Tag Archives: featured

Vince Cable

Vince Cable writes: The rebirth of council housing

By Vince Cable | Mon 20th July 2026 - 8:55 am

One of the few clearly articulated commitments which Andy Burnham has made is “the biggest council house building programme since the post-war period”. No sooner had he made the pledge than critics were lining up to pan it. The Economist, far from being Labour’s fiercest critic, described it as “the wrong fix” and the council house system as “wasteful, unfair and a barrier to growth”. Others have dismissed it as impractical, even if desirable, and a throwback to a bygone age.

It is not clear if the Burnham pledge is to use councils – either mayoral combined bodies or single district councils – as developers to boost housing supply of a variety of tenures; or specifically to build and own more houses for – below market -social rent. In the three decades after 1950 local authorities did both, at scale. The high point was 1968 with over 190,000 houses were built, and let, by UK councils and the 1970’s average was 130,000. I was a Glasgow city councillor in the heyday of council house building to replace slum dwellings in the early 1970’s and 5,000 a year was achieved in Glasgow alone (albeit that some were of poor quality and later demolished – like the Red Road development). With the advent of the Thatcher government, council house building largely stopped, 2 million council homes were sold at a discount under the Right to Buy policy and most new ‘social housing’ was provided by non-profit housing associations. In 2025, English councils delivered a mere 1,705 new council houses and started a negligible 300.

Nonetheless, 16% of the total housing stock still consists of social housing.

Much of the criticism of Burnham’s vision is a criticism of social housing. Tenants, who enjoy (implicitly) subsidised rents, are not necessarily in financial need: one third are not judged to need welfare benefits with a small number -usually well publicised in the popular press – enjoy relatively high incomes. There can be indefinite tenure and, in some instances, inheritance. Most council tenants are in a more favourable position than those who rent privately, often with insecure short-term tenancies, and – if they can find a landlord willing to house benefit recipients- rely on far-from-generous housing benefit ( capped by local Housing Allowance). And there are growing numbers of homeless in temporary accommodation or shipped out to councils with housing surpluses, far from work and family support networks. Such invidious comparisons do not however mean that we should have less social housing. Rather, more. Without more social housing, families on low and unstable incomes are forced out of more prosperous areas, where there is work; there is a rise in homelessness; and villages die for lack of trade and tradesmen. At the same time, rents can rise, gradually, to reduce the subsidy element (with housing benefit for those in need) and the option of sale is available for those who are able to progress to ownership.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 12 Comments
Victor Chamberlain

An early win for affordable housing – now let councils build

By Victor Chamberlain | Sun 19th July 2026 - 11:32 am

Less than two months into Southwark’s new Liberal Democrat-Green Joint Administration, we’ve secured an encouraging early win.

One of our first decisions was to support the legal challenge against the Mayor of London’s proposal to reduce the affordable housing threshold from 35% to 20%. That proposal has now been dropped. It is welcome news for everyone who believes London’s housing crisis will not be solved by making fewer homes affordable.

For us, this was about more than planning policy. It was about what kind of politics we want to practise.

Southwark faces one of the most acute housing crises in the country. Thousands of families remain on the housing waiting list. Thousands more are living in temporary accommodation. Young people who grew up here increasingly cannot afford to stay. Key workers are being priced out of the communities they serve.

Against that backdrop, reducing expectations for affordable housing was never the answer.

That doesn’t mean opposing development. Quite the opposite.

Liberal Democrats should be unapologetically pro-development. We need significantly more homes. We need private investment. We need housing associations, SME builders, institutional investors and especially councils all playing their part in increasing supply.

But development should be a means to deliver better communities, not an end in itself.

Too often, housing debates become polarised between those who oppose development altogether and those who argue that any development is good development. Neither reflects the challenge we face.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , and | 4 Comments
Lord William Wallace

William Wallace writes: The case for higher taxes

By Lord William Wallace | Wed 15th July 2026 - 11:55 am

Liberal Democrats believe in a limited state and a market economy.  We are naturally cautious about how much of the economy should be taken by the state.  Our party started out strictly opposed to high taxes: ‘peace, retrenchment and reform’.  But the largest share of 19th century central taxation went on the army and navy, and Liberals opposed imperial expansion and geopolitical strategy.  At the local level Liberals taxed and spent, on the ‘municipal socialism’ of water, public health, gas, electricity and transport, against Tory opposition.  From W. E. Forster’s Education Act onwards, Liberals committed government to spend on improving the opportunities and welfare of British citizens; and under Keynes the party also committed to investment in public infrastructure and the promotion of economic growth.  We have even fought an election campaign, in 1997, on a commitment to raise income tax, against comments from Labour strategists to our manifesto team that ‘no-one will ever vote for a party that wants to raise taxes.’

Again in 2024, Labour campaigned cautiously on a manifesto that committed to holding down the three most important revenue-raising taxes, in spite of recognising the enormous backlog of public investment that had built up since 2008 and the challenges of our ageing society and rapid technological change.  The two years since then have further exposed the neglect of our armed services in the face of rising foreign threats and an unstable world.  The Conservative Party denies that there is a serious problem, and is still calling for tax cuts, suggesting that welfare spending that rose sharply when it was in government can be cut back enough to fund stronger defence at the same time. Burnham’s government thus faces some hard choices.  Either it cuts back again on public investment and research and development, as well as squeezing welfare, or it raises taxes to fund both stronger defence and rebuilding our economy.

How should we react, as a responsible opposition party?  The easiest line would be to attack Labour for betraying their manifesto, without saying what we would recommend instead.   The Tories have adopted a radically economic liberal line, assuming that the market will sort most things out and that cutting public spending – after 35 years of privatization and austerity (yes, the Blair Government did not entirely break with the Thatcherite model) – will leave more space for entrepreneurs to flourish.   But the free market model is now questioned even in the USA, while the hybrid Chinese model of market and state capitalism has unbalanced the global economy,  ‘Geoeconomics’ – the combination of political, industrial and economic objectives in state strategies, coherently in China and incoherently in the USA – has overturned many of the assumptions of economic globalization, strengthening the case for participation within a regional confederation, the EU, capable of bargaining with both.

Accepting the case for higher taxes now does not mean rolling over into uncritical support for the government.  It recognises that the country has to spend more on defence – not on more aircraft carriers or F-35 interceptors, but learning the lessons of the Ukraine war, sharing security with our neighbours and investing in homeland defence.  We should be calling for a major programme of tax reform, to sort out the horrifying complexity of our tax code and the loopholes it contains.  We should support welfare reform, under careful parliamentary scrutiny, recognising that housing allowances can only be brought down if more social housing is built and that paths to training and employment are vital elements in reducing the number of young people not in employment, education or training.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 31 Comments
Joe Nutt

ALDC’s By-Election Report 09.07.26

By Joe Nutt | Wed 15th July 2026 - 8:57 am

4 parallel white vertical lines on orange background ALDC logoSixteen principal authority by-elections took place across England, Wales and Scotland last week, with two taking place on Tuesday and 14 on Thursday. 

The Liberal Democrats were the main defenders this week, attempting to hold onto five seats. The Green Party and Plaid Cymru were defending three each, with Labour and the Independents defending two apiece, and Reform UK on just one this week. 

