Britain stands on the edge of a cliff with the General Election only 105 days away. Will we vote Tory or UKIP for Euroreferendum chaos, lasting two years at least and putting thousands of businesses, millions of jobs and our long term peace and security at risk? Or will Labour, Liberal Democrat, Green and all progressive voters come together in the marginal seats that matter to elect a Parliament for progress and reform and a Labour-led Government with Ed Miliband as Prime Minister? He has stood firm against the clamour for a referendum with considerable courage and nous. Scotland shows how referenda, even with a 55-45 vote, can settle nothing, just open a can of worms.
We must keep Britain in Europe and clean up our rotten political system, where big money can buy you the inside track to influence, access to Ministers and officials, or even a seat in the still indefensibly unelected House of Lords. Many Liberal Democrat and Labour candidates tell me the Tories have spent over £100,000 campaigning against them, even before the official election campaign – and spending limits – started in December. I’ve taken leave of absence from the Lords and am just a non-party social democrat now, but I want to help save our country from a Tory Government cringing to UKIP.
Most seats are safe, so your vote is wasted under archaic First Past the Post. In some seats, progressive voters can vote without fear of letting in the Conservatives or UKIP. But the results in 100 seats at most will decide who forms a Government after 7th May. I’ve invested as carefully as I can in 46 of them across England and Wales, (but not in Scotland or Northern Ireland as they are virtually Tory and UKIP-free zones.) I have given £20,000 each (£300,000 in total) to the campaigns of 15 Liberal Democrats – 8 MPs and 7 candidates in marginal seats. All of them are robust, progressive, rooted Lib Dems, with whom I was or would have been proud to sit and vote in Parliament. All of them are head to head against the Tories, except the outstanding Jenny Willott in Cardiff Central – Parliament and the Liberal Democrats really need her. Some other excellent Liberal Democrat MPs don’t need more money to win on 7th May.
I’ve also given the same amount (£300,000 in total), £10,000 each, to 30 Labour candidates in marginal seats. Twenty nine are attacking Tory marginals with small majorities and one, Melanie Onn, is fighting to hold Great Grimsby against UKIP. There are of course, many more Labour than Liberal Democrat candidates in winnable marginal seats, so I’ve had to concentrate my cash on first time Labour candidates, rather than ex M.P.s. Finally, I have given £10,000 to help return Caroline Lucas, with whom I have worked on tax justice and voting reform, as the Green MP for Brighton Pavilion,
Millions of Green voters must have a voice in Parliament and in TV election debates. But I appeal to you and to all Labour, Liberal Democrat and progressive voters – don’t think tribally, come together to make your votes count.
Here’s how it would work, for example, in two neighbouring seats. Martin Horwood is defending Cheltenham for the Liberal Democrats against the Tories and Sophy Gardner is attacking them for Labour next door in Gloucester. Two recent and really helpful polls (thank you so much, Lord Ashcroft!) show Horwood 8% in front of the Tory candidate with Labour and the Greens right out of the race on 7% and 4%. Meanwhile Gardner is just 1% behind the Tories, with the Liberal Democrats and Greens trailing on 12% and 3%. If progressive voters unite behind Horwood in Cheltenham and Gardner in Gloucester, they should both win. If they don’t, they’ll get two Tory MPs and a Tory Government.
