Tag Archives: featured

Support WASPI women at Conference

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.

Posted in News | Also tagged , , and | 9 Comments

Caroline Pidgeon Tackling road safety by helping vulnerable road users

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.

Posted in News | Also tagged , and | Leave a comment

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

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.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 2 Comments

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

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.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 2 Comments

Power shared, not hoarded: finishing the argument

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.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , and | 11 Comments

Towards a third way – a reformed, liberal Palestinian party

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?

Posted in Op-eds | 13 Comments

Roz Savage MP writes: Not left, Not right. Liberal.

Not Left. Not Right. Liberal.

The Green victory in the Manchester Gorton and Denton by-election should stiffen every Liberal Democrat spine.

Not because we suddenly face a new political opponent. But because it reveals something important about the electorate.

Voters are restless. They are frustrated with managerial politics. They are wary of institutions. And when they sense conviction, clarity and purpose – even if they do not agree with every detail – they respond positively.

That matters to us, and our future strategy. 

If we do not define clearly what Liberalism stands for, others will fill that space with their own narratives of change. The Manchester result is not simply about the Greens. It is about a wider hunger for something that feels principled and future-facing.

And that makes it more urgent than ever that we explain who we are.

Every few years someone tries to pin down the Liberal Democrats to a position on the traditional political spectrum. Are you left or right? Are you centrist?

It is an understandable question. British politics has trained us to see everything through that narrow lens – a straight line stretching from higher taxes to lower taxes, from big state to small state.

But that axis no longer explains the world we are living in. And it certainly does not capture what British Liberalism is about.

The word “liberal” has become slippery. Some hear it and think libertarian – no rules, no guardrails. Others assume it means American-style progressivism. Neither is correct. British Liberalism is its own tradition: rooted in liberty, fairness, community and the decentralisation of power.

If we accept the old frame, we fight on someone else’s battlefield. If we redefine it, we start telling a much more compelling story.

So what is the alternative?

Open vs Closed

The dividing line in modern politics is increasingly not economic theory but mindset.

Open politics is confident, cooperative and outward-looking. It believes Britain succeeds when we work with others, welcome new ideas, and adapt to change – to the excitement of new experiences and learning from others. It values evidence over dogma and sees diversity not as a threat but as enrichment.

Closed politics is defensive and tribal. It thrives on suspicion and nostalgia. It prefers blame to problem-solving.

That does not map neatly onto left or right. It cuts across them.

As Liberals, we are unapologetically on the side of openness – to trade, to ideas, to scrutiny, to renewal.

In Manchester, voters backed a party that projected a clear moral stance and a sense of direction. If we want to compete in that space, we must be equally clear about ours.

Power hoarded vs Power shared

If there is one axis that defines Liberalism more than any other, it is this.

Do we concentrate power in Westminster, in corporate monopolies, in unaccountable institutions? Or do we share it – and give power back to the people?

When we argue for electoral reform, we are arguing for shared political power.

When we back community energy and SMEs, we are arguing for shared economic power.

When we push for devolution, citizens’ assemblies, co-operatives and local procurement, we are saying that the people affected by decisions should shape them.

This is not technocracy. It is democratic imagination.

If we are centrists, it is purely because our belief in the individual means we are as wary of the reach of the state as we are about the clout of big business.

That instinct – sceptical of concentrated power wherever it sits – is the golden thread of British Liberalism.

And it is precisely this instinct that allows us to offer something distinctive in our winnable seats: not just protest, but power; not just anger, but agency.

Short-term vs Long-term

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 37 Comments

Lib Dem takeaways from Gorton and Denton

It would be very churlish not to congratulate Hannah Spencer and the Greens this morning. It’s a good feeling to win a by-election. Having another young, progressive woman in Parliament is so much better a result than it could have been.

The Greens did pretty much our playbook and took a seat that, in other times, we would have grabbed and we have to ask ourselves whether the strategy that allowed that to happen is one that we wish to continue.

The result was:

Green Party – 14,980 40.7%.            +28%
Reform UK – 10,578  28.7%               +15%
Labour Party – 9,364  25.4%               -25%
Conservative Party – 706 1.9%.            -6%
Liberal Democrats – 653 1.8%              -2%
Monster Raving Loony Party – 159
Advance UK – 154
Rejoin EU Party – 98
Libertarian Party – 47
Social Democratic Party – 46
Communist League – 29
The total number of votes cast was 36,814, with a voter turnout of 47.62%.

First up, this is a total and utter failure by Reform. This is the third by-election they were supposed to walk but lost after Hamilton and Caerphilly. They threw the entire contents of the luxury kitchen at it. And of course they are doing the Trump thing by complaining it was “sectarian” and stolen from them by illegal “family voting.”  Their blatant racism is unsurprising.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 71 Comments

Scottish Liberal Democrats call for measures to tackle medical misogyny

Scottish Lib Dem Women, the official Lib Dem organisation representing women, took a motion to Scottish Conference at the weekend which called on the Scottish Government to improve women’s health care.

Medical misogyny refers to the gender bias or discrimination women can experience when accessing healthcare.

Instances of medical misogyny include the dismissal of pain as “normal”, a lack of research into women’s healthcare and a general lack of understanding among many GPs.

Medical misogyny can lead to longer waiting times for gynaecological care, which have increased by more than 250% over the last seven years in Scotland.

The motion called on the Scottish Government to:

  • Launch a public awareness campaign for both medical professionals and the wider public to remove the stigma faced by women seeking help for their reproductive health.
    Improve access to diagnosis, end dismissal of symptoms and the normalisation of pain faced by women.
  • Tackle postcode lotteries of care by enhancing understanding of conditions, including but not limited to, endometriosis, the menopause, polycystic ovary syndrome, hyperemesis and ectopic pregnancies.
  • Embed a better understanding within the NHS of the effects of reproductive health conditions on period poverty, women’s mental health and women in the workplace.
  • Vastly reduce waiting times for referrals and then treatment, especially in gynaecology and urology.
  • Improve training and standards across NHS services in Scotland.
  • Increase research into reproductive health over a women’s life course, moving away from the belief that this is a ‘niche’ area.

The motion is part of the Scottish Liberal Democrats’ broader strategy to tackle misogyny and Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG).

The debate was emotional, thoughtful and powerful as women shared their sometimes awful experiences in accessing healthcare.

You can watch it here.

Christine Jardine said:

There are too many women who have effectively been told to put up and shut up when accessing healthcare.

