The Telegraph should apologise to Andrew George and Alan Reid

Not the kind of stern injunction I was expecting to come out with after a day of Liberal Democrat expenses revelations, I must say. I was all prepared to be angry, disappointed, humbled and even-handedly condemnatory. It has become a sort of communally agreed ceasefire in the political blogosphere and the media in the past few days – no-one’s allowed to query, say “eh?” or doubt the word of the Telegraph. That would be being cocky and partisan. One must only observe the same humilities as everybody else. Shock horror expressions must be worn at all times.

Well I don’t buy it. Under cover of this pious mood music, the Telegraph are  apparently in the process of  getting away with some fairly outrageous smears against two Lib Dem MPs. Had either story been mounted on any normal day it would have been the subject of fierce debate, much better research and – ultimately – a withdrawal  and apology. But the Telegraph has thrown so much mud around this week that the small amount that slides immediately to the floor goes almost unnoticed.

The two MPs in question are of course Andrew George and Alan Reid. They’re not the only Lib Dems I felt the Telegraph treated a bit unfairly, mind – Norman Baker and Steve Webb were both, puzzlingly, accused of scrupulously obeying both the letter and spirit of the rules, a charge to which one is at a loss to know how to respond. But George and Reid are the two for whom the Telegraph’s misrepresentation begins to amount to outright lying.

Andrew has a two-bedroom flat. His daughter, a student with her own halls of residence room uses it to store things, stays there sometimes and spends time with him there sometimes. “Student flat!” screamed the Telegraph’s headline – it was the first and most heinous item in their round-up of great Lib Dem crimes.

They tried  initially to make hay with the fact that her name was on the insurance documents, only to find that there was a perfectly logical explanation. I haven’t actually rung the Post Office to check the likely veracity of Andrew’s claim that he wasn’t able to insure a second property with them and already had his own name on the policy for his Cornwall home. But it would be a daft thing to lie about.

So we’re left with the fact that Andrew’s daughter sometimes uses the flat, although her more permanent home was her own halls of residence (again, easy to check). Which might have been a problem. Some of the furniture for the flat does seem to have been bought with a frequent guest in mind.

The Telegraph said (and still say):

Mr George’s claims reveal how MPs are able to use the system to buy properties from which their families can benefit.

Except that the Telegraph somehow forgot to mention that Andrew actually owns a third of the flat himself. The taxpayer pays the interest on two thirds of the mortgage. Andrew pays the other third, and charged only half his furnishing expenditure on the flat to the taxpayer. If we were being absolutely strict, we might decide that Andrew’s daughter really should not be using the flat more than a third of the time. And if the Telegraph has any evidence to offer for this, it utterly fails to produce it, despite apparently having camped a photographer outside said flat all day.

In fact, at the time of writing, the Telegraph has failed  even to acknowledge that Andrew pays for one third of the flat. Since it is not telling the truth on that matter, it is very hard to judge the veracity of the rest of its claims.

Andrew has been charging around the news outlets for the past twelve hours demanding an apology. I hope that Joe Taylor was wrong in suggesting in a comment that the Telegraph went for Andrew because his daughter would make a great front-page picture. I really do. Not the sort of thing I’d want on my conscience as a journalist unless I’d actively chosen to go to the News of the World. But, well, what with the photographer-waiting-outside-flat thing (I’ve not heard that they’ve bothered to lay on this special treatment for anyone else implicated) and the fact that they’ve used two shots of her above their stories in the past twelve hours, it really doesn’t look good, does it.

So, in sum, we’ve got a guy who at worst may have overcharged the taxpayer for a futon having his name dragged through the mud for a far, far greater offence by means of the omission of a germane truth, and a totally blameless 21-year-old girl who didn’t ask to be on the front page of a national news website for most of the day.  And I note that this morning these same jackal-hacks, realising that their flat story wasn’t stacking up because they hadn’t bothered to do any research, have added some more coverage on his hotel bills before he bought the flat. They weren’t of any moment before, but now they are.

Classy, Telegraph, classy.

Then there’s Alan Reid. He whose £1,580 in B&B claims so outraged the Telegraph because they were within his own constituency, Argyll and Bute. Go on, let’s just look at that map again, shall we?


These bozos at the Telegraph never looked at a map, did they? They should have the grace to admit that – there is simply no other explanation for such rank stupidity. These smirking goons actually think a “constituency”  is twenty by fourteen Georgian terraced streets, don’t they. They have no other reference point than London, they’ve sought no other reference point than London.

That’s a twelfth of bloody Scotland, that is. A quarter of it is islands, some of them so small and remote that I keep rubbing at specks on my laptop screen and being puzzled when they don’t move. And according to Alan (again, easy to check) the ferries won’t always, shock horror, deposit themselves in your eyeline the minute you want to leave one island and go on to the next, or undertake the six hour journey across your constituency to home.