Triple race in Haslemere

Both of Tuesday’s principal authority by-elections were triggered by the sad passing of Liberal Democrat Cllr John Robini, who as well as sitting on both Waverley Borough Council and Surrey County Council, was also a town councillor in Haslemere. The Liberal Democrats won all three seats in the ensuing by-elections. 

An important side note on the Borough and County level races. Because of LGR, both Waverley and Surrey will cease to exist next year, with the unitary authority of West Surrey taking their place. Oli Leach, who stood in the Borough by-election, and Terry Weldon, who stood in the County by-election, both won election to the Haslemere ward on the new authority in the May 2026 local elections.

Here’s a closer look at the District and County level races. 

Waverley BC, Haslemere West 

In 2023, the Liberal Democrats took control of Waverley for the first time since 2007, with it being solid blue territory in the intervening years. 

The two-member ward of Haslemere West was only created at the last set of elections in 2023, where the Liberal Democrats won over 60% of the vote against the Conservatives and Labour. This time Labour did not stand a candidate, but the Green Party and Reform UK did this time. We stomped to victory with well over half of the vote. 

Lib Dem: 551 (58.6%, -5.4%)
Green Party: 164 (17.4%, new)
Conservative: 141 (15%, -7%)
Reform UK: 84 (8.9%, new)

Liberal Democrat HOLD

 

Surrey CC, Haslemere

The Conservatives have run Surrey County Council for decades, with a strong Lib Dem performance in 1993 the only time they have run the council without a majority. The last election in 2021 was at the peak of the Conservative party’s popularity under Boris Johnson. 

In the shadow elections for West Surrey this May though, the Liberal Democrats won majority control. 

The Haslemere seat has had a chaotic recent history: narrowly won by an Independent against the Conservatives in 2013. The seat turned blue in 2017 before a big swing to the Liberal Democrats meant we won it in 2021. The Conservatives lost even more ground this time as Reform UK and the Green Party also stood candidates. 

Lib Dem (Terry Weldon): 1,181 (47.8%, -2.2%)
Conservative: 797 (32.3%, -10.7%)
Green Party: 280 (11.3%, new)
Reform UK: 213 (8.6%, new)

Liberal Democrat HOLD

No Liberal Democrat candidates 

To start the reporting on Thursday’s races, let’s briefly analyse the two races where a Lib Dem candidate was not on the ballot paper.

South Lanarkshire, Larkhall 

Only one race in Scotland this week in South Lanarkshire caused by the sad passing of the incumbent Labour councillor. South Lanarkshire last went to the polls in 2022. Negotiations following that set of elections saw a Labour/Lib Dem minority administration come in. 

At the last election in Larkhall, the Liberal Democrats did stand a candidate who was knocked out in the sixth round of voting. Two seats were taken by Labour, and one apiece for the SNP and Conservatives. 

This time around, Reform UK managed to overcome the SNP on the fourth round of voting. Below are just the first preferences. 

Reform UK: 1150 (35.2%, new)
SNP: 975 (29.9%, +1%)
Labour: 799 (24.5%, -8.5%)
Conservative: 342 (10.5%, -14%)

Reform UK GAIN from Labour

Flintshire, Connoh’s Quay Central

At the last set of elections in Flintshire, only Independent and Labour candidates stood in the ward of Connah’s Quay Central, with both Independents prevailing by a large margin. While the Liberal Democrats did not stand a candidate in this by-election, all other major parties in Wales did, alongside a couple of Independents in this crowded field. Reform UK ultimately won by a big margin.

Reform UK: 256 (48.1%, new)
Labour: 101 (19%, -15.1%)
Plaid Cymru: 71 (13.3%, new)
Independent: 59 (11.1%, new)
Conservative: 21 (4%, new)
Independent: 13 (2.4%, new)
Green Party: 11 (2.1%, new)

Reform UK GAIN from Independent

More elections in Wales

The long running series of Welsh by-elections – caused by new Senedd members not legally being able to hold onto their council seats – sees another seven races take place this week. 

Pembrokeshire, Pembroke Dock Market

The last election in Pembrokeshire saw the Pembroke Dock Market ward being taken by an Independent in an uncontested election, who sadly passed away in April. This time, three Independents were joined by candidates from the Conservatives, Plaid Cymru, Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats. 

Pembrokeshire has a strong tradition of electing Independents, with over half the seats being taken by independent candidates in 2022. At this by-election though, the Conservatives scored a somewhat surprising win.  Thanks to Lee Herring for offering a Lib Dem choice. 

Conservative: 143 (36%, new)
Independent: 100 (25.2%, new)
Plaid Cymru: 79 (19.9%, new)
Reform UK: 48 (12.1%, new)
Independent: 11 (2.8%, new)
Lib Dem: 9 (2.3%, new)
Independent: 7 (1.8%, new)

Conservative GAIN from Independent

Flintshire, Argoed & New Brighton

The second race in Flintshire was the only Liberal Democrat defence in Wales this week in the ward of Argoed & New Brighton, where two of our four councillors on Flintshire Council come from. The race was triggered by the sad passing of Hilary McGuill. 

Last time both Lib Dems finished above individual Labour, Plaid Cymru, Independent and Green candidates. Both right-wing parties entered the race this time, but the Liberal Democrats fended off astrong Reform UK challenge to beat out every major party in Wales, with an increased share of the vote! Fantastic win from Cllr Faron Hadfield-Jones.

Lib Dem: 614 (39.8%, +3.8%)
Reform UK: 490 (31.7%, new)
Plaid Cymru: 191 (12.4% , – 2.2%)
Conservative: 113 (7.3%, new)
Labour: 113 (7.3%, -17.3%)
Green Party: 23 (1.5%, -8.8%)

Liberal Democrat HOLD

Vale of Glamorgan, Baruc 

In the Vale of Glamorgan, Plaid Cymru were looking to hold onto one of the three seats in Baruc. In 2022, they won all three seats on offer, with their Labour, Conservative and Green Party competitors running quite a close contest to be runners-up. 

This time, Reform UK joined the contest and finished in second place, though far behind an insurgent Plaid Cymru who increased their majority, mirroring a strong performance in this part of Wales in the 2026 Senedd elections. Thank you to Gabriela Ferguson for getting the Lib Dems on the ballot this time. 

Plaid Cymru: 856 (47.7%, +11.2%)
Reform UK: 429 (23.9%, new)
Conservative: 219 (12.2%, -8.2%)
Labour: 179 (10%, -15%)
Green Party: 90 (5%, -13.1%)
Lib Dem: 23 (1.3%, new)

Plaid Cymru HOLD

Llanrug, Gwynedd

Plaid Cymru’s had a reversal of fortunes in the Gwynedd seat of Llanrug, where they lost to an Independent. Gwynedd is another county with a strong Independent presence, finishing second in total number of councillors to Plaid in their stronghold. 

In 2022, Plaid Cymru won an uncontested election in Llanrug, along with many others throughout the county. At this by-election, the Independent and Plaid Cymru swallowed 95% of the vote share. Thank you to Linda Park for standing. 

Independent: 394 (57.4%, new)
Plaid Cymru: 262 (38.2%, -61.8%)
Reform UK: 17 (2.5%, new)
Conservative: 6 (0.9%, new)
Independent: 4 (0.6%, new)
Lib Dem (Linda Park) 3 (0.4%, new)

Independent GAIN from Plaid Cymru

Neath Port Talbot, Trebanos 

Only Plaid Cymru and Labour stood at the 2022 election in Trebanos. This time, it was contested by all six major parties in Wales. Unlike other contests last week in Wales where we ran paper candidates, we did fight a good campaign here with an excellent candidate in Hayley Davies. 