There is an insidious and entrenched prejudice around women’s pain, and the cost can be devastating. It can lead to conditions being undiagnosed, to misdiagnosis and, ultimately, to an eroding confidence amongst women about the point of reporting symptoms at all.

The SNP have only added fuel to the fire: by mismanaging our NHS over two decades, they have made it much tougher to deliver the care that women need.

Progress on the women’s health plan has been slow; ministers need to step up and get on with making plans a reality.

Women deserve a system that they can trust and depend on. To build that system, we should be moving heaven and earth to increase awareness and understanding of women’s healthcare, ramp up training and research, and end the damaging waits for diagnosis and treatment.

Kirsten Herbst-Taylor from Dumfries and Galloway proposed an amendment calling for annual gynaecological screening for women. She has been living with Stage 4 Ovarian Cancer and she told Conference:

When I was diagnosed during a routine check-up at my local GP surgery, the disease was already advanced. I underwent extensive surgery and six rounds of chemotherapy.

I am here today because of the extraordinary skills of the surgical team at the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh — Dr Pete Sanderson and Professor Stephen Wigmore — and because of the expertise and steady care of my oncologist, Dr Rachel Nirsimloo.

We are incredibly fortunate to have such dedication and excellence within NHS Scotland. I am deeply grateful for the treatment I have received.

But gratitude for treatment must sit alongside urgency about prevention.

In Scotland, around 600 women are diagnosed with ovarian cancer every year. It is the most lethal gynaecological cancer. Across the UK, fewer than half of women are diagnosed at an early stage.

Stage at diagnosis changes everything.

When ovarian cancer is detected at Stage I, around 95 percent of women survive five years or more. At Stage IV, that figure falls to around 15 percent.

That is not a marginal difference. It is the difference between life expectancy measured in decades and life expectancy measured in years.

We have national screening programmes for breast and cervical cancer. We do not have one for ovarian cancer. Instead, we rely on women recognising vague symptoms and primary care identifying a rare disease early enough to alter outcomes.

That is not a systematic early detection strategy.

I am asking this conference to support the establishment of a national screening programme for ovarian and other gynaecological cancers, and to give women the entitlement to an annual gynaecological check-up, including ultrasound where clinically appropriate.

Even at Stage 4, there is hope. Treatment advances mean many women now live for years with good quality of life. But earlier diagnosis reduces the need for aggressive treatment and dramatically improves survival.

With survival at around 95 percent when ovarian cancer is detected early, and only around 15 percent at the most advanced stage, the evidence is clear: early detection saves lives. A national screening programme and annual gynaecological checks are not optional — they are necessary.

Let’s make this a reality.

Central Scotland candidate Lucy Smith told of her experience of endless visits to the doctor with abdominal pain and being dismissed. After too long, she was diagnosed with Crohn’s Disease. Lucy’s experience was almost identical to that of someone I love very much and it is infuriating that both of those young women had to experience years of hell.

Beatrice Wishart MSP talked about the importance of training future doctors in these issues – asking how many women had been fitted with IUDs without pain relief, being told they would experience only slight discomfort.

Jacquie Bell spoke very movingly of her traumatic birth experience and how the refusal of her doctor to consider home birth meant that her child never had any siblings.

While my own childbirth was not nearly as traumatic, I told the Conference how I basically ran away and hid for a few hours after a male obstetrician told a midwife without reference to me to just break my waters and get on with it. I also added that every time I went to the doctor after I turned 40, no matter what with, it was put down to the menopause. And now I come to think of it, that might be why it took 3 months to get my Glandular Fever diagnosis back in 2009.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , , , , , and | 1 Comment

WATCH: Alex Cole-Hamilton’s speech to Scottish Conference: Lib Dem revival will get things done

For the first time in over twenty years, the Scottish Liberal Democrats can approach the Holyrood elections with a degree of optimism. Our Conference this weekend was buzzing. Held in Dynamic Earth, a tourist attraction overlooking the Holyrood Parliament (well worth a visit if you are in Edinburgh), there was a real feeling that this was our time.

Introduced by two recent by-election winners, leader Alex Cole-Hamilton said that we were on the cusp of a huge Liberal Democrat revival and the presence of a large number of Lib Dem MSPs would mean that we would get things done. He said we were aiming to win 10 constituencies, up from four, and gain on the peach ballot.

Watch here:

The full text is below:

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | Leave a comment

British, northern, not leaving

Last week, Rupert Lowe launched his new “Restore” party. Restore what, exactly? Strip away the branding and the flag-waving and what you’re left with isn’t renewal. It’s resentment. It’s grievance politics dressed up as patriotism.

To me, it looks like a diet BNP the same division, repackaged for the social media age.

And I’m tired of pretending it isn’t dangerous.

Circling this movement are voices openly advocating “re-migration” the idea that British citizens like me should be sent “back” somewhere else. Steve Laws has pushed exactly that kind of rhetoric. According to this worldview, my place in this country is conditional.

I was raised in Bolton, making me a Boltonian

My accent is Northern. My upbringing was working-class. I grew up around graft, shift work, tight budgets and pride in standing on your own two feet. I support England in the football. I complain about the weather. I queue properly.

But because I am brown and Muslim, there are people who believe I don’t quite belong.

That should alarm anyone who believes in equal citizenship.

Alongside “Restore” sits the so-called “Advance” party. Advance where? Because this feels like reverse gear. Even Ben Habib, who aligns himself with this hyper-nationalist energy would, by the cold logic of “re-migration,” eventually find himself on the wrong side of the same purity tests. Ethno-nationalism does not stop at one target. It keeps narrowing the circle.

History has shown us that, again and again.

I am Northern. I am working-class. I am British-Pakistani. I am Muslim. Apparently that makes me suspect in certain political circles. What angers me most is that these movements claim to speak for the working class.

Posted in Op-eds | 29 Comments

UPDATED: Daisy Cooper announces new economic policy – Get Britain growing again

In a major speech in the City of London this morning, Daisy Cooper has announced Liberal Democrat plans to break up the Treasury and move it to Birmingham.

A new Department for Growth would include the Department of Business and Trade’s responsibilities and would have a mandate to boost long term sustainable growth. It would be a single point of contact for business and investment.

A smaller department for public expenditure would control departmental spending

Stronger economic growth would be recognised as the only sustainable solution to the country’s problems. This would come alongside a better relationship with Europe.

This department would align tax policy so that Labour mistakes like the rise in employers’ National Insurance Contributions could never happen again.