Here’s the list of the 46 candidates I’m backing – I hope all progressive voters will too. (Scroll down to see a map showing the constituencies)
Liberal Democrat
Norman Baker MP (Lewes)
Lorley Burt (Solihull)
Helen Flynn (Harrogate & Knaresborough)
Martin Horwood MP (Cheltenham)
Ros Kayes (Dorset West)
Tessa Munt MP (Wells)
Julie Porksen (Berwick-upon-Tweed)
Jackie Porter (Winchester)
John Pugh MP (Southport)
David Rendel (Somerton & Frome)
Dan Rogerson MP (North Cornwall)
Adrian Sanders MP (Torbay)
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset & North Poole)
Dorothy Thornhill (Watford)
Jenny Willott MP (Cardiff Central)
Labour
Jessica Asato (Norwich North)
Catherine Atkinson (Erewash)
Nick Bent (Warrington South)
Louise Baldock (Stockton South)
Polly Billington (Thurrock)
Lisa Forbes (Peterborough)
Victoria Fowler (Nuneaton)
James Frith (Bury North)
Sophy Gardner (Gloucester)
Jamie Hanley (Pudsey)
Rupa Huq (Ealing Central & Acton)
Sarah Jones (Croydon Central)
Uma Kumaran (Harrow East)
Peter Kyle (Hove)
Amina Lone (Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Jo McCarron (Kingswood)
Natasha Millward (Dudley South)
Lara Norris (Great Yarmouth)
Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby)
Sarah Owen (Hastings & Rye)
Nancy Platts (Brighton Kemptown)
Lucy Rigby (Lincoln)
Will Scobie (Thanet South)
Lee Sherriff (Carlisle)
Paula Sherriff (Dewsbury)
Joy Squires (Worcester)
Will Straw (Rossendale and Darwen)
Sharon Taylor (Stevenage)
Janos Toth (Cannock Chase)
Julia Tickridge (Weaver Vale)
Green
Caroline Lucas (Brighton Pavilion)
* Matthew Oakeshott, Baron Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay, was a Liberal Democrat peer. He resigned from the party in 2014.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Temporary Traffic Order - Lower Pleasance
Calling them out
The railway wars come to Market Harborough
Constructive opposition: a phrase you will hear a lot
Hugh Young
Roland
Kevin Hawkins
Steve Trevethan
68 Comments
It looks like an audacious attempt to set up a non-tory based coalition. Well it’s a shot in the arm for us in LibDems in Cheltenham, especially following our tory opponents latest leaflet; which implored local voters not to vote Liberal Democrat on the grounds that we might go into coalition with someone other than the Conservative party….. an odd pitch in a Tory/LibDem battleground. I can only assume they think there are more soft tories and kippers to scare than there are tactical anti-tories to motivate.
I agree but Progressive voters must unite against the Tory enabling Lib Dems too.
Once again we see how money can give inappropriate and disproportionate influence to individuals.
I’d have like to have seen some of our candidates refuse these donations on those grounds. Bit optimistic I guess…..
The thing is, will enough potential Green voters -who may be stubborn ideological purists- vote tactically to enable this to happen, otherwise the Green votes may work to deny Labour the seats they need to become the largest party, something which I’m sure has not go unnoticed at Conservative HQ!!
There is no sign of Miliband being willing to work with any other party or consider voting reform. One of the major reasons for the failing of the coalition Government has been the fact that the conservatives have always had the option of going it alone minority government or seeking a majority at another election. Had there been just 30% -35% of MPs being Conservative and no chance of them getting a majority on their own, then the coalition would have been very different. The Scottish Independence vote shows Labour have learnt nothing when it comes to genuine pluralism.
Despite welcoming the money to the Lib Dem seats I question the wisdom of giving money to two parties. If Labour uses £20,000 that would have gone to Gloucester to fund campaigns against Lib Dems elsewhere what is gained ?
Not a bean for some fantastic MPs facing up to Labour – particularly Julian Huppert, who is a credit to this party and Parliament as a whole, or in places like Hull where the local party has fought long and hard against the supposedly “progressive” Labour Party. Just a man who couldn’t depose a leader with record unpopularity trying to buy his way back into favour so he can play “Build-A-Coalition” in LDV posts.
Thanks a bunch Matthew for stuffing a load of Lib Dem Councillors as in places like Leeds and Grimsby. It’s not as if fighting against Labour isn’t hard enough!
“We must keep Britain in Europe and clean up our rotten political system, where big money can buy you the inside track to influence”
Oh the irony. Maybe he swaps notes with Lord Ashcroft. Anyway, Labour is very much part of our rotten political system, otherwise it would have reformed political funding and junked FPTP instead of keeping it.
Anyway, if Matthew Oakeshott thinks that being in a coalition with Labour will be good for the Lib Dems straight after the terrible ordeal of having to work with the Tories (And Dan, who were we supposed to “enable”, when Labour had just been kicked out with 29% of the vote?), then he really needs to think again. It would be the final nail in our coffin.
Labour needs to go into office on its own and have to make the cuts it has always hypocritically opposed for people to see what a sham it is.
Would anyone be taking notice of Oakeshott if he didnt have pots of money to splash around ? Money talks but thats no reason to listen.
Or to put it another way: rich man uses his money to try to influence the results in 46 seats across the country.
And apparently, this is a progressive approach to politics!
I’s a good point made by Guy there
@ Martin Land,
The Daily Mirror gave a list of donations to politicians purportedly relating to health care: ‘Selling of theNHS for profit: Full list of MPs with Links to private healthcare firms’.
I don’t believe everything that appears in newspapers, but it is hard, if not impossible to fight off mounting cynicism about the way in which our so called democracy works.
I also meant to ask whether state funding of parties would eradicate this sort of thing or would political parties still be permitted to continue receiving donations for political purposes?
