Nick Clegg has sent an email to all party members this evening to explain why the parliamentary party will be supporting air strikes on ISIL in Iraq.
It contains the entire broadcast interview which he did this afternoon. He talks about what a”vile and murderous” outfit ISIL is, about how the action is legal and how this isn’t being done by “the west” to “the rest”. It comes as part of a coalition of countries acting on a formal request from the legitimate government of Iraq.
Since last week, debate has been running high on where the UK needs to head to deal with the constitutional issues raised by the Scottish Independence Referendum.
As such, I’ve decided to put forward (and my local party is backing) an amendment to the pre-Manifesto document (F30 on the Conference Agenda), aimed at altering Section 7 to reflect where we need to go to deliver our aims as a party.
One of the major problems with Section 7 of F30 as it stands, is that al the initiative in devolution is put into the hands of councils. I believe it’s inevitable that this would lead to gerrymandered councils in areas where a party can establish a one-party state. Can you imagine South Yorkshire Councils, after the recent scandals in Rotherham, having the ability to set their own boundary? This is a terrible idea, and would lead to a worsening of the democratic crisis in our country.
Never in the field of Liberal Democrat fundraisers has one event attracted quite so much media attention as the Lib Dem Disco which is due to take place in just 10 days’ time at our Glasgow Conference.
This has been arranged by Cambridge Liberal Democrats to raise funds for Julian Huppert’s re-election campaign. He will MC the event, assisted by 4 guest DJs, Tim Farron, Alistair Carmichael Don Foster and, wait for it, me.
I’m writing from the Climate Change Summit in New York, hosted by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon. While Liberal Democrats don’t need reminding just how much of a threat climate change is – from the increased risks of flooding, to the impact on the world’s poorest – I thought it timely to give you an update on the progress we’ve made and what comes next.
Care Minister Norman Lamb is undertaking a 100 mile cycle around his constituency to raise money for a number of care charities in the area. The first leg took place yesterday as EDP 24 reports:
He left from North Walsham and District War Memorial Hospital at 10am, travelling through Honing, Smallburgh and Hoveton before crossing to Ludham and then North to Stalham.
The route then headed out towards Hickling before following the coast road to Sheringham.
Mr Lamb was scheduled to call in at the Break shop on Stalham High Street, and will be at Cromer Hospital at 3pm.
Mr Lamb said: “One of my highest priorities as Member of Parliament for north Norfolk has been campaigning for better health and care services in our area.
“We are fortunate to have some wonderful hospitals and local charities in this area, and I am really pleased to have the opportunity to support such a great set of causes and the excellent work they do.
On the subject of Post-Scottish-Referendum constitutional reform in the UK, I wish to counsel my fellow Liberal Democrats with a call for sobriety and modesty.
Sure, we are the party which is most in favour of constitutional reform and the Tories and Labour are clearly, by comparison, the parties of the constitutional status quo.
Before we get too excited that the public and political pundits will rush to support us, because now everyone is playing to our agenda, we should look to our own policies and assess what WE also need to recast in the light of changed political circumstances. Let us not fall into a trap of our own making and mistakenly believe that our long standing or more recent policies are a 100% fit with the public mood for constitutional change. Nor should we assume that we are automatically well-placed to capitalise politically on the recent ways in which the public have expressed anti-Westminster-elite sentiments.
Constitutional reform in the UK is very complex and there is much scope for officials to tie politicians in knots, and to ‘Yes Minister’ us into contradictions that will result in minimal change. One reason for this is the fact that we are one of only three countries in the world without formal special (‘superior’) constitutional law, and parliamentary sovereignty makes it almost impossible for us to adopt such laws in peacetime.
It looks as though Parliament will be recalled this Friday to discuss British involvement in air strikes against Islamic State. I thought it might be a good idea to see what you, our readers, thought about this.
I don’t often approve of military action, but I might be open to the possibility on humanitarian grounds alone. I certainly was ok with the airstrikes on Libya in 2011. On IS, we cannot have these people being allowed to chase whole communities up mountains and leave them to starve. We can’t have people being summarily executed for refusing to convert to a particular religion. Standing by and doing nothing while that is going on is not an option. However, we can’t just go wading in there. Air strikes alone will do little more than contain IS. We need a long term solution.