Basing it in Birmingham would be a strong signal that we want to rebalance the economy across the whole country and as the only party with MPs spanning the Highlands and Islands to south west,  we see the differences in growth between the south east and everywhere else.

She argued that if we could close the productivity gap between Birmingham and London,we could boost tax revenue by $4 billion which could, for example, provide 80,000 teachers

She said that rising inequality and cost of living pressures were grinding people down. The C0nservatives and Labour have failed and the British public who are left wondering if anyone knows how to fix it.

This all comes with a slogan: Get Britain Growing Again.

Farage wants to break things, not fix them. Others want to hoard power in London. Conservatives are chasing Reform saying that moderates are not welcome in their party.

She said our future liberal economic vision are rooted in the values which have guided us for hundreds of years. We champion international trade, fair markets and wealth creation.

Wealth creation and social justice, she argued, are two sides of the same coin. She concluded:

We believe we can give people a sense of hope, end the cost of living crisis and build the UK’s future by all of us for all of us together.

She then took questions from journalists. The BBC’s Nick Eardley asked how she could justify the time and money to be spent on this. Daisy replied that the plan was  entirely consistent with existing plans to move civil servants out of London. We would prioritise this particular department. He followed up by asking why Birmingham rather than the north of England, Scotland, Wales?  Daisy’s answer: our second city has good combination of manufacturing and financial sectors and if we boost it will help other places around the UK too.

Posted in News and Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 36 Comments

UPDATED: Jim Wallace’s funeral takes place in Kirkwall

UPDATE: A brief reflection on the service that took place earlier today.  If you knew and admired Jim, and haven’t seen it, it will be up for a while here.  I’m not going to tell you too much about it, but there were some stories that illustrate Jim perfectly, from the things he was excellent at, grace and kindness being mentioned a lot, to the things he was less good at. It sounds like he might have been less good at DIY than I am and that’s saying something.  And there are some things you might be surprised to learn. 

His brother Neil gave the most perfect tribute, as requested by Jim a few days before he went into hospital for his operation.  The best euologies are crafted so that you are lifted from sadness with laughter and this was no exception. There was one point where I was about to dissolve into tears and then he said something really funny and everyone laughed. 

Liam McArthur told us about their long working relationship, which started in a noisy pub in Edinburgh Waverley station. Alistair Carmichael shared his one abiding memory of Jim, which may surprise you. It will not be what you think, but in other ways, it will be exactly what you think. 

It is a very fitting summary of a life lived with  love, empathy, kindness,  ferocious intellect, modesty and humour with liberalism at its core. We’ll all be raising a glass to Jim tonight, I expect.

Many Lib Dems have been heading north to Kirkwall over the past couple of days for Jim Wallace’s funeral whihc takes place in the beautiful St Mgnus’ Cathedral in Orkney today.

Theer have been a few photographs of people stopping to campaign with Highland candidates David Green and Neil Alexander on the way, and no doubt we’ll see the same tomorrow as people make the return journey.

Our thoughts are very much with JIm’s wife Rosie, daughters Helen and Clare and brother Neil and all those who were close to Jim.

The service will be livestreamed here

Christine Murdoch and I thought it might be a good idea to open a Zoom room for those of us who will be watching online. We might need a gentle space where we can have a cup of tea and a chat afterwards. If you want to join us between 1 and 2, email [email protected] for the link.

Alistair Carmichael paid tribute to Jim in an article for Politics Home which you can read here. He said:

Posted in News | Also tagged , and | Leave a comment

Dunfermline by-election – 20 years on from an historic and unexpected victory

Twenty years ago today, I and many many Lib Dems took to the streets of Dunfermline at the crack of dawn to deliver our Good Mornings.

We were quietly hopeful that we would be able to “Send Willie to Westminster” which was a bit of a miracle given the pickle the party found itself in at the time. Our leader Charles Kennedy had just resigned after a bit of a psychodrama and many of us felt pretty bloody annoyed about that. During the by-election campaign itself, there were multiple tabloid stories about potential replacements.

But when we are under the kosh, we can do great things. The party worked together to deliver a fantastic campaign. Willie Rennie was well known from the very north of Scotland to the very foot of Cornwall so activists came north in huge numbers. We quickly established momentum with a petition to remove the tolls on the Forth Road Bridge.

People in the then brand new Eastern Expansion were fed up of the construction traffic which led to the famous “Mud on Roads” special Focus.

I was on casework, working with Ed Maxfield who once co-wrote a book on winning elections. I joked that he used to spend his days shifting work from his desk to mine, but most of my work came from an energetic candidate who seemed determined to pick up at least 3 pieces of casework from every door he knocked on. He’d bound in at 9pm every night and hand it all over.

Downstairs, Liz Barrett ran many things, including front of house. She’s now a councillor in Perth. Working alongside her was Gladys Herbert. Gladys had not been involved in politics before but had married the local party chair a few months before. She took to it all so well and was so generous with her time. Everybody just adored her by the end of the campaign.

James Simpson was a very popular local councillor for Dunfermline City Centre, a ward now held by Aude Boubaker-Calder.  James famously took a good hour to walk from one end of Dunfermline High Street to the other because people kept  chatting to him. His knowledge and passion for the people of his ward were invaluable to me as I worked through the casework mountain.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 2 Comments

Why Vince is wrong about Gorton

Jackie Pearcey surrounded by orange diamondsHowever much I love Vince Cable, I can’t let his comments urging people to vote tactically for Labour in the forthcoming Gorton and Denton by-election pass without comment. He told the I Paper:

He pointed out that in previous by-elections and at the last general election, the Lib Dems had benefited from tactical voting by presenting themselves as the main anti-Conservative force in certain areas.

Cable – who was business secretary in the coalition government before leading his party from 2017 to 2019 – said: “First of all, the Lib Dems are not going to win here.

There is a flipside to tactical voting – the Lib Dems have benefited from perfecting organised tactical voting, and there is a reciprocal side of it that when we stand no chance of winning, we have to be honest about what we would do instead.

We do have a duty to get behind the candidate – and the sense I get, we’re all floating in the unknown here, is that whether it’s local surveys or the kind of feedback our people are getting on the ground, is that, for all the problems of the Labour Government they are still strong enough to present the main challenge to Reform and we have got to therefore get behind them.

Where he is right is that we do, of course, encourage tactical voting when we are in a position to win a seat. Squeezing the third, fourth or fifth place candidates’ votes is a legitimate campaign tactic. We need those people to vote for us if we are going to do well.