It just seems to sum up the state of UK politics at the moment, crazy. Giving money to Lib Dems and the Greens,, economic policies diametrically different.
I have no problem with what Lord Oakeshott has done. It is his money – his views – and as long as he is operating within the rules – fair enough.
I just wished he had given us a few thousand in Rochdale – for a brilliant genuine liberal candidate in Andy kelly against a very right wing / UKIP sympathiser Labour M..P – in SImon Dimchuk. There is still time Mr Oakeshott…….
Dear Lord Oakeshott, the ECB has decided to commence on a 1.1 trillion Euro money printing program and the rich are delighted because they are getting a big chunk of it. I’ve hardly ever seen anything so unethical and the only way to get the people in these institutions to listen to us is to tell them we want to leave. Being servile will get us nowhere.
Regards
What an amazing display of consistency –
1 ‘big money can buy you the inside track to influence, access to Ministers and officials, or even a seat in the still indefensibly unelected House of Lords.’
2 ‘I have given £20,000 each (£300,000 in total) to the campaigns of 15 Liberal Democrats – 8 MPs and 7 candidates in marginal seats. ..I’ve also given the same amount (£300,000 in total), £10,000 each, to 30 Labour candidates in marginal seats… I have given £10,000 to help return Caroline Lucas, with whom I have worked on tax justice and voting reform, as the Green MP for Brighton Pavilion,’
Maybe in Matthew Oakeshott’s world, £610,000 isn’t ‘big money’?
“We must keep Britain in Europe and clean up our rotten political system, where big money can buy you the inside track to influence”
Lol, says the man who just bought £610,000 of influence.
The deep hypocrisy of Matthew Oakeshott’s actions have been eloquently pointed out above, not least by Geoff Crocker.
Liberal Democrats who might have some sympathy for this argument should think about this. The 30 Labour candidates he has supported, he has done so in preference either to giving more money to the Liberal Democrat campaigns he has donated to or to funding some of the Lib Dems he has not. Norman Lamb? Lisa Smart? Stephen Williams? Oakeshott thinks it is preferable to have these Labour MPs in the Commons than them.
And frankly, anyone who describes the Labour party as progressive has spent far too little time campaigning against them, particularly in the north. As David points out, it is the last label one would apply to Simon Danczuk, for example.
Has he such a short memory that he has already forgotten the ambivalence (at best) of Ed Miliband during the AV referendum, and the hordes of Labour MPs and activists uniting with the Conservatives to defeat voting reform? It seems he has.
During the course of the last 45 years I have given money, time, physical effort and possibly a chunk of my health to getting candidates elected. If at any point I had had £600,000 I would have given that as well.
I have actually given some money to candidates around the country. If I had more money in 2015 I would be doing exactly Lord O has done, although my list would be restricted to Liberal Democrat MPs who have a realistic chance of remaining MPs who are not (comment moderated for inappropriate insults)
Well done Lord O !
You are being entirely open and honest about what you have done. It would be interesting to know how the Closet Conservative Hedge Fund Managers have spent their cash to manipulate the party since the publication of their Orange Book — but I doubt that we ever will.
As several other people have pointed out it is Lord Oakeshott’s money, he is working according to the rules and he is being entirely open and honest. Why are people whining and negative
It is a shame there are not more like Lord Oakeshott.
If everything truly is corrupted and money buys results we’re not going to change things without people who care buying victory for us.
If it’s not as corrupt as all that then there’s no problem.
The reason Huppert may not have needed the money is here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30034887
Keep your money Lord Oakeshott. You are dragging the political system into further disrepute.
If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.
No.
Christopher Ecclestone is right to point out that not all our candidates need additional cash.
The only one I can remember coming here to LDV and asking for donations and volunteers is Adrian Sanders.
I hope people will take note and provide Adrian and the Torbay Team with cash and with time to fight off the forces of darkness. I am told that Torbay is delightful in April and I am sure any helpers will be made very welcome.
I consider Joseph Rowntree one of the most inspiring people in history. He was a radical non-conformist, passionate about the well being of society, and tackling disadvantage and the root causes of social problems. His compassion was matched by his desire for an open and plural politics, where the reforming voice was not drowned out by the influence of rich Tory backers, especially in the press. To this end he set up the (now called) Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust (for ‘influencing public thought in right channels’ and ensuring ‘legislation is influenced by the spirit of human brotherhood and alive to the claims of social justice’). The Trust helped in keeping the Liberal Party alive during the twentieth century. Although Joseph Rowntree would be viewed as a social-liberal today, his Trust remains one of the Party’s biggest backers. It is good see Lord Oakeshott cite the influence of and his desire to counter big money, to advance progressive politics. In this he is joining a noble reforming tradition, which I would like the Liberal Democrats to vie as the inheritors of.
