An email came out from Chief Executive Tim Gordon today outlining the timetable for the election of the new leader.
I am in awe of these members of staff who have been working like mad for months on end and are still keeping going through this weekend. They are brilliant. I know this is utterly churlish on my part but I feel I must, though, point out that dates with “of” in them make me feel a tiny bit queasy.
Here it is in full:
Dear Caron,
Following the agreement of the Federal Executive and the party’s returning officer I am pleased to be able to confirm to you the timetable for the election of a new party leader.
Opening of nominations 13th of May 2015 Close of nominations 3rd of June 2015 Dispatch of ballot papers 24th of June 2015 Deadline for ballot papers to be returned 15th of July 2015 Count and declaration of the winner 16th of July 2015 Any member who joins the party before the close of nominations is able to vote in the election, so this is a fantastic time to ask local supporters and former members to join the party. The easiest way for them to join is online at www.libdems.org.uk/join.If you have any questions regarding this process, please get in touch via www.libdems.org.uk/contact.Best wishes,Tim Gordon
Chief ExecutivePS. You’ll have heard from Austin earlier that this morning our membership passed 50,000. People are joining us today who have never been involved before, and everyone who joins now is going to get a vote in the leadership election. So why not forward this email to a few friends now and ask them to join? All they need to do is go to www.libdems.org.uk/join.
I was part of the Federal Executive discussions yesterday. There was also a massive mood for an extensive review of recent events based on members’ feedback. More details of how to contribute will be available in due course.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Violent Bonham Carter features on Fake or Fortune?
Have resignations led to a rethink?
High Fell leaflet watch (2)
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
David
Jana
Peter Martin
29 Comments
Too far, too fast, to coin a phrase.
The appropriate leader should only be sought when the party has held a full independent investigation into what happened, including questioning voters, completed structural reforms, and reaffirmed it’s underlying ethos and raison d’et re.
Perhaps poor timing, the months when retired members like me choose to go on holiday before the schools break up.
If the party decides to go back to pitching to “the left of the middle class” it will be a disaster. We need to reach out to working class UKIP voters, liberal tories and basically anyone with reasonable concerns or anxieties, even if they have misplaced the cause of these.
No free market fetishism either.
@TCO
I completely agree, I feel this will be used to cover up the cracks “look we have a new leader, everything’s changed”!
@Eddie Sammon agreed. It would be good to see more balance away from the traditional education / public sector influences to embrace business, the unions, the armed services and the voluntary sector too.
@TCO
This is what I mean when I say show people, don’t tell them, if you can build a coalition of advocates, showing how policy is solving their problems – how is that not a more powerful message than just rhetoric?
TCO, totally agree. We should champion trade unions and the armed forces, as well as co-operatives. None of this pamphlet utopia stuff. Let’s just get behind the United Kingdom.
Regards
I think we need to step away from this knee jerk reaction and just leave things to cool off before deciding on a new leader. Members need to rest and take time to reflect on the past and consider the future.
Hearts and minds will be all over the place at the moment so rest is needed.
A new leader is only step, more has to change.
Clegg was right to enter the coalition, but he then made all the wrong moves, but it is not just Clegg.
Changes required include:
The driving force within the centre of the party that took us away from our values.
The process by which a reasonable manifesto that left conference became a long confused agenda for coalition.
The mind set of the lemming MPs who could not see the writing on the wall after the Euros.
The mind set that dreamt up the appalling Stability, Decency, Unity, slogan and left it on the web site after we had been thrashed, to show everybody why we were thrashed..
Our PR and marketing who let us down, our policy unit has forgotten what a liberal policy look like.
This is not SLF versus Orange Book. It does not stop with a new leader, the driving force within HQ must wake up and think like liberals or go, along with the FPC and FE.
We have 8 MPs
We know 4 won’t run.
We pretty much know 2 will.
We don’t know about the other 2.
We, realistically, will only have two options.
Not sure how long this campaign needs to be in these circumstanes. The same changes will need to be made regardless of who is leader.
Really tempted to rejoin, but will the party regain it’s grip on reality or continue on it’s search for the mythical right wing unicorns who are thirsting to vote Lib Dem.