Legality is important and international law professor Philippe Sands has said that strikes on Syria may not comply with international law. It’s less problematic in Iraq because their government are likely to formally request our help.
Of course any military action is likely to lead to more murders of hostages. We don’t know how many British hostages they have, although Newsweek reports that they have potentially thousands of hostages from across the region including 186 Kurdish schoolgirls taken around the same time as the Boko Haram kidnappings of 20o girls in Nigeria.
Joe Otten has already given you his inimitable take on Ed Miliband’s speech. I do love it when he gets cheeky.
I thought I’d stick my oar in as well with a few not quite so witty observations.
Six days ago, I was lucky enough to see Gordon Brown make one of the most incredible speeches I have ever heard. It had some welly behind it. It was absolutely superb. Close to the top of the list of things I never thought I’d say is that Gordon gave me goosebumps, but it really was electric. It had the melody that the Better Together campaign had been lacking, although it was definitely more Motorhead than Idina Menzel. Maybe it spooked Ed, because yesterday he forgot to thank Gordon for the role he’d played in the campaign to keep the country together.
Now Ed, shall we say, doesn’t quite pack the same punch. Today he spoke for far too long. It was all very earnest and it had a theme of Together that kind of worked, but it had no energy behind it. It had all the passion of the slogan of this year’s conference, the stultifying “Labour’s Plan for Britain’s Future”. I mean, 8 months out from an election you would assume they had one. Although Ed Balls seemed to spend half his speech yesterday apologising for everything from the 10p tax rate to their failure to regulate the banks – and now they’re asking for another 10 years to fix the country?
23 September every year is Bi Visibility Day. Why, I hear you ask, do we need such a thing in these tolerant and accepting times? Didn’t we just pass same sex marriage?
Well, actually, there is still a fair amount of homophobia around. And if you are bisexual, you can actually experience discrimination even from within the LGBT community.
A couple of years ago, The Bisexuality Report produced by the Open University and contributed to by LGBT+ Lib Dems’ Jen Yockney gave a snapshot of what life can be like for bisexual people in the UK. Many of its recommendations aim to tackle marginalisation of bisexual people and to promote a wider understanding of the specific problems they face.
Last year on Bisexual Visibility Day, LGBT+ Lib Dems’ Dave Page wrote an excellent post in which he outlined why this day is needed:
The following arrived in a brown envelope at Lib Dem Voice Towers, this morning. It is probably an early draft.
Thankyou so much.
Friends, this country will never turn our back on the world and on the principles of internationalism. Those values are reflected not just in this country but in this party, and in the great team of Manchester United.
Earlier this month, Edward Lord, who until last Thursday sat on the FA’s Inclusion Advisory Board, criticised the FA for not taking inclusion and diversity seriously enough. In an interview with the Telegraph on 3rd September, he said:
The public and the rest of the sport industry are getting fed up with football’s inability to tackle discrimination in the game. Most other governing bodies have really embraced the need for change, to make their sports more inclusive. It always seems as though football is lagging behind. The FA must take action when participants so flagrantly breach their rules against discrimination.
He was referring in part to the fact that the FA took no action against Premier League Chief Executive Richard Scudamore when his highly sexist emails were published.
Last Thursday, the FA sacked him from his role on the Inclusion Advisory Board. You have to wonder what this says about their actual commitment to tackling discrimination. Their statement was uncompromising:
It is not about what Edward has stated publicly, but a matter and question of conduct and respect for colleagues. The group collectively felt that all trust in Edward, due to his repeated failure to work in the spirit of collaboration, had broken down irretrievably.
As I said on Friday, one of the best sights of the Independence Referendum was seeing enthusiastic 16 and 17 year olds heading to vote. They were so engaged in the process and it seems so unfair to take it from them now. Votes at 16 has been our party policy for a long time. It was our Secretary of State for Scotland Michael Moore who, along with Nicola Sturgeon, made it happen for the Referendum. It may not be practical to implement before next May, but we should at least try to get legislation passed this Parliament if we can.