Fair play to Lord Oakeshott, after all the knocks he’s taken, and all the villification he’s suffered from people in our party, he’s still given money to Lib Dems in the frontline key marginal constituencies.
Yet we just don’t seem to get it in our response to this. To give you an example, yesterday’s Mail had a quote from a spokesperson for Clegg, responding to this story: “‘It’s not surprising, Lord Oakeshott has been on a path to destruction since he resigned. He has apparently left politics but clearly couldn’t help himself. ” I don’t know about you, but when someone donates £300,000 to my party, no strings attached, my response is to say “Thank you”, not to verbally abuse them. In a surreal touch, the spokesperson then added “Money can get you so far in politics, but only if you have a leader who connects with people and the right policies in place”, which is certainly skating on rather thin ice if you happen to work for Nick Clegg…
So good for him. For all his differences with the leadership, Oakeshott’s put his money where his mouth is. Which is more than many of the Cleggites have done (barring five who are currently sitting in ermine).
@Christopher Ecclestone: To answer your question, I doubt Huppert has seen a penny of the money George Watson bequeathed to the Liberal Democrats – it was left to the national party, not the local party, and the Electoral Commission database confirm this through the accounting unit it went to. Nor was Watson giving out lots of money beforehand. As someone who was once active in the local Cambridge party, and who knew George Watson slightly, I have to say it came as a complete surprise.
I’m not sure how Lord Oakeshott can expect to be taken seriously by Lib Dems when he decides to fund political opponents of the party? I also don’t think it is in any way credible to describe Ed Milband in such glowing terms as a future potential PM.
Instead of accusing people of hypocrisy Perhaps Nick Thornsby ought to think about why it is long standing Liberal Democrats don’t want to see their money wasted on Nick Clegg and his acolytes. Liberal Reform ? More like Liberal Extinction. Given the money poured into the Party by Paul Marshall all to entirely negative effect, money clearly isn’t everything.
Caracatus – what is your view on the specific point of money being given to candidates of parties who are seeking to defeat Lib Dem candidates in May? Are you comfortable with that?
@Edward Reach: I thought that we as a party were comfortable with the concept of tactical voting? Certainly, that’s what we seem to have been saying in our held and target seats for the last few decades. Or should we advise all voters to not vote tactically? Such advice could cost us many seats.
If we welcome tactical voting, then we have to face up to the fact that we won’t be its beneficiaries in every case. I don’t share Oakeshott’s embrace of the Labour Party, but if (as he does) you argue that you’re trying to build a tactical all-party coalition against the Tories, then it makes it inevitable that Labour will be the beneficiaries in some seats.
For this much we should be grateful: He gave twice as much to our candidates as to candidates for Labour and the Greens. I think that’s pretty significant.
Seth 23rd Jan ’15 – 2:03pm
“Money can get you so far in politics, but only if you have a leader who connects with people and the right policies in place ….”
Seth — thank you for drawing my attention to this statement for someone speaking on behalf of our dear leader.
I read this only days after learning in LDV that someone has been given a job with the objective of “Building Brand Clegg”.
Looks like this is going to be some building project.
Can we expect the Grand Designs team from Channel 4 to film the progress in this major construction project?
I can just see Kevin McCloud turning up every week with the film crew in an emoty field in the pouring rain talking to camera.
Kevin each week is his usual supportive self – admitting that he cannot help noticing that the foundations have not been put in the ground yet, there is no evidence of any real planning and although there is a budget there is no evidence so far that anything is actually being done.
‘ The Grand Design to Build Brand Clegg ‘ coming to a TV screen near you any day now.
I cannot believe the amount of money being spent by Lord Oakshott to try to manipulate the election results in specific seats What would happen if 100 rich people tried this approach to try to achieve their own particular political aims, say a few Russian oligarchs? Even more reason to have state funding of political parties and a cap of say £10,000 on individual donations. Big money shouldn’t be able to buy power. Democracy should be about the battle of ideas not wallets.
Judy
I think you will find that a lot of rich people do this anyway – mainly to the Tories – but without the honesty of Matthew Oakeshott
Of course we would prefer ’twas otherwise but at the moment the Tories are avoiding any discussion at all on capping individual donations
The Tories are funded from some very, very dodgy places and you can see how this influences their policies but then again the Liberal Democrats seem to focus more on the Trade Unions than the millionaire hedge fund manager or Russian expat!
