SLF Conference – The Tweets #2

Here’s our second look at tweets from SLF Conference covering late morning and early afternoon. It’s a great day. Remember you can watch live below:

First up a session on how the Lib Dems rebuild featuring Sal Brinton and Mark Pack:

But at the end…

Sadly nothing too controversial. The most surprising thing was that Mark didn’t mention chocolate once.

And elsewhere the Huppertmeister and Kelly-Marie Blundell talked about liberty:

And Positive Money were questioning our approach to the money markets and showing up the ignorance of MPs (not just ours).

In the early afternoon, Daisy Cooper and Chris Nicholson took very different approaches to idea of reforming governance. Daisy wanted us to use it as a campaigning issue, and talk about concentration of power in hands of the few and how we would hand it back to people:

Chris Nicholson, former Special Adviser to Ed Davey, gave the perspective from inside government and said something that many people will consider quite controversial:

Some might see this as the Westminster Bubble blaming the party for our lack of success.

Federalism was on the agenda elsewhere

And a discussion on community:

* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

18 Comments

  • Eddie Sammon 4th Jul '15 - 5:07pm

    Wrong to call MPs ignorant about money creation. Positive Money and the Bank of England both admit that banks delete money too, but Positive Money don’t really talk about the latter.

  • It might well be the case now, and if it is then that means no deal as far as the Lib Dems are concerned. I think there are signs that Labour are supporting PR on some levels, but their leadership candidates are not interested.

  • Conor McGovern 5th Jul '15 - 1:12am

    Geoffrey Payne, judging by history it looks like it might take another 20 or 30 years until Labour back PR then!
    Later’s better than never though.

  • Voting reform is not going to happen for a number of reasons.

    -Voters aren’t interested and it never comes up as a voter concern in polls.

    -We had a referendum only 4 years ago when it was massively rejected.

    -The two major parties aren’t interested.

    -With only 8 MP’s (same as the DUP) it’s a very long road back to have sufficient numbers to make a difference

  • Billy Boulton 5th Jul '15 - 8:57am

    I am struggling to see how a party with the word “Democrat” in it’s name can possibly justify bringing in major constitutional change, like changing the voting system, without either a referendum or at the very least a parliamentary majority under the current system.

  • Mick Taylor 5th Jul '15 - 11:45am

    Some people can learn from their mistakes! Sal is absolutely right that there must never be a coalition again with a change in the voting system being implemented. For me that has to be STV with no compromise.
    Why no referendum? We live in a representative democracy, where we elect representatives to take decisions for us. Then if we don’t like the way they are working for us we chuck them out. Parliament has been undermined systematically over many years and referenda have contributed to that by essentially stopping MPs to do the job they were elected for.
    The big problem with a referendum is that people don’t vote on the question but on some hot political issue. The farcical referendum on AV became a referendum on Nick Clegg not on the voting system.

  • Mick Taylor 5th Jul '15 - 11:46am

    Ooops. without not with

  • Chris Burden 5th Jul '15 - 5:26pm

    RE: Sara Scarlett 5th Jul ’15 – 1:17pm
    I agree!! with bells on.
    The N2AV campaign was slick, ruthless and hard-hitting. They worked out (not very difficult) that Nick Clegg was toxic, and just banged away . . . ‘Nick Clegg/tuition fees’ became the subject of a referendum on a voting system.
    By the by, Cameron also stabbed Clegg in the back by not very subtly supporting the N2AV. If Clegg had had any significant experience of local campaigning against the Tories, he would have expected and would have adjusted his behaviour accordingly.
    Oh, and the Y2AV was comically incompetent, though as an activist I met some amazing people through it, and from outside the LibDems.

  • Yes, the Tories were never under any obligation to back AV. They agreed to give us the referendum, but that’s all. They always made it clear that they would campaign in that referendum for no change, and we (LibDems) accepted that. So there was no ‘backstabbing’. The Tories behaved perfectly honourably on that one.

  • The main problem with AV was that many people like me who have been wanting electoral reform for many decades just could not work up an enthusiasm for such a half-hearted measure, plus only the Lib Dems thought they would benefit from it so it did not get the backing of the Greens etc..

  • @ Mr Wallace

    9 lib Dems, 1 UKIP and 1 Green actually!

    But don’t let a report by the Electoral Reform Society based on a survey of 40,000 people post election get in the way of your usual random speculation!

    AV is pretty rubbish though, as I said already

  • Richard Underhill 6th Jul '15 - 11:04pm

    Evan Harris is right. Magna Carta did nothing for Jews, women and serfs, as the director of Liberty said on the Andrew Marr Show.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Mary Regnier-Wilson
    Claiming that removing the housing target is not nimbyish is like claiming that having a revoke policy was not anti-democratic. True in principle, but compl...
  • Aidan Jenkins
    I agree with John M. Some areas also do not have sufficient resources to ensure a candidate is stood everywhere. Where a 6% vote share is a positive result and ...
  • Paul Fisher
    By how much has membership increased since the last conference? 25%?...
  • Paul Fisher
    When measuring the population against its land area, Australia has one of the lowest densities in the world. Compared with the population density of other count...
  • Brad Barrows
    Tokenism, I’m afraid. If we are serious, we need to call for full economic sanctions. Calling for a boycott of the Winter Olympics just means that we want ath...