Last week’s local and European elections were truly awful.
Those of us who joined the Liberal Party back in the dark days of the 1970s remember the many false dawns and disappointments that followed local and General Elections.
We built our base bite by bite from the bottom up and fighting Labour it was tooth and nail.
The loss of all our Councillors in Manchester or seeing Liverpool reduced to just three Councillors or in my own Rochdale where we have gone from 33 to 1 in four years (though blame cannot be laid solely at the national parties fault) is painful and has caused me much soul searching.
Yes the Leadership have made mistakes and have been out of touch with what is happening on the ground. Policies like the bedroom tax, tuition fees and disproportionate cuts to local government have given our opponents a field day.
As a former Council Leader, Group Leader and veteran for 3 local government coalitions ( Tory – Lib minority, Lib Dem – Tory Majority and All Party ) I understand the frustrations that have driven many people to speak out.
The Leadership have not helped matters by crass emails written in Annette Brooke’s name boasting about our few successes or similar comments on air by Sir Malcolm Bruce MP.
I agree with the comment made by Lynne Featherstone MP on the BBC on election night that we as politicians have lost our humanity and need to start understanding how ordinary people feel.
Similarly John Pugh’s initial comments about our Leaders behaving like First World War Generals acting from the Westminster bunkers and sending loyal local troops out to be mowed down reflect how we feel.
A little humility from Nick the day after instead of “I’m not resigning” would not have gone amiss. The other two Party Leaders got it so it is a pity that Nick could not have recognised the same need to be humble.
What would we gain by getting rid of the Leader? We have already in my view, further diminished ourselves in the eyes of the public by appearing to be self-interested and introspective . The Libdems4change website has in my view done us immense damage and will further damage our already dismal poll ratings.
Changing the Leader now will change nothing. Those of us who have worked in minority and majority coalitions understand how difficult it is for the minority partner to get the credit for what happens. A look at what happened to the FDP in Germany in their General Election last year ought to be a salutatory lesson.
As the only genuinely centre party in the UK we need to recognise that drawing supporters from the left and right is our strength but also our weakness. When we align ourselves with one wing or another we cannot be surprised if the other wing goes back to its natural base. The loss of up to 40% of our support predominately from Labour cannot therefore be a surprise.
The crass suggestion that we could support a Labour government after the next election risks losing another portion of support from the right. We need to focus as Lynne rightly said on what people think and getting our values across not self-interest.
That means discipline and compromise from both the Leadership and the membership.
I do not want us to return to the dark days of the 1970 when we had 6 MPs. WE have 11.5 hard months where we need to get our message across. Let us spend it promoting Liberal valves rather than navel searching!
* Paul Rowen is the former MP for Rochdale
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Joe Jackson: It's Different for Girls
Trumps' White House thuggery appals the world including most Americans
The toxic legacy of Brexit
Could Hitler have won?
Say hello to the Act that successfully set rules 1,050 years into the future - Calendar (New Style) Act 1750
Alex Macfie
Jana
FS People
David Allen
54 Comments
Nick Clegg has made it clear there will be no compromise. He will not change course.
It would be much better to get matters sorted instead of being left in the air, as they are at the moment.
Nothing can disguise the fact that we are now lead by a lame duck and this will continue right up and through the general election. It is not his fault, it is the way the cookie has crumbled.
More total humiliation is to follow, starting with Newark, frankly we are getting a kicking, we deserve a kicking and it may be that the party will have to go down to a rump of say 10 MPs if we are,lucky, before commonsense and reason take over
and we stop running away from reality.
We are not a centre party. – w e have always been the liberal alternative to Labour.
How can getting rid of Clegg possibly damage our “already dismal poll ratings” – Really, I’d like to know, It is the most absurd argument. We are already worse than 1970 – then we got about 15% of the vote per seat contested – I don’t know if you’ve noticed but we have just got 6.7%.
Perhaps we should get £1 million down to Ladbrokes and start betting on how few seats the Lib Dems will win in 2015 so we can fund the lost deposits.
Paul – this is a fair account of the desperate situation we are in, but where are your answers?
We have lost half our members, half our Councillors (around 80% of them in big cities and inner cities), we were almost swept away in the Scottish Parliament and the European Parliament, a small rump in the Welsh Assembly…and a catastrophe looming in May next year.