@Judy: “What would happen if 100 rich people tried this approach to try to achieve their own particular political aims, say a few Russian oligarchs” Actually, there’s ample reason to believe that a lot of Russian oligarch money is winging its way to UKIP via various proxies.
And yes, @Stuart Moran is quite right, a lot of big money does wing its way to all three parties – but particularly the Tories – often through proxies, shell companies, wholly-owned subsidiaries, spouses, children, and even just plain old pseudonyms. It’s pretty reprehensible, really, but I would see Oakeshott’s actions as an attempt to counterbalance this, and at least (as you say) he’s doing it openly.
@ Seth,
I agree with Judy,( and also with you that the buying of power and influence is pretty reprehensible).
I am sure that Lord Oakeshott means well, but how can your party take the moral high- ground when voters can turn round and state that your party wasn’t above taking money from a rich benefactor when it suited you?
Arguments about redressing of balance etc., will just seem like excuses for what seems like another example of unprincipled behaviour.
Thousands of wealthy individuals along with private and corporate businesses have funded the Tories for decades.
The Unions and a much smaller number of donors similarly with Labour. Then, a well known former Liberal and continuing Radical, Matthew Oakeshott does it to a group of cross party MP’s and candidates he considers to be progressives and all hell lets loose!
There is a danger of the publicity being counter productive but at least he is being transparent.
It would be very interesting to know the true identities of all those major contributors funding UKIP, the Tories and the Lib Dem economic neo-Cons.
Before opportunistic opponents start throwing mud at the recipients of this money, they need to be very willing to reveal the identities of their own donors! Hiding behind donor anonymity will not be an option!
I guess time will tell how his attempt works i personaly think he has done a disservice for the LibDem party people will find his actions strange considering the coalition that stands now.
I think that those who can not face a referendum likely to be in cahoots with the wealthy 1% if the facts stack up you should not fear a referendum maybe we need a party more like Greece just default on our debts oh wait the top 1% would not like that
Having welcomed Matthew Oakeshott’s initiative, I should say that although I am in favour of cross party cooperation and genuine realignment of the green, egalitarian and Libertarian left, I don’t think this will be served by a coalition (or even a confidence and supply agreement) with anyone this time round.
We need a change of leadership and time to restate what we stand for before we go anywhere near formally working with others in the next parliament.
Only once we truly know the damage the economic neo-Cons have done to the party and its membership will the future of the Liberal Democrats and its economic wings become clear.
“I’m not sure how Lord Oakeshott can expect to be taken seriously by Lib Dems when he decides to fund political opponents of the party?”
Well, I’m not sure how Lib Dems can expect to be taken seriously by the nation at large, when they persist in boasting of their blinkered tribalism.
Oakeshott is arguing, in an open and transparent way, for a progressive alliance.
The Lib Dems are preparing to fight the election in a covert, duplicitous way, for a right-wing alliance. The leadership also hope to bring along the traditional centre-left Lib Dems – in shackles, hidden under blankets, trudging along in a colmn of prisoners dreaming dreams of escape.
Oakeshott has pointed up the hypocrisy of that stance. The voters understand, and the activists and MPs should understand. The best time to escape is now.
really party funding is another Clegg failure – he could have united with the Tories to reform trade union funding = having done that Labour would have combined with the Lib Dems to similarly stuff the Tories on donation from companies and cap individual donations. As usual, Clegg who used to say things like lock the doors of Parliament until reform agreed now is reduced to trying to get a few more minutes airtime in the leaders debate than the green party.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5402573/MPs-expenses-Nick-Clegg-wants-summer-break-cancelled-until-reforms-agreed.html
David Allen
I find myself in agreement with you
I understand the comments from those wanting to clean up party funding but we are not there yet and the Tories have a massive advantage based on their links to the rich and corporations
The other parties have their own skeletons but noting compared to the Tories
Oakeshott has money, he has been very open who he is supporting and what his aims are – is the leadership of the party being so honest?
I, as a voter, want to know what I am voting for. I can clearly see that Oakeshott supports what he sees as a progressive alliance of the left against the extreme right of the Tories/UKIP.
I keep asking this question to LD members and have only had one answer (for the Tories)
If you have to choose the party with which to have a Coalition (based on ideological similarities) then who would you choose: Labour or the Tories?
No rubbish about biggest party, or most votes – we are talking about policies and values
@Seth:
: “‘It’s not surprising, Lord Oakeshott has been on a path to destruction since he resigned.”