Plaid Cymru capitalised on their history here to pull off a big win. Of the other parties, we finished in third, just 11 votes behind Reform UK. This sets us up well to challenge them in next year’s local elections. 

Plaid Cymru: 223 (51.1%, -18.3%)
Reform UK: 88 (20.2%, new)
Lib Dem : 77 (17.7%, new)
Labour: 37 (8.5%, -22.1%)
Conservative: 7 (1.6%, new)
Green Party: 4 (0.9%, new)

Plaid Cymru HOLD

Splott, Cardiff

Finally, we go to the Welsh capital to wrap up the Welsh segment of this report. The election was triggered by the former Labour leader of Cardiff Council getting elected to the Senedd. Splott has been dominated by huge Labour majorities since 2012. 

The last time the ward was competitive was back in 2008 when the Liberal Democrats ran the council and had one of the three seats in Splott. 

In 2022, we finished behind Labour, a Green Party-Plaid Cymru unity team and the Conservatives. This time it was a Green Party challenger (no Plaid Cymru candidate) who came fairly close to beating Labour. Thank you to Rhys Husband for flying the Lib Dem flag here.

Labour: 765 (40.3%, +6.3%)
Green Party: 678 (35.7%, +18.4%)
Reform UK: 286 (15.1%, +2.1%)
Lib Dem: 114 (6%, -8%)
Conservative: 54 (2.8%, -0.1%)

Labour HOLD

 

Green Party Defences in London

Continue reading »
Posted in News | Also tagged and | 1 Comment
Lord William Wallace

William Wallace writes: What do Liberal Democrats have to offer the “left behind”?

By Lord William Wallace | Wed 1st July 2026 - 12:55 pm

Regional redistribution from the wealthy South-East to Britain’s poorer cities, towns and villages is a sensitive issue for Liberal Democrats.  When Britain left the EU and English regions and the devolved nations lost their share of EU regional funding (part of the balancing gains to the UK that the Leave campaign successfully ignored) the imbalance of investment and funding between the wealthy south-east and the rest of the UK tipped further.  Boris Johnson breezily promised to ‘level up’ the country, raising expectations that were shattered when he failed to follow through.  Andy Burnham may be more serious about reviving our poorer regions, and we as Liberal Democrats will have  to respond carefully.

I have had a number of difficult arguments with colleagues in the party about this over the years.  Liberal Democrats are above all local champions, standing up for neglected communities within the areas they represent.  When I and others have argued for larger regional transfers MPs and councillors have reminded us of the pockets of poverty in north and east London, Kent, Somerset and beyond.  Our parliamentary party spreads broadly across southern England, but sadly has few champions yet for Lancashire, Yorkshire or the North-East.  We’ve already heard some champions of London – not in our own party – protesting that ‘taking money from London’ would be a betrayal of Londoners’ interests.  It’s hard for some of our own to resist similar responses.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 17 Comments
Victor Chamberlain

“Build, baby, build” but don’t lower our ambitions on affordability

By Victor Chamberlain | Sun 28th June 2026 - 11:55 am

One of the first decisions taken by Southwark’s new Liberal Democrat-Green Joint Administration has been to back the legal challenge against the Mayor of London and MHCLG’s decision to reduce affordable housing requirements from 35% to 20%.

For me, as Southwark’s new Deputy Leader responsible for Strategic Planning, this was a straightforward decision.

Housing has always been one of the defining Liberal Democrat issues in our borough. For years we have challenged Labour’s failure to build enough genuinely affordable homes, called for stronger affordable housing requirements, and argued that local people deserve to be able to afford to live in the communities they grew up in.

Now that we have the opportunity to put those values into practice, we intend to do exactly that.

Southwark has 23,000 households on its housing waiting list and more than 4,300 households living in temporary accommodation, including more than 5,000 children. The shortage of genuinely affordable housing is the defining challenge facing our borough.

Affordable housing requirements are the benchmark against which councils work with and negotiate with developers. Lowering that benchmark makes it harder to secure genuinely affordable homes through the planning system and risks setting a weaker standard across London for years to come.

That is why Tower Hamlets, alongside Lewisham and Hackney, has launched a legal challenge. Southwark is proud to support it.

Some have suggested that councils should simply accept the Government and Mayor’s decision and get on with negotiating the best deal they can. I disagree. Liberal Democrats have never believed that local government should quietly accept decisions that make life worse for residents. If a decision from Whitehall and City Hall will leave London with fewer affordable homes, it is right to challenge it.

The decision also says something more fundamental about Labour’s approach to housing.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 16 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Actually, this Summer of Strategy could be quite good…

By Caron Lindsay | Sun 14th June 2026 - 12:28 pm

Party President Josh Babarinde wrote to all members and on this site this week inviting us to share our views on the development of the party strategy which will be debated at our Brighton Conference in September.

The consultation process involves a Typeform which has to be completed by this Thursday and 3 online consultation sessions over this weekend. The final one is tomorrow night at 5:30pm and I can promise you that if you go to it, you will retain your will to live and will feel that your time has been well spent.

This is not usually the case with party consultations, I’ll be honest. I have come out of many before wanting to pull off my own toenails because they involved some party luminary talking at you and power-pointing you within an inch of your life.

I went to this morning’s one tired and hungover after the football and not expecting much. In fact, I was cursing Josh for organising it 5.5 hours after the match ended. However, it was actually very good. Even some of our grumpier members thought so, too.

Josh set the scene for 20 minutes or so and then there were two breakout sessions on what our party is for and organisational priorities.  We were put in breakout rooms of 4-5 people with a series of questions to answer and feed back. There were some really useful discussions with a lot of common themes, particularly about developing an emotional message which connects with people.  “Stop the word salad” was my contribution to that – we need to show our sincere  trust in people, our ambition for everyone to be able to live the best life they choose and show a hopeful vision where we fix things together not do nothing and turn on each other like Farage wants.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 2 Comments
Josh Babarinde

Josh Babarinde writes…The Lib Dem Summer of Strategy

By Josh Babarinde | Tue 9th June 2026 - 8:16 pm

The May local elections have shown us we’re at a critical point for this party, and we need to decide where to go next.

There were some great results to celebrate. We gained three councils, 153 councillors, and hit double figures in Scotland. We knocked on over three million doors, and had more than a million conversations on the doorstep. Our canvassing was up 25% on four years ago. Our polling day activity was so strong, it was nearly at General Election levels! Our members, activists, councillors, staff and parliamentarians pulled out all the stops. It was an incredible effort and I am so so proud to be a part of it.

But I know that only tells part of the story. We didn’t make enough gains across key parts of the country, particularly in the North, the Midlands and urban areas. As someone who once stood for Parliament in Tower Hamlets, I mean it when I say that liberalism should be a key offer to our inner cities. 

Ever since I became Party President, I have been clear that I want us to go further than places we are comfortable. It is time to be ambitious. We cannot afford to abandon parts of the country because they may be difficult for us to reach. Politics is crying out for a serious, positive, liberal message, and we leave no stone unturned. 

There were brilliant candidates who gave everything to campaigns and didn’t get what they deserved. I campaigned (to name a few) in Cardiff, Hull, Southwark, Birmingham, Sheffield and Cambridge. Watching some of them lose to Reform or Green candidates who put in a fraction of the effort we did was utterly gutting. 