We started the European campaign with European poll ratings of 9 or 10, and ended up with 6.7. And people pretend the campaign was some sort of success for Liberal principles! (Remember the aim was to get to 13 or 14 with the help of pro-European voters).
So “steady as you go” in the shifting Doldrums of the political centre – how will that change anything?
We are indeed heading for a catastrophe next year and the powers-that-be at the top of the party have not got a single idea of how to avert it. Steady as you go???
Tony
“Changing the Leader now will change nothing.”
I would like to dispute this, only I’m afraid it might be true. I hope it is not. If it is true, however, then it’s a sign that the upper tiers of the Party have totally lost touch with the interests of the base and have floated off into the æther. That would indicate that in the long term (and, perhaps, in a much shorter term than I’d like) the Party is doomed.
Being, like most Lib Dems, naturally optimistic, I’d prefer to believe that it’s not true; that there is enough support for a new direction among Liberal Democrat MPs to turn back from this catastrophic road to ruin which the Party is on. I don’t know that the be true, but as long as I have a choice, I’ll believe it until it’s categorically proved false. But if the Party enters the 2015 election with Nick Clegg as its standard-bearer, that proof might not be too far off.
“changing the leader will change nothing”
You forget how powerful a leader is in a party. The whole point of changing a leader is that a leader can change direction. The incumbent often believes in what he is doing and thus cannot do so.
I would like those who see a way forward with Clegg to consider laying out exactly what that route is
It’s not just a question of ‘doing something’ it’s more a case of doing what. No doubt those closest to the levers of power will defend the status quo giving for the same response as a former Labour PM who when asked what he was doing about the crisis said, ‘crisis, what crisis’. Anyway who would seriously replace Clegg. Vince maybe but the party once got rid of a very good leader because he was too old. We can keep banging on about how many people have been taken out of tax and more money for education, blah,blah but the nobody when confronted with a ballot paper believes it.
The public is aware of at least part of what the LibDems have done. That is why the public mentions the broken pledge. It would not be able to do this if the pledge had been kept
Lib Dems need to understand that changing direction might be possible, but changing the leader alone won’t achieve this. Most, if not all, of the Coalition ministers will have to go, leaving Tim Farron as probably the only possible leader. Much, if not most, of what has been done in the last 4 years would need to be repudiated with all MP’s on board with this. And a whole new ‘front bench’ would need to be appointed to replace those too tarnished by association with the coalition. Of course it would probably involve leaving the government a year before the election as well.
Any less than most if not all of that will not achieve much. Is that what people really want? Or not? If not then they will just have to carry on with the current strategy and hope for the best. Just getting rid of Clegg will not help.
@Stephen W
Let us say that the party carries on and reduces the number of MPs from 56 to 40. Would that make it harder or easier to recover? What is the best option?
I think there is a problem within the party, 2010 the party split apart, not MPs but members and voters, now the party is splitting yet again, those who have led the party; the MPs and the behind scene command structure are all responsible.
The problem is this is the way those who lead actually wanted the party to go, and this is the way they still want to go, there is a core element that also support the leaders going in that direction for whatever reason right or wrong, that leadership and the direction they have led will not change, the next GE will leave a few MPs in very safe seats the core of support for the new direction.
I think the members and supporters have to face the facts staring at them; you either support the new direction or leave, because absolutely no one in the chain of command is listening to the voice of sanity even if an odd MP or two decide to voice concern about their own futures it is way too late, 2010 was the time to voice concerns now no one will believe any concerns raised, the party cannot change back to what it was, that support has left and will not return.
The party core has followed the leadership, they cannot turn aside; too much has been given to deviate even if it means the end of the party altogether, of course we will not know what end until after the 2015 GE, changing leadership will not change the course already set, if leadership change happens, expect the worst because I think some MPs will walk the moment that happens they will not have a future within a left centre party (which will not recover for generations).
People keep overemphasizing on the tuition fees pledge but I think it goes a lot deeper than that with those that are angry with the Liberal Democrats and have stopped supporting the party.
The coalition government did not have a mandate for the top down reorganization of the NHS. The Tories did not get a majority and it was certainly not in the Liberal Democrats manifesto, therefore a whole chunk of the electorate are furious that such changes to an institution which they did not vote for is wholly undemocratic.
