It’s early days – Vince only announced he was stepping down as the party’s deputy leader last night, in order to focus on his cabinet responsibilities – but who would you, LDV’s readers, like to see take over from Vince?
Of course the electorate for the deputy’s post are the party’s 57 MPs (party members choose our leader and president), and I imagine and hope there will be four criteria uppermost in their minds:
1) Ensuring a ‘balanced ticket’ for the party leadership. Nick and Vince have worked well together precisely because they look, sound and are different. Their combined blend of youth and experience has worked incredibly well for the party. I don’t imagine the party will want a 40-something white male as deputy to Nick. The party will also be looking to someone identified with the ‘social liberal’ wing of the party, or at least regarded as being within the mainstream of Lib Dem thinking. And finally there will be a strong feeling within the wider party that the Lib Dems need urgently to promote one of our female MPs into a prominent position.
2) Someone who can represent the non-ministerial ranks of the party. With so many of the party’s senior figures now in the government, the party needs someone who can represent the coalition who isn’t tethered to collective responsibility in quite the same way as an MP on the coalition government payroll. We know there are issues where the Lib Dems disagree, quite fundamentally, with the Conservatives. I’ve no doubt Nick Clegg will continue to represent Lib Dem interests as Deputy Prime Minister. But he will, inevitably, feel more constrained than if he were not sitting round the cabinet table. The new deputy should, therefore, be someone from outside the ranks of ministerial office, able to champion Lib Dem causes with the freedom that comes from the backbenches.
3) An MP who could be a credible future leader of the party. For all that the party will want and need a backbench MP, preferably female, preferably from the social liberal wing, it’s important too that they command credibility as a potential leader of the party. This person will be Nick Clegg’s number two, the deputy deputy prime minister. And as we saw when Vince Cable needed to stand in as leader when Ming Campbell resigned, choosing a deputy who can instantly step into the shoes of the leader is a vital quality – even more so, given the high-risk strategy the party has adopted of entering into coalition government, when suddenly politics is thrown into utter unpredictability.
The following names have all been suggested in the last 12 hours as potential contenders for the deputy leadership:
- Lorely Burt
- Tim Farron
- Lynne Featherstone
- Don Foster
- Simon Hughes
- Adrian Sanders
- Jo Swinson
- Sarah Teather
- Steve Webb
- Other
So over to LDV’s readers to cast your vote for who among them you favour … Or organise a write-in campaign in favour of someone we’ve missed out.
49 Comments
I voted Jo. But clearly there are some very competetnt candidates on there.
The way the wind is blowing itll have to be a woman I think. She is clearly up to the job. A regular on QT so well known, clearly articulate and intelligent. And in a media-driven age, easy on the eye too. Sorry to be shallow but this is the world we live in.
Mike Moore or Lynne F.
If it does not have to be an MP, then Julia G.
Well if we took the non Minister’ criteria as the most important ( which in my view it may be ) then surely that rules out Lynne, Steve and Sarah ?
Simon would be my choice.
Jo has gained widespread attention and respect for her work on the Real Women campaign and excess packaging. She’s already a well known and well liked face.
She would be the perfect choice for Deputy Leader.
Isn’t it about time we started having polls under the AV system? What is the voting system used for the actualy deputy leader election?
Perhaps we should use the title “Deputy Leader of the Parliamentary Party” to make more clear what the role of this person is.
As I have written elsewhere, the coalition situation indicates that there is a need to de-couple leadership of the Parlliamentary group in the party from more general leadership of the party as a whole. They are two separate roles, and there is a potential conflict of interest in holding both. Vince Cable’s resignation is a recognition of this.
To be fair I think these are the wrong criteria. We seem to be mixing up the roles of Deputy Leader who, er, deputises for the leader, and the parliamentary party Chair (ex-Paul Holmes wasn’t it?) who ought to be the “voice of the rank and file” facilitating communication between leadership, whips, POLD and Cowley St).
I seem to recall also that both posts are elected each and every parliament, so although Vince has said he would not be standing again, he would still technically have been up for election it being a new parliament and all.
