Welcome to the final instalment of our most read posts of 2020. For those of you late to the “countdown”, the earlier posts can be found by following the following links;

• posts 20-16
• posts 15-11
• posts 10-6

It would be naive to suggest that the 2019 General Election campaign was a success and, for good or ill, much of the blame fell upon Jo Swinson and her advisors. In the fifth most read post of 2020, Paul Walter highlighted the views of the former Chief Executive of the Party, and former MP for North Devon, Sir Nick Harvey. He wasn’t particularly supportive…

At number 4, we noted Jo’s response to defeat, looking back at what might be fairly said to have been an eventful decade. She suggested that she might not be finished either…

Welcome back to the third of our four articles featuring the most read posts on the site in 2020. If you missed the earlier posts, posts 16-20 can be found here, and posts 11-15 here…

June saw the tearing down and immersion of the Edward Colston statue in Bristol. At number 10, Chris Bowers wrote for us suggesting that supporting what was, in strictness, a criminal act, was a troubling step. It would be fair to say that opinions were split, and the debate about when, or if, it is appropriate to break the law in order to advance a cause ran on for three days.

Our ninth most read piece came from our Wednesday Day Editor, Tahir Maher, who may not have expected his piece in mid-April justifying lockdown to spin off into a debate on the economics of the national debt. It is one of the charms of LDV that the comments threads can occasionally stray quite a long way from the primary topic…

At number 8, Paul Walter reviewed the findings of the General Election Review and was as honest as the authors were. I’m not a campaigner, and I wondered about some of the strategy applied, but these things aren’t usually quite so blunt. Will we learn the lessons for next time, or will we fight the last war again?

Welcome back to the second instalment of the most read posts on Liberal Democrat Voice this year, featuring the posts ranked at positions 11-15 (part 1, featuring posts 16-20, can be found here).

In September, our number 15 post saw us still debating what to do next in terms of Brexit, and ten of our former MEPs attempted to convince us that then was not the time to campaign to rejoin the European Union. Admittedly, that argument still rages to some extent, and there will be many Party members and supporters who are keen to start such a campaign as soon as possible, preferably yesterday.

It’s the time of the year when a Day Editor is minded to look back at the year’s highlights and, given how interested some of our readers and contributors are in such things, I thought that I’d look at our data and see what drew most interest. Today, I start with numbers 16-20 (in reverse order, naturally)…

At number 20, the announcement of the findings of the General Election Review, courtesy of the Party President, Mark Pack. It was, in fairness, rather more hard hitting than some of its predecessors, but it was certainly time for some home truths…

There was a time when Liberal Democrat Voice was, how can I put it, a bit more edgy. At number 19, James Belchamber suggested that Nick Clegg be condemned for his work on behalf of Facebook. And, if truth be told, Facebook went on to have a less than entirely positive impact on international politics… Is the money really worth it, Nick?

Welcome back, gentle readers, after our brief winter hibernation. On behalf of the team, I hope that you enjoyed the Christmas break as best you were able to, and that you’ve all kept well enough. And thank you for the kind comments that some of you have made whilst we’ve been away.

Of course, the big news is that a deal has been negotiated with the European Union and goes before both Houses of Parliament on Wednesday. Labour will support it, whilst the SNP and the Liberal Democrats will vote against, if the news reports are to be believed. It’s a pretty hopeless deal in many ways – the wilful giving up of Erasmus, the apparent lack of understanding as to what a non-tariff barrier actually is and the lop-sided nature of an agreement where goods (where the EU has a trade surplus) are tariff-free, whilst there are no corresponding benefits to the UK’s lucrative services sector being merely three obvious defects. And as for fishing…