And I suspect that many Lib Dems vote tactically to stop other parties at the same time as campaigning in target seats to ensure other Lib Dems win. And I’m not going to judge them. However, it’s not for us to pro-actively encourage our supporters to vote a certain way. It’s for the party who wants their vote to persuade them. We might, by the size of our campaign in a particular area not stand in their way but we should always be about encouraging people to vote Lib Dem.

The party spokesperson who responded to Vince’s comments did so with respect, which was good.

Vince Cable has made an invaluable contribution to the party over the years and he is entitled to his own view.

As a party we’ll always make the case for voting Liberal Democrat, and that’s why we’re standing a candidate in Gorton and Denton and fighting for every vote.

For me, though, there are no circumstances in which I could vote Labour at the moment. There is a time when I might have considered voting tactically for them. The closest I ever got was in 2015 to counteract the SNP surge. However, I voted Lib Dem because I didn’t think my Labour MP was worth saving.

Not now, though. Labour are clearly worried about the Scottish Parliament elections because they canvassed me a couple of months ago. I told them that they had disappointed so much on various things, such as the two child payment, Starmer’s “island of strangers” speech and the way they had thrown trans people under the bus that I wouldn’t even give them a preference in a Council election (we have STV up here).

I don’t necessarily have a problem with the idea of voting for another party to stop Reform. Farage’s party is the ultimate nasty party that brings the worst of Trumpian politics to Britain. And we only have to look at innocent protesters being gunned down by barely trained thugs on the streets of Minneapolis, people being ripped from their families and sent to prison in another country without due process, the blatant corruption (Trump has enriched himself by a minimum of $1.4 billion) in the first year of his second term and the dismantling of the international order and democracy itself in the US to know that we don’t want that here.

But Labour’s answer to Reform has been to imitate them, to ape their narrative and paint themselves as a sort of Reform Lite. And the more they do that, the more the Reform narrative on immigrants, on marginalised groups of people, becomes embedded.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 36 Comments

Liam McArthur’s tribute to Jim Wallace

There have only ever been two MSPs for Orkney: Jim Wallace and his successor Liam McArthur. Liam worked for Jim as a Special Adviser when he was First Minister. You can see Jim’s influence in the way that Liam works to bring people together.

Yesterday the Scottish Parliament held tributes and flew flags at half mast. We start with Liam’s heartfelt tribute to his old boss and mentor.

The text is below:

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 1 Comment

A toast to the lassies!

One of the highlights of the Edinburgh Lib Dems social calendar is the South Edinburgh Burns Supper which I’ve been going to for probably 15 years now.

I have seen Alex Cole-Hamilton dressed as a mouse being chased by one time LDV contributor John Knox reciting the programme To a Mouse. I kid you not.

It’s always guaranteed to be a good night. If you are ever in Edinburgh, the food at Mortonhall Golf Club is brilliant and the bar prices are incredibly reasonable for a city venue.

I thought you might be interested in reading the Toast to the Lassies by Scottish Campaigns and Candidates Convener Charles Dundas and the reply, which I’ll post tomorrow, by Scottish Convener Jenni Lang.  There’s a lot of relevant political observation amidst the gentle roasting.

One person very much on all of our minds was Jim Wallace. I was relieved to be able to spend time with the Lib Dem family as we come to terms with his sudden loss. Everyone had so much love and admiration for him and there were few dry eyes in the house when Jenni Lang talked about him in her reply.

Anyway, enjoy Charles’ toast. His fears of imminent cancellation are premature, I feel.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | Leave a comment

Jim Wallace has died

I know that everyone reading this will be as shocked and sad as I am to hear of the terrible news that Jim Wallace, a giant of this Party, died today. We send our love to his wife Rosie, and his daughters Helen and Clare.

Jim’s death was announced by Alex Cole-Hamilton:

The Scottish Liberal Democrats today announce with great sadness the passing of Jim Wallace, Lord Wallace of Tankerness, former Deputy First Minister of Scotland and a towering figure of modern Scottish liberalism.

Jim Wallace was born in Dumfriesshire and educated at Annan Academy before attending Cambridge and Edinburgh universities. He was called to the bar in 1979, practising mainly in civil law cases, and became a QC in 1997.

Jim was elected to parliament in 1983 as MP for Orkney & Shetland, succeeding Jo Grimond, and held the seat for 18 years, earning a formidable reputation as a diligent constituency champion and a respected voice at Westminster. After becoming leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats in 1992, he led the party through the Scottish devolution referendum in 1997, having also been a member of the Scottish Constitutional Convention which created the blueprint for devolution and a Scottish Parliament.

Upon the establishment of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, Jim was elected as MSP for Orkney and became Deputy First Minister of Scotland, serving in government from 1999 to 2005. He became acting First Minister while Donald Dewar underwent heart surgery in April 2000, after Dewar’s death in October 2000 and again following the resignation of Henry McLeish in 2001.

He also held the roles of Minister for Justice and later Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning, playing a central role in the early years of devolution and helping to shape Scotland’s modern political settlement. He also established a world-leading freedom of information regime.

He entered the House of Lords in 2007 as Lord Wallace of Tankerness, where he remained an authoritative and thoughtful contributor on constitutional, legal and Scottish affairs, including serving five years as Advocate General for Scotland.

Jim also served as the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland from 2021 to 2022.

Alex Cole-Hamilton, who worked for our MSPs in the Scottish Parliament when Jim was leader, said:

Jim Wallace was one of the architects of modern Scotland and one of the finest liberals our party has ever produced.

He believed deeply in devolution as a way to give people better services and more control over their own lives and he lived a life of public service right up until the end.

For me personally, he was a mainstay of support throughout my adult life. Even as he went into hospital for the final time, he was still sending me words of advice and I will always try to live up to the standards he set.

Throughout his career, Jim was widely respected across party lines for his integrity, calm judgement and deep belief in liberal values: fairness, the rule of law and respect for communities, no matter how remote.

Scotland is a better country because of Jim Wallace, and the Liberal Democrats are a better party because of his example.

Alistair Carmichael, Jim’s succsssor as MP for Orkney & Shetland, said:

Jim Wallace gave his adult life to serving the people of the Northern Isles, Scotland and the United Kingdom. His sudden and tragic death leaves a huge gap in public life. For those of us who knew him as a friend and for his family that gap is one that we shall struggle ever to fill.