Given all that, and that the deputy leader’s job will involve this time potentially deputising in a leadership situation (discussing how the group ought to vote, say, in the absence of Nick) I suggest in fact it ought to be someone who is in cabinet. If a decision is taken at cabinet that requires a discussion about how we support that in the House and Nick is away ought it not to be someone who has been part of the discussions in cabinet and can talk it through with the whips and chair and members from a position of knowledge?
On the other hand, the position of parly party Chair probably needs to be a little bit strengthened so that the chair can, for example, insist on the attendance of a minister if there is something the rest of the parly party feel the need to discuss on one of their briefs.
So basically, LDV is backing Jo 😀
i.e. you need someone who can participate in things like “the usual channels” with the implicit authority of the leader, when the leader is not about.
If one has to use a crude analogy that I suspect doesn’t really apply to the Lib Dem group the Deputy Leader is on the side of the leadership and the chair is the backbench champion/facilitator/conduit of information and discussion: the sort of “anti-whip”.
My vote would go to Simon Hughes. Many would see it as keeping us on the ‘left’ placated and for that I will not disagree. He is also quite straightforward with his views. I may disagree with with his non nuclear approach to the energy crisis, but he puts forward an articulate argument and upholds the principles of Liberal Democracy.
Another point in his favour, is that he is media savvy. But whether he commands the respect of fellow MPs as he does with the membership would be the clincher.
It’s also odd, since some people are mentioning ministers, that no-one has mentioned the Huhney Monster. Not sure why I haven’t actually.
I would love to see Lynne take it.
You know who might also have been perfect? Susan Kramer 🙁
I’d back Lynne.
I think she’s a miracle worker – and I can see a future Prime Minister in her.
I can’t see that in anyone else.
Charles Kennedy!!
I think Simon Hughes, he’s media savey, to the left and a safe pair of hands
I’d’ve written in Evan Harris.
Bah, I’m still annoyed about that.
Jo Swinson – she’s talented, engaging, good with teh twitters and would bring a fresh perspective.
If not, then of course there’s Simon Hughes, legend.
Oh and as Josh said, there would have been Evan Harris too – ach, if only…
Spoken to a number of people and I think that Jo is the logical choice 🙂
Michael Crick is reporting that Farron is going to stand:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2010/05/farron_to_run_for_lib_dem_depu.html
I hope Jo Swinson goes for it. She’d be great. Young, very articulate, passionate and a woman, which is very important if we are serious about encouraging women to get involved and to make our party in parliament and elsewhere more representative.
Actually Jo would be really good. We need to grow our party membership and project our party identity, and inparticular amongst the young who were receptive to our election campaign. Who better?
Photogenic and articulate, it’s time for a higher profile.
I would personally vote for Simon Hughes, for energy, vigour and the ability to enthuse. Even before his successful tenure as President, Simon was campaigning across the country – boosting many a flagging campaign. (There have been many)
I have never seen someone so good at ‘walk-abouts’, pressing the flesh and taking to real people. In a world of synthetic politicians, he is a breath of fresh air. He would have had Mrs Duffy inviting him round for a cup of tea and to meet the grandchildren. Simon will re-connect the membership to the leadership – something vital – after all, he has probably met most of them!
Even before his successful tenure as President
Remind me, when did we actually achieve the doubling of membership that Simon promised? His term in office was at best indifferent, marked out by gimmicks such as the tokenistic vice-presidents.
Simon Hughes is the best choice to keep the membership “on-side” with the coalition. He’s already the unofficial media spokesman of the party!
But then Jo Swinson would be an excellent choice as a potential future leader.
I’m a bit torn. Lynne Featherstone and Jo Swinson would both be very promising, but I can see the point that Lynne might be less free to speak up for Lib Dem views as a Minister of State. On that basis I’d lean towards Jo Swinson.
And yes, it is about time we had a woman in the top ranks of the party (beyond Ros Scott, who is of course President but has a low public profile)! I am sure I was not the only person disappointed that we didn’t have one female cabinet minister, though it was not entirely within Nick’s control as we lost IMO the two most “ministerial” female MPs in Susan Kramer and Julia Goldsworthy.
Another for Jo, for all the reasons people have outlined above.
