The final in our series of Q&A podcasts, this addresses economic issues, with Our Vince on the panel along with Lord Newby, Jeremy Browne and Prof Paul Ekins.
Yesterday’s environment Q&A was asked whether economic growth was sustainable. Today’s panel received a similar question. Listen on to find out whether Vince Cable and Steve Webb agree or not. The tension is palpable.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Can we afford the Triple Lock? Not as a low tax party (Joe Wright)
Labour’s new vape tax is disastrous policymaking (Rees Southern)
Welcome to my day: 5 October 2026 – it’s beginning to feel a lot like AGM season… (Mark Valladares)
Observations of an ex pat: Stormy Red Sea (Tom Arms)
By-Election Report 01.10.26 (Joe Nutt)
Colin Milburn at Lord's in 1968: The first test innings I remember
Show Racism the Red Card
"Chop chop ya bam" Grandson of Big Mags Haney jailed over 'sadistic' machete attack
Ian Anderson on the old hippies who used punk to get on in music
Lawrence Hogben, Pressure and the meteorologists of D-Day
Greens split over 'Zionism is racism' policy
One in the eye for the Tory Bayeux Tapestry as Labour hits back
The Joy of Six 1586
What do Britain's death-penalty cheerleaders have to say about Christa Pike?
This is Lorelei: Billy Come Back
nigel hunter 
Jonathan Calder 
Nick Baird 
Rees Southern 
Matt (Bristol) 
One Comment
I saw this as it happened, and it was a great debate. I have to say though that I was alarmed at how Jeremy Browne and Paul Ekins seemed to be polls apart in their analysis. Jeremy Browne seemed to be totally blinkered in his support of free market economics that he had no inclin as to how concerns about the environment will impinge in his “business as usual” outlook on economic growth. He may have been interested to hear what Paddy Ashdown said in an evening fringe meeting on the matter, which was the complete opposite.
Jeremy used the usual free market dogma as to why he disagrees with Green economics. At may sound good against a run of the mill Green party candidate in a Parliamentary election, but when tested against the views of Paul Ekins, it sounded remarkably ill thought out.