Well-placed sources inform The Voice that Michael Meadowcroft, who (re-)founded the continuing Liberal Party in 1989 following the Liberal/SDP merger, has now joined the Liberal Democrats.
And it’s now on his Wikipedia entry, too, so it must be true.
Welcome aboard, Michael.
UPDATE: Nigel Ashton has the full story.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
We need a debate on Electoral Reform (Samuel Jackson)
Mathew on Monday: We must never deny the importance of soft power (Mathew Hulbert)
‘What is truth?’ (and why this matters to Liberal Democrats) (Mark Paine)
How to empty the hotels (Suzanne Fletcher)
Governments must do more for survivors of same-sex sexual assault (John Jewers)
Market Harborough goes bananas on Carnival day
A boiler explosion at Stonton Wyville in 1862 killed four men
You have no idea if the Spending Review boosted growth
Developing your new business pipeline
Family's horror seeing tourists eat from saucepans in idyllic Cotswolds village
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Wales set to lose most from disabled benefit cuts
Thelma Davies 
Simon R 
Suzanne Fletcher 
Cassie 
Nonconformistradical 
37 Comments
Good news.One of the few Liberals in the continuing Liberals. The continuing Liberal Party has been a bolt hole for those who have fallen out with the Party & now see the Lib Dems as the main enemy.
The Lib Dems & Liberal family will be much stronger with Michael finally on board.
Welcome home Michael!
I am delighted and I hope he will put pressure on the Morrish’s to join so that we can at long last mount a united and successful challenge to the authoritarian new Labour stooge Ben Bradshaw in Exeter.
If it’s true, it’s very good news. I first met him as a student in Yorkshire in the mid-70s. One of nature’s gentleman. Can he bring a few more in though and end this silly division. Or shall we just wait a few years and all join them and get our old name back?
3 – It’s true. I’ve spoken to Michael.
What prompted the move?
Any chance we might now be able to capitalise on Labour’s woes in Liverpool West Derby now or is that too much to ask?
Is the rest of the continuity Liberal Party following him?
Welcome back Michael. It is great to know that the Liberal voice in the party will be stronger for your return. Perhaps one day we will be able to truly marry Liberal theory and practice at the local level.
Martin Land. Some of us did not join the Liberals. We joined the Liberal Democrats.
Nich Starlig – Some people are VERY young…..
This is excellent news.
Sid, its 20 years since the merger.
Nich has a point – the majority of Liberal Democrat members have never been members of either the Liberals or the SDP and frankly Meadowcroft will mean little to them.
I welcome all converts as long as they recognise that they are joining the party rather than the party joining them.
I was rather confused by Michael Meadowcroft. When I joined the Liberals back in 1983, he argued a radical left of centre position for the Liberal Democrats and published a number of pamphlets that made very good reading. At the time of the Liberal SDP merger he was fond of quoting J K Galbraith about the importance of staying with your friends. Then he left us!
He had 3 fundamental concerns; the name of the party (which at that point the short form did not include the word Liberal), the reference to NATO in the constitution, and the difficulty in making constitutional amendments.
To me it seemed worth hanging around to see whether these changes would be made, and they duly were in a relatively short space of time. But that in itself did not persuade Michael to come back.
Well first past the post is a cruel system for small political parties and it was obvious that the continuing Liberal party was not viable. It also became rather eccentric, particularly in regard to it’s policy of isolation in relation to the EU. I do not know if Micheal agreed with the new policy, but I could not imagine joining the continuing Liberals, even if they were a serious contender for power.
I saw Michael Meadowcroft at a fringe meeting at the conference in Harrogate last year, and he seemed perfectly at home in our party, even though he was not a member. Then I read recently in Liberator his review of “Reinventing the State”, of which he seemed very enthusiastic, and I could not see how he could remain outside any longer.
So welcome back Michael. It must have been a wretched 11 years whilst you were away attempting the impossible (being a Liberal Democrat is hard enough), but we need you back and I hope you will have a major role in developing the ideas and policies of our party.