And the Telegraph suggest he’s out of order in claiming B&B expenses? In fact, they go even further than that. As if in panic at the realisation that this particular bit of mud ain’t gonna stick (did someone look at a map at the last minute?) they even insinuate, like the worst guttersnipe from a tabloid sewer, that he had an affair on one such trip.  Without actually saying so, of course. That would be far too much like a risk.

And what kind of MP have they done this to? This is a Scottish MP, for goodness’ sake, who doesn’t even have a second home. He manages on hotels in London and late night flights to Glasgow. From his spending and working patterns he ought to be the kind of person being held up by the Telegraph and others as the model of probity – the hard-working MP who actually visits his constituents and doesn’t spend his time living it up in a paid-for London pad.

I’m all for exposing the appalling, the bad and the merely dodgy – whatever the party.  But in attacking these two MPs, in failing to carry out even the most basic checks like call an aide to ask about a property or even – for goodness’ sake – look at a map, the Telegraph have covered themselves in far more shit than either of their targets. They’ve undermined all their good work in exposing the various cheats and big spenders – Lib Dems, Tories, Labour and all – and instead exposed themselves as lazy, sub-standard journalists. For anyone who truly wants to see offenders expelled and the system cleaned up by means of unimpeachable  and compelling argument, this is an enormous disappointment.

On the facts as they appear at the moment, I can’t see any reason why a bit of suing mightn’t be in order. Lies and omissions appear to be involved, and the aim has undoubtedly been defamatory. The writers of those articles should simply apologise, publicly, prominently and immediately, to Andrew George and Alan Reid, or expect worse.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds.


  • Agreed that the Torygraph coverage has gone too far and Stephen Fry-esque fatigue will soon set in.

    Here in Jockland though a new expenses issue starring, of all people, the holier than thou MSPs, is rearing its ugly head.

    This was covered on Newsnight Scotland last night.

    The background is in the following Sunday Herald article. Seems that not all elected Lib Dem politicians are subject to Nick Clegg’s moratorium on making profits from selling second homes.

    Will Tavish Scott reach for the cheque book or pocket this windfall?


  • Alix Mortimer 14th May '09 - 10:46am

    You raise an interesting point, Fred. I’m not sure Clegg has the jurisdiction to instruct Scott to do anything on this. His words at PMQs were “we on these benches” when he made the pledge about second home profits. Scott could, however, claim the initiative by following the same line voluntarily…

    Stephen, I used it yesterday afternoon too. Great minds think alike 😉

  • I think you might be getting a bit tribal on some of this.

    Andrew George is my MP and I have been very happy with him and I was very disappointed when he announced he would retire at the end of this Parliament. However I am uncomfortable with some aspects of his case – Like you, I also don’t know the ins-and-outs of home insurance but we who live in Cornwall are surrounded by second-homes and somehow I doubt they have all had to be insured in the name of family members rather than the owner because they have already insured their main residence.
    Equally, our next-door MP Julia Goldsworthy has always struck me as impressive but I really think she is taking the p*** by claiming for items bought from Heals.

  • Simon Titley 14th May '09 - 11:04am

    The Telegraph should apologise? What about you, Alix, for rushing into print here on Lib Dem Voice yesterday with your “piggy-wiggy” ratings, before any of the MPs concerned had had a chance to respond?

    A case of pots and kettles?

  • Apologies should be given in open court (as well as published on the front page of the newspaper), and must be suitably grovelling. (The targeting of Andrew’s daughter is particularly vile, as is the false innuendo that Alan was having an illicit affair.)

    Is it any accident that the “Torygraph’s” former owner is currently sitting on a slop-bucket in a Florida nick? (Couldn’t resist that one!)

    We are very badly served by the press in this country. Most of our newspapers are either comics or partisan propaganda mouthpieces. Even the BBC has now been emasculated by the execrable Hutton.

    Do not believe for one moment that the “Torygraph” gives a stuff about clean government. Its motive in publishing this material is to destroy what is left of public faith in elected politicians and thereby strengthen the positions of elites who find the existence of such people inconvenient to their interests.

  • Yeees… I keep thinking they’ve probably been hard done by, certainly Alan Reid seems entirely blameless. But then you find out that Julia Goldsworthy’s rocking chair cost 1005 pounds, and you listen to Lembik discussing his televisions, and patience starts to wear thin again…

  • Mark Williams 14th May '09 - 11:10am

    In what way is Andrew George’s gaughter not “benefitting from the use of” a flat paid for by the tax payer, even if she only uses it occasionally. Of course she won’t turn up there for the next few weeks if there is a photographer outside and halls of residence, but the Telegraph and others have been tipped off to the facts and are confident in their assertions.

