There has been no shortage of criticism directed at Carl Cashman over the past few days following his appearance as the cover star of Attitude magazines Pride edition. Yet, looking at much of the reaction, I cannot help but conclude that there is more than a hint of the green-eyed monster at work.
The truth is that many of those complaining would love to have Carl’s reach, his charisma and his ability to connect with audiences far beyond the traditional Liberal Democrat bubble. His interview is an excellent one. He speaks about the importance of promoting positive masculinity to young men, something desperately needed in an era when too many are being lured towards toxic online influences. He stands unapologetically alongside trans people at a time when far too few politicians – sadly, even within our own party – seen prepared to do so publicly. He criticises former leader Tim Farron’s stance on gay sex after losing the leadership, reflects honestly on the shortcomings of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat 2010-15 Coalition government, and consistently roots his politics in the liberal belief that individuals should be able to live their lives without unnecessary interference as long as doing so doesn’t stop others from doing the same.
That is liberalism with conviction.
When I sat down with Carl in Liverpool late last year for what became the first longform interview that he gave – available in three parts on this site – I came away convinced that his political future looked to be exceptionally bright. Nothing that has happened since has changed that judgement. If anything, it had reinforced it.
Of course Carl is undeniably photogenic. Politics has always rewarded people who communicate visually as well as verbally. But reducing his success to his appearance misses the point entirely.
The real reason he is becoming such an effective communicator is that he does not look, sound or behave like what many peoplr imagine a Liberal Democrat politician to be. He reaches parts of the electorate that the rest of us often struggle to engage. He’s authentic, comfortable in his own skin and able to communicate liberal values in a language that resonates well beyond Westminster or party conference. That is a gift.
Rather than grumbling abour his prominence or trying to ignore it, the party nationally should be asking itself a very simple question: how do we get Carl Cashman onto our TV screens and radio more often?
Politics is ultimately about persuading people. If someone is capable of doing that, we should celebrate it rather than resent it.
I very much hope he becomes Leader of Liverpool City Council next year. But I also hope that, before too very long, he is elected to Westminster and who knows where things go from there? Maybe one day he’ll lead our great party.
Liberalism needs compelling advocates who can take our message to audiences we do not usually reach. Carl Cashman is proving to be exactly that.
Keep soaring, Carl.
Who Speaks for the Victims?
I like Max Wilkinson, our Home Office Spokesman. He has much to offer the party.
But I believe he’s got this one badly wrong.
Calling for longer pub opening hours for England’s World Cup matched may sound like a harmless boost for hospitality, yet it seems to overlooked the wider consequences. Police leaders have warned that England games are associated with increases in violence and domestic abuse linked to alcohol consumption, while extended licensing places additional pressure on already stretched emergency services.
Supporting our pubs matters. But so does asking what happens after the final whistle. Who is thinking of the police officers working longer shifts? The A&E staff? Above all, who is thinking about those who may face violence behind closed doors?
Liberalism should always champion freedom, but it must also recognise responsibility and protect the most vulnerable. On this occasion, I fear our party has focused too narrowly on the one and forgotten the other.
Keep Cool, Keep Safe
This week’s expected heatwave is no joke. Drink plenty of water, avoid the strongest midday sun, check in on older or vulnerable neighbours, and don’t overdo it. Heat can be dangerous, especially for those with health conditions. Enjoy the sunshine, yes – but stay sensible, cool and well.
* Mathew Hulbert is a former Councillor, is a regular commentator on TV and Radio, and is Co-Host of the Political Frenemies podcast.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Alexander Mackendrick, Tony Hancock and Rhinoceros
Big money should not buy elections
The infected blood scandal highlights the siloed nature of Whitehall
Reality hits the Burnham agenda
Reading Ulysses
Tom Arms
Matt Wardman
Pawel Urbanski
Jana
Nonconformistradical
4 Comments
“ But I believe he’s got this one badly wrong”
I disagree. It is not a liberal approach to ban something for the law-abiding majority because of the behaviour of a violent minority. Max Wilkinson made the right call.
That said, if there is learning from this for our Party, it may be that we need to be strengthening our policies and approach to tackling violence in society – not in a way that impacts on the freedom of the majority of law-abiding citizens but that impacts on the culprits directly.
I agree with Jana and Max and would also add that our pubs need all the help they can get. (If this would help…) Anyway it all came to nothing
Well it worked with smoking in buildings so as a social liberal and not a libertarian one I fully support bans to prevent harm to a significant number of people, ditto social media. Matthew gets my vote. The police are stretched as are the emergency services. Much as I love football, people in these jobs still have to get up early for shift work. I used to live near a pub that blasted out music in the early hours, then urinating in the street, swearing , shouting etc. so good riddance to that.
I’ll comment on this one a bit late.
I think that “Positive Masculinity” is an excellent idea, as we need to counter both cultural (eg advertising) and political narratives around “you are worthless unless you can do THIS, and look like THIS”, and the following on fear-based levers around “protect our women and girls”, which fail to mention the criminals and abusers with which our far right movement is stuffed.
“Physical training” was used as a recruitment channel by Mosley and the BUF. And “Active Clubs” are being used now.
I think that Tim Farron would be in support of this movement – “what is masculinity” is a big question for Christians at the moment, when Christian Natonalists like “manly man’s man” Pete Hegseth are trying to reimpose the old definition around physical strength and ability at being violent, and killing people with no emotions. That involves implicit and assumed misogyny.
When “Iron John” was the background for men in search of self-worth, I was involved in an evangelical movement gathered by authors such as Roy McCloughry (who has more recently been National Disability Adviser to the Church of England), and we framed it around “What is a real man?” – with various follow-ons.
I’m also of the view that Farron was mainly the victim of a media monstering in 2015, and I’m not convinced that his “controversial” statement meant what they said it meant, but I’ll leave that one for another day.