Funnily enough, there is a Bill being debated in the House of Lords, a Private Members Bill brought in by our Paul Tyler. It was introduced on his behalf by Alison Suttie in June. It needs the Government to give up some time for it. This is something that we could make happen.
Unsurprsingly, Alistair Carmichael says it’s a matter of when, not if, 16 year olds get the vote:
The energy and enthusiasm of young people in the referendum campaign is something of which Scotland should be proud.
I have always believed that young people are much more politically engaged than they are given credit for. Never has that been clearer than during the referendum campaign. One of the most active volunteers for Better Together Orkney was in fact fifteen year old Jack Norquoy of Birsay. Jack spoke at a packed meeting in Kirkwall Town Hall alongside Shirley Williams. He made a powerful and compelling case for what he believed in.
Our young voters were given the opportunity and seized it with both hands. I believe that it is now only a matter of time until we see votes at 16 rolled out across the UK. That time should be now.
A couple of weeks ago, Alex Salmond picked a fight with the BBC’s Nick Robinson. Cue a mob descending on the BBC’s shiny new Pacific Quay HQ in Glasgow demanding that the journalist be sacked. In fact, much as it pains me to admit it, Robinson was actually in the right on that occasion. Salmond hadn’t answered a question he’d asked. He’d spent several minutes giving a rambling answer about the first part of his question before lambasting the BBC for publishing a story that the Royal Bank of Scotland would move its HQ from Scotland in the event of a Yes vote. It was quite bizarre to see hundreds of people demand that a news station takes the Government line. Where else would you see that?
Yesterday, political commentator David Torrance, who is probably one of the most fair minded people around, wrote a pretty critical but in my view accurate article about Salmond for the Herald. Torrance had written a well-received biography of the First Minister some years ago. This is what he had to say yesterday:
But then blatant hypocrisy never seemed to bother Mr Salmond. The Liberal Democrats, another party which wasn’t spared his tribal warfare, were pilloried for reneging on their no-tuition-fees promise after the 2010 General Election, yet three years previously Mr Salmond had ditched a manifesto pledge to eradicate all student debt, even though it had arguably captured a significant chunk of the student vote.
And in spite of lofty rhetoric about being “positive”, divide and rule was a hallmark of his style, as was phoney outrage.
Anyone not perceived as a threat was treated with charm and thoughtfulness, but for those who fell outside that category condescension, pettiness and often downright rudeness were the order of the day.
I can think of no other politician who behaved as badly as often and, more or less, got away with it.
As a Jack I owe my life and heritage to Scotland. I totally understood why so many Scots voted yes, but the thought of losing Scotland also filled me with dread. However, whichever side of the debate you sat, I hope we can all agree that the positive outcomes for all of us have been the revitalising of politics in Scotland and the reopening of the question of how as a United Kingdom we should constitute ourselves. We saw graphically the power of having a say in something that really matters. No, the electorate are not apathetic, they are disillusioned and cynical. I don’t think I have ever been out canvassing without at least one comment of “you’re all the same” – to which my reply is generally “if we were all the same why on earth would I be in the Lib Dems?” We now have a great opportunity to demonstrate that difference, to lead the debate in response to the events of last week.
So, as the call is growing stronger for a Constitutional Convention, I firmly believe this is an issue we as a party should and must take a lead on. Unlock Democracy, the Electoral Reform Society and others including the Labour and Green parties, are calling for a citizen led convention. In my view such a convention must tackle not only the relationship between our four nations and devolution of power from the centre, but also electoral and Lords reform. This is our bread and butter – our opportunity to kill more than a few birds with one stone! For too long reform has been slow and piecemeal. Despite the clear disaffection of so many, the political elite continue to drag their collective ‘vested interest’ hobnail boots. Remember the man in his 70s who was voting for the first time in Scotland?Despite the clear interest and engagement of the people when they have the chance to vote for something that really matters, the threat that this always poses to those who already have power limits progress.
This concept of an Immigration Premium was developed after watching Nick Clegg struggle to counter Nigel Farage on the subject of immigration in the European election debates. The UKIP leader is correctly able to state that we have an open door policy to European Immigration and hundreds of thousands of people arrive year after year, putting immense strains on housing, education, healthcare and other infrastructure elements.