Is it surprising that a spokesperson for Nick Clegg comes out with such rubbish? It would appear entirely consistent with previous output and will likely achieve the same sort of results.
As for Matt Oakshott, he appears to me to be behaving in a manner typical of the majority of the electorate. Supporting candidates most likely, in the constituency concerned, to ensure the defeat of the people one is certain one does NOT want. The only exception is in the 30-50 seats where there is an individual candidate who has the personal attributes which attract positive support.
Nick Thornsby,
the label I would attach to Simon Danzuck is tireless campaigner to uncover historic child abuse.
Oakenshot was right when he tried to remove Clegg last year and he’s right here too. You can either listen to people saying sensible things or continue down the route currently being taken and find the once proud Liberal party getting less votes than the Greens and the SNP. This is the disaster unfolding because of poor leadership and a strategy aimed at forming another coalition with Conservatives. Seriously, does any one sensible really think that reducing the Lib Dems to 7% is a good basis to form another coalition government.
Caracatus
Your post explains to me why all is wrong with the Lib Dems and why I doubt I will vote for your party again
Time and time again we see the Trade Union link equated to the massive contributions from individual millionaires to the Conservative Party. Although, union funding needs reforming to some extent probably the best party to do this with would actually be Labour as a number of them are open to this…not easy but possible
As we have seen the Tories view on Trade Unions is vindictive and based on completely removing any possibility of them having influence – something that has done our country no favours at all
The main issue is not Trade Union funding of Labour, which is relatively transparent, it is the secretive funding of the Tories by individuals through all sorts of means.
Stop pretending that they are all the same – the Tories are a vicious party that believes in nothing but maintaining the position of the privileged . Labour has many, many faults but there is no real comparison in my view
@ Stuart Moran
I do understand that Lord Oakeshott has at least been been honest about what he is trying to achieve, but that is not really the point . This is a wake-up call. It is not acceptable for a few fabulously wealthy people to wield so much power in our democracy, whatever party they support. If he was supporting UKIP candidates in specific marginals how would we really feel about that? It is one thing to give money to a party, but targeting specific seats in an attempt to micromanage the overall outcome of an election is taking things too far.
Is this really the kind of democracy we want? In fact, if Lord Oakeshott’s strategy were actually to work, would any of us be that comfortable with the outcome?
stuart moran 23rd Jan ’15 – 10:02pm
“the Tories are a vicious party that believes in nothing but maintaining the position of the privileged . Labour has many, many faults but there is no real comparison in my view”
OK Stuart, I agree and have regularly posted here accordingly but, as life-long trade unionist, it cannot be said that the unions have ever been friends or even neutral towards the Lib Dems. My own union, Unite, often appears to be stuck in the 1980’s when it comes to politics.
Stephen Hesketh
I am sure they haven’t been friends to the Lib Dems but there is a missed opportunity there – most unions are unaffiliated to Labour so there is some opportunity there
Unite are clearly aligned with Labour but Labour does not seem to have done much for workers in the recent past so who knows what opportunities are there. I think saying they are back in the 80s is a bit of an exaggeration – perhaps they haven’t fully adapted to the new realities but they don’t have much opportunity to do much damage either.
I do not anticipate any union will give a glance at the LD due to the pronouncements of the leadership
I do not want, though, to give an opportunity again for union basing – there are many on here only too happy to divert attention from the real enemies of the UK people – and they overwhelmingly support the Tories.
I keep hearing about equidistance and the media stating that ‘all the parties are the same’ – this is not the case.
The Tories leadership and many of its acolytes are focused on the continuation of the status quo and the sucking of money from the poor to feed the rich
Oakeshott is not a hero but at least he is giving money to people who would probably lead to him becoming poorer….and he is being open about it
Judy,
No it is not the country I want, but it is the country we have. Oakeshott is supporting parties that may change it. Those supporting UKIP or the Tories do not want to anything to change which is why they support them
Well said, Judy.
I agree.
Bravo for Lord Oakeshott! He has grasped the nettle, as we all must. While it is clearly of the utmost importance that we elect as many Liberal Democrat MPs as possible, it is absolutely vital for the future of our country that we throw the Tories out of power. And the best way to do that is by tactical voting. I live in a constituency that was held by Labour up until 2010 and is now held by the Tories. What am I to do? If I vote Liberal Democrat, I might well be contributing to the saving of a deposit (though I doubt it), but I might also be letting the sitting Tory retain the seat. So I will go into the polling-booth, swallow hard and vote Labour. I won’t enjoy doing that, but there isn’t really any choice.