This is far, FAR too quick. I’ve been a supporter, Focus-deliverer, candidate, canvasser in election after election and an on-off member for nearly 20 years since I was at school. I kept canvassing, I kept the faith and I kept hoping that we would come through 2015 secure, if battered. I have argued the LibDem cause to my friends. I was appalled that we did not support a Euro referendum some years ago and even then I let my frustration pass. I have been reduced to watching local election results between my fingers. The tuition fees debacle – to put it mildly – left me at a loss for words. Had this policy been the work of a majority Tory or Labour government, I would have been shouting from the rooftops about the injustice of such a policy in a society such as ours. But even then, I kept trusting that the LibDems knew what they were doing. They had my vote then and they do now.
I am, from the bottom of my heart, a Liberal. I am a Democrat. I have not decided to become one. I am one because that is who I am. We are a devastated community and I want to remain here more than ever. So let this be a plea to all of us, lapsed members, new members, potential members and those who look on us with mistrust:
Tomorrow, I will renew my membership. For every 1 leaflet I have delivered previously, I will deliver 10 or 20. I am devastated at the losses we have sustained and at the opportunities we have missed. The constituency where I campaigned this year has lost an outstanding MP and it will be poorer for it. I want to see the Party recover. We do not have the luxury of passively accepting that it will be 40 years before we are restored to our former heights.
We made a Tory government better and more just than it would otherwise have been. That is a fact. But we do need to see things from the electorate’s point of view and they rated us very, very poorly indeed. That, I hope, explains my strong opinions below as to what should happen next. Parties do not recover from defeats like this unless they undergo fundamental change.
I have seen the debates on here and elsewhere about assigning blame (different from responsibility, please note) for our defeat, about Orange Book vs Social Democrat wings, about skewed poll data and who in the Party hierarchy knew the truth, and whether there was wilful blindness in the hierarchy to the approaching cataclysm that was May 2015.
Let there be a reckoning. Cancel the leadership election. We have a mere 8 MPs and our numbers are too small to be of weight in the Commons for the next few months. We will survive for a few more months with an interim leader to hold us together but with the weight to facilitate the brutal, honest debate we need. I can think of no finer person than Shirley Williams. Let this reckoning be a process of open examination of our consciences, our policies and priorities. Let us find ourselves again. If necessary, let there be bloodletting. Let us show how resilient we are to ourselves before saying it to an electorate who has just utterly rejected us. And let us, one day in the near future, when we are refreshed, forgive each other and let the past remain there. We made mistakes in government – but Nick Clegg, Vince Cable, Danny Alexander and all of our colleagues would make a far, far better government than we have now or had pre-2010. I will stand by that, come what may.
I support an idea raised elsewhere that our leader should not have to come from the Commons. Change the Party constitution. If the hierarchy reject it – bring them down.
Let there be no more blaming of our woes on the electoral system – you cannot form a government or an opposition on 8% of the vote.
We seem, at the moment, to offer a terrible lesson to the world in what happens when a party is perceived to have sacrificed all its principles and ideals for power. Let there be no more of this terrible lesson.
Eddie and TCO, agree completely on the need for us to embrace wider society and address the concerns and desires of workers and families across the UK. Being relevant doesn’t just involve the first step of rediscovering our values, it also means applying them to 21st century Britain with clear, ambitious and achievable policies that resonate in people’s daily lives.
Marry in haste, repent at leisure. Why the rush, surely better to have an interim leader until Conference when the Party can debate our future and have clearer evidence of Tory and other parties’ plans? No major elections coming up, and Scottish party already has a leader in place ahead of 2016 ones.
As someone who is thinking about joining the LibDems, and has never been a member before, I would like to make some observations about what attracts me to the LibDems – and what dissuades me from joining.
Positive points:
The need for a liberal viewpoint to be expressed, in support of human rights, against authoritarian measures
The need for a pro-European viewpoint to be firmly expressed, stating the benefits of Europe
The need for a non-authoritarian (no more surveillance, unnecessary wars etc.) alternative to the Conservatives that believes in fairness, social justice etc.
Negative points:
The tuition fee debacle – on three grounds: 1)Tuition fees in themselves are unjust 2) Even worse, it showed the LibDems to be untrustworthy liars (I am sorry, but that is what it did) 3)It showed the LibDems as either politically incompetent or shameless. It was the most obvious suicide declaration that I have ever seen – why did supposedly intelligent MPs not see it as such? (I, like millions of ordinary people knew what would happen in 2015 from that moment onwards). Was it simply greed for power (that’s how everyone I knew saw it)? Or were they deaf to the electorate? Even now this worries me, when I see that some people still try to justify the broken pledge. Every time they do so they hammer a nail into the coffin of the LD party. If I ask any of my friends “which is the party of greed?” they will say “The Tories” (even if they are Tories).If I say “which party lied?” they will say “The LibDems”.