The Immigration Premium turns this problem on its head. New immigrants (identifiable by NI number) have high levels of employment and through sheer weight of numbers make a major contribution to the exchequer both through direct taxes and indirect spending. In fact, immigration is a major factor in the economy’s return to growth. The Immigration Premium identifies additional tax revenues generated by immigration and directs additional funds to the geographic areas and services most directly affected by sudden influxes of large numbers of new people.
London is widely regarded as a liberal city. It is not, however, a Liberal Democrat city.
The party now controls just one council and has only 6% of the councillors, as well as 2 London Assembly members. And yet, at least anecdotally, London should be our city. It’s diverse and often cosmopolitan.
One of the most striking aspects of the 2014 British Social Attitudes survey was that over half of Londoners welcomed immigration as good for the economy – almost double the number of people who did so in the rest of the UK. In Merton, a losing UKIP councillor blamed the “more media-savvy and educated” Londoners for her party’s lack of success. Although she was widely mocked for this statement, the results would suggest that large parts of London are not natural UKIP territory.
Politics is macho at the best of times – strength and power, even clarity is used in a ruthless context. All too often there are militaristic metaphors: “I intend to march my troops towards the sound of gunfire” (Joe Grimond 1963).
Indeed, it has always been my experience as a campaigner, member of staff for the Party and as candidate, that macho effort is often valued above more subtle contribution. You often hear Conference bar boasting about the number of by-elections attended (usually citing the first exciting one that we won, forgetting the less sexy ones: Ogmore or Bootle 2), the number of nights, days, weeks and indeed months (in the case of Brent East) spent at said by-election, and the first by-election attended (often Christchurch or Eastbourne, being a direct reference to the decades of perceived thankless service!).
Being very much a politics geek, the renewed discussion on English Devolution following the pledge of home rule for Scotland by all three major party leaders, prompted me to start considering what England might look like if the same powers were devolved to it.
Two well known options for English devolution are those of either a devolved English Parliament or devolved regional assemblies for the regions used in European elections. To my mind the former (as a result of covering 53 million people) would continue over-centralisation in England while the latter is hindered by the regions lacking cohesive identities and being …
The prospect of more devolution to Scotland has, rightly enough, ignited the debate in England over devolution. The country has been alive with this, and the party seems to me at times a microcosm of this with some pulling in the direction of English Votes on English Laws and others in the direction of a constitutional convention and devolution to the regions of England.
Nick Clegg speaking earlier reasserted the idea that groups of local authorities should have the right to demand powers are devolved to them, while nodding at the McKay commission on English and England-and-Wales votes in the Commons.
There may be a danger here that we, England, fight ourselves to exhaustion over which solution we want to the West Lothian Question (WLQ) and end up with none of them.
Over the past two decades summary justice has been transformed in England and Wales. Part of the change has been a loss of local visibility for the justice system. The police and Crown Prosecution Service has acquired new authority to sentence those admitting to crimes through use of Conditional Cautions and the expansion of fixed penalty and exclusion notices. In this they have been aided by new powers gained by local authorities.
On the other hand, local magistrates’ courts have disappeared from many towns and the suburbs of …
While I was a governor at a primary school, we had a yearly dilemma. By law, we had to hold an annual meeting with parents. About a dozen usually turned up. Normally the same faces. Interested and engaged, they gave us good feedback and a nice time was had by all. Soft drinks and nibbles supplied.
But a dozen parents for a school with several hundred pupils was considered low. So, annually, we considered ways of increasing parental attendance, only to be frustrated. After several attempts, I jokingly suggested that the only way to increase attendance was to announce that, at the next meeting, we would be showing a preview of an experimental Swedish sex education video which we were considering showing to pupils.
I wrote an opinion piece for LibDem Voice on 26th August arguing for devolution for the regions. My piece elicited a mixed response. The events of the last few days, in my opinion, have made this viewpoint more mainstream and catapulted this issue up the political agenda. We have a once in a lifetime chance to change the way we are governed in this country for the better and repair the damage done by scandal, expenses and the notion that we are governed by a small number of people from the same socio-economic background. We have an opportunity to re-invent a truly democratic model of governance at a national and local level.
