Brighton was wonderful but I’m still left asking: what are the Liberal Democrats for?

There is much I love about Lib Dem Conference.

Brighton last week reminded me why. Seeing friends and colleagues from across the country, some of whom I only ever see at Conference, was wonderful. There were fascinating fringe meetings, including the one on Assisted Dying that I was honoured to chair on behalf of Dignity in Dying, passionate debates and the reassuring experience of spending a few days among people who, whatever part of the party they’re from, share a belief in liberalism, internationalism and social justice.

But I returned home with the same nagging question I took to Brighton: what, exactly, is our party trying to become? To be fair, the party knows it has a problem. The new party strategy talks about the need for a clearer national Liberal identity and a distinctive message. Conference itself was full of conversations about what-and who-we are for.

Yet I’m not convinced our gathering in Brighton provided the answer. Are we becoming a sort of One Nation Conservative Party, offering a home go moderate former Tories who are repelled by the direction of their old party?

Are we returning (as I’d certainly prefer) to our radical, centre-left traditions, talking about inequality, redistribution, public services, Europe and constitutional reform? Or are we, as I suspect, still rather vulnerable to that oldest accusations against Liberals: that we face both ways?

Ed Davey’s announcement of £17 billion of income tax cuts, funded through the growth the party believes would follow from rejoining the Single Market and a customs union, illustrated the dilemma perfectly. There was plenty there I welcomed – particularly the much stronger argument for rebuilding Britain’s broken relationship with Europe but what bigger story are we telling about the society we want to create?

And there is another question our party must answer: what are we saying to urban, Labour-facing England? Our spectacular advances against the Conservatives transformed the party’s parliamentary strength and should be celebrated.

But Liberalism cannot become something practised only or mainly in prosperous southern constituencies where the Tories are the principal opponent.

What is our offer to Leicester, Birmingham, Liverpool, Nottingham and Newcastle, to name but a few? What do we have to say to people in communities where inequality, struggling public services, poor transport connections and insecure work shape everyday life (which, of course, includes pockets in the South too)?

Our own strategy now talks explicitly about expanding in the North, Midlands and urban Britain. Good. But organisational strategy, important though it surely is, isn’t enough. We need a story to tell, too.

For me, that begins with confident Liberalism: internationalist, socially just, decentralising, environmentally ambitious, unapologetically pro European and determined to redistribute, power, wealth and opportunity.

Brighton reminded me just how much I love this party and its people.

Sadly it didn’t exactly answer my question about where we’re going next.

Christine Jardine deserved better

I was deeply saddened to learn over the weekend that Christine Jardine will not fight the next general election.

Christine has been a fantastic MP: thoughtful, compassionate and, crucially, liberal. I have particularly admired her steadfast support for the trans community at a time when standing up for their rights has too often been met with hostility. Her wider record, including on domestic abuse and childhood bereavement, is formidable.

She should, in my view, have been reselected by the party in Edinburgh West. There are now very troubling questions about what exactly happened. Christine failed to secure the backing of her local party executive, while allies have reportedly claimed she has been pushed aside for an ally of Scottish leader Alex Cole-Hamilton.

I gather Christine could have demanded a ballot of the wider local membership but, understandably, decided against prolonging what she described as “tension and division.” These claims remain disputed and should not simply be accepted as fact. Mr Cole-Hamilton could easily clear them up and I’d encourage him to do so. If that fails to occur, I believe the federal party should establish exactly what happened.

Members deserve transparency, Christine deserves fairness and the circumstances surrounding the loss-at the next election-of one of our distinctive liberal voices deserves proper scrutiny.

A heartfelt thank you

Finally a big thank you to the handful of people I’d never met before who stopped me at Conference to say hello and tell me they enjoy this column and/or my TV and radio commentary. It was genuinely heartwarming knowing people value what I do. It really does mean an enormous amount.

Thank you!

* Mathew Hulbert is a former Councillor, is a regular commentator on TV and Radio, and is Co-Host of the Political Frenemies podcast.