2) Those liberals that seemed to want to belong to the Conservative party on economic matters, that believed that the (rigged by the corporations) market would solve everything and cosied up to big business. There has to be a concern for social justice (although an understanding of the needs of small business owners is also very welcome).
3) I am not convinced that the lessons from the past will be learnt. Stick by principles. keep pledges (and think carefully about them before making them).
Some final advice, as I ponder whether to join:
Have a concern for ordinary people. On important matters (Europe, human rights etc.) be prepared to tell them when they are wrong, why they are wrong (some of them will respect you for it) – but don’t tell them one thing and do another. No one will respect you for that.
Oh – and keep well away from power anyone who doesn’t even now honestly think it was the wrong thing to do to break the tuition fees pledge, or who doesn’t understand why lying so publically was so disastrous.
ATF says it all.
Linda
You make a good point about marrying in haste, but as we saw when Ming Campbell was briefly leader of the party there are some amongstus who are ruthless enough to arrange a quickie divorce.
Of the two who might run, we know of one who will run and will probably win by a large margin.
He will know that the only way forward is to listen to and act on the wishes of the wider membership. The cult of loyalty to Clegg, regardless of what the issue was, is now thankfully over and everyone should be open and honest about what went wrong in the last five years and what needs to be changed for the future.
Do we really need a leadership contest?, or are we really in a position where the other MPs might accept that Tim is the best person to put the Clegg era into the past and and that our 8 MPs be a small, but united force in Parliament.
After the near wipeout in the Scottish Parliament in 2011, the MSPs united behind Willie Rennie and this saved the 5 MSPs from a pointless contest.
As well as rebuilding the party, I believe the new leader should constantly remind everyone in and out of Parliament, who will listen, that many more people voted Lib Dem than SNP and that the electoral system is rotten. No doubt UKIP, with only one MP, will do the same.
The other issue worthy of much more thought regards the UK constitution.
I hope our new leader will also argue strongly for Federalism, by proposing in any future discussions on independence for Scotland that this is an option on the ballot paper. The choice between yes or no to independence was like giving a vegetarian a choice between beef and pork. It is essential that something we can support is on the menu.
What we do not need now is to be labelled as Unionists and for our voice to be drowned out in another Better Together campaign by the Labour and Conservative parties in Scotland, While this might not be the number one issue south of the border, it will be a constant issue at Westminster with 56 SNP MSPs. The leadership in Scotland should have an alternative to jumping into bed with the Labour and Conservatives in Scotland, who, like us, have fewer MPs than there are pandas in Edinburgh Zoo.
TCO 10th May ’15 – 9:58pm …………………Too far, too fast, to coin a phrase.The appropriate leader should only be sought when the party has held a full independent investigation into what happened, including questioning voters, completed structural reforms, and reaffirmed it’s underlying ethos and raison d’et re.
For, perhaps, the first time I agree with you….Our views on “underlying ethos and raison d’etre” are different but why the rush? It’s not as if, at the moment, our ‘voice’ will make much difference in parliament; so let us at least decide what this ‘voice’ will say before electing someone to say it…
.
Cllr. David Becket 10th May ’15 – 10:36pm
Many good points David!
We have just five short years to rebuild and re-establish the party both as a progressive force and as a progressive force in the minds of the electorate.
I am significantly more inclined to listed to your view than those saying it is too early for an election when they are many of the same people who said it was the wrong time for a leadership election last May!
With many weekend media commentators already saying we are dead in the water, we need to get on with refloating this ship and nail the flag of fairness, liberty and democracy to its mast.. Media types understand nothing better than a dynamic leader being in place. The absence of a leader will only be used to confirm their prejudices.
I would have liked a longer contest for the reasons TCO suggests. I know the logic is to have someone in place so the Tories don’t get a free run over the summer but, to be honest, that’s the least of our worries.