With all that said, with populism and nationalism on the rise, and with a crowded multi-party system intensifying, we need a new party strategy to meet this new moment. 

A party strategy built by members

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 5 Comments
Alison Suttie

Alison Suttie writes: Thank you to our volunteers

By Alison Suttie | Sun 7th June 2026 - 7:55 am

Headshot of Baroness Alison SuttieThank you.

As we mark Volunteers’ Week, that’s the message I most want to share with the hundreds of Liberal Democrat members who give their time to support our candidate approval and selection processes.

As Chair of the Joint Candidates Sub-Committee, I see first-hand every week the extraordinary contribution our volunteers make. Whether you sit on approval panels, help organise assessments, support candidate development, serve on selection committees, provide mentoring, stand as a candidate or any of the other ways volunteers keep the whole process running behind the scenes, you are helping to build the future of our party. 

Every approval conducted and every selection completed is only possible because volunteers step forward to make it happen. Your efforts ensure that local parties across the country can put forward strong Liberal Democrat voices in their communities. 

So, to everyone who has played a part – thank you. Thank you for the evenings spent on Zoom, the weekends given up for assessments, the paperwork, the interviews, the mentoring conversations and all the countless hours that most members never see. 

As we look ahead to the next General Election, our work is far from finished. We will need more approved candidates, more selections completed and more support for those stepping forward to represent our party. That means we will once again be asking members to volunteer their time and expertise. 

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 1 Comment
Caron Lindsay

What’s going on with party strategy?

By Caron Lindsay | Sat 6th June 2026 - 12:19 pm

Once per Parliament, the Federal Board is obliged to put before Conference a party strategy. Article 5.1 of the Federal Constitution states:

The Federal Board shall have the responsibility periodically, and at least onceper Parliament, for preparing a document outlining the Party’s strategy, inconjunction with the Leader’s political strategy, for submission for debate and
agreement by Conference.

The Board’s plan is to bring a strategy to Autumn Conference. If the anger following the local elections is anything to go by, members will be looking for a commitment to developing a nationally relevant message to re-establish us as a viable national alternative. Ed Davey’s comments about wanting us to be “the party of Middle England” have sparked huge concern in the party. There is a feeling that we are being too timid for fear of upsetting the Daily Mail at a time when the country is screaming out for a liberal alternative to the populist parties of right and left. Imagine that, a party that fixes stuff, stands up for liberal values and really resonates with people who are, to use a good Scottish word, scunnered with politics.

PoliticsHome has an article this weekend titled “Inside the Lib Dem strategy rethink.” Several MPs are quoted, including Tom Gordon, Layla Moran, Daisy Cooper along with some who are un-named.

Politics Home says the party is looking at changing direction:

To that end, the party is undergoing a strategy and policy overhaul, with key areas of discussion including the economy, welfare, and, as the 10th anniversary of the Brexit referendum approaches, a bolder stance on the European Union.

Tom Gordon confirmed the rethink:

I don’t think it was necessarily the wrong approach, but just given the nature and the timeline of where we’re at in this parliament and the political events and that fragmentation, I think there is now a rethinking of what we do, what we offer, how we’re more punchy, how we’re bolder, and what the offer from us is.

A senior MP hinted at an approach that to me sounds too managerial:

The MP said the party is “starting to think about the economy in a much more structural manner”, and the frontbench team had been “set a task of properly scrutinising departmental budgets, where money is being spent”.

They added that the party needs to “make sure we are economically credible”, with there being more appetite from figures at the top of the party towards thinking about what the Lib Dem offering would be in a potential future coalition.

Layla Moran sounded optimistic about what was coming:

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 17 Comments
Jennie Rigg

A strange but welcome feeling

By Jennie Rigg | Wed 3rd June 2026 - 10:10 am

I write this as a serial and vocal complainer about much of what the Parliamentary Party does. I have been such for many years. Way back in the neolithic era I won awards for blogging my complaints. So it’s only fair that when the Parliamentary Party knocks something out of the park I be equally vocal with my praise.

Firstly, on Sunday, Ed Davey, our leader and Marie Goldman, our Equalities Spokes, sent this letter to Bridget Phillipson. The consensus among the exec of LGBT+LDs was “well, we might have worded a couple of things differently, but mostly, it’s really good”. We weren’t really surprised at Marie’s name being on it, because she’s been consistently great in the equalities role from day one, but Ed putting his name to it was a very welcome surprise.

Then yesterday’s debate on the EHRC New Section 28, I’m sorry, services guidance happened in parliament. And our MPs were MAGNIFICENT.

It’s worth reading the whole thing in Hansard, for exactly how great they all were (and how awful the non-responses from the Labour minister were), but I want to do a roll call. First up was Marvellous Marie, who pointed out how unworkable the guidance was, and asked the minister to consider new legislation.

Then came my fellow Yorkshirer Tom Gordon, who was appalled by the Tory response.

Then, Honorary President of LGBT+ LDs Queen CJ admonished the minister for her non-adherence to the spirit of the Equality Act.

Then, Layla Moran asked the minister to consider what would be the consequences if her assertions that this document provides protections for trans and non-binary folks were wrong.

Then, Josh Babarinde, our Party President, not only made the point that this code does nothing to protect women and girls, but also gave a shout out to LGBT+LDs and Lib Dem Women.

Then, Vikki Slade pointed out the lack of respect for human rights of trans and non-binary people.

Then, Charlotte Cane asked “Will the Minister consider changing the law so that the Equality Act lives up to its name?”.

And then Mike Martin asked for a vote on the code itself.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , and | 19 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: The Elephant Returns

By Tom Arms | Sat 30th May 2026 - 9:24 am

For several years the Brexit elephant sat quietly in a corner of Westminster, ignored by politicians who hoped it would eventually wander away. Instead, it has stood up, stretched its legs and begun stomping through the corridors of power once again.

“Rejoin,” Brexit was a “catastrophic mistake,” declared wannabe prime minister Wes Streeting.

Not so fast, said other main contender Andy Burnham, he hoped Britain would rejoin “in my lifetime” (Burnham is 56), but feared that any sudden rush to rejoin would further divide an already divided country.

Former PM Tony Blair then entered the fray with his 6,000-word essay. The former staunch Remainer opposed a quick application to return to the European fold. Instead, Britain should concentrate on rebuilding its economy and repairing relations with Brussels.

The Liberal Democrats remain the most pro-European party. But even they are focused more on a gradual progression—a return to the Customs Union by the end of this decade and practical moves towards deeper cooperation and integration.

The Conservatives, Reform and the new far-right party Restore, are simply against anything that smacks of improved relations with Brussels.

But what about the Europeans? They opposed Britain leaving, but they do they want Britain back?

In many respects, Britain is quite a catch for the EU, especially as the Ukraine War  and the rise of China has forced it to focus increasingly on security issues. Britain has Europe’s largest navy with 450,000 tons under the Union Jack. France is just behind but current UK defense plans will put it well ahead by 2040.

Then there is the fact that Britain is a nuclear power. President Emmanuel Macron has talked about extending the French nuclear umbrella to other European countries. Such pledges would be more effective if they included the British deterrent.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 13 Comments
Donna Harris

Liberal Democrats should be the first choice for women

By Donna Harris | Wed 20th May 2026 - 11:55 am

The recent local elections should have been a moment for honest reflection within the Liberal Democrats. Instead, much of the response has felt overwhelmingly positive, almost detached from the frustrations expressed by many hardworking candidates and activists, particularly in urban areas where our results were deeply disappointing.