Welcome to the Golden Dozen, and our 390th weekly round-up from the Lib Dem blogosphere … Featuring the seven most popular stories beyond Lib Dem Voice according to click-throughs from the Aggregator (14-20 September, 2014), together with a hand-picked quintet, you might otherwise have missed.
Don’t forget: you can sign up to receive the Golden Dozen direct to your email inbox — just click here — ensuring you never miss out on the best of Lib Dem blogging.
As ever, let’s start with the most popular post, and work our way down:
Many thanks to the 23,200 visitors who dropped by Lib Dem Voice this week. Here’s our 7 most-read posts…
What do you think will be the result of the Scottish independence referendum? Your predictions, please? (68 comments) by Stephen Tall
Yes Scotland is a bit late to realise that Wings over Scotland is bad news (28 comments) by Caron Lindsay AGAIN
++Mike Hancock MP quits Lib Dems (7 comments) by The Voice
Note to agents: do not publish anything you may learn at postal vote opening (6 comments) by Alex Foster. Another oldie from 2010
Nick Clegg used strong language earlier. However, that sounded like sweet nothings compared to Paddy Ashdown’s comments on the Murnaghan programme earlier. You can read the whole transcript here, but here are some of the highlights:
An interesting turn of phrase here as Paddy tells the two “old party” leaders to take a reality check:
Mr Miliband and Mr Cameron are already running away from the promises they made. Mr Cameron didn’t seem to realise that when he made that promise he may not be able to carry his MPs with him and is now amending it so that it is somehow tied to English parliaments and English votes – we’ll come on to that in a minute. Mr Miliband by the way, Labour didn’t even want to have devo max, they didn’t want it, they didn’t want it, they didn’t want it and then at the very end in a panic they accepted it without accepting it’s implications and now they are running away from it too. Look, I suggest these two old leaders go away into a quiet room, these two leaders of the old parties, go away into a quiet room this afternoon and play a game of join the dots because if they don’t realise that there is something very close to a national citizens revolt against Westminster – it may be that the Scottish revolt, near revolution, may go away but I rather doubt it listening to Mr Salmond earlier on and his, in my view, entirely justifiable anger. Now join that dot with the other dot, Farage and UKIP running a campaign against Westminster and the Westminster elite and you’ve got to realise that this is a profoundly dangerous moment, a moment by the way that I’ve been warning was coming for ten years now as the gap between government and governed grew. To renege on a solemn promise like that will destroy Westminster’s legitimacy and reputation in Scotland and will do the same in England too and the consequences of that are very great.
I’m slightly more sceptical of Salmond than Paddy. The First Minister accused Cameron of breaking a promise that hadn’t been made on Friday, stoking the fires of frustration amongst independence supporters. It seems that what Paddy and Nick are trying to do is to insert some backbone into Cameron and Miliband but there is no real sign at the moment that they are not going to deliver on the powers for Scotland. I think Paddy is right to call on them to reiterate that that will happen and that the process is completely separate from the English issue. He’s just trying to block of any potential escape routes, but I think he needs to be careful not to over-egg the pudding. It’s perfectly fair, though, to eviscerate Cameron for his political ambush of Miliband.
Here’s my selection of stories to infuriate, inform and inspire from today’s Sunday papers. I can’t pick all the stories, so please add your favourites in the comments.
Obviously the fallout rom the Scottish independence referendum dominates. Don’t blame me. Blame David Cameron for using the occasion to pick a fight with Ed Miliband to try and make him out to be anti-English ahead of the General Electiona and, more immediately, the Labour conference. Labour wanted the week to plug their platform for the election. No such luck, it seems. It’s very annoying that Scotland has been caught in the crossfire.
The Independent on Sunday quotes Nick Harvey, Bob Maclennan and Paul Tyler on what they see as the way ahead. Nick Clegg is urged by Harvey to do a deal with Cameron and implement it before the election:
Sir Nick Harvey MP, a defence minister for the first two years of the coalition, said that Lib Dems should agree to support Tory calls for English votes for English laws in exchange for regional reforms. Sir Nick said that this could include more powers for local councils or city regions.