There should have been a full, independent investigation which the (presumably two) contenders could consider and discuss with the membership over a relatively long campaign. Alistair Carmichael could’ve stood in in the interim. As it is, I do feel the contenders will be forced to draw on-the-hoof conclusions about the causes of our failure and next steps. I am sure they, like each of us, have theories. But those theories need testing before launching into what will be a slow process of renewal.
In any event, I hope the contenders agree that, post-leadership election, such an independent inquiry should be launched and that they will set aside their pet theories andgenuinely listen to its output.
In many ways choosing the party leader is more important to the voters than the policies. If the public don’t think they can trust a party leader – as happened with Clegg – it doesn’t matter what the policies are no one listens. Looking at the list of LibDem MP’s it’s a very average field, not to say they are bad MP’s, but it’s very hard to see them as future PM’s. The bookies had Farron at 1/7 to be the next leader when the LibDems had 57 MP’s – I doubt they are even taking bets now. If the campaign went on too long it might start looking silly when everyone knows who will win. Labour taking a long time seems sensible as they have a lot of potential winners, the LibDems don’t.
Strongly disagree with those that think this is too quick.
We have ‘General Elections’ in Wales and Scotland in 12 months time. For those elections, what matters most is still our narrative in Westminster (sadly). We don’t have months on end to discuss who should be next leader. We need action.
We have leaders in Scotland and Wales, Han. Additionally, I think the “narrative” of a long contest for GB leader would have been that we are listening, learning, and thinking really carefully about the way forward.
It’s been a pretty cataclysmic event. The idea that the best way to deal with it is get a new frontman, bang out some policies, and be seen shambling about Aberdeen and Aberystwyth ASAP is very short-sighted and unlikely to yield the results you want.
Rediscovering our identity, rebuilding the national and local organisation, and crafting a consistent, credible and compelling message is going to take time. I hoped a long-ish campaign would be part of that – I way to really engage the membership in that process. Obviously, that ship has sailed but I hope the new leader has a strategic view going beyond the most imminent set of elections.
@Han – but what kind of action? Thrashing around is an action. But so is stopping to draw breath and think about where to go from here. We shouldn’t just “Do something, anything” for the sake of it. All I’m saying is that we should wait until after Conference before deciding on a leader. Yes, I know Tim Farron is 90% certain to win but I’d like to know that he grasps exactly why we lost so horribly before anointing him as leader. Post-’97, the Tories ended up with William Hague, then IDS, then Michael Howard in very quick succession…with no good results. We don’t have the luxury of the Tories’ resources, MPs or support base to go through something similar.
I want leadership candidates to accept where we went wrong. I am having a hard time trusting what the Party upper echelons say at the moment. Our survival rests on our next leader. I want to make absolutely sure that he Gets It. And I think Conference is the best place to prove it. Then we can vote.
We need a leader to act as a spokesperson for our party otherwise we will disappear down the plug hole of media disinterest. We want that leader to ensure the membership has a good long say in how we should move forward, in terms of policy, structure of the party and even that awful word narrative which implies we don’t gave any policies or bedrock beliefs and that belongs to the intelligentsia .
Sorry, to return to my point, that leader has to sign up to and say how he ( because , sadly, it will be a he) will implement this process and then we throw our support behind the one that suits us best. After this decision supporters of the other candidates MUST accept the majority decision and adhere to it until this process is over. At that point it might be a good idea to build in a new leadership election so that will keep the Leader on his toes re consulting the membership until the rebuilding is over
Eddie – no, our business is not to go after anyone with concerns no matter how illiberal they are.
Even from a tactical point of view, we are not a big party which in five years’ time will be chasing a few moderate floating voters to take it over the line. In five years’ time we could be wiped out. More likely we’ll survive and rebuild, but our first task is to regain the confidence of the numerous natural Liberal Democrat voters who abandoned us in 2010. To do that we need to be passionately, confidently, even extremely Liberal.
SImon Banks, is it illiberal to be concerned about having a job once your military contract is up? Too many people don’t even understand the concerns of UKIP voters and just want to write them off as prejudiced. Bubble mentality.
tony123 – part of the answer to your question is whether you choose to rejoin or not. I would urge everyone who has the interest of the party and its values at heart to rejoin, participate and be part of the #Goldsurge.
TimB – As Jo Grimond said “Liberals should be on the side of the governed, not the governing,” some senior people forgot that. That is what is part of the bedrock of being a LibDem. If you share that simple viewpoint, join us and help us grow. #Goldsurge