persuaded enough moderate / pro Remain Tories to vote for us. All we can do is keep on fighting and target even more heavily than we might have done. The most important thing we oldies can do is to make sure our new members don’t give up hope.
I also want to see a reform in our policies, particularly investing in more social housing and paying for better services through inheritance tax (and of course investing more in the green economy as we did in Coalition) and this should appeal to soft Labour voters too.
Ashley Pragnell: In 1997 the Conservatives received about 31% of the votes and this enabled 46 Liberal Democrats to be elected on almost 18% but now they are expected to get about 48% and the Liberal Democrats are stuck at about 11%. What do you think the outcome of that will be, especially in traditional areas ? It is unlikely to be a Liberal landslide.
I doubt if the supporters of the Labour party from 1906 to 1923 went through all this agonising as their party quickly grew from 29 seats to 194 and then over 250 in 1929. Why do you think that was ?
Until recently Liberalism was a popular creed and even members of other parties affected to support it but now it is subject to often vicious attacks especially in social media and no one from the other parties even pretends to support it. In France and Germany Liberalism is either a dirty word or a bad joke in the latter case.
There is a reason for this. Do you know what it is ?
The best thing the LibDems and any other sensible centre left party can do now is to strengthen their positions and plan in readiness for the virtually inevitable brexit economic disaster that is about to hit in around 3 years time. In any case, another world recession is expected and about due.
As someone involved in small company manufacturing and exporting for 20 years, I am convinced that there are no significant gains out there for coming out of the Single Market and Customs Union, certainly not that can replace worsened trade within the EU, which is what Vince Cable has said recently.
The loss of Financial Services passporting to Frankfurt, Dublin, Paris and Lux alone which would definitely go, will cost the country £440 bn p.a. in GDP and the main vehicle plants will mostly and publically not commit beyond a 2-3 year brexit related timescale. They built their business models around those institutions and most would not have come to the UK without them.
Various components pass across up to 8 countries, each adding processes and value, which might invite routine delays and inspections which would make JIT Just In Time methods used, impossible.
The Tories have been told all of this, but Fox ends meetings prematurely if business people tell him anything negative about this process which he does not want to hear. This all adds in to May’s attempt to wipe out opposition and scrutiny inside parliament.
This process is likely to be as damaging as Minford’s Monetarism ( and to Chile) was in the early ’80 and bar mounting and winning another Falklands War, and withoutLa bour seriously turning themselves around, the LibDems ought to be making themselves ready for government in 2022. Who else would be able to credibly do it?
Thomas: “we should also bring back the industrial democracy- employee co-ownership, a long-time Liberal policy in the past.”
Very well said Thomas! The key point here isn’t to put employee representatives on company boards but to secure for employees a defined minimum share of corporate profits (maybe 10% or 20%). This not only motivates the workforce; it also secures a rather more even uneven distribution of wealth.
P.S. I of course meant more even/ less uneven wealth distribution!
Well, I predict that if Vince is correct, then by 2022, we would expect another “siege economy” from Labour
John Probert – What would happen if the other parties still offer a debt-fulled consumption-led economic model, while Libdem reintroduces mercantilist export-led growth model, which could be DISGUISED via pledges to encourage exports, to cut trade deficit, AND to strengthen foreign exchange reserves (you know, the only viable way for hoarding foreign currencies is to push for export to achieve trade balance/surplus)? These would be reinforced by pledges to increase investment and R&D spending, and to enlarge British Business Bank to provide funds to SMEs (all are core prerequisites for an export-led strategy).
Besides, regarding healthcare, I believe that people use NHS for things like IVF, non-essential cosmetic surgeries, or transgender operations must be excluded from free healthcare. Besides, those suffer from obesity and diabetes due to unhealthy lifestyle must pay extra fees. We must prevent moral hazard.
@ Ashley Pragnell
“At the 1997 election we were on 10 percent at the beginning of the election, by the time we got to polling day are rating was nearly eighteen percent, and through targeting certain seats we won forty six!”
I don’t know where you got the 10% from but according to Wikipedia on 17th March when John Major called the general election we were on 12% and the next day 17%.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_general_election,_1997)
@ Thomas
“In addition, a mercantilist export-oriented economic strategy should be put forward as a STRONG commitment to cut trade deficits and achieve trade surplus,”
What policies would the government take to increase exports and decrease imports – Add a tax on imports? Give a tax discount on exports?
Lots of UK governments have wanted to reduce the balance of payment deficit but we haven’t had a surplus since the late 1990’s. It seems that between 1994 and 1998 we had a surplus due to approximately a 20% decline in the value of the pound. (https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-5031d75e0f04a1d47caac8e01fae7182)
Therefore our trade deficit should improve now the pound has fallen in value since the EU referendum.