The Lib Dems have long called for decentralisation of political power, and in their 2010 general election manifesto even pledged to help develop regional stock exchanges. Lib Dems complain that the UK is one of the most centralised western states in the world – but whatever the prize, many activists do not want to see another deal with the Tories.
Party conference serves so many purposes. It’s there to make policy, to deliver training and for members from around the country to get together and chat. I have to say that I’ve never thought that the big thing missing from our annual gathering was a film night. In fact, putting me in a warm, dark room after 4 sleep-deprived nights is likely to have me snoring in seconds.
I was therefore surprised to see some weeks ago that a film night was to happen and the party was running a vote on its website so that people could choose what film was shown. We could choose between all sorts of blokey political culture from Watergate to In the Loop. Why could we not have had Aaron Sorkin’s The American President on the list? What about Made In Dagenham, a film about the fight for equal pay at the Ford car plant. When that latter film came out 4 years ago, Lynne Featherstone criticised it being given a 15 rating because it had one incident of the F word (not the federalism one) but praised the film itself:
That fight still goes on today – with a pay gap between men and women in full time work – as unacceptable now too.
But outside of the issue itself – which is extremely timely with the coalition commitment to promoting the right to request flexible working to all and promote equal pay – it is just a brilliant film.
It is in the genre of Billy Elliot and Brassed Off – and I hope that everyone sees it – as it is truly inspiring.
Voting closes in the Liberal Youth annual elections tomorrow at noon. All members of the party under 26 are eligible to vote. Those members for whom we have an email address should have received a ballot paper from Opavote. If you haven’t received one, check your spam to make sure isn’t in there, then email me on [email protected] with proof of age and Liberal Democrat membership.
I had a sneak preview of an article Nick Clegg wrote for today’s Sunday Post. I was a bit disappointed in its blandness. We needed more robust language, I felt. Why? Well, when Cameron had just had almost half of Scots who voted tell him they wanted out of the Union, his main message in response was to pick a fight with Labour on the so-called “West Lothian Question.” Really, Dave, is that what you take from all of this? By making more powers for Scotland seem contingent on resolving the English votes for English laws issues, he exacerbated tensions up here.
Yes supporters were already, entirely understandably, devastated. I only need to think of the anxiety I’ve felt over the last couple of weeks to understand entirely how it feels for them. The last thing these people needed to do was to find themselves in the middle of a scrap between the Tories and Labour over something that was irrelevant to them. There needed to be a very clear message that the powers would be delivered on time. If they aren’t, then, frankly, the three pro-UK parties are completely stuffed. As Ming Campbell memorably put it on the BBC News Channel on Friday night, you might as well hand out free membership of the SNP.
Rather than use his resignation statement to bring people together and soothe people’s emotions, Alex Salmond sought to raise tensions by suggesting that David Cameron had reneged on a commitment to have the Second Reading of the new Scotland Bill by 27th March. That was never part of the deal. As an MP of 20 years’ standing, Salmond should know that even if it had had its second reading by then, it would have fallen as Parliament is due to be dissolved days later. The commitment was to have a Bill ready to be debated by the next Parliament immediately after the election. That’s what the Better Together election poster explicitly said:
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Are the men of violence back in British politics? (Chris Nelson)
London needs more social homes – and Liberal Democrat boroughs are determined to deliver (Gareth Roberts)
Andy Burnham’s devolution reforms go only half-way (Mark Corner)
Reform donations row shows how facts get trampled at Westminster (David Vigar)
The Independent View: Turning back the tide on free speech (Jack Coulson)
Lord Bonkers' Diary: Wah-wah brass and boings on the timpani
Elvis Costello: The Other Side of Summer
Government must do more to help people onto the housing ladder
The foxes who visited London Zoo with deadly intent
9 tips for speaking at a Liberal Democrat conference
Coyote vs. Acme: "A warm and witty and weirdly moving film"
The Joy of Six 1577
How to fix the problem of money in our politics
Is Reform UK self-destructing in Wales?
Tristan Ward 
David Raw 
Simon McGrath 
Andy Hyde 
Tristan Ward 