11 years? Maybe it was 20!
This is great News, it was always a shame he didnt come on board earlier.
With the sad death of Mike Oborski recently, the continuing Liberals have had a rough time recently. I doubt there will be any peace in Liverpool, since Steve Radford despises the Lib Dems, but it would be good to see Wyre Forest and Exeter re-unite with the LDs…
Not too late for Meadowcroft to be parachuted into a nearby seat if there is a snap election too! 🙂
Agreeing with Nich and others— I’m a Lib Dem, I wouldn’t be here if not for the SDP split and alliance, and a lot of others wouldn’t be either. Yes, the Liberal party had a strong tradition, but this is a new party, that builds on that tradition and welcomes in others.
Welcome to the Lib Dems Michael, now please tell The Morrishes that it’s time to retake Exeter in a combined effort.
Are we absolutely sure about this?
There’s nothing on Michael’s website about it; nothing on the national LibDem site; nothing on the Liberal Party site (well, undertandable); nothing on the Grauniad site.
Could this be a hoax…..
The edit referring to him rejoining the party was done by a Darren reynolds on the 5 October if that means anything to anybody…
Welcome back, Michael, good to have you back in the tent 🙂 Once you’ve followed Adrian’s and Matt’s advice re the Morrishes, there’s work to be done on your own doorstep regarding another authoritarian stooge that NuLab have parachuted into your old seat – not that she’ll ever make it to the dizzy heights of “Minister for Chewing Gum” like Bradshaw has!
Ian @ 17 – there’s a Darren Reynolds who’s an LD councillor in Burnley, so if that’s the guy who performed the edit I’d guess this is genuine and not mischief-making.
16 – Yes we are absolutely sure about this, I spoke to Michael on Thursday.
On balance this is good news. The Lib Dems used one of there nominations to make him an Alderman in Leeds a few years ago. This was not with out controvesy given some of the things he did to the newly merged party in the city. However I’m pleased that old wounds have healed. The party in Leeds could certainly do with a decent thinkwer/philosopher at the moment.
7- There are only about 1,000 people in it.Of those I hope the true Liberals will find their home in the Lib Dem party.
And while we are talking about Liberal Parties- long live the Ulster Liberal Party!
What? Does Ulster Liberal Party still exist? I thought that what remained of it joined the Labour ’87 group.
In fact the Liberal Society of The Queen’s University of Belfast is in need of re-forming but I feel sure that someone in this esteemed institution that was once represented in Stormont by Ulster’s only Liberal MP will answer the call.
One of the (many) fundamental ideological differences between the proper Liberal Party and the “Lib Dems” is the former’s belief in free and fair trade, as opposed to the obsession with creating a European superstate endemic in the Liberal Democrats.
How ironic that Mr Meadowcroft should now talk about “a bright vision” of a “united Europe”.
What a shame he has decided to abandon his principles after all these years, by joining an organisation that bears little relation to the Party of Gladstone and Palmerston.
The continuing Liberal Party provide an ideological fig leaf for runaway-Lib Dems councillors, to justify their betrayal. Like the Bideford town councillors who left because one Lib Dem councillor was a strip-a-gram — very liberal.
The continuity Liberal Party is simply not a serious political party – short of eurosceptism and an irrational hatred of the Lib Dems stemming from a merger most of us never experienced, I struggle to see what purpose it actually serves.
They’d all do much better to realise that we’d better off working together than splittng the liberal vote and letting Labour & the Tories in in places like Liverpool West Derby and Exeter!
