Last night the new Parliament had its first vote on the Queen’s Speech; the government parties voted together of course. So there I was rubbing shoulders in the voting lobby with all these Tories, many of them new, most of them – through no fault of their own – from rather privileged backgrounds. Never before have I felt quite so aware of my state comprehensive / red-brick education – and immensely proud of it too.
I was also made acutely aware that our new bed-fellows are not very much like us but that our Labour opponents will nevertheless work hard to lump us together as a single entity. There are huge and wonderful opportunities open to the Liberal Democrats due to our being part of the coalition government but at the same time our distinctive identity is at risk unless we take ambitious steps to prevent this.
The job of Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrats has never been more important. If I am successful, I want to present Liberal Democrat achievements and Liberal Democrat ambitions in an unashamedly bold and effective way. We are right to be part of the coalition and we must treat our coalition partners with professionalism and respect … BUT I have absolutely no desire to see the Lib Dems become the British equivalent of the German FDP, an inoffensive minor party, propping up a series of administrations, constantly in government but effectively neutered and relegated to tiny party-status as a campaigning and independent force.
I am ambitious for the Liberal Democrats, I don’t want Nick Clegg to be Deputy Prime Minister after the next election, I want him to be Prime Minister.
There will be no Coalition Party for anyone to vote for in next years Scottish, Welsh and local elections, and if we aren’t careful we’ll end up eclipsed by our coalition partners but blamed equally for any perceived government failings. My job as Deputy Leader is to ensure that we give clear and inspiring reasons to vote Liberal Democrat – on fairer education policies, on fairer and redistributive taxation and free access to higher education.
I joined the Liberals when I was a teenager having watched Live Aid. As I watched the coverage that hot July day in 1985 and saw the documentary clips of the heartbreaking tragedy in Eritrea, the penny dropped that poverty and inequality never ever happen by accident, they happen because of the wickedness of the few combined with the complacency of the many. I want the Liberal Democrats to be clearly seen as the radical and effective agents of change to challenge that wickedness and complacency.
There are three things the new Deputy Leader must do
- Provide ambitious and energetic political leadership for the party – specify what the Liberal Democrats are for, concentrate on key issues that make us distinctive such as fairer taxes (including those we haven’t yet got into the coalition agreement). We must also ensure that we have spokespeople for each department where we have no minister, and have teams of MPs and Peers focussing on policy creation and campaigns for every government department otherwise we risk political atrophy in these areas.
- Lead the construction of an ambitious and professional political infrastructure for the Liberal Democrats. Now we are in government, we have lost many of the political, media and staff resources in Parliament that we had in opposition. My job will be to build a strong press and policy operation based on private fundraising – something I’ve done to good effect in the recent past.
- Be the radical voice of the party in regular private conversation with the Leader and Liberal Democrat ministers – to make sure that we deliver the radical change and fairness that we believe in.
One thing that the Deputy Leader must not do is to freelance or become a liability. Nor must they have an agenda that is separate to that of the Leader.
‘Cleggmania’ revealed a new political market that the Liberal Democrats are uniquely placed to win over: young people and others who have previously not voted. In Westmorland we proved that we could reach that market in a sustained way. We believe that we doubled the turnout amongst under 25 year olds in Westmorland and that around 80% of them voted Liberal Democrat. We used Facebook to communicate, but our main tool to motivate young voters is passion and belief and my ability – though I say so myself – to speak to people in a way that inspires them. I am emotional about my politics, and I seek to infect others with the same enthusiasm and passion.
18 Comments
Really pleased to read this – hope you win!
I’m hopeful about the way the Deputy Leadership seems to be being recast into a new role facing post Coalition challenges. This does however beg the question of mandates. I doubt there is the time or the money for the party to intitute another all member postal ballot into the cycle. However if the “New” Deputy Leader role is to “speak for the party” or be a ” bridge” between party and coalition then its unsatisfactory to say the least that he/she is elected solely by Westminster MP’s.
There are several models you could play around with but two quick thoughts.
1. Election for a Parliamentry term at the first Federal conference after an election would be quick, cheap and much more inclusive.
2. Swap the all member postal ballot attached to contested Presidential elections for point one and use the money/time/effort to have a proper election for Deputy leader
3. another comporomise given not everyone goes to Conference would be to use the mailings/franchises for FE elections.