Yesterday, I was talking about the forthcoming election with work colleagues who know nothing of my affiliation. All agreed that most London Liberal Democrat MPs would hold on because of incumbency. All were disparaging of Nick Clegg, but very respectful of Vince Cable. They could not understand why Vince is not the leader. If I got a tenner for everyone I heard express those sentiments, I would be almost as rich as Lord Oakeshott!
Can someone please tell me how Lord Oakshott is trying to gain influence with a political party in deciding to spread his wealth as he has done? I cannot see how his tactic of funding Lib Dem PPCs will endear him to the National Labour Party, just as I am unable to grasp how he is fighting to be allowed back into the Lib Dems by handing out money to Labour PPCs.
If he truly was using his money to gain influence with Lib Dems nationally, surely he would have pumped large amounts of dosh into the likes of Sheffield Hallam? Maybe even just handed £600,000 straight to Lib Dem HQ? As for attempting to claim power in Labours ranks, surely all he has to do is leave the cross benches of the Lords and start sitting with the Labour peers?
Excellent idea, if I wasn’t in a Tory safe seat I’d definitely join in. Surprised not to see Taunton on the list as I thought this was one of our more marginal seats; won by 4000 votes last time but Jeremy Browne whose standing down has a large personal vote and the Tory candidate last time was useless (even Tory party members agreed on that). Did you not include it because you think we can win it without the extra money or because you think it’s a lost cause; I don’t think either (I think it’s a key marginal battle ground) but would be interested to hear your opinion.
What’s been pretty feeble has been the response of various Labour and Lib Dem PPCs over social media who’ve had nothing more to say than “Can I have some money now?/Why didn’t I get any money?” Envy is not an attractive quality in a parliamentary candidate.
What John Tilley said (twice).
I’d add that the Tories in my seat have been spending at least £10K a month for the past year and thanks to this donation we can hold our own for a couple of months – actually for a bit longer as we spend what little we have far more effectively. Nevertheless we need even more help because of some special factors in the constituency: Geography, demography, topography and economy.
Geography: We are only bordered by two constituencies and less than 400,000 people live within an hours traveling time of us – compare that to your own constituency and its ability to appeal for helpers.
Demography: We have one of the oldest populations in the country and this is reflected in the membership of all the political parties locally. Many live in sheltered accommodation where addressed mail is the only way of reaching them.
Topography: The constituency is built on several hills that with along with the demography means unpaid volunteer deliverers and canvassers are in short supply.
Economy: Torbay has the lowest household incomes and highest household debts in England. This obviously affects what we can raise locally and gives an inbuilt advantage to the Party that can spend the most on reaching the voters.
I’m sure every seat can make as strong a case for support so I will simply say go visit any of our held seats, do some telephone canvassing for them from home if you can’t visit, send them a cheque for as much as you can afford if you can’t physically help, and if you are short of cash send any books of stamps you might have in your drawer – the latter are very useful In Torbay for the above reasons.
That is simply the only way we can compete with a Party that would view Matthew’s donations as loose change.
Anyone who can contemplate a Tory Government is either senseless or heartless.
Good on you Matthew!!
This is immensely generous of Lord Oakeshott, but can I remind him that the vast majority of BME Candidates within the Liberal Democrat Party are themselves Social Democrats , but generally they do not received the necessary support and funding to achieve the success that is essential for the Liberal Democrat Party if it genuinely desires to reflect society.
The Ethnic Minority Liberal Democrats would be ever so pleased and grateful if Lord Oakeshott, or any other funder that supports the desire to rid society of race inequality, could find their way to assisting our brothers and sisters who seem to face a concrete ceiling.
Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Ethnic Minority Liberal Democrat (EMLD) – Vice Chair
Liberal Democrat South Central Region Executive – Diversity Officer
I also welcome’s Matthew’s initiative and generosity, but the two criticisms levelled at him need to be dealt with (i) that he has been mischievous and at worst duplicitous, and (ii) that his funding activity embodies the worst form of corrupted ‘big money’ in politics.
On the former Matthew has always been pretty clear and transparent on both his objectives and his political position; that he is social democrat (who came into SDP then in libdems till last year) in the progressive tradition who supports progressive alliances across centre left parties, rather than the political engineering that is now producing centre right Government – his criticism of the Party’s strategy and leadership are well known as are his his views on economic policy and Europe, and he has been a key voice and influence in our party on banking reform, tax, city regulation etc. His actions and selections on who to support seem to me to follow his long held and openly declared views about the sort of Government, including the role for LibDems, that he would like to see – he’s simply putting his money where his mouth is.