I correct your readers I do not despise liberal social democarts per se i am sure there might be some pleasant individuals, I despice their actions and political dishonesty:promising to protect green spaces then build on them all, forcing woring class families out of their homes to benefit national house builders, proclaiming gay rifghts then voting against debating equality issues
A party than defends EU corruption, protectionism et al does not deserve the title Liberal of any sort
can any one name one fundamental difference of a social liberal democrat council than a labour council in practice
both support blatant waste of mass demolitions, both destroy local playing fields and parks, both destroy housing and cause waiting lists to rise, both supported phoney regional government, its about time the closet social democrats of the lib dems reminded people it was a new party created for the sdp in 1988, i respect some liberals joined , thats a matter for their conscience or lack of one
lets face it whenever labour need bailing out the lib dems are there to save them, like over the eu referendum promised but to be betrayed
Steve (or would you prefer steve ?)
Try using the “shift” key. It allows you to use capital letters.
Strange that the Councillor has to use his title – self importance perhaps – who I am I to say.Why not go the whole hog & list all your titles & postions – thats really going to make me sit up & listen………. – not.
Ps I’ve heard another Liberal Councillor has come home to the Lib Dems in Wolverhampton – oh & were your recent converts in Torridge the ones who fell out over the Lib Dem strippergram?
‘The title Liberal does not deserve….’ you were saying.
Councillor Steve Radford is guilty of a damnable calumny.
Liberal Democrats across the land are fighting with all their might to prevent the mass demolition of sound housing stock and the development of green open spaces.
When I was a Liberal Democrat councillor in Ealing (1994/98) I did all I could to oppose the destruction and degradation of the historic and natural environments and assisted numerous residents and residents groups. Planning officers dreaded seeing my name.
As I write, Liberal Democrats in South London and Surrey are campaigning to protect back garden land from greedy developers, and Bob Russell has broken the convention that MPs abstain from commenting on planning applications to fight a shopping-centre development that would ruin the centre of Colchester.
You influence government behaviour, not by belonging to an irrelevant and little-known sect, but by joining a mainstream political party.
As for Councillor Richard Stokes invoking the names of Gladstone and Palmerston, I am totally nonplussed.
Gladstone’s first speech as an MP was in support of slavery. And Palmerston, the Dick Cheney of the 1850s, operated a foreign policy of such imperialist arrogance that it gave rise to the term “gunboat diplomacy”.
Councillors Radford and Stokes: all but a tiny handful of the British electorate give not a stuff about your two decades old dispute with David Steel. Nor do they particularly care about the contributions to history made by 19th century politicians.
The Lib Dem Liverpool is demolishing more homes and inflating public sector waiting lists, than any other Pathfinder in the Country.
Who profits ?
National building companies running an effective monopoly in their quarter of the city
Nothing Liberal about private sector monopolies demolishing woring class communities
The housing are essentially sound at least 6 out of 7, what is needed is gainful employment and business aprks to facilitate.
The Lib Dem Labour demolition coalition prefer demolishing the homes of the poor at vast public expense
It is arrogant by those former Liberals who defected to the SDP to talk about us rejoining them. We never abandoned Liberalism to jump ship for the SDP you defectors did, no wonder Labour can always expect you to bail them out.
Lastly I put Cllr as there is a gent of the same name who is not a cllr or a Liberal
If Social Lib Dems are so keen on further EU integration why are they so gutless they would deny people a referendum on the EU Constitution in drag, alias Lisbon Treaty
Why are Social and Lib Dems happy to lie to people that they would support a referendum?
Steve, are you able to answer the points made in general terms rather than dodging the question through a barrage of facts.
The Liberal Party website says you are their national leader, for what it is worth. Could you start discussing this in terms of the national policies of the Liberal Party and the national policies of the Liberal Democrats nationally, rather than local grievances?
It seems to date on this thread that you are simply engaging in lazy generalisations arising from specific accusations against LibDem-run Liverpool about which most of us know little about.
For the record I was barely out of nappies at the time of merger, and the spats of merger seem to me as irrelevant to modern Liberal Democrat politics as the 1983 Labour manifesto is on the behaviour of the current Labour government.
What can you do to convince to me that there is a modern purpose to the Liberal Party beyond merely providing a home for liberals that have a grudge against the Liberal Democrats?