Michael BG – granting R&D tax credit like in France; expanding British Business Bank to improve access to funding and lower borrowing costs with export firms receiving greater prioritization (it must become a big bank); moderate import substitution strategy and development of regional supply chain (well, if Brexit is a hard one, import prices would surge and this must be considered) (a robust regional supply chain development strategy would give Libdem a big boost); raise investment rate excluding new housing to over 20% of GDP and raise R&D spending to over 2%; subsidizing investment in automation and computer technology, especially in manufacturing to help produce mass produce cheaper, high-quality goods (you know, automation minimize human errors) without using cheap labour. Finally, we must develop a strong electrical, electronic and computer manufacturing industry because these products receive WTO tariff free status.
One example would be like this: you want to develop a renewable energy industry. Then, you would develop a local supply chain comprised of local firms to produce the supporting equipment.
All of those mentioned above are practiced in France, Germany and Asian Tigers. Government must work closely with industry.
Successive governments never shifted the engine of growth from domestic consumption to exports and investments. They never attempted to keep wage growth below productivity growth, unlike Northern European countries. They never attempted to raise investment rate and R&D spending in line with our competitors.
@ Thomas
I am sure that Liberal Democrats would support encouragement for firms to carry out R&D and getting investment into companies. So having a lower interest rate for exporting companies would assist. As I suppose would these interest rates being extended to the UK supply chain for exports.
A strategy sounds good, but what should the government do to encourage the development of UK supply chains? What should be part of a “moderate import substitution strategy”? Are we going to give subsidies to ineffective companies that can’t produce their goods cheaper than foreign companies?
I assume you mean pay towards investment in automation and computer technology and R&D in these areas?
When you say we should develop electrical, electronic and computer manufacturing industries do you mean the government should invest in companies to try to pick winners?
I think it would be wrong for the government to attempt to keep earnings increases below productivity growth. In fact if wages increase faster that would be an incentive for companies to invest to increase productivity.
“The Liberal Democrats topped the polls in Eastbourne”.
Lib Dem canvassers in Eastbourne must remember that our candidate is known for keeping his promises, one of which is that he will respect the referendum result, as he said on the Sunday Politics (South East).
Michael BG – the availability of funding and preferential treatment that companies, especially exporters, receive in the medium- to long-term must be performance-based, which is called export discipline (unlike Labour strategy during 1970s). Without export discipline, firms would happily stay in domestic markets and hide away from global competition. I mean, this would be a process of culling weaker firms (losers) via competition, rather than pick winner. The state would support them with infrastructure and basic research, as well as licensing foreign technology; technological development can be a combination of domestic R&D and “beg, borrow and steal”. We can place a requirement on foreign firms that they must also operate R&D activities if they want to invest in the UK, and even demand them to hand over their technology. Of course, government must force firms to retool their plants, invest in computer, automation and energy efficiency technology. But the basis of the strategy would be eliminating losers (not pick winner) not propping up them. Frankly these should have been done 40-50 years ago. The strategy above was mentioned in How Asia Works: Success and Failure in the World’s Most Dynamic Region written by Joe Studwell.
Next, as I said, promoting cooperation between labour and capital. Besides, we must regulate dividend policy as one solution to tackle short-termism.
For import substitution, we could start developing plans for car, aerospace, food and pharma sectors, where the capability of British local supply chain are better.
Also, we need a strategy to develop a strong, proactive venture capital sector like in the US.
Last is bank regulation. Libdem must press forward macroprudential regulations, which take into account the relation between banking and macroeconomy. For example, if banks choose to meet capital requirement by dumping assets, this could cause devastating consequences. Besides, shadow banking must not be ignored. Finally, I hope to see that bank finance for real estate and consumers would be magically dried up for manufacturing and technology.
If you want to attach significant weight to the local election results then remember that the Lib Dems were only 4% ahead in Westmoreland and Lonsdale and about 1000 ahead in North Norfolk. Though in North Norfolk they were well behind in 2013 which is a pointer as to how reliable this can be.
In St Albans the party was 13 points ahead – compared to 10 in 2013, in Watford 18 – about the same as 2013. We also IIRC won several seats on the local election vote whilst losing the Parliamentary seat in 2015 (when it would have been the same voters voting)
Two of the seats where the Lib Dems polled highest in local election votes were Oldham East and Saddleworth and Liverpool Wavertree which would both get to 60-70% at times. With one exception never came that close to winning either.
[Figures from Vote 2012 forums and may or may not include adjustments for split wards]
Top psephologist John Curtice did not predict his own knighthood, which is in the 2018 New Year honours list. He told the BBC that the honour was “not something I saw coming.”
As a scot he is also expert on the SNP. Others lump them in with ‘others’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-42512523
https://inews.co.uk/news/john-curtice-poll-polls-shows-labour-still-hangs-one-point-ahead-conservatives/