I heard Tim Farron speak at Conference this year. In a debate run by the Centre Forum his ideas and enthusiasm sparkled and I left with new inspiration and hope. I was feeling pretty deflated, not by the undoubted achievements of the Liberal Democrats in office, and as a teacher in an inner city comprehensive I know the great benefit of the pupil premium, but by the things that had gone through Parliament which I felt to be wrong and unjust. The bedroom tax stands out among them and it is to Tim’s credit that he did not support it. Improvements to schools can make such a difference but only by levelling the gap in our unequal society can you really transform life chances.
Tim Farron represents a liberalism which does not believe that you can be free to develop as an individual if you are cold, hungry, homeless or badly housed. He will champion decent housing for all, as he has done this in Westmorland and Lonsdale and this success, widely replicated would bring benefit not just to those accessing new, affordable homes but to society as a whole. David Cameron may have long turned his back on the principles of the ‘Spirit Level’ but equality brings benefits for the whole of society. Opposing the ‘Right to Buy’ is but the first step in the process. The Labour Party may be falling over themselves to champion economic aspiration, there isn’t much wrong with trying to make a better life for yourself and your family; however for a political party it shows a lack of ambition to uplift society; under Tim, the Liberal Democrats can show a clear message of hope. Tim can present a case in a way that changes minds and moves people in a new direction. He will make the case for the Liberal Democrats as the champion of small business, energising local communities and economies.
It may suit a certain elite to reduce liberalism and deny the proud heritage from Lloyd George through Beveridge, Charles Kennedy and in my opinion to Tim Farron. Beveridge did not ‘distrust the state’ but used it to slay great evils. The Liberal Democrats must proclaim loudly the value of the state in tackling poverty and inequality and protest the loudest against the state as snooper or oppressor. That is our proud tradition and what I believe can be our great future. Yes, Tim has charisma and is an inspiring speaker. These are important. However what is much more valuable is his cast iron belief that “inequality …crushes the spirits of those at the bottom” and the fire and determination to make society better for everyone. His refusal to pander to the right wing press over immigration and to make the simple case for basic values of human decency and respect is evident, indeed a ‘blessing not a curse’.
It is time to protect our civil liberties and human rights. It is time to show our tolerance and defend the powerless. It is time to create a society where everyone matters. In my opinion, Tim will make these issues resonate, not just with Liberal Democrats but across the country. It’s time for Tim.
* Liz Makinson is an activist in Liverpool.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
A swamp of lies and disinformation
The mysterious mole men of New York caught on video
Doing better? The goal must be Sufficeincy
Michael Meadowcroft (1942-2026) - A Liberal to His Core
Peter Martin
Kira Collins
David Raw
Jamie Dobson
Mick Taylor
10 Comments
Well written, Liz Makinson,
Especially your observation that —
“…It may suit a certain elite to reduce liberalism and deny the proud heritage from Lloyd George through Beveridge, Charles Kennedy and in my opinion to Tim Farron. Beveridge did not ‘distrust the state’ but used it to slay great evils..”
It is time to start using the power of the state again to slay those evils.
Your article makes a fair case for social liberalism which is one important strand of liberalism that the next leader, whoever he is, will need to embrace and develop coherent policy regarding.
But there are other important strands too. You say little about personal freedom – you’re right that the state can do positive things, but there is also a role for liberals in finding areas where the state can and should compel less. Examples include liberalising drug laws to stop criminalising young people, and giving (with the right protections against abuse) the right to die for those who choose it.
I also worry when you get to the line, “there isn’t much wrong with trying to make a better life for yourself and your family”. Saying “there isn’t MUCH wrong” is just so grudging! It’s a really important, healthy motivating force for people and we ought to be at the forefront of making it easier – removing obstacles at work like discrimination and lack of access to childcare, obstacles for small businesses like unnecessary red tape, and obstacles at home like disproportionate planning restrictions. We absolutely must not cede this ground to other parties and be seen as grudging “I guess so if you must” merchants.
“It is time to protect our civil liberties and human rights. It is time to show our tolerance and defend the powerless. It is time to create a society where everyone matters.”
But this leaves me asking a very simple question: how is a man who couldn’t even vote for same sex marriage & who I cannot see supporting right to die or the enhancing of abortion rights for women the right person to do this? It seems that when push comes to shove Tim isn’t really living up to the rhetoric.
Sammy
I have already replied to you on this subject on another thread.
Norman Lamb didn’t for equal marriage at the third reading. Nor did Tim.
They both voted for it at the second reading, which is, in fact, the most crucial reading of a bill.
TheyWorkforyou.com says: “Tim Farron voted strongly for allowing marriage between two people of same sex”
TheyWorkforyou.com says: “Norman Lamb voted moderately for allowing marriage between two people of same sex”
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11923/tim_farron/westmorland_and_lonsdale/divisions?policy=6686
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/11032/norman_lamb/north_norfolk/divisions?policy=6686
I still miss the Liberal Summer School. Which leader will re-create it?
We also need Centre Forum. It probably needs money, we continue to need a flow of ideas.
@Paul
Please don’t misinterpret my comment as claiming Lamb is any better re: same sex marriage, I totally accept he isn’t. It disappoints me hugely that we’re in a situation that both leadership candidates voted the way they did. That said, I think Norman’s support for assisted dying/abortion rights puts him above Farron in terms of commitment to civil liberties/individual rights.
Sammy
But the point is that the third reading of a bill often doesn’t matter, and didn’t in this case as demonstrated by the fact that both Tim and Norman missed it. It is the second reading that is crucial and they both voted for equal marriage then.
I support positive campaigning, including for our next leader. I don’t like the personal negatives which are constantly being added. Can we stay positive for our candidates please! Reason? Apart from the fact that we appreciate both of them, one of these men will NOT be leader and will also need our support; I agree with another article by Peter Jones that we need both – to continue to inspire us and lead in their own way, whether party leader or not.
@Paul Walter
Tim Farron didn’t miss the third reading of the Equal Marriage Act, he abstained. Norman Lamb wasn’t in Parliament that day. That does matter – he stated explicitly that he abstained for religious reasons. We’ll never hear the end of this, so we’d better improve how we discuss it!
ChrisB 8th Jul ’15 – 12:40pm
@Paul Walter
“Tim Farron didn’t miss the third reading of the Equal Marriage Act, he abstained. Norman Lamb wasn’t in Parliament that day. That does matter – he stated explicitly that he abstained for religious reasons. We’ll never hear the end of this, so we’d better improve how we discuss it!”
Oh gawd! Why would Tim vote for the EMA on second reading but abstain on the third reading? Surely his religious reasons would apply throughout? This is all very confusing!