In the world of politics, having people on whom you can truly depend is a rare and precious thing. For me, Jim was someone who was there through good times and bad and I am bereft at his passing. I shall miss his acute political analysis, his warm and occasionally waspish wit and, most of all, his easy company and friendship. He was never someone for whom I had to present a front.

My thoughts are with his wife Rosie, his daughters Helen and Clare, his mother and his brother Neil who I know are heartbroken at this moment. I hope that they may eventually take some comfort from the knowledge that the man that they loved in their family was loved by so many others too.

Liam McArthur, Jim’s successor as MSP for Orkney, said:

Posted in News | Also tagged | 6 Comments

Ed Davey on Kuenssberg: Lib Dems have a moral obligation to win

Ed Davey did his traditional start of year interview with the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg this morning. The conversation started with Donald Trump backing down on his disgraceful comments about British troops in Afghanistan.

Ed said he was grateful to the King for his intervention but said that this didn’t change his view of Donald Trump who has supported Putin on Ukraine.

They moved on to discuss defence spending. Ed acknowledged that we do need to act.

Liberal Democrats have argued that we need to increase defence spending. We’ve called on the Government to issue war bonds. The Government hasn’t shown how to increase defence spending by the end of the decade.

We’re in a cold war type scenario.

We need to increase defence spending quickly.

There has to be a question on whether we can rely on the US. With Trump in the White House they are no longer a reliable ally.

Kuenssberg asked him how this would work? Was it Govt borrowing with a fancy name on it?

Ed said that  we should do this over two years and  cap it at £20 billion

Institutional investors and public would be able to buy these to give the  defence industry needs to know that the money is behind it to make plans.

So let’s just step away from the interview for a moment. This seems to be another example of a new policy being announced – a bit like the 7 day guarantee for GP appointments – without any sort of due process in the party. There have been plenty opportunities to talk about, to consult on such an idea internally. Given the amount of surprise I am picking up in the party about today’s announcement, I feel that this could have been handled better

It’s not necessarily a bad idea, but there are ways of ensuring that there is buy-in from the party before making an announcement like this. Then you avoid people feeling like they are being disrespected. There have been concerns about power being grabbed to the centre with no accountability for some time.

Back to the interview now, Ed said that there were other things we need to do on defence given the dramatic changes since the last election which requires a step change. He wants to see things like pushing the Joint Expeditionary Force further and faster and invite Canada to join it.

Kuenssberg asked him whether  we were avoiding a conversation on the amount we are spending on welfare and the NHS

Ed replied:

We are up for these conversations. We have talked about a digital services tax, a European rearmanent bank and we have called for cross party talks on how we get (defence spending) up to 3.5% beyond 2030.

Ed has been pretty bullish on his language on Trump, much more than Starmer has been. Kuenssberg asked him if he would be the same if  he were PM. Would he call him a bully and an international gangster

My language might be a bit more nuanced but my approach would be the same.

He highlighted areas where the UK Government could do more, such as rejoining the Customs Union.

How did Trump back down on Greenland? EU standing together with a bazooka of retaliatory measures.

Trump is so unpredictable. I really worry for America – he is doing huge damage to their economy and their world standing.

He was then challenged on our glacially improving poll ratings and the fact that we have only a third or so of the members of Reform and the Greens. – we have ten times the number of MPs but Green at 170,000 and Reform on 210,000. Ed pretty much said he didn’t care about either.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 29 Comments

William Wallace writes… Defending Liberal Democracy against populist powers

As we watch Donald Trump knock down the checks and balances built into the US constitution to constrain the powers of executive Presidents, with the acquiescence of the Republican Party,  we need to think hard – and campaign about – the absence of similar checks within our own system of government.  Britain’s unwritten constitution has rested, as Peter Hennessy famously said, on the ‘good chaps’ theory of constitutional behaviour: that no political leader who won a majority in the House of Commons would ever behave in an ungentlemanly fashion.  Across Europe as well as in the USA we’re now learning that populist leaders are not gentlemen.  So we must be out there making the case against unlimited populist government and for reforms to strengthen constitutional liberal democracy.

Reform of our over-centralised political institutions is at last creeping from the realm of political nerds into the field of active discussion.  That’s partly because of a rising awareness that the outcome of the next election could become a constitutional crisis – either a Commons without any party large enough to form a government on its own or with only one coalition partner, or a party with a majority of seats elected on less than a third of those voting.  It’s partly because we face a crisis of public distrust in national politics, with surveys showing much higher levels here than in comparable European democracies.  And it’s partly that Britain is evidently suffering from an over-centralised state, in which the Prime Minister now struggles to with so many issues at once that long-term thinking is impossible.

Asked to contribute the other week to a discussion at the annual conference of the Institute for Government (the leading think tank on Whitehall, central government and public services), Andy Burnham argued that ‘we need to reform Westminster to bring about the reform of Whitehall.’.  Our first-past-the-post electoral system, he went on, builds in a two-party system that rests on staged confrontation between government and its institutionalised opposition.  The Whips’ control of government business and the majority party’s MPs stifles critical and constructive debate and inhibits cross-party cooperation.  The Financial Times published a letter last Friday on similar lines.  A list of City leaders set out ‘the economic case for coalition government’, arguing that ‘the see-saw of policies’ which accompanies the constant shuffling of ministers in this ‘era of politics as a blood sport’ deters investment and damages business confidence.  The FT followed up with a full-page weekend article by Andy Haldane declaring that ‘the public has lost faith in the political system’ and asking ‘Has Britain become ungovernable?’

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 9 Comments

Josh Babarinde writes…. Trump can go f**k himself

There are moments that demand we speak plainly. 

The moment that Trump demeaned and mocked the sacrifices of our troops is one of them. 

It is time we recognise this moment for what it is, and move together as a party and as a country to meet it.

Donald Trump has accused NATO forces in Afghanistan of having “stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.” It is time for an uncomfortable truth. This man is no friend of Britain, and we must stop pretending that he is.

Our armed forces personnel stand ready, if necessary, to lay down their lives for our security. There is no higher calling. And those who answer that call, those who brace themselves to face dangers most of us will never know, deserve our eternal gratitude and a clear promise: that we will never forget, and we will never allow their service to be disrespected.

Afghanistan was the only time in NATO’s history that Article 5 was invoked. And it was invoked for America, after the attacks of September 11th.