Nick Clegg has lost a lot of credibility because we can all remember the Party political broadcast of Nick Clegg walking through London with the litter of flyers “no more broken promises” for those who wish to remind themselves of the video it can be seen here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTLR8R9JXz4
Nick promised a new kind of politics based on “fairness” he spoke of the government being more transparent, and the right to recall.
A lot of people identified with the kind of politics Nick Clegg was promising, however he has failed quite spectacularly in delivering it.
The David Laws shambles within a few weeks of entering government.
Raising Tuition Fees,
Top down reorganization of the NHS
and a complete lack of transparency when it came to negotiations within the government where there was disagreement on policy.
The party has suffered from a catastrophic reputational damage under Clegg’s stewardship for which he must shoulder most of the blame. But it would not be good enough for those lost voters and members for Nick Clegg to go. The party must also reflect on the mistakes that have been made and the direction it traveled. It must understand that a change of direction is needed in order to win back the trust and support of those whose support has been lost.
It is not good enough to say we must soldier on and shout louder to get the message across. The message has been heard and it has been rejected by the electorate. The party has to decide does it want to abandon completely those lost supporters from the left, or does it want to continue steering its party and policies towards the right, that to me seems like a pretty crowded place that is well and truly sown up by the Tories and UKIP
However it’s the parties right to decide the direction it travels, it just needs to be honest with the electorate on it’s intentions.
@ Matt
Let’s not forget the shambles that is Universal Credit, the demonisation of the disabled (or at least, we have not countered IDS or McVey’s rhetoric), Selling the Student Loans, the Bedroom Tax, the utter failure to deliver any electoral reform, an increase in VAT – the list could go on.
Maybe I should quit!
Paul, David Howarth has just published an evidence based route map elsewhere on LDV. The trouble is that if he had written it up as a conference motion in 2009 the leadership would have organized to vote it down. In fact two years ago they did organize to vote something down and if in a month’s time rethink they have got away with the present shambles they would still trash others who dared promote it, because fundamental to it is a social liberal approach to redistribution and public service.
It I’d not just the electorate who do not trust them. They are compulsive small statists and low taxers who borrowed our coat, exploited what we had built over years of service and action, and trashed our reputation.
Hesitate at this moment when people like you can help get our Party back and it will be lost forever.
Paul Rowan: ” The Libdems4change website has in my view done us immense damage and will further damage our already dismal poll ratings.”
Not really, I think. The damage was already done before polling day, hence our pretty dire polls leading up to last Thursday and the results themselves.
The response of the leadership throughout has been particularly noteworthy: denial, denial, denial… and little if any humility (you have also pointed out this lack, quite rightly).
Maybe I’ve been naive but I always thought it likely, even during the first year honeymoon of coalition, that Nick Clegg would stand aside 6 months or so before the next election and we would move to a supply arrangement and a more distinctive agenda under a new leader. I don’t think it is possible in the British system for the leader of a minority coalition party to credibly lead his/her party into the subsequent election however talented they are. I’m surprised that this doesn’t appear to be what he and his Lib Dem cabinet colleagues were intending to do all along.
I can’t go along with the suggestion that the libdems4change website has done any damage though – if the leadership changes and there is a shift in direction, the website will be seen to be a small part of that. If the leadership continue and nothing changes, the result next year would have been so bad anyway, that it couldn’t really have been any worse. Is it really that important whether we get 9 or 10 MPs when set against the damage to our reputation that is being done by the leadership continuing when they have lost a national election in which the public have resoundingly told them to leave?
@matt
“The party has to decide does it want to abandon completely those lost supporters from the left, or does it want to continue steering its party and policies towards the right, that to me seems like a pretty crowded place that is well and truly sown up by the Tories and UKIP”
I thought it was clear that the leadership see appealing to centrist voters as being a key part of our strategy, so why do you talk about “continuing to steer the party and its policies towards the right”?
You (correctly) talk about that right as being a pretty crowded place, and I’m sure you would accept that the left is too. So who exactly do you see people who regard themselves as centrists voting for if not for us?
And just to be clear, I am not saying that we should not also seek to appeal to many in the Centre Left.