On the latter his critics have more of a point – it looks downright hypocritical to be giving so much ‘big ‘money’ to influence electoral outcomes in key marginals, especially if at the same time you’re having a pop at donor led politics. However our system is as it is – we know that the Ashcroft money made a decisive difference in carrying many a Tory MP over the line in the 2010 marginals, we also know that many libdem campaigns, and some labour campaigns are woefully under-funded by comparison – sometimes the only answer is to fight fire with fire, at least till we can secure a fairer electoral system and some campaign finance reforms that might level the field a bit.
Stuart Moran
I have read the above posts, and been thinking hard about whether the Lord Oakeshott’s means might justify the ends in this case, and am leaning towards the view that, given the existing system as you say Stuart, perhaps it is potentially reasonable for him to have donated his money to the seats as he has done – even though giving money to two different parties still seems a bit dubious. I do take the point though, that as other rich donors are throwing money at this campaign, why shouldn’t he,
Nonetheless, I think the Scandinavian model, where parties are largely state-funded is the right way to go for the future (in Sweden, for example, the state funds political parties to the tune of around 80%) as when all is said and done money still should not be able to buy power in a democracy.
“We must keep Britain in Europe and clean up our rotten political system, where big money can buy you the inside track to influence, access to Ministers or officials, or even a seat in the still indefensibly unelected House of Lords.”
In this sentence alone Lord Oakeshott has shown himself to be a master self-parodist, in addition to his other talents for self-promotion, hyperbole, economic jeremiads, unsubtle press briefings, plotting and spectacularly botched coups.
I suppose he thinks our political system should be like the sea-green incorruptible EU, where big money never buys you the inside track to influence or access to officials, and whose accounts are a model of professionalism and probity.
On no account must the British people be allowed their first vote in 42 years on our membership of this wonderfully democratic and accountable organisation*; indeed so important is it that they shouldn’t do so that Lord Oakeshott cites this as the main reason he has felt moved to put so much of his own money where his mouth is.
As others have said, at least he is being open about it. It will be interesting to see how effective his strategy is. If it is seen to work, perhaps Lord Oakeshott will set a trend. Is it intended to be a template for other contexts and other elections, I wonder, or in other less trusty hands would it be frowned upon?
* On balance I would probably vote to stay in, but that isn’t my point. It is the sheer hostility to the idea of the public having a say that strikes a discordant note coming from those who want the public to have all sorts of other votes on subjects they are indifferent to (AV, regional assemblies etc) but not on the one thing they seem to be quite keen to express an opinion on.
Whilst I appreciate that Lib Dem opponents to the Labour funded candidates will feel aggrieved, this donation is of net benefit to the Lib Dems.
Those who complain about the influence of big money should take into account the failure of the Lib Dems in office to reform party funding. In addition every local party in every winnable seat has to seek large donations from various sources including rich individuals. Receiving a donation from Matthew Oakeshott is from a moral point of view no different from receiving a large and unpublicised donation from a local wealthy individual and no one complains about that, not in this context anyway.
I just hope that the Labour candidates are in board for electoral reform and coalition government.
@Geoffrey Payne ” .. of net benefit to the Lib Dems”
Yes perhaps but, much more important, it will be of potential benefit to the poor in our society who won’t be punished buy a future Tory government
We seem to be accepting that elections can be bought. Liberal Democrats should campaign to end this possibility with new political funding measures. Matthew Oakeshott could fund this campaign instead.
In the meantime, the electorate can seize the initiative and vote according to principle and not be swayed by well funded constituency campaigns.
Elections cannot always be bought, but Conservatives certainly buy lots of seats. The differential in funds is a major disadvantage. Thank you Matthew, in Winchester we gratefully accept and will put your money to very good use!
“I suppose he thinks our political system should be like the sea-green incorruptible EU…”
Ha ha ha!
I have just been reading Carlyle’s brilliant history of the French Revolution so this reference to Robespierre made me smile. 🙂
Alex, you are the best poster on this website by a country mile. And what you say here is is absolutely spot on.
If you will forgive praise from a Kipper. 🙂
Simon: I’ll accept praise from most quarters, if I’m honest 😉
– “It is never ridicule, but a compliment that knocks a philosopher off his feet. He is already positioned for every possible counter-attack, counter-argument and retort…only to find a big bear hug coming his way.”
Criss Jami, Killosophy
– “I have been complimented many times and they always embarrass me; I always feel they have not said enough.”
Mark Twain
There’s nothing “progressive” about the EU.