We answered the call. We sent our troops because when your ally is attacked, you stand with them. That’s what the alliance – and the special relationship – has meant to us. That’s what we believed America meant. It is that type of internationalism that our party has always defended, and what makes me so proud to be a Liberal Democrat. 

But we must be clear about who in Britain still lacks the courage to stand up. Nigel Farage could only muster that Trump’s comments were “not quite fair.” Not quite fair. 

As if hundreds of British deaths were a matter of fairness, as if this were anything less than disrespect of their memory. That cowardice tells us everything we need to know about the choice before our country. 

Populists have tried to claim ownership of patriotism and we must take it back.

Real patriotism isn’t wrapping yourself in a flag while tearing down your neighbours. It isn’t exploiting people’s fears or looking to divide communities.

Real patriotism is what our armed forces showed when they deployed to Afghanistan and elsewhere. It’s what their families showed when they said goodbye at RAF Brize Norton, not knowing if they would ever see them again.

Posted in News | Also tagged , , , and | 22 Comments

The Emperor’s New Clothes

How deliciously ironic that the popular folktale The Emperor’s New Clothes was written by a Danish author, Hans Christian Andersen. How apposite is that tale today? A slow-witted narcissist is easily duped and, because he is believed to be a powerful emperor, no one is willing to challenge him and point out what a fool he is being. Trump is undoubtedly a fool, but he is constantly emboldened by the dithering appeasement of most world leaders, while the functioning malevolent minds of Putin and Xi quietly look on with delight.

Whether it’s from fawning, fear or flippancy the world can no longer pander to this great blustering bully and his dangerous nonsense. For some time now I have been wanting for a small child to step from the crowd as Trump goes by and shout out, “But that man’s talking bollocks!”

Far from being a small child, today, we may have found a fearless voice willing to speak out on the world stage. Mark Carney, speaking in Davos, has clearly set out what a Liberal approach could look like. It is beholden on those of us who agree that a safe and peaceful world, can only be secured by fairness, respect and the rule of international law to boldly stand with Carney and join our voices in a resounding cry of “enough!”

His was no dewy-eyed nostalgia, hankering after a golden age that never was. If Trump has achieved anything, it is that that old ship has sailed, and sunk! Liberals, and indeed all people who believe in reason and dialogue, must move forward to a better future while there is still any future to hope for.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 16 Comments

Why banning social media for children misses the point

The Government is  considering following Australia’s lead with a blanket ban on social media for under-16s. It’s a move that will appeal to anxious parents and play well in focus groups. It also represents a fundamental misunderstanding of both the problem and the solution.

This isn’t to dismiss legitimate concerns about children’s online experiences. The evidence on mental health impacts is real and concerning, particularly for young people already vulnerable. Algorithmic amplification of harmful content, cyberbullying, and the manipulation of attention through addictive design features cause genuine harm. Parents are right to worry.

But a ban throws the baby out with the bathwater. It looks decisive whilst avoiding the harder work of actually fixing anything, and in the process, eliminates the genuine benefits alongside the harms.

The practical problems are obvious

Age verification technology remains unreliable and privacy-invasive. Australia’s ban, which only came into effect this month, relies on platforms policing themselves – the same platforms that have consistently failed to enforce their existing age limits. VPNs and workarounds are readily available to any teenager with basic digital literacy, which is to say, most of them.

More fundamentally, a ban creates an unregulated underground. When young people inevitably access social media anyway, they’ll do so without adult guidance or support, less likely to report problems or seek help when things go wrong. We’ve seen this pattern before with abstinence-only approaches to sex education and drug policy: restricting access doesn’t eliminate risk, it just pushes it into the shadows.

But the deeper issue is one of rights and autonomy

Children and young people are not simply adults-in-waiting, passive recipients of adult protection. They are rights-holders under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, including the right to freedom of expression and access to information. These rights don’t disappear because we’re uncomfortable with how they’re being exercised.

For many young people, particularly those who are LGBTQ+, disabled, from minority backgrounds, or geographically isolated, online spaces provide crucial community, information, and support that may not exist in their immediate physical environment. Social media is also where civic life increasingly happens. Youth climate activism, political organising, and public discourse occur online. Excluding an entire age group from these spaces is excluding them from democratic participation at precisely the age when political consciousness typically develops. We can’t simultaneously lament young people’s disengagement from politics whilst banning them from the primary forum where political conversation occurs.

What would actually work?

The answer isn’t another badly designed law, it’s properly addressing the actual problem: platform business models that profit from harm. None of these proposals are untested fantasies – elements exist in various jurisdictions – but nowhere has implemented them comprehensively or with adequate enforcement.

Rather than banning access, we should be banning the business model. That means:

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 17 Comments

Time for Lib Dems to stop using X/Twitter?

Back in 2008 when I first joined, Twitter was a lifeline for me. I had Glandular Fever which knocked me out for months and it was incredibly isolating. But here was a community of people I could communicate with in real time, many of whom became friends in real life.

There was the Formula 1 crowd. My life was made when then Brawn driver Rubens Barrichello replied to me.

Of course there were the growing community of Lib Dems – and Jo Swinson was quickly recognised for her authentic use of the platform not just as a broadcast mechanism, but a means of engagement.

Back then, it was truly fun, though looking back, I can’t believe I did one of these things:

Where else, before you’ve even got out of bed in the morning can you:

discover that the Lib Dems have won a by election in St Austell and Newquay, where Tory PPC Caroline Righton recently smeared Liberal Democrat candidate Stephen Gilbert;

give Nadine Dorries some advice on how to tweet pictures from her Blackberry (not in the same league as my friend Sarah (@soggous) who recently helped Jenson Button’s girlfriend fix her Mac, mind you);

engage in intelligent discourse about the relative merits and demerits of Google Wave which included the phrase, from Charlotte Gore, “It’s collaborative, rich media, non-linear communications!”?

However, in recent years, it has become a much darker, more sinister place where dangerous misinformation and prejudice is spread with impunity.  This week, confirmation of a new low came.

From The Guardian:

The posts offer a new level of detail on how the images are generated and shared on X, with users coaching one another on prompts; suggesting iterations on Grok’s presentations of women in lingerie or swimsuits, or with areas of their body covered in semen; and asking Grok to remove outer clothing in replies to posts containing self-portraits by female users.

Among hundreds of posts identified by Nana Nwachukwu as direct, nonconsensual requests for Grok to remove or replace clothing, dozens reviewed by the Guardian show users posting pictures of women including celebrities, models, stock photos and women who are not public figures posing in snapshots.