Optimism has its place in politics, but if we continue to avoid difficult conversations, we risk ignoring the deeper issues steadily weakening our party from within.

As Chair of Lib Dem Women, Vice Chair Campaign for Gender Balance, and former Council Group Leader and Leader of the Opposition in Lambeth, I believe one issue can no longer be ignored: the Liberal Democrats’ continued failure to properly represent, attract and retain women.

For as long as I have been a Liberal Democrat activist, one question has consistently followed us, both internally and on the doorstep: what do the Liberal Democrats actually stand for?

Many of us have defended the party passionately over the years, pointing to our liberal values, commitment to equality and strong policy platform. Yet despite all of this, the question never truly goes away.

For too long, we have relied on a narrow understanding of campaigning success: leaflets, door knocking and data. Of course these things matter, but they are not enough on their own. Recent elections have exposed that reality clearly.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 11 Comments
Victor Chamberlain

Liberal Democrats cannot afford to be absent from Britain’s cities

By Victor Chamberlain | Thu 14th May 2026 - 11:30 am

The Liberal Democrats have a growing urban problem and pretending otherwise will only make it worse.

Last week’s local election results exposed something many campaigners in cities have felt for some time: our local organisation is often far stronger than our national political message. In too many urban areas, particularly diverse cities, voters simply do not hear a compelling Liberal Democrat case for why we matter to modern Britain.

Politics today is increasingly shaped nationally, even in local elections. Voters consume politics through social media, online debate, podcasts and national narratives. Parties that succeed understand this and communicate with clarity and confidence. Too often, we do not.

In cities especially, the Liberal Democrats can appear politically invisible not because our values are unpopular, but because our national message lacks definition and urgency. We are too often seen as a party speaking comfortably to affluent southern seats while struggling to project a clear vision for younger renters, working-class families and diverse urban communities.

That should concern us because those voters ought to be natural Liberal Democrats.

I recently wrote privately and constructively to Ed Davey to raise these concerns and invited him to Southwark to discuss them further. Not to complain, but because there are genuine signs of opportunity if the party is prepared to adapt.

In Southwark, despite difficult national headwinds, we gained a councillor and returned 12 Liberal Democrat councillors in one of the most diverse boroughs in the country. That success did not come from national momentum. It came from relentless local campaigning, strong community relationships and candidates with personal credibility built over years of work. But we deserved to get far more people elected and do better.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 12 Comments
Lord William Wallace

The UK’s political leadership deficit

By Lord William Wallace | Wed 13th May 2026 - 6:02 pm

Political leadership is about changing the public agenda. Keir Starmer has failed to sway public opinion on major issues. Nigel Farage has been a much more effective political leader, albeit for a fraudulent project. He successfully made the argument for leaving the EU against the conventional wisdom of the majority of the British political elite and political commentators.

Margaret Thatcher was in this sense also a highly effective leader. She defied the civil service, many within her own party and Cabinet, and wide sections of the public, and drove through a deliberate shrinking of the size and functions of the state, through tax cuts, privatization, curbs on local government, selling off social housing and more. Politicians today still hesitate to challenge assumptions about outsourcing of public services or pledging to lower taxes, in spite of the very different economic and demographic circumstances we face. The nationalization of British Steel and the return of the railways to unified public management are moves away from neo-liberal orthodoxy – but the water industry still seems a step too far.

Keir Starmer has proved incapable of engaging with the public. The Strategic Defence Review, published ten months ago, called for a ‘National Conversation’ on the multiple threats our country now faces and the response needed to meet them. But we have been told almost nothing since then, and the promised Defence Industrial Plan is still blocked by the Treasury’s refusal to fund it. He’s just delivered another speech on how to ‘reset’ our relations with the EU, which began with some splendid rhetoric and ended with a promise of ensuring better youth mobility, without attempting to explain the complexities of closer cooperation with our neighbours or the trade-offs between sovereignty and shared prosperity and security that we have to make. Worst of all, neither the prime minister or his chancellor have tried to engage the public on the hard choices to be made on public spending and investment in pursuit of sustainable economic growth.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 6 Comments
Vince Cable

Vince Cable writes: Escaping the Brexit dilemma

By Vince Cable | Wed 13th May 2026 - 11:55 am

There is a Brexit dilemma: a growing consensus that Brexit was a bad mistake together with the fatalistic acceptance that nothing much can be done about it.

For committed Remainers, there is the smug satisfaction of having been right all along. The predicted economic costs have duly materialised. The less predicted global upheaval has left Britain dangerously stranded in a geo-economic no-mans-land.  Public opinion polls are increasingly negative about Brexit. 

If the mistake is so obvious, surely then Britain can and will re-join, with some urgency?  But there is a big difference between the virtual reality …

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 17 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Another stream of consciousness on the election results – England this time

By Caron Lindsay | Sun 10th May 2026 - 12:33 pm

So we’re up 155 councillors in England. We can give ourselves a big pat on the back, right?

Well, maybe not.

Let’s look at London. A tale of two cities in one if ever there was one.

In the leafy southern areas, our heartlands, our results were, to be honest, unhealthily good. While it is a testament to how well our councils in Richmond, Sutton and Kingston are doing and are regarded by local people, holding virtually all the seats just isn’t conducive to good, inclusive government.  Even though it would disadvantage us, perhaps we should really be pushing for PR for local government as much as national.

But it wasn’t all plain sailing in that neck of the woods. In Merton, we had hoped to do much better against a dreadful Labour Council, but our gains were modest and Labour easily held control, gaining a seat from the Conservatives in the process.

It was a completely different story in inner London where the Green vote rocketed up.

Voters looked to them, not our well established Council groups, to defeat Labour and several councils, including Southwark, Haringey and Lambeth went to no overall control as the Greens surged. In Islington, where we once ran the Council, we didn’t make the breakthrough we had hoped and I was very sad that talented people like Rebecca Jones didn’t get elected despite spirited campaigns. In Haringey, voters again looked to the Greens and another disappointment was that Shamim Muhammad missed out. She spoke in the global women’s rights debate we had at Federal Conference and would have been a powerful voice for women’s rights on the Council.

We ran full, locally relevant campaigns in those areas and worked our socks off. The Greens did next to nothing on the ground but yet hoovered up hundreds of Council seats.

Why?

Everyone knows what the Greens stand for. They are speaking to people’s concerns about the divisive rhetoric we see from Reform and other socially conservative sources, about inequality, about poverty, about housing, about the international situation. And our lack of a cohesive national message is holding us back.  People do not feel that we get it, that we are on their side.

The challenge for us is that the Greens is that they are going full throttle with an emotionally resonant message that connects with people and we are not.  We sound technocratic. We lack passion. We don’t respond with suitable levels of outrage when the Prime Minister comes out with Reform lite garbage on immigration. In fact we come out with nonsense that sounds like we’re pandering to it only to put out a slightly better thing a few days later. It’s mixed messaging that makes us look untrustworthy.

We don’t have to promise everyone a free puppy, as the Greens frequently come close to doing, but we do need to wear our liberal values on our sleeve. It is simply not good enough to slightly shamefacedly and timidly put out something saying we are against division without actually taking on the arguments advanced by those who are stoking the division.