P.S. I think the spin from the party that the libdems4change website can also be blamed on Lord Oakshott is disgraceful and I’m very pleased to see that at least Paddy has distanced himself from this allegation.
@Helen Tedcastle
“Paul Rowan: ” The Libdems4change website has in my view done us immense damage and will further damage our already dismal poll ratings.”
Not really, I think. The damage was already done before polling day, hence our pretty dire polls leading up to last Thursday and the results themselves.”
So you are seriously suggesting that the actions of certain members (and at least one ex-member) over the last 5 days will have improved our poll ratings.
So that’s alright, then.
@Gareth Hartwell
“P.S. I think the spin from the party that the libdems4change website can also be blamed on Lord Oakshott is disgraceful and I’m very pleased to see that at least Paddy has distanced himself from this allegation.”
Despite a thorough Google search I didn’t see the “spin” to which you refer. Could you give fuller details or a link?
Simon Shaw that’s not what Helen T said.
Matt you are absolutely spot on !
Simon Shaw
I didn’t write that Simon. I wrote that I thought damage had been done before the antics of Matthew Oakeshott came to light. The annihilation of ten out of eleven MEPs and hundreds of Councillors shows this. Voters have turned away from us in droves – not everywhere, as your area, where there is a dug-in presence and an MP, did very well.
We are left with islands of strength in a hostile sea.
The present crisis does not help us of course but it was inevitable after these sets of election results.
@Helen Tedcastle
Well if you look at what you said I think you will see that you did. Maybe you didn’t mean to.
@Simon Shaw
“I thought it was clear that the leadership see appealing to centrist voters as being a key part of our strategy, so why do you talk about “continuing to steer the party and its policies towards the right”?”
the problem lies in your perception of where the left,center,right spectrum is.
I would regard the center left, center is situated in policy area that i mentioned on a previous thread here https://www.libdemvoice.org/a-day-of-light-and-ideas-40418.html#comment-296490
A few starters would be
1) Reverse the Bedroom Tax. Even daily mail readers are starting to criticize it because of the lack of smaller housing for people to be able to move into. Not to mention the damning report by the UN
2) Cancel Universal Credit. The project is a complete failure, has been reset so many times and millions written off already and a further 90 million to be written off. The project has been a disaster and unworkable, especially as it requires real time earnings updates from HMRC for people with fluctuating pay etc.
3) Abolishing help to buy which is creating another housing bubble
4) Reform the WCA it is not working, upto 50% of ESA decisions are being overturned in the courts, costing the country millions in added costs to the DWP and the Justice department (and the human cost to many vulnerable people)
5) commit to reversing the NHS privatization and instead raise income tax by 1%
6) Appose companies like serco, G4S, A4E from being able to tender government contracts when they have been found guilty of overcharging or fraudulence.
7) Insist on a LVT or mansion tax
8) Force land holders who are sitting on land which is earmarked for housing development.
9) Commit to an EU referendum and give the people their say. After all we are supposed to live in a democracy and it is perfectly legitimate for the UK citizens to have a choice of whether they want to be a member of the EU or not. It feels very much like a dictatorship from ALL of the parties with this we know best attitude.
10) Appose Fracking. If wealthy land owners are sitting on land which is needed for housing, they sure as heck should not be able to profiteer and use it instead for fracking.
11) Make it quite clear to the electorate that IF liberal democrats where too enter another coalition with either the Tories OR Labor, they will stick to the policies that are in the coalition agreement AND they will use their Veto on polices that are not in the coalition agreement if it goes against the parties constitution and there was no mandate for such a policy i.e the NHS reforms.
12) A promise that any future coalitions will be transparent, that where disagreements exist and a compromise is made, the public are aware of where each party started from on the policy and what the compromise was. That is a perfectly transparent and legitimate way to run a coalition, so that the electorate can see DEMOCRACY at work.
That is Where Liberal Democrats placed themselves before the 2010 election during the campaign, or that was the impression that they gave to the electorate.
The problem is the reality ended up being quite different and we saw Liberal Democrats abandoning these.
” So who exactly do you see people who regard themselves as centrists voting for if not for us?” I see people who regard themselves as “centrists” as you call it or left inclining returning to Labour or possibly voting Green.