I was going to ask for clarification as to what the role of Deputy Leader actually is in the LD constitution (apologies, I know this debate was had on LDV a week or two ago) but I reckon it will ultimately be up to the winner to define the role in how they do it. Instinctively I prefer Simon Hughes’s vision for what he would do as Deputy Leader – but if Farron wins and achieves what he has laid out here, it will be a big step forward in making the LDs a distinctive party whilst still being in government.
this is really good I hope you become the new deputy. I am only 16 but have been very interested by the last election and will certainly vote lib dem in the future.
SO TIM
WHY DID YOU VOTE AGAINST Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007, ????????
why were you one fo four people in the lib dems to vote against it…. ???
“My job as Deputy Leader is…….”
Being a little presumptuous, aren’t we??
@Tim
Excellent vision.
@Annie
The question has been answered very satisfactorily in the past. Use the site search facility.
Good stuff – sustaining and developing the growth in enthusiasm we saw amongst younger voters would be an excellent things for the party.
Surely the word “more” in that sentence is otiose? 😀
for those who don’t know Tim particularly well, let me assure you that the drive and the passion which is expressed here is the reason that he secured the majority which there is inWestmorland & Lonsdale. As one of the Councillors in W&L I know that Tim will forever push and push, and make what might seem unreasonable demands , but at the end of the day he is a winner, and a man for the future.
Good luck.
‘Cleggmania’ revealed a new political market that the Liberal Democrats are uniquely placed to win over: young people and others who have previously not voted.
But it flopped – badly. If our party is to progress, we must work out what went wrong. We had the opportunity to do amazingly well, and I think when we had that opinion poll boost people were really taking us seriously. I’d say it was also to do with our local campaign for the election kicking off (the polls were rising before the TV debate), but undoubtedly the creditable performance of Nick Clegg in the first debate helped. So why did we end up with a poll share in the actual election no better than what we started with before the “Cleggmania” boost?
I’m afraid the “Cleggmania” thing was the problem. The party is more than Nick Clegg, but the response to that first opinion poll boost was that this got forgotten. Cleggmania was our Sheffield Rally – it made us look shallow and cocky and not yet ready for government, and we were punished for it.
Am enthusiastically backing Tim and agree with most of this, though I think he does the FDP a profound disservice.
http://action.compassonline.org.uk/page/s/pledgeforpr
COME ON, TIM! COME ON, TIM! etc etc
@Matthew
“But it flopped – badly.”
Hm, yes and no. It may actually have saved our bacon. In 2010, for the first time, our votes-to-seats ratio became less efficient rather than more efficient (95k last time, 120k this time was it?). We got more votes in places that were useless, and lost them in places where they could have made a difference. That suggests an air war at work (which encompasses Cleggmania, but clearly is more than that). Of course, there will always be some natural wastage from the youth vote not turning out, but if it hadn’t turned out at all I suspect our squeeze would have been far worse. I keep meaning to look at the stats in full and try to work out where and to what extent this replacement happened, but on the face of it that’s what the overrall numbers suggest.
@Paul McKeown
Well ive used the site search facility and i cant find anything..
The theyworkforyou site which shows clearly their voting record, that he was present and he voted against. This law protects me in employment, why did he vote against it. ?
@Annie
You didn’t try very hard. Scroll through the comments on this https://www.libdemvoice.org/tim-farron-runs-for-deputy-leader-campbell-and-munt-back-him-19695.html to find the one that Tim Farron wrote explaining his position on free speech.
for nick to be prime minister after the next election we need to start now, and the deputy leader should look at building up the party profile and infrastructure in places where we are not that strong, we have a foot in the door in a way we have never had before by ebing in government
Alix
In 2010, for the first time, our votes-to-seats ratio became less efficient rather than more efficient (95k last time, 120k this time was it?). We got more votes in places that were useless, and lost them in places where they could have made a difference.
Yes, but it was even worse in 1983. What was the common factor linking 1983 and 2010? I’d say a national campaign that attracted shallow support but failed to capitalise on our best asset – our enthusiastic and knowledgeable local campaigners. There was no reason we should have been squeezed in 2010 any more than previously. Labour was losing support more than ever before, people were VERY distrustful of the Tories. We could and SHOULD have done better, and sorry, but I do put it down to the national campaign becoming too cocky and too Clegg-based early on, then Clegg faltering in the later debates.