Our job as a liberal party is to bring people together and protect marginalised communities from attack and we need to be much better and clearer about it.

We look very much at the moment that we are here to serve the home counties and “blue wall” seats when we should be a voice for the north and our cities too.

So much of what we say seems to be moderated by timidity. We fear upsetting those in those seats more than we fear failing those in the rest of the country. Our liberal values are universal and we need to apply them and be relevant in every setting.

I understand that some key councillors across the country were warning that we needed to up our game against the Greens a long time ago and were ignored. The results this week show that we will lose out in the future if we fail to do that. In places like Oxfordshire we need to keep all progressive voters onside if we are going to continue to win. If we don’t, and at some point in the future the Tories and Reform merge and unite the right block vote, we will be in peril.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 44 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Just peachy! Scotland needs change with fairness at its heart

By Caron Lindsay | Wed 6th May 2026 - 11:51 am

This Scottish election campaign has been exciting from a Scottish Lib Dem point of view. For the first time in 15 years, we have a real chance of making significant gains in our representation. The polls are putting us anywhere between 8 and 13 from our current 5.

Alex Cole-Hamilton has been brilliant at delivering our message. He lands it every time and somehow manages to make it sound fresh.

He has been on fire. Watch him tackle John Swinney on ferries in the last tv leaders’ debate:

We are focusing on 4 key areas:

  • Fixing health care so you can see a GP, mental health professional or GP when you need to
  • Cutting the cost of living by insulating cold homes and using our renewable energy to cut bills
  • Getting Scotland moving again – sort ferries, buses, other public transport and roads
  • Getting Scottish education back up the rankings by putting 2000 pupil support assistants back into classrooms and taking mobile phones out.

Our aims is to win an extra 6 constituencies in addition to the ones we already hold:

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 2 Comments
Roz Savage MP

What is the economy for? Liberalism already knows the answer

By Roz Savage MP | Tue 28th April 2026 - 9:10 am

What is the economy for?

It’s a simple question. But how we answer it underpins everything else in politics.

We created the economy to serve us – to make life easier, safer, better. It is a human system, designed to help people thrive.

But somewhere along the way, that relationship has become inverted. Too often, it feels as though people and communities are expected to bend themselves around the demands of the economy, rather than the other way round.

For decades, we have treated GDP growth as the ultimate measure of success. If the number goes up, we assume things are getting better. But most people instinctively know that isn’t the full story.

GDP can rise while people feel less secure, less connected, and less hopeful. It can rise while our rivers are polluted, our soils depleted, and our public services stretched. It can rise while inequality widens and communities fracture.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 66 Comments
Ed Fordham

“Forthright, clear, determined, energetic” – a tribute to Councillor Jeanette Sunderland

By Ed Fordham | Wed 22nd April 2026 - 10:54 am

Jeanette Sunderland running Photo Credit: Bradford Lib Dems

Some people stand at the front and lead, others sit and back and chunter. Jeanette Sunderland did both, and did them both very well. Forthright, clear, determined, energetic and a real sense of no-nonsense she was a familiar face to so so many of us within the Liberal Democrat family.

In tough times and good Jeanette would be there – often turning up to the by-elections that could not be won, precisely because she knew they could not be won and she wanted to help and thank the team who were flying the flag for liberal democracy.

Across at least three decades Jeanette was a liberal to her core, and her untimely death this week will come as a very real shock to so many.

ALDC was very much a part of who Jeanette was and what she believed in – but she was no sycophant. Few people could express their concerns or criticism so clearly and so nicely – if she was angry you could just tell, words were often not needed. Jeanette was always willing to ask the question no-one else dared. I recall then Party Leader Nick Clegg MP being at an ALDC reception taking questions, Jeanette was straight to the point: “if our MP’s are wiped out in the forthcoming General Election, will you resign?” The room gasped at the boldness of the question and Jeanette added “oh come on, you all know it’s coming and if you don’t you deserve to lose.”

Back in February 1998 we won our first ever seat for over a generation on the City of Stoke-on-Trent, Jeanette rang to congratulate and to arrange a group meeting. I explained that Cllr Ian Openshaw was our first councillor and we didn’t have a Group. Back came the reply: “im planning ahead and suggesting June, that gives you time to win the by-election ward again and become a group of two.” When May came round we won the ward again and I gained a second ward and we became a group of three. I excitedly rang her to arrange an Away Day for June as Jeanette had suggested – she was delighted. I also recall her collapsing into tears of laughter when, catching up at a party conference soon after, i showed her the photo I had taken of a wall in Stoke on which was sprayed “Preserve the past! The future’s f****d!” She quipped through the tears, “well they’re not wrong”.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 3 Comments
The Voice

Wendy Chamberlain to run London Marathon

By The Voice | Sun 12th April 2026 - 2:15 pm

It says something about Wendy Chamberlain’s capacity for hard work that in amongst being Chief Whip, an energetic constituency MP, and running the Scottish elections that she’s going to be running the London Marathon two weeks today.

Here she is talking to Radio 5 Live about it this week:

Obviously we wish Wendy all the best in her endeavour, but we should all really put our money where our mouths are too. Wendy is using her run as an opportunity to raise money for two charities very close to her heart.

Wendy has been raising the issue of PANS PANDAS ever since a constituent came to her not long after she was elected. Donate here.

PANS PANDAS UK is a charity that was established by a dedicated group of parents with children that are affected by these conditions who were determined to make a difference to how these conditions are understood by both the general public and the medical profession.

I came across the conditions during my constituency work when I was contacted by a family who were struggling to support their daughter and navigating health and education challenges. I became a member of the All Party Parliamentary Group for PANS PANDAs and led a debate in Parliament. Following the General Election in 2024 I secured a meeting for the charity with the relevant health minister.

Support for PANS PANDAS remains very patchy with families often dependent on having a supportive GP who is willing to consider the conditions as the cause of the very distressing symptoms that include OCD, tics, restrictive eating behaviours, anxiety and enuresis. The money raised from my maraton efforts will be used to support further research.

And we know from her Carer’s Leave Act how much supporting carers means to her. She is also raising money for Fife Carers’ Centre. Donate here.

Continue reading »
Posted in News | Also tagged and | Leave a comment
Max Wilkinson

Max Wilkinson writes….Free speech, X and immigration – FAO Katie Lam

By Max Wilkinson | Wed 1st April 2026 - 3:07 pm

Free speech is an important principle in Britain. It’s one of the things that gets me out of bed in the morning. It’s why I so strongly believe we must remain in the ECHR, which protects in law our right to free expression. I am a supporter of free speech because whether I agree with you or not, as a liberal I’m always keen to hear what you think.

That applies as much to the vexed question of immigration as it does to anything else. I take a nuanced view on the subject, just like the majority of British people. Do I believe in open borders? Of course not. Do I think we should aim for zero net migration or pursue the harmful approach of ‘remigration’ (AKA kicking people out who currently have the right to be here)? Absolutely not.

I believe strongly that immigration has a role to play in our nation, just as it always has. We can’t pretend our public services would work without a level of immigration – not least in the health and social care sectors. We can’t pretend that our economy will thrive unless we have a level of immigration to ensure private sector vacancies are filled in sectors where we have a skills shortage. And with a birth rate below the replacement rate and falling, we cannot pretend things are going to work without a level of net migration to ensure we have enough people paying tax to fund public services like the NHS and our growing pensions bill.