I do not see them voting Liberal Democrat because they feel that the so called magic center has suffered from a polar shift in the Liberal Democrats Idealistic world.
A vote for Labor will be become for many, better the devil you know
In my opinion
Simon Shaw
” Well if you look at what you said I think you will see that you did. Maybe you didn’t mean to.”
I did look back at it and I stand by what I wrote. The polls are the evidence of the voters’ verdict on this leadership and this has led to wipeout. Pretty damaging I would say – no wonder there has been considerable protest ever since.
Paul – You mentioned that is was worth looking at what happened to the FDP in Germany, who were also junior coalition partners. They were all but wiped in when they failed to return to the Bundestag in September 2013 (as they have a 5 percent barrier in federal elections), and they were humiliated again last Sunday with just 3.4 percent (2009: 11.0 percent). They will however have a few seats in the EU parliament, as their Supreme Court has recently declared the 5 percent barrier unconstitutional for European elections. If we carry on with ‘business as usual’ we will probably end up in a very similar position next May, or even worse, as there will be no Supreme Court ruling to save our skins.
Just for clarity as well.
In my ideal world, I would have wanted to see a coalition government in 2010 between Labour and Libdems, however I totally acknowledge that this was no feasible given the results of the election.
I would have liked to seen a coalition with Labor/Libdem in 2015. With Liberal Democrats having prominent positions within the Government
With Liberal Democrats holding the treasury with Vince Cable
The home office and the secretary of state for justice.
As I do not believe that Labour have proven they have totally learnt lessons from the past yet.
However after seeing the performance of the Liberal Democrats during this coalition and how in my opinion the party has shifted to the right (in my perception) this no longer looks like an attractive idea to me anymore. So as I said previously “better the devil you know” and I would want to see a Labour Majority government
The allegation was on the BBC website in one of their articles connected with the ICM polls but I can’t find it now either – I think it has been removed in an edit to update the story.
I am often asked why I use the soubriquet “Mack”: it is to remind myself everytime I make a post on this site of the disastrous Coalition (and betrayal) entered into by Ramsay Macdonald. That’s why I always knew there was never going to be a happy ending for the Liberal Democrats after their destructive coalition with the Tories.
You need to ditch your equivalent of Ramsay MacDonald, get out of the Coalition and find yourselves an Atlee. There is plenty of talent on your backbenches that isn’t too tainted from supping with the devil. And not all of them are Orange Bookers.
@matt
“Simon Shaw: ” So who exactly do you see people who regard themselves as centrists voting for if not for us?”
I see people who regard themselves as “centrists” as you call it or left inclining returning to Labour or possibly voting Green.
I do not see them voting Liberal Democrat because they feel that the so called magic center has suffered from a polar shift in the Liberal Democrats Idealistic world.”
If you were correct then Labour would be heading for a massive majority in 2015. In fact Labour would surely win every election going (if the left mainly vote Labour and the centre mainly vote Labour, then how can they not win?).
Don’t you think that you have, maybe, got things wrong slightly there?
Incidentally, as I have said here before, my preferred outcome for the 2015 GE is a small overall Labour majority. Unfortunately I cannot see it happening.
@Simon Shaw
“If you were correct then Labour would be heading for a massive majority in 2015. In fact Labour would surely win every election going (if the left mainly vote Labour and the center mainly vote Labour, then how can they not win?).
Don’t you think that you have, maybe, got things wrong slightly there?”
No Simon I do not think I have got things wrong there from “my” perspective.
The way I see it, left leaning voters tended to vote Labour, People who saw themselves as “centrists” where pretty split between Labour and the Liberal Democrats.
Liberal Democrats pitched themselves as a center, left of center party, which wooed a lot of voters who had become disenfranchised with Labour.
My recollections of the Liberal Democrats before the 2010 election was this.
The most prominent figures within the party who got the most air time and spoke for the party where.
Vince Cable, who I always regarded as being intelligent, full of wisdom and integrity I saw him as being on the left of the party and regarded him as the parties biggest asset. He was also in my opinion the parties biggest vote winner.
