Tag Archives: Federal Council

Orange throwing at the Federal Board? That’s new!

The new Federal Committees took office on 1st January and we always like to know what’s going on in them.

In the internal elections last year, Janey Little was elected, alongside Prue Bray and Hannah Kitching as one of the three directly elected members.

The Board had its first meeting recently and Janey took to Instagram to give us a flavour of what it was like.

I spent 10 years on the Federal Board and its predecessor, the Federal Executive, and not once can I remember any fruit being harmed in the pursuance of our Liberal Democrat values. The orange throwing ice-breaker sounds intriguing and fun, though I’m glad I never had to do it. My hand-eye co-ordination is, shall we say, sub-optimal. I’m just slightly disappointed that there is no video.

Enjoy Janey’s video below.

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

Learnings from a term on Federal Council, and advice for the next

I don’t think Federal Council ever fully found its feet. And I think one of the fundamental reasons for this is that we never really understood what it was for. Was it intended only as an emergency brake for bad decisions made by a reduced size Board, or was it intended more of a broader Overview and Scrutiny function, equivalent to local government? My interpretation of the constitution was that it was the latter, but much of the discussion in Council focussed more on the former – which decisions should we call-in?

This fundamental tension is one the party must resolve if it wants a functioning Council. A productive relationship between the Board and Council isn’t one where the Council threatens use of a big red stop button constantly. Instead, the Council must trust the Board to do the right thing, with that trust being earned with Council being confident that the Board is doing the work to implement the party strategy, as agreed by conference, through proactive scrutiny. The use of a veto power should be an extreme one. Expense limits for the Presidential election was one of the few examples of the Council being effective at influencing the board, and we did not need to use the veto to implement this.

Posted in Op-eds and Party policy and internal matters | 2 Comments

Welcome to my day: 2 October 2023 – autumn has come…

It’s October already, and despite the rather pleasant September that we’ve had, today offered a sense that the seasons are turning. And whilst the Conservatives are still in Manchester, engaged in what the Economist described as “magical thinking” (paywall, I’m afraid), the rest of us have moved on to what will happen in Rutherglen and Hamilton West, Tamworth and, of most interest to Liberal Democrats, Mid Bedfordshire.

If the polls are accurate, Labour should win in Rutherglen and Hamilton West, but Tamworth is supposedly neck and neck, despite Labour’s recent performance in local elections there, and Mid Bedfordshire is being claimed by all three major parties. Should the Conservatives hold either or both, it will be a confidence boost for them, even if it persuades them to keep going as they are – in the face of the national polling data. Thus, it’s important that we keep pushing in Mid Bedfordshire, and I’m perpetually impressed by the reports of activists converging on the area from across the country.

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

Scrutiny in Federal Council – why we are not there yet

Federal Council is not yet a productive committee. In fact, given I’ve had to skip at least one canvassing session to attend it, I might go as far to say that it’s been a net negative in terms of achieving the party’s goals of getting liberals elected.

It has so much promise. In the handy visual diagram of the party’s committees provided in the conference handbook, it’s shown as equal to Federal Board, so is a committee that if effective yields important power. But so far, we have little to show for our time.

Much has been said about our power to call-in and overturn Board decisions, but for me, the call-in power should only be one of last resort—an Emergency Stop to the workings of the federal party only to be used in extreme circumstances. Our other power, that of asking the Board to respond on any issue, has barely been used. We have had Q&As with the president, but if all Federal Council can aspire to be is another forum for Q&As, indistinguishable from those asked of the Board at Conference, then we are failing in the responsibility to Conference when the Federal Council was created as the compromise for a smaller, more agile Federal Board.

Posted in Op-eds and Party policy and internal matters | 3 Comments

Federal Council – a body still in search of meaning… or rules, for that matter…

I was elected to Federal Council in April, following the resignation of Alison Eden from the Party, so yesterday’s meeting was my first as an official member…

Joining any organisational committee part way through its term of office can be challenging, and I suspected that Federal Council would be no different, given that there is a degree of informational vagueness that currently pervades it. For example, it has currently decided that members may, if they wish, give reasons for their call-in requests and are encouraged to do so, but do not have to. It strikes me that, in order to consider the value of a call-in request, or even to respond to it, that’s exactly the sort of information I’d want.

Federal Council has also somehow managed to get one-sixth of its way through its first term without Standing Orders, a communications plan or a transparency policy, which led to the truly bizarre situation of a member demanding a point of order when no such order exists. Now this is not my first rodeo, as I was the first Secretary of the Federal International Relations Committee when, in 2017, it dealt with all of these things at its first meeting. I am, to put it politely, surprised that this has taken as long as it has.

The main item of business was, in itself, imperfect, as it revolved around a request to “call in” the Federal Board’s decision to appoint six members of the Disciplinary Sub-Group. Imperfect because, whilst thirteen members (the minimum required) had originally called it in, one of them subsequently withdrew their request, making the call in notice inadequate. Nevertheless, as the discussion had been put on our agenda, and the Party President had prepared a presentation, we went ahead with what might have become merely an interesting discussion without purpose.

Posted in Party policy and internal matters | 4 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Chloe
    'The truth is that our freedoms are being subtly eroded in an era where emotion and sentiment are prized above reason and rationality'... KB...
  • David Allen
    "Starmer failed to communicate the home truths that the country needs to be told. Over promising led to under delivery." This doesn't quite cut it. One, bec...
  • Nonconformistradical
    "which is more than I can say for Ms Badenoch who was shrill and cheap in her remarks" I can't recall ever being impressed with anything she has said......
  • Chloe
    After Burnhams arrival at Westminster hall on a Donkey - given the adulation he received, maybe he's tired from such a long journey. As for Phillipson, she des...
  • David Raw
    Watched P.M.Q.'s today. Thought Sir Keir Starmer handled it well with great dignity - which is more than I can say for Ms Badenoch who was shrill and cheap in h...