On asylum, of course we need to prevent dangerous small boat crossings and have a fair, safe and controlled system. The way to do that is to work with our European and international partners, not to follow the doctrine of the Tories and Reform by pretending we can withdraw from the world.

These nuanced, commonsense positions based on reality rather than dogma often get lost in the battle between the simple arguments made by those either side of us. Consequently, I’m grateful that something I’ve said on the subject of immigration has been noticed. Indeed, it hasn’t simply been noticed – it’s gone round the world. Many users of X, right wing commentators, the Conservative Party MP Katie Lam and the US Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy have leapt upon some comments I made on (checks notes) December 8 last year.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 9 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Elections kick off – six exhilarating weeks ahead

By Caron Lindsay | Wed 25th March 2026 - 8:36 am

It’s that time of year again. My social media feeds are all full of pictures of groups of people out canvassing or leafletting, of people handing in their nomination papers.

It must be the start of the “official” campaign for the huge array of national and local elections coming up on May 7th.

The Scottish Parliament, the Senedd in Wales and every Council seat in London is up for grabs along with local elections around the country from Liverpool to some places where they didn’t know until a few weeks ago that the elections were back on again.

I have to show you …

Continue reading »
Posted in News and Op-eds | Also tagged , , , and | 3 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Read and watch: Ed Davey’s speech to Conference

By Caron Lindsay | Mon 16th March 2026 - 8:45 am

Ed Davey’s speech to Conference yesterday is already proving controversial within the party. His announcement that we are now calling for the country to develop its own independent nuclear deterrent had one member in tears and others mystified. Given that we will be debating a paper on international security in Autumn, people were wondering why that proposal could not have been properly announced as part of that process.

Anything to do with nuclear weapons has long been an emotive issue for the party.  Over dinner the other night, we were talking about the (before my time) leadership defeat on its proposal of developing a nuclear weapon with France at the Eastbourne Liberal Assembly. What will happen on the 40th anniversary of that? We have had many knife edge debates on this subject which have often led to fudge and long grass and the “part time submarine” coalition era proposal is ridiculed every Glee Club to the tune of Yellow Submarine.

The world is a different place now. The Cold War was thawing back in 1986 and people were feeling more optimistic. Having an erratic narcissist with neither understanding of or respect for international law makes everything a lot more complex and the global situation a lot more dangerous. When Conference comes to vote on this proposal, what will today’s members think? Will they consider that spending so much on nuclear weapons is what we need to do to keep our country safe or is the answer more soldiers, navy officers and airforce personnel?

However much you love Ed Davey’s stunts, and I love them a lot, most of the time,  I do have to think that coming on stage to Daddy Cool, complete with Macron style sunglasses, was an interesting choice when he was just about to talk about spending gazillions on a whole new generation of weapon of mass destruction. I guess it shows he has range.

Anyway, the video of his speech is below so you can watch for yourself. And below that is the text as specifically requested by one of our readers. This comes probably much later than he might have liked but the company and the black cherry gin at the Mason’s Arms was too good.

Continue reading »
Posted in News | Also tagged , and | 18 Comments
Donna Harris

Support WASPI women at Conference

By Donna Harris | Fri 13th March 2026 - 1:40 pm

When Liberal Democrats gather at conference, we often debate policy in terms of budgets, systems and reforms. But sometimes an issue comes before us that cuts far deeper than policy mechanics. The injustice faced by women born in the 1950s, or WASPI women, is one of those.

This is not simply about pensions. It is about fairness, trust in government, and how we treat the generation of women who helped build the Britain we benefit from today.

Millions of women born in the 1950s were affected by rapid increases to the State Pension Age. In some cases, their retirement age rose by as much as six years. The real injustice, however, was not just the change itself, but how it was communicated.

Many women discovered these changes with as little as 18 months’ notice.

Eighteen months is not enough time to rebuild a retirement plan that someone has spent forty years working towards. Retirement planning is something people structure their entire working lives around. To suddenly move the goalposts so dramatically, without proper notice, left millions of women in an impossible position.

In contrast, by contrast, typically received up to six years’ notice for an increase of just one year, exposing the deeply unequal and gendered impact of these changes.

We now know that this was not simply unfortunate or unavoidable. The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman investigated and found maladministration by the Department for Work and Pensions in failing to properly notify women of changes to their State Pension age. That is not the language of campaigners or political opponents; it is the official conclusion of the body Parliament established to hold government departments accountable.

Yet despite this finding, justice for these women is still being denied. On 29 January this year, the Labour Government announced that it would not be compensating these women.

This is particularly disappointing given how many now Labour cabinet ministers previously expressed their support for the WASPI women when they sought their votes, only to deny them any compensation at all once in office.

Lib Dem Women, the official body representing women in the Liberal Democrats, has submitted an emergency motion calling on the Government to accept the Ombudsman’s recommendations, to apologise to the women affected and to introduce a fair, transparent and comprehensive compensation scheme. You can read it here in Conference Extra.

This motion is about fairness, accountability and ensuring that women who were failed by the system are not ignored. The generation of women who are most affected are also the generation who started their careers before the Sex Discrimination Act so they could be sacked for getting pregnant or even married, didn’t have much in the way of childcare provision and were on the sharp end of the gender pay gap. To make them wait up to an additional six years for their State Pension is an injustice too far.

Continue reading »
Posted in News | Also tagged , , and | 9 Comments
Caroline Pidgeon

Caroline Pidgeon Tackling road safety by helping vulnerable road users

By Caroline Pidgeon | Wed 11th March 2026 - 2:55 pm

Just one per cent of traffic, but twenty-one per cent of fatalities. A shocking statement. This is the reality of motorcycling on our roads. This underpins the danger of being a motorcyclist on Britain’s roads. It is a disparity that shows no sign of diminishing nor, unfortunately, being addressed by government.

The Government’s recent Road Safety Strategy is broadly welcome. While one of the measures in the Road Safety Strategy will help motorcyclist safety, namely increased funding for combatting the scourge of potholes on Britain’s roads, there is little else that is new or transformative for motorcyclists, one of the most vulnerable groups of road users.

The Strategy discusses how “Legislative changes introduced to improve safety for motorcyclists have resulted in a complex motorcycle training, testing and licensing regime, with motorcyclists remaining at greater risk of KSIs than many other road users.” But the actions to make things safer are limited.

The main thrust of the government’s plans is that it will be consulting on changes to the training, testing and licensing regime for motorcyclists. Whilst this is very welcome, and something I have had concerns about for some time, especially with the increase in delivery drivers, more is needed.

In some ways, the government acknowledges the dire statistics on road safety for motorcyclists. Then they explain how, thus far, the main safety changes that successive governments have introduced have done very little to affect motorcyclist safety. The follow up is to then announce that they will do more of the same tinkering around the rules.

Meanwhile, the same Road Safety Strategy introduced plans for 18 new mandatory technologies for cars and other powered four-wheel vehicles. This is a clear example of how, for most motorists, the new Road Safety Strategy is very good. There is plenty to celebrate. But this only makes the difference in treatment that much harder to accept.

It is a glaring hole in the strategy. Motorcyclists, by the nature of a motorbike, are more vulnerable and yet the government appears to not want to embrace any potential safety advancements.