I actually think it would be a bad thing to elect someone on the grounds that they are on “the left” of the party. In practice, that translates as “less keen on the coalition than the leadership”, since as good liberals we all know that our party doesn’t really split so neatly into right and left as people would like to think. The election of someone to fill that role would hand the media a narrative about “rumblings from the backbenchers” to mirror the whole business in the Tory party about the 1922 Committee. I think it would be better for us to be the party of maturity who are capable of rolling their sleeves up and making sensible compromises, and not whingeing petulantly about it from the backbenches when we don’t always get exactly what we want. So far, I think we’ve done that pretty well.
Vince Cable resigned because of his workload. I am inclined to think that this must apply to anyone in the government at the moment.
So Simon Hughes would be the obvious choice, whilst Jo Swinson and Jenny Willot would be a good choice in terms of up and coming talent.
I hear that Tim Farron is thinking of standing and he would also be a good choice.
Any of those four would be good for this position.
Simon would be great except that everybody knows who he is & what he stands for, he would inevitably be seen as more of the same. Someone like Jo or Lynn would show a new side of The LDs, make more people take a new look. We need to be, & be seen to be The Party of The Future.
Maybe Simon Hughes or Ming Campbell as chair of the parliamentary party (and general backbench shop-steward), and a younger MP (Farron/Swinson) as deputy leader, would be a good combination?
Jo or Simon. Not Tim, he’s too close to the Leadership.
@Nigel
I’ve seen that said elsewhere – what’s the background to this? TF never struck me as anybody’s yes man. He was one of the demotees after the European referendum vote.
It has got to be Jo (Swinson I mean, though Shaw would have been nice too) – she was marvellous on the Scottish GE debate she did.
I can’t understand how Lynne Featherstone gets away with it – her tabloidy sanctimonious comments about the Duchess of York were undignified and ill-judged.
Norman Lamb and Jenny Willot would have time to concentrate on the job of the debuty leader, as they don’t have work in the government.
Nobody seems to know what exactly the Deputy Leader does apart from deputise when the Leader is unavailable. Could someone please explain to me? Obviously it does require some day-to-day work if Vince is resigning for that reason.
What’s the fourth criteria?
Foregone Conclusion
Posted 27th May 2010 at 1:56 pm
Indeed, and as a result there is a lot of bo11ocks being spoken and written about who it should be and why and a lot more being made of this than it warrants in the media etc.
Both Chair of the Parliamentary Party and Deputy Leader of the Parliamentary Party are exactly what they say, internal roles within the Parliamentary Party. They carry no constitutional role out into the wider party AFAIK.
The Deputy Leader deputises for the leader – an important roll in its own right. So, in opposition, Vince got the questions at PMQs if Nick wasn’t there. But more importantly than that, if there needs to be a “huddle” and a decision about something – which way a vote should go or whatever, that is outwith the remit of the whips but within that of the leadership, then the deputy would deputise. As such, the most important part of that role is that they have the confidence of the leader and are able to “command” the respect of the leadership when dealing with others *as* leader.
The Chair is the “voice of the parliamentary party”; the person who would provide a conduit for discussion between backbenchers and leadership and whips and the party at large.
Both offices, from what I remember of last parliament, are technically vacant each new parliament, just as our council group officers are each annual council. So Vince has, technically not resigned, since he would have had to stand again anyway, but merely said he no longer wants to be considered for it. But it’s not a role for which you want to have someone antagonistic to the leadership or as a “counterbalance” to the leadership – they will be part of the leadership, a substitute.
I still think that the job people are really talking about here is the Chair of the Parliamentary Party. That was Paul Holmes in the last parliament and again would need to be re-elected anyway in the new parliament. That is the one you want some “counterbalance” to the leadership in.
Paul Holmes ceased to be chair of the parliamentary party in 2007 – it has been Lorely Burt since then (defeating Evan in a hotly contested battle, if I recall correctly).
Jock and others are correct that the position we are talking about is deputy leader of the Commons Parliamentary Party – the post of deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats does not exist. Having said that, of course, everyone treats this as that, and that is obviously not totally irrational…
Oh yes – I think I did recall the Chair passing to Lorely.
Jo Swinson for me. Competent, eloquent, and equally at home with the grass roots, the leadership, and the media.