Simon Hughes, who I always regarded as a very sincere, believable, Liberal Social justice on the left of the party
Danny Alexander, who if I have to be honest, i saw as pretty wet and unconvincing, however the impression he gave me was most certainly that he was on the left of the party, especially considering the channel 4 dispatches he participated in on Disability Benefits and Atos whose cheating you.
Nick Clegg, Who most certainly pitched himself as on the left, social justice, transparent and cleaning up politics, child poverty, civil liberties, etc etc.
These where the faces that where presented to the public.
I do not recall the party ever putting forward those on the far right of the party, David Laws, Jeremy Browne to speak on behalf of the party.
It is my belief that these right wing views where pretty much hidden from the general (non political nerds) public, because those views would not have attracted the support the Liberal Democrats most desperately needed.
I would go as far to say and this is my honest opinion for which i am entitled too, the electorate was intentionally misled.
Soon after the coalition government was formed. The most prominent figures became
David Laws, whose right wing attitudes soon became apparent in the treasury.
Danny Alexander who seemed to have a personality change over night and become a nodding boy for Osborne.
Nick Clegg, well, I really do not need to say anything more because I think it has been covered so many times already.
Simon Hughes became sidelined and he was not used in the media any longer to present the views on the left of the party.
Vince cable was used to trot out the Tory Mantra of TINA and he lost that sense of passion and integrity which always showed in his personality before entering coalition, His mouth would say one thing, but his face and body language would say another and you could tell that deep down he did not believe what he was being forced to defend.
So it is not just Clegg which is the problem for the Liberal Democrats, It is the direction that the party has veered towards, which the electorate are obviously rejecting in all the election results.
Incidentally, I do not see Labour having a massive majority in 2015. I do believe that Labour will have a small majority and I will put this down to the effect that UKIP will have on all 3 parties.
This Tory led government has sown so much social division what with the constant attacks of those on unemployment or disability benefits. They have segregated huge chunks of society. They have used their friends in the right wing media to whip up hysteria about workshy, freckless, scroungers and fraudulent claimants. Every day the public are fed with article after article about welfare claimants, TV documentaries like benefits street, on benefits and proud, Chanel 5 Gypsies on benefits. The public have practically been brainwashed. And all it has achieved is anger and resentment which has boosted support for (UKIP)
It has been a spectacular fail for the Tories, because instead of boosting the support for them and their controversial policies, It has boosted support for UKIP instead.
The Liberal Democrats have failed to challenge the government when it has used dodgy statistics (Ian Duncan Smith)
they has failed to condemn the derogatory language employed by Tory Ministers. It has given the impression that the party did not have the courage to stand up to the Tory party, which made the party look weak and ineffectual, This has turned off left leaning, center, voters who thought that coalition governments could offer something new, something different
This is a good article. I agree with you that John Pugh was right to be firm with Nick Clegg and also that libdems4change and other members went too far and showed a total lack of discipline. Signing a petition is one thing, but others went as far as basically saying “we don’t support the party under Nick Clegg” and these people should be dealt with if they don’t take back some of their statements.
Eddie Sammon: “These people should be dealt with”
What precisely do you mean by that?
Peter, I mean people who don’t support the party under Nick Clegg should be kicked out. It is one thing to say you want a new leader, but another to embark on an undermining campaign whilst pretending to be a supporter.
For the purposes of unity and respect the party should promote a message of liberalism with no adjectives. Anyone who this isn’t good enough for should go.
Paul Rowen
I agree with much of what you have written. I guess many if not most of the 400 members who signed the LibDems4Change would agree with you too.
So I am surprised thatbyounattack them.
I refer you to the wise words of Mark Valladeres on this subject —
@LibDems4Change – can we leave them alone, please?
The launch of LibDems4Change last week has offered an interesting insight into the internal democracy of the Liberal Democrats, …. ….
This is my party. I have supported it through my voluntary efforts for nearly thirty years, carrying out a series of almost entirely thankless tasks for a mostly unappreciative organisation because of my belief in the importance of a liberal voice in a vibrant civic society. I do not do it so that others within can demonstrate a lack of tolerance that shames our claim to believe in an open, tolerant society where people work together to make our lives better.
So, LibDems4Change have an absolute right to act as they do, even if I don’t agree with them. They don’t have to justify their approach, other than to make a case that allows them to win the argument. Those who believe that now is not the time to replace Nick Clegg can likewise argue their position.