While the platform later clarified it would limit this facility to paid users, this really is not enough. Think about it? You can abuse women’s privacy if you can afford to pay a relatively small sum per month.  That is not ok.

All this was too much for the UK Parliament’s Women and Equalities Committee who announced that it would be withdrawing from the site. The Committee’s vice chair, our own Christine Jardine has also left as reported in The Guardian:

Another, the Liberal Democrat MP Christine Jardine, said she was leaving the platform, calling the images generated by Grok “the last straw”.

Jardine said she had taken the view that X was a good way to communicate with constituents. “But I cannot in all conscience continue to use a platform which seems unwilling to act against this grossly offensive and abusive online behaviour towards women and girls,” she said.

In the past couple of days, Lib Dem MPs including Lee Dillon, Martin Wrigley, Tom Morrison, Vikki Slade, Caroline Voaden, Danny Chambers have said that they won’t be posting any more.

Our Mark Pack used a House of Lords question tochallenge the Government to reduce its use of X.

This is the first post in probably 15 years where my Twitter profile has not been linked to my profile on here. I have severely cut back on my Twitter use in recent years and hardly ever post, preferring Bluesky instead.Similarly, at Lib Dem Voice we have been winding down our use of X and preferring our Bluesky profile instead.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 20 Comments

Vince Cable writes….Tech and Trump

The British government has been scrambling to keep up with the outrageous behaviour of the rogue superstate which happens to be our main ally and with which we claim to have a ‘special relationship’. Keir Starmer says that he had no warning of the attack on Venezuela which suggests that he has clean hands but no influence. 

A subject much closer to Britain’s long term vital interests are forthcoming negotiations with the Trump Administration on technology. These talks will determine whether Britain is to be a digital and AI colony or retains some vestiges of sovereignty.

They affect our freedom to levy taxes.  They affect our freedom to manage the flow of sewage contained in social media content being defended as ‘free speech’. They complicate any move to realign regulations with the EU. Furthermore, the allegiance of the leading tech companies to the Trump Administration makes any commercial deal highly political. And geo-political too since we are being pressed to choose between the two superpowers.

The pending negotiations build on the Economic Prosperity Deal under which the USA agreed to reduce Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs to the baseline 10% (rather than the EU’s 15%) in return for various UK concessions. One concession was accepting a ‘poison pill’ limiting agreements with ‘non-market’ economies (ie China). 

The next stage is a Technology Prosperity Deal which promises more digital infrastructure investment in the UK in return for more UK concessions on policy. The USA objects to the UK 2% digital sales tax and to the UK On-line Safety Act which is said unfairly to constrain US AI companies. Other irritants have included British demands under the Investigatory Powers Act, for Apple to break its end-to-end encryption.

Britain has a high dependence on US tech companies. Britain’s digital economy accounts for around 13% of GDP (manufacturing is around 9%). The digital economy in turn depends largely on the platforms and services of US tech companies.  The new growth area is AI where US companies also dominate.

Dependence stems from the power of the algorithms used by the tech companies which can be manipulated to slant output to serve the interests of owners or the ideological prejudices of the Trump administration. The opaque decision-making processes of AI make subtle manipulation easier. The sheer complexity of AI also makes it easier to lock users into platforms which then become embedded and difficult to replace. 

In principle, users have the option of using competitive alternatives which, in practice, are Chinese: platforms like Alibaba or Deep Seek for AI. But Chinese companies have difficulty meeting privacy regulations; and there are security and geo-political concerns. In any event the UK has already conceded to the USA an effective veto over Chinese involvement. 

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 4 Comments

Ed Davey’s New Year Message

Ed Davey’s New Year message came out when we were on our break, but, for the sake of completeness, here is his video, a kind of Lib Dem Wrapped. An unusual choice to give Kemi Badenoch a cameo, but then she was telling everyone how we get the church roof fixed, something which will, we suspect, never get old.

Enjoy!

Posted in News | Also tagged | 1 Comment

Coalition Government again?

Just before the Christmas recess I sat down in the Commons cafeteria opposite a Conservative front-bencher whom I knew.  ‘There will have to be a coalition after the next election,’ he told me, ‘bringing you together with Labour and the Greens.’  I realised after absorbing this that he was effectively telling me that the Conservatives could not revive in time to hope for a majority, and that the prospect of either a Reform majority or a Tory-Reform coalition gave him nightmares.

It’s 3½ years at most until the next general election.  Plenty of crises and shifts in political moods may intervene to alter the pattern that opinion polls and local by-elections have indicated over the past year – of five parties between 10% and 30% in England, with six or more competitive in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales.  But it’s wise to anticipate the likelihood of an indecisive outcome.  We would probably then have to negotiate – and successfully manage – a multiparty government.  The current Labour Government is floundering in large part because the campaign it fought to win its majority did not provide it with the programme needed for successful government in difficult domestic and international circumstances.  The circumstances that will face the incoming government – of whatever colours – in 2029 are likely to be even more difficult than in 2024.

Many readers of LibDem Voice will groan at the thought of entering another coalition.  But we’re in politics to promote liberal principles, and the most effective way to promote them is to be in power, locally and nationally.  So we need to learn lessons from the 2010-15 coalition and from earlier attempts to cooperate with other parties.

To start with, we need to admit that Liberals are instinctively too inclined to trust others, to be optimistic about outcomes and to believe in rational negotiation. David Steel was naively confident that Callaghan would reward the support we offered his shaky government in 1977-8.   In 1996-8 Paddy Ashdown was far too trusting of Tony Blair, not appreciating the hard and partisan men behind him.  Nick Clegg set out to demonstrate that coalition government would work, without being sufficiently suspicious of those behind Cameron who wanted to push through their Conservative agenda while leaving the Liberal Democrats to take as much of the blame as possible.  Next time we have to be harder, more suspicious and more politically partisan.

In the 2010 coalition government the 53 Liberal Democrat MPs served to close the small gap between the 306 Tory seats and an overall majority: too much of an imbalance to stop most Conservative ministers behaving as if they were still the majority party, let alone to change significantly the working methods of Downing Street, Whitehall and Westminster.  Parliamentary numbers matter enormously in our flawed political system.  If no party in the government has much above 200 MPs, and we have gained well over 100, we will be better placed from the outset.  Winning more seats is a necessary precondition for effective shared government.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 49 Comments

Ed Davey’s Christmas message

Here is Ed Davey’s Christmas message.

