The Liberal Democrat challenges for 2011: recap

Over the last week I’ve had a series of posts about the main Liberal Democrat challenges for 2011. In case you’ve missed any of them over the Christmas festivities, here is a quick recap:
Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.
Advert

4 Comments

  • I think the link below identifies an extremely top-down approach to the creation of LibDem party policy not just from presumably senior LibDem coalition members but also from Tories and I am unclear where ordinary party members or officials actually figure in this particular policy formulation process which could produce prospective ‘Coalition MPs’ standing at the next GE under a ‘coalition’ policy banner rather than separate Tory and LibDem party policies. Especially as Letwin says it has the full backing of both parties.

    I wonder if this will begin the fusion of LibDems and Tories into one party? It also seems to suggest that the original Coalition Agreement is capable of being changed and extended and isn’t actually cast in stone as currently argued.

    Link is: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12064969

    The link contains the statement: ‘Conservative and government policy chief, Oliver Letwin, claims in the Guardian newspaper that a “deep bond of trust” has been formed between both coalition parties – whose policies, he said, have a huge amount of overlap.

    ‘The coalition was working on a range of policies that had the full backing of both parties, which it planned to announce mid-term once the current tranche of major policies had become law.’

  • The Letwin article makes no mention of joint candidates & in fact makes it quite clear that the two Parties will fight the next Election seperately.

  • Ian Sanderson (RM3) 28th Dec '10 - 10:45am

    “Defining and explaining economic fairness – is “social mobility” the right message?”
    Not quite.
    “social mobility” is good. More than that, it is essential for a well run society to get the best people into key jobs (at all levels) and make the best use of resources, irrespective of previous privilege or disadvantage. For optimists and the self-confident it can seem to be fair. But “social mobility” can go down as well as up.
    However, fairness is more than that. It should provide a basic lifestyle and opportunities for the less fortunate, whether they are chronically or temporarily in bad straits. People who chronically down are not attractive, and are unlikely to have political clout. Some of them are even seen as “undeserving poor”. That is why those of us who have some power and influence must spend time and effort caring for them, if we are to be able to look at ourselves in the mirror.
    Of course, one group without current power and influence are the people of the future. As a society we haven’t been too good at being stewards in their interests.

Post a Comment

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

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

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

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

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

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarDavid-1 23rd Mar - 12:20am
    It is worth pointing out (however obvious it may be) that revoking Article 50 does not intrinsically mean No Brexit. It does, however, mean No...
  • User AvatarDavid-1 22nd Mar - 11:41pm
    In fact Parliaments elected under the Septennial Act almost never reached their maximum seven-year span. In the nineteenth century, the average was about four, two...
  • User Avatarfrankie 22nd Mar - 11:04pm
    Matt, You are not doing facts, you are doing a mixture of vague facts with a whole load of conjecture. The facts are these Small...
  • User AvatarAndrew McCaig 22nd Mar - 10:51pm
    I agree with James. The end does not justify the means, and if we have to revoke then we have to put it to the...
  • User AvatarRichard Underhill 22nd Mar - 10:40pm
    This was a seven year parliament with a large government majority and allies. It was nevertheless forced into a general election in 1910, and then...
  • User AvatarRichard Underhill 22nd Mar - 10:34pm
    The PM has written to all MPs saying that if there is insufficient support Meaningful Vote 3 ay not be moved. She creates a further...