But the nastiness is uncalled for, and unhelpful. If we can’t treat each other with a bit of respect, why should others believe that we are serious about collaborative politics?
Posted by Mark Valladares
Eddie. So you want all the people like myself who don’t support Nick Clegg to be kicked-out?
Even those of us who have been party members for over 40 years and, in my case, an elected councillor for 35 years, re-elected last week with a tripled majority in one of the handful of council areas where we gained seats rather than lost them.
How illiberal is that?
It is perfectly possible to support the party without supporting Nick Clegg and the direction in which he is leading it. As the LDV Poll showed 48 per cent of participating members are unhappy with Nick’s performance and 39 per cent think it is time for him to go, are you seriously suggesting they should all be ‘kicked-out’ because their views are different to your own?
May I remind you Eddie that we belong to a liberal party, not a stalinist party, and we are allowed to hold and debate opposing views without threat of being ‘kicked out’ by the likes of you.
“Eddie Sammon 29th May ’14 – 12:21am
Peter, I mean people who don’t support the party under Nick Clegg should be kicked out. It is one thing to say you want a new leader, but another to embark on an undermining campaign whilst pretending to be a supporter.
For the purposes of unity and respect the party should promote a message of liberalism with no adjectives. Anyone who this isn’t good enough for should go.”
Goodness me. Eddie Sammon, you do know this is the Lib Dem Voice you are on – ie the noun Democrat with the adjective Liberal? Kicking people out for criticising the leader is not very liberal and dare I say not very wise given the falling membership numbers. As for kicking members out for attaching an adjective…. Words fail me.
Peter, where did I say I think 39% of the party should go? Of course people can support the party and want a new leader, but I think there are a handful of people who don’t actually support it and wanted it to do as badly as possible on Thursday.
Eddie, you said it in your comment at 12.21am when you said “people who don’t support the party under Nick Clegg should be kicked out.”
A shameful and utterly illiberal comment for which you should apologise… and made even worse by your latest assertion that there are people in our party “who don’t actually support it and wanted it to do as badly as possible on Thursday.”
We all support our party and want it to do as well as possible. We wouldn’t be party members otherwise.
You really should be more careful with your comments.
Eddie, you said it in your comment at 12.21am when you said there are people in our party “who don’t actually support it and wanted it to do as badly as possible on Thursday.”
Correction:
Eddie, you said it in your comment at 12.21am when you said: “people who don’t support the party under Nick Clegg should be kicked out.”
You then added at 12.45am another completely unjustified claim that there are party members “who don’t actually support (the party) and wanted it to do as badly as possible on Thursday.”
If we didn’t support the party we wouldn’t be party members.
You really shouldn’t suggest that any member would want the party “to do as badly as possible” in any election.
Eddie Sammon 29th May ’14 – 12:45am
Peter, where did I say I think 39% of the party should go? Of course people can support the party and want a new leader, but I think there are a handful of people who don’t actually support it and wanted it to do as badly as possible on Thursday.
Eddie
Turn your attention to the 93% of the people who voted on Thursday. They don’t actually support us and wanted us to do as badly as possible, they are the voting public. In a campaign that was centred on and dominated by Nick Clegg, who do you think should be stepping up and taking repnsibility for this disaster?
Stop imagining a mythical fifth column – it does not exist.
If you check Peter Chegwyn’s results in Gosport you will find it is one of the few places in the country where we won seats on Thursday. You remember winning seats? It was what we used to do before Nick Clegg became leader.
Hi Peter, I don’t think Oakeshott was acting alone and I think there needs to be more discipline. Everyone is not going to agree, but we’ll just have to leave it as that and have the debate as respectful as possible without expecting perfection all the time.
Hi John, I don’t have much more to say on this at the moment, I was interested in Clegg being held to account but made a quick judgement that he has learnt from his mistakes and a leadership campaign would be counter-productive. Of course others disagree, including many very honourable supporters.
So what do you mean Eddie by “people who don’t support the party under Nick Clegg should be kicked out.”
This seems typical of the reverse logic touted by Clegg’s uber-loyalists. What you actually appear to be saying is “people who don’t support Nick Clegg should be kicked out.” This is Nick Clegg we’re talking about here not Kim Il Sung or Mao Tse Tung! And were a Liberal Party not a Stalinist one.