A problem for the Liberal Party is that we haven’t become a soggy centrist or Social Democratic party as feared, but are fundamentally a social Liberal one. Old Social Democrats uncomfortable with this left a long time ago. The Liberal party do not occupy the only real gap in the Liberal market, that of being an economically Liberal party, but remain true to the old Liberal Party’s social Liberalism too.
The existence of Liberal Cllrs and Lib Dem Cllrs on Exeter City Council (where I am a Lib Dem Cllr) is frankly absurd, as the two groups and the individuals within them so often vote the same way.
At the last election I managed to acquire a copy of the Liberal Party manifesto. It was very similar to our own, talking about constitutional reform and decentralisation, as well as their opposition to ID cards, the war in Iraq and tution fees. The most noticeable differences I noted (excluding our respective positions towards the EU) were the Liberals’ commitment to nationalising the railways and desire to increase the state pension to a higher level than ourselves. Consequently they were calling for a greater state involvement in the economy and greater welfare provision, absurdly both more Social Democratic positions and ones which I don’t doubt would prove very popular with many Lib Dem activists.
On the EU issue, although I am a Europhile, there are coherent Liberal positions towards being both pro and anti EU – seeing the EU as a path to greater internationalism vs a hostility to a greater centralisation of power. In the South West were I hail from many Lib Dems are sceptical towards the EU, yet are still comfortable being Lib Dems. Claming we are illiberal because of our qualified support of the EU is pretty rich, especially when you consider that at a recent Liberal Party conference their anti-EU line was only retained by a small majority of its delegates. The old Liberal Party was of course also pro-European.
Like Chris N I can’t comment on Cllr Steve Radford’s criticism of the Liverpool Lib Dem council group, as I am not well-informed about the local issues at stake. However, I can see no significant differences between the two social Liberal parties that rationally mean any unhealable rupture or schism should remain.
If you are like my liberal Liberal Party council colleagues in Exeter Steve (barring the recently elected one who claims to be a Socialist) then I would welcome you to the Lib Dems. I am embarrassed the parliamentary party failed to come out in support of a referendum on the new constitutional treaty and there are other Lib Dems who feel the same. I think you and all Liberals should search your souls and ask if British Liberalism is best served by having two tents. I can’t for the life of me believe it is.
At the time of merger between the Liberal party and the SDP, the SDP was lead by Dr David Owen. Many Liberals at the time perceived him to be a closet Tory. He had a macho attitude to foreign affairs and nuclear weapons, his economic policies were becoming increasingly Thatcherite. In fact because of Thatcher, the Tory party was loathed, yet he appeared to want us to go into coalition with them.
Owen claimed his beliefs were “Social Democratic”, but it was not social democracy that we could recognise.
Previously under the leadership of Roy Jenkins Social Democracy was very different and easier for Liberals to stomach (albeit the criticism then was that the Alliance appeared to be a soft option).
So for those Liberals who could not stomach the prospects of the new party becoming a “Sub-Thatcherite” party, to coin a phrase from Roy Jenkins, a small group that included Michael Meadowcroft set off a “Continuing Liberal Party”.
Under our brutal electoral system, it was doomed to fail, as was the “continuing SDP”.
Since then the Liberal party has been the repository of disaffected Lib Dem councillors and activists. Inevitably you get personality conflicts in the party, and one way of defecting whilst staying a Liberal is to join the Liberal party.
I would suggest that nor Michael has left the Liberal party, the game is up for them. In fact in most parts of the country it has been up before it even got started.
As with the Green party, their biggest potential support base is from people who are now voting Lib Dem. And the same problem arises for both parties; the more you succeed in taking Lib Dem votes, the less likely you will see implemented Proportional Representation (PR), and without PR both parties have a much harder job to do.
So under our current electoral system, however much we may like individual members or their policies, we have to defeat both of them as much as we can.
The Lib Dems made the Chinese mistake of changing their name.