With that, we will bow out for our own Christmas break. We will be back briefly at the weekend, but our plan is to take a proper break and see you again on 2 January.

Posted in News | Also tagged and | 6 Comments

Alex Cole-Hamilton’s Christmas message

Scottish Lib Dem Leader Alex Cole-Hamilton has released his Christmas message:

First of all I would like to thank all of those in our emergency services and those in the military who cannot spend Christmas with their lived ones because they are on duty today. You have our thanks, stay safe.

It’s been a massively successful year for the Scottish Liberal Democrats. From pushing for action on long mental health waits and the closure of care homes, to delivering progress on the Edinburgh Eye Pavilion and the Belford Hospital in Fort William, I am so proud of how my party gets stuck in and gets stuff done. That’s what Scottish Liberal Democrats are all about.

It was with that energy and ambition that we kicked off our spring conference in Inverness, welcoming the former Conservative MSP Jamie Greene into our ranks. Jamie’s decision struck a chord with all those people who are frustrated with the Conservative Party as it lurches to extremes and apes the likes of Nigel Farage. Sensible, moderate voters – who perhaps took a chance on Ruth Davidson’s Conservatives – deserve better than this.

In every corner of Scotland, people deserve a party that will restore decency to our politics, that will fight for them on the issues that matter – that’s what you get with the Scottish Liberal Democrats.

It is now just over 100 sleeps until the Scottish election: a chance to get the change Scotland truly needs – a change of government.

Posted in News | Also tagged and | 1 Comment

ALDC’s by-election report – 11 December 2025

4 parallel white vertical lines on orange background ALDC logoThis week, there were nine local council by-elections, from all over the country. Three local by-elections did not have a Liberal Democrat candidate.

We start in the Highlands, where wewere able to gain this seat, at the expense of the SNP. Congratulations are due to Councillor Matthew Prosser and the local team for winning this seat.

Highland Council, Fort William and Ardnamurchan
First preferences:
Liberal Democrats (Matthew Prosser): 925 (40.5%)
SNP: 665 (29.1%)
Reform UK: 220 (9.6%)
Green Party: 216 (9.4%)
Conservative: 175 (7.6%)
Labour: 87 (3.8%)

Liberal Democrats GAIN from SNP
Elected at Stage 5

Turnout: 25.9%

In the Central Belt, Reform successfully gained this seat, for their first Scottish electoral victory. Thank you to Dougie Butler and the local team for flying the Liberal Democrat flag.

West Lothian Council, Whitburn and Blackburn
First preferences:
Reform UK: 1177 (32.0%)
SNP: 1028 (28.0%)
Labour: 627 (17.1%)
Independent (Lynch): 484 (13.2%)
Conservative: 129 (3.5%)
Liberal Democrats (Douglas Butler): 102 (2.8%)
Green Party: 101 (2.7%)
Independent (Millar): 27 (0.7%)

Reform UK GAIN from Labour
Elected at Stage 8

Turnout: 22.2%


In the Tees Valley, there were two by-elections this week, yet only one had a Liberal Democrat candidate. In Darlington, Reform were able to gain this seat off Labour, with us and the Tories finishing in joint second place. Thank you to Simon Thorley and the local team for flying the Liberal Democrat flag.

Darlington Borough Council, Red Hall and Lingfield
Reform UK: 341 (37.7%, new)
Conservative: 157 (17.3%, -22.5)
Liberal Democrats (Simon Thorley): 157 (17.3%, new)
Labour: 152 (16.8%, -37.1)
Green Party: 89 (9.8%, +3.6)
Independent: 9 (1.0%, new)

Reform UK GAIN from Labour

Turnout: 27.47%


In the West Midlands, the Conservatives successfully defended their seat. Thank you to Morag Maclean and the local team for winning this seat/flying the Liberal Democrat flag.

Lichfield District Council, Armitage with Handsacre
Conservative: 630 (46.7%, -6.3)
Reform UK: 431 (31.9%, new)
Labour: 127 (9.4%, -23.5)
Liberal Democrats (Morag Maclean): 99 (7.3%, -6.8)
Green Party: 63 (4.7%, new)

Conservative HOLD

Turnout: 22.43%


Moving south, we turn to the Welsh Valleys, where a local by-election was prompted by the outcome of the recent Senedd by-election. Plaid Cymru were able to comfortably hold this seat. Thank you to Mary Lloyd and the local team for flying the Liberal Democrat flag.

Caerphilly County Borough Council, Penyrheol
Plaid Cymru: 956 (60.1%, +6.3)
Reform UK: 422 (26.5%, new)
Labour: 114 (7.2%, -24.4)
Conservative: 66 (4.2%, -10.4)
Liberal Democrats (Mary Lloyd): 32 (2.0%, new)

Plaid Cymru HOLD

Turnout: 16.3%


In East Devon, we were able to gain a seat at the expense of the Conservatives, who were attempting to defend this seat, which they won in 2023, but the resigned councillor had since become independent. Congratulations to Councillor Steve Hunt and the local team for this decisive victory.

East Devon District Council, Seaton
Liberal Democrats (Steve Hunt): 789 (41.3%, +21.2)
Reform UK: 565 (29.6%, new)
Conservative: 400 (20.9%, -9.5)
Independent: 156 (8.2%, new)

Liberal Democrats GAIN from Conservative

Turnout: 33.4%


The results for the three by-elections which had no Liberal Democrat candidates are below.

South Kesteven District Council, Aveland
Reform UK: 290 (41.0%, +26.5)
Conservative: 280 (39.5%, +19.0)
Green Party: 115 (16.2%, new)
Labour: 23 (3.2%, new)

Posted in News | Also tagged and | 14 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • David Raw
    @ Katharine Pinder I have the same perception as you on how Mr Burnham appears to be handling matters so far, Katharine. He is certainly wrong footing Ms Bade...
  • Katharine Pindar
    Thinking of the very different wars that Andy Burnham's government and William Beveridge's government face or faced, one thing is clear - there is not an enemy ...
  • David Evans
    Mick, While acknowledging that you successfully retrained as a primary school teacher and that on another occasion you taught, probably very successfully in...
  • Mick Taylor
    I requalified as a primary school teacher from being a secondary teacher. There were, and may still be, one year courses for this purpose and I imagine that cou...
  • Jana
    “ One practical solution would be to make it much easier for primary school teachers to requalify and go to work in our secondary schools” Really? Most p...