It a bit like the old adage about “the Captain goes down with the ship.” Captain Clegg’s crew have a new version ie. “the ship goes down with the captain!” I’m afraid too many people seem to place their personal loyalty to Nick Clegg above their loyalty to the party as a whole. The same happened in the Tory party with Thatcher, and it made them irrelevant and marginalized for over a decade. Sometimes you just have to accept that there has to be a change of management for the greater good of the party, even if you like the manager.
And what of the European campaign? On the one hand we keep being told that it was brave of Nick to challenge Nigel Farage. Yet he completely flunked the second debate, especially when he made it obvious to all the viewers that he had no vision for the future of Europe (or not one he was prepared to articulate publicly). His version of being the ‘party of in’ was to cast us as the party of the status quo, and who would be inspired by that? Our MEPs were not even used in the Party Political broadcasts, many could have made a compelling case as to why they should be re-elected, but no – we had endless re-runs of a tame broadcast featuring Clegg. We didn’t so much promote ourselves as ‘the part of in’, more as ‘the party of Clegg!’….and all that did was remind those who’ve stopped voting for us why they don’t like us anymore.
Sadly most Party Leaders seem to develop a bunker mentality, but this time its even worse than it was under Steel. I understand people having personal loyalties, but the party is bigger than any of us. I hope it thrives and outlives me, yet my fear is that sticking with Nick Clegg and ‘more of the same’ for another year will take the party back to 1970 levels of support and organisation.
“So what do you mean Eddie by …”
People should perhaps bear in mind that leg-pullers are in their element at a time like this.
By the way, Peter, I forgot to answer your initial question: no I have never thought you should go. I thought some people (not you) who had been asked to calm down but wouldn’t needed to be presented with a choice to “calm down or be disciplined”. The action taken seemed to be one of “calm down or I’ll ask again”, which I didn’t think was good enough and came across as begging. I might have gone too far at times, but nobody gets the balance exactly right all the time.
@Eddie Sammon
“I don’t think Oakeshott was acting alone and I think there needs to be more discipline.”
Once an organisation ceases to be attractive to participants, the possibilities for disciplinary action tend to be limited. The worst remedy available is probably kicking people out, but frankly, if one were standing for election right now, being kicked out by the Lib Dems probably wouldn’t damage one’s chances half as much as not being kicked out by the Lib Dems, so it may be more of a blessing than a curse. And if one were dissatisfied as is, well then, being kicked out just makes it easier to move on, which presumably just raises the likelihood of a schism.
So if we’re talking discipline, say you were given the opportunity to take your best shot at disciplining these wayward folks; whatcha gonna do ’bout it?? Especially, whatcha gonna do that doesn’t result in a sudden reduction in number of LD members and the formation of a large pool of active, disaffected ex-LDs, most of whom would then be looking for some other party?
Hi Steve, I’ve always felt centre-leftists should be welcome. Your quip about Clegg’s loyalists having a doctrine of “the ship goes down with the captain” also made me laugh (and no I don’t believe that!).
Daft, I think it would be extreme not to discipline Oakeshott and extreme to discipline everyone who has spoken out against Clegg. There is a line that you have to draw somewhere and that is what is up for debate.
@Eddie Sammon
Bit late to discipline Oakeshott, surely??
“Especially, whatcha gonna do that doesn’t result in a sudden reduction in number of LD members and the formation of a large pool of active, disaffected ex-LDs, most of whom would then be looking for some other party?”
There comes a point in the development of some political parties at which loyalty and purity become more important than popularity.
Hi Daft, well we had at least one person who described the disciplining of Oakeshott as Maoist and it is this kind of extremism that I want to tackle.
Regards
@Eddie Sammon:
” I think there are a handful of people who don’t actually support it and wanted it to do as badly as possible on Thursday.”
If you judged by results, one might think there were considerably more than a handful of people in ‘leadership'(sic) positions in the Party who were of that ‘bent’, however I would not impute such motives. Thankfully, there have been those of us who have not only worked to make Lib Dem wins in our necks of the wood. but achieved this. I know this is a highly-heretical position but we intend to continue so to do .
Leave well enough alone would be my suggestion.