    Meanwhile it seems Norman Baker is paying himself rent for his constituency office.

  • Alix Mortimer 14th May '09 - 11:11am

    That’s a very odd and unpleasant comment, Simon. I don’t think anyone would have thanked me for trying to excuse unacceptable behaviour. It would have been unfair of me to judge our MPs any less severely than those of other parties.

    All but one of my ratings (Andrew George’s) I stand by. On him I published a whole new post as soon as I learnt that he owned a third of the flat, a fact which the Telegraph omitted. Did you read that? I said this “blew my objections out of the water” and downgraded the rating.

  • Painfully Liberal 14th May '09 - 11:13am

    “If we were being absolutely strict, we might decide that Andrew’s daughter really should not be using the flat more than a third of the time.”

    Even that’s pretty incredibly strict, it suggests that if he hadn’t paid for a third of the flat couldn’t ever have people over. Some people might consider that a fair rule but I don’t.

  • Alix Mortimer 14th May '09 - 11:14am

    “In what way is Andrew George’s gaughter not “benefitting from the use of” a flat paid for by the tax payer, even if she only uses it occasionally.”

    She is. And he’s paying for it. For the Telegraph’s “confident assertions” to stand up, they’d have to prove she’s there, alone, for more than a third of the total time of its use. And since they won’t even admit that he does own a third of the flat, they’re not really in a position to do that. Their evidence so far is totally unquantifiable.

  • If saying “we on these benches” was code for “this announcement only applies to MPs because constitutionally I have no jurisdiction over the Scottish party” then its even worse because Clegg knew that Scottish Lib Dem MSPs could be pocketing windfalls from selling second homes and excluded them.

    I agree that Scott could have taken the initiative here and made a statement more or less at the same time as Clegg’s but Scottish HQ gave Newsnight a clearly worded statement to the effect last night that he wouldn’t.


  • Alix Mortimer 14th May '09 - 11:17am

    @David, I agree. Couldn’t believe Lembit yesterday. Painful.

    But logically, there is a clear line to be drawn here, and the Telegraph won’t draw it, so I will. Ming’s flat renovation = unacceptable. Julia’s chair = unacceptable. Phone calls, trouser presses, Lembit’s telly etc = all unacceptable. All of which I hope I made clear yesterday, though clearly some ultra-loyalists feel I shouldn’t have done that.

    But the allegations against these particular two MPs look like bollocks to me, and we shouldn’t be afraid to say that either.

  • Alix Mortimer 14th May '09 - 11:27am

    Yeah, I saw those and put them in the article above. I note he has agreed to pay £19.90 back for his wife’s breakfasts, quite rightly.

    Passing strange how this only became an issue when they realised their flat story looked rubbish. It makes you wonder what similar claims other MPs have got away with whose main coverage did stand up to scrutiny.

  • The insinuations about Alan Reid were disgraceful. The Telegraph has undermined some of its genuinely shocking uncoveries about all parties with various bits of innuendo. Listing items of Chris Huhne’s shopping that he had crossed off as not be claimed for – no-one’s business but his own – was also a low point.

  • Matthew Huntbach 14th May '09 - 12:53pm

    I hope that Joe Taylor was wrong in suggesting in a comment that the Telegraph went for Andrew because his daughter would make a great front-page picture. I really do. Not the sort of thing I’d want on my conscience as a journalist unless I’d actively chosen to go to the News of the World.

    That is like hoping it is purely coincidence that when news about the A-level results comes out, it is always illustrated in EVERY newspaper by good looking female sixth formers wearing lowish cut tops. Nothing obvious, obviously, but … well it’s never someone who is fat, has acne, is wearing an anorak etc is it?

    Fairly obviously here, the Telegraph felt it had to have a go at the LibDems as well, though most of it is scraping to find anything nearly as bad as they could find on various Labour and Tory MPs.

    As I’ve already said, even Ming’s flat refurbishment while extravagant by the standards of people on average income is only really upper-middle market stuff, what you’d expect someone on an income of an MP to regard as fairly normal. If the newspapers are going to have a go at that – well, they should stop promoting the idea that this is how normal people live e.g. on their style pages (sainted Guardian included – who on earth pays the prices of the clothes they tend to have on their fashion pages?) or in their use of the term “middle England” to refer to people who are stonkingly rich as in “this tax will be a blow to middle England” for some tax change which affects the top 5% or less.

    It’s always difficult to judge when one is subject to unfair attacks to what extent one should fight back. Often to fight back ends up just looking whingeing. But it does look like these two do have a case worth trying to get an apology for.

  • Well, the Telegraph knew it was going to be bad for the Tories so they have done their level best to make sure that the Lib Dems get dragged into the same reputational mire.