Steve Webb would have been a good choice, but he has a thankless job to do as a counterweight to IDS and Grayling’s hideousness at the DWP; we need him there. As for Simon Hughes, he’s a damned good constituency MP, but as Deputy Leader he’s bound to have too many of those “Simon moments” we all know and don’t always love, and the press will eat him alive.
I am not a member of the Lib Dems although I do vote for them. If I had a say, it would be for Jo Swinson also. A number of reasons:
1. She’s Scottish – important since you’ve gone into coalition with the Tories who aren’t well liked in Scotland.
2. Independent of those in government as article points out the Deputy should be.
3. Competent on issues relating to economics, environment and foreign affairs, and a good local champion.
4. Comes across well, has a nice, friendly personality, not like most politicians.
5. She’s female. That’s not to say there should be any positive discrimination, as most here including me are against that, but if you are 50/50 say between Jo and Simon Hughes, this could be the tie-breaker, as the party does get a lot of criticism for coming across as overwhelmingly white male middle class.
But most of the names brought up here would also make good Deputy leaders.
There’s now a Group “Jo Swinson for Deputy Leader” on Lib Dem ACT.
Please join it if you support her!
The group Felix mentions is at http://act.libdems.org.uk/group/joswinsonfordeputyleader
I think Simon Hughes is the best choice for the vacant Deputy Leader role as he has been excellent as a media expositioner in media on the `Coalition Governmnet’ and combines political wisdom,wit and craft whenever he speaks.
Simon Hughes smiles a lot and has 30 years constituency track record in Southwark and Bermonsey constituency and has thousands of miles of travel when President over 8 years. I have always admired Simon Hughes greatly on his humanity and ability as an active listener..
Simon Hughes also connects best with all grass roots Members and is respected by Labour and is feared most by the Tories.He would also act as a counterweight with our gifted Leader as he makes principled policy beliefs the centre of his Liberal gravity at all times.
Tim Farron is also very able and a talented speaker and clearly a very entertaining orator at Party Conferences and is very passionate in his beliefs and knows how to beat the Tories at home.
There is a case to put for a female candidate for this post, notwithstanding that Sarah Feather,Lyn Featherstone or Jo Swinson all have other fish to fry but we do have a female President doing an excellent job.
I would agree with others that someone with a counterbalance Liberal background pedigree like Paul Holmes or Lorely Burt would equally make a good Chair of the Parliamentary Group as they have both feet firmly on the ground and reach deep into grassrooots opinion.
Felix – I can’t find your group; Dave’s URL leads to a 404 I’m afraid.
These are no ordinary times and, with the leader in government, ‘deputy leader’ takes on a completely new meaning.
The job of deputy will be promoting Lib Dem policy as opposed to coalition policy. This will require skill to make sure the pressure is kept on, like the Tory 1922 committee is doing, to get the best deal possible for us and the country while not undermining our ministers. That means that the deputy is best outside government.
At the same time the deputy must not pose a threat to the leader. This post must not be a launchpad for a leadership bid. The leader will have a difficult enough job fighting our corner in government without the threat of a potential rival as his deputy building up to pounce at the first opportunity.
It is also worth recalling that the most successful deputy leaders (as deputy leader) are usually a bit older than the leader. In these unprecedented circumstances that will be particularly important.
Get this choice right and we will be strengthened greatly. Get it wrong and we’ll suffer.
Lynne Featherstone comes across as the most human. Sarah T is great but her brief is too tough to also manage the deputy leadership.
I would have preferred Julia Goldsworthy, but that’s not possible at present. Oh dear!
I’m backing Tim Farron. I was Tim’s constituency chair when he was first elected 5 years ago and I’ve seen him transform politics in this area to such an extent that yesterday all of Kendal Town Councils 24 seats went Lib Dem. He also increased his majority from 267 to 12,264 taking the majority of the votes from the Conservatives. So, Tim knows how to appeal to the voters.
He also relates to party members and has led them in an incredible work rate over the 5 years. He leads from the front, very successfully.
Finally, Tim can very quickly master a complicated brief. A very necessary attribute for a deputy leader.
Simon is a great Lib Dem and is indeed a legend, but he doesn’t have the wide appeal that Tim is capable of commanding.