Since 2018, all new cars have been hooked up the eCall programme, a national programme for crash detection. However, despite motorcyclists being far more vulnerable in crashes there is no equivalent system even being considered by the government. This is a missed opportunity in the strategy.

Continue reading »
Posted in News | Also tagged , and | Leave a comment
Hina Bokhari

Hina Bokhari writes… After years of delay, the Government’s Islamophobia definition still misses the mark

By Hina Bokhari | Wed 11th March 2026 - 12:55 pm

It’s finally here.

After years of campaigning by Muslim organisations and communities, against the backdrop of record levels of hate crime, the government has finally chosen the holiest time of Ramadan to publish its definition of what it calls “anti-Muslim hostility”.

And what do we have to show for all that waiting?

A watered-down version of a definition we already had.

The 2018 All-Party Parliamentary Group definition of Islamophobia was endorsed by more than 800 community organisations, over 100 academics, and every major political party except the then-governing Conservatives. It was the result of genuine consultation and rooted in the lived experience of Muslim communities.

So why has it taken this government years to deliver something that appears deliberately diluted? Why was the recommendation of its own independent working group seemingly not good enough? And why, throughout this entire process, were grassroots Muslim organisations largely excluded from meaningful engagement?

This isn’t just about the wording of the definition – though many have already raised serious concerns about what was diluted and why. This is about the process that produced it.

The Macpherson Inquiry established a clear principle: communities must play a central role in defining the racism they experience. Yet that lesson appears to have been ignored.

The process has been marked by exclusion, by hand-picked representatives replacing genuine grassroots engagement, and by a government seemingly more concerned with managing political optics than listening to the communities it claims to protect.
And perhaps the most telling failure of yesterday’s announcement was what the government chose not to say.

In 2016, the UK government adopted the IHRA working definition of antisemitism. That decision was taken quickly and with broad political consensus. Yesterday’s announcement could have been an opportunity to say clearly: we are doing for Muslim communities what we already did for Jewish communities nearly a decade ago.
Instead, that comparison went unspoken.

That matters because bad-faith actors, including much of the British media, have spent years spreading the lie that recognising Islamophobia somehow gives Muslims “special treatment”. The truth is the opposite. British Muslims are not asking for something extraordinary. We are asking for the same recognition and seriousness that other forms of racism rightly receive.

Fairness, not favours.

The key question is where we go from here. Organisations like the Muslim Council of Britain and the Islamophobia Response Unit are not endorsing this definition at the present time. They are reserving judgement, recognising that a definition is merely a starting point.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 2 Comments
Eleanor Kelly

Parent? Guardian? Expecting? Tell us your thoughts on childcare at Conference

By Eleanor Kelly | Sun 8th March 2026 - 10:30 am

Parents holding baby with words Tell us your views on childcare at ConferenceI was listening to Marie Agnes Strack-Zimmerman, a German MEP answer a question on the delivery of Taurus missiles to Ukraine at a forum in Copenhagen. She was momentarily interrupted by the gurgles of a 4 month old sat on the knee of a friend from the Danish Radikale party. As Zimmerman remarked that it was good to get her interested in defence policy so young, it struck me that I had rarely, if ever, seen children so comfortably integrated into British political spaces.

We have some mums brave Lib Dem Conference with a papoose, but having spoken to even some of the most determined parents, it’s clearly harder to coordinate family life around the party than it should be. Some question whether their families are welcome at all.

I for one want to make it overwhelmingly clear that the Liberal Democrats welcomes members as they navigate family life and that we should be striving to be the best party to be a parent or carer. I want to hear from you about making conference, the nerve centre of our party, work for families.

The Federal Conference Committee’s survey for parents, guardians and anyone expecting is open for your input. If your children are grown up or you’re a professional childcare provider, please answer no to the first question and use the free-form text box to share your views.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 2 Comments
Tanya Park

Power shared, not hoarded: finishing the argument

By Tanya Park | Wed 4th March 2026 - 9:50 am

Roz Savage’s piece earlier this week, and Jack Meredith’s response to it, have done something worth building on. This is an attempt to follow the logic a few steps further, because I think it leads somewhere important.

The strongest thing in Savage’s piece is the power axis. “Power hoarded versus power shared” is not just better messaging than left versus right. It’s a more honest description of what’s actually happening in Britain. Decisions that shape people’s lives are made in places they can’t reach, by institutions they didn’t choose, in processes they can’t scrutinise. That’s a liberal problem, not just a left-wing one.

Meredith picks this up thoughtfully. He’s right that different liberal traditions notice different concentrations of power. Social liberals see material inequality. Market liberals see monopoly and cartel behaviour. Civil libertarians see the state. Bring them into the same room, and they converge, even if they arrive from different directions.

But there’s a step still to take.

If dispersing power is the organising principle, it can’t stop at constitutional reform. Democratic reform is necessary, but formal political power gets hollowed out when economic power remains sufficiently concentrated. In theory, everyone gets one vote. In practice, sufficient accumulation of wealth means your money votes for you in ways the ballot box never could: through political donations, through media ownership, through the ability to fund strategic litigation, through the simple fact that governments worry about the confidence of capital in ways they never worry about the confidence of people on a zero-hours contract. The dispersal of political power and the dispersal of economic power are the same argument. You can’t complete one without the other.

Concentrated wealth isn’t simply an inequality problem, though it is that too. It’s a power problem. When wealth compounds across generations, when returns to capital consistently outpace returns to labour, when a small number of individuals accumulate resources sufficient to shape political culture and purchase influence over public debate, that is a liberal emergency. Not a socialist one. A liberal one.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , and | 11 Comments
Samer Sinijlawi

Towards a third way – a reformed, liberal Palestinian party

By Samer Sinijlawi | Tue 3rd March 2026 - 4:16 pm

When I welcomed a delegation of British Liberal Democrats to Jerusalem and Ramallah last week, led by Gavin Stollar OBE and the Party’s Foreign Affairs lead, Calum Miller MP, I was reminded that politics, at its best, is not a transaction but a relationship. It is built on trust, curiosity and, above all, friendship.

In a region where suspicion is often the default setting, the simple act of sitting together – listening, disagreeing respectfully, and breaking bread – can itself feel radical. Our conversations were frank. They were searching. They were, at moments, uncomfortable. And they were deeply encouraging.

I write this for Lib Dem Voice because what I encountered was not a party looking for slogans, but a movement seeking understanding. The delegation came not to lecture, nor to posture for headlines, but to ask difficult questions: What do Palestinians owe to peace? What political renewal is possible? Where does responsibility truly lie? And who, among Palestinian actors, is capable of delivering a future compatible with liberal democratic values?

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | 13 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Michael Bukola
    Much of the stigma surrounding council homes rests in the design of such properties and tower blocks in particular. Building tower blocks addresses housing shor...
  • Pawel Urbanski
    Housing is the symptom, not the disease. But the money at the top isn't sitting in payslips but in assets, and homes are the favourite. An average home in Engla...
  • David Allen
    Governments have repeatedly promised to do something, and have then done nothing, thanks to scare stories about costs from their opponents. What, if anything, ...
  • Nonconformistradical
    @Jason Connor "There are still many developers sitting on so may empty properties so councils should be allowed to seize them for social housing if they are le...
  • Roland
    >” So pleased Mathew to see your comment about Kemi Badenoch” We shouldn’t forget the Conservatives lead the attacks on social services - deriding the...