    The Torygraph has plumbed new depths in terms of editorial integrity in the way it has distorted some of these stories.

    The worst aspect is this Tory spin “story” that Cameron has somehow shown “leadership” in this whole sorry affair, whereas he has merely reacted on an ad hoc basis when it was dragged out into the limelight. There was even an article put out by Reuters that was carried online by the Independent that towed this ridiculous “Cameron leadership” line.

    All in all very disappointing that Clegg hasn’t made more of the rebuttals and been able to draw a line between us and the other two parties. However, the minor infringements (and one less minor – thanks Ming!) by some MPs have muddied what were mostly clear Lib Dem waters.

    Now for real leadership on Nick to put forward a workable solution that will be adopted by all. Come on Clegg, you can do it!

  • Mr Titley never suggested anyone should judge different MPs by different standards.

  • leah darbyshire 14th May '09 - 1:58pm

    Checked into LD Blogs to see what defences are being made of LD MPs. But agree, you do sound tribal. One of the things Robin and I can’t get over is how so many in the Party are being blindly loyal over this (as we have experienced often) and trying to find all sorts of ways of defending their MPs when quite frankly there is no defence to be made and it would be easier to give up. I watched Chris Huhne on breakfast TV the other day and wanted to throw something at the screen because he didn’t answer the question just went on about how the Lib Dem MPs weren’t as bad as other parties. Who cares? No Party is free of dodgy people or sleaze, it has to do with the type of personality that wants to be in politcs, egos etc What the Lib Dem MPs have done is still wrong.

    Actually, none of this stuff is acceptable. At all. I really resent Julia Goldsworthy and Ming Campbell for both spending thousands of pounds on furniture with taxpayers money. As I’ve said elsewhere, if I was buying furniture with taxpayers money I wouldn’t dare go higher than Ikea! But maybe I have more of a moral conscience.

    Most people I work with in public sector book the cheapest hotels when they travel on business and explain it is because they are using taxpayers money. That is the right attitude to take.

    Did not Julia or Ming or any of them even stop to think that what they were doing – having a little spending spree in Heals on the taxpayer might be morally wrong? Why on earth not?

    It smacks of greed and arrogance, of people who think they are better than ordinary people (an attitude that is prevalent in politics but not desirable).

    I think humility IS required. People are very angry right now and rightly so. When I’ve relocated for work with a private company you get assistance with rent but they don’t buy your furniture and certainly not expensive furniture. They earn plenty enough money to buy their own, at least twice the national average and as much as a City lawyer.

    If I was still involved with politics I think I’d be quite humble when answering my non-political friends about this stuff as indeed I was when having to explain the MP I worked for owned a flat in Central London courtesy of the taxpayer.

    He is a nice man, a good MP, a good person but I think even he would accept that the property gains he made out of his MP-ship out of the taxpayer were not really fair.

    Just to show you how angry people are about this. My father-in-law, a Lib Dem member and former Treasurer was having a really het up discussion about this stuff with my husband last night when he said he was quote “livid” unquote at MPs expenses. Prior to that he was talking about his grand-daughter but this issue is big enough to get people who are not usually that bothered about politics angry and talking about it.

    The expenses stuff is wrong, it’s not on but one thing is for sure, I’m pretty certain that at long last something will be done about it. That’s the good thing.

  • Alix Mortimer 14th May '09 - 2:39pm

    Oh, I am personally disgusted by the whole thing, including some of the Lib Dem stuff – Ming’s cushions and Chris’ trouser press were particularly grating. See my previous posts referring to these and other miscreants here, here and here.

    But I think it’s unfair on people to have got caught up in this when they really didn’t deserve to, and as far as I can tell on the facts we know, Andrew George and Alan Reid fall into that category.

  • Starting an illegal war and allowing the banks to ruin the economy, neither of those is sufficiently serious to bring down a government. But a couple of free dinners…

  • I was disappointed by Mr Cameron.

    He took action and seemed to think that this gave him permission to attack Mr Brown for a lack of leadership.

    This indicates to me that he thinks he is on the high ground but he took action after his party was caught out and not before.

    This shows a lack of judgement on proportion.

    If the Tories had taken action years ago, I would not make this criticism.

  • There are reasons why the two things Sesenco mentioned did not bring down the government.

    It has seemed to me that those who have claimed that the war was illegal have not been able to explain why they think so. Kofi Annan said it was but I am not sure that he has the necessary legal background for such a remark to have credence.

    And the bank issue was not foreseen by any of the three major parties. So it is hard to single out the Brown government.

  • Voter:

    (1) Almost all lawyers with experitse in public international law are of the view that the war was illegal. There is a rule of customary international law that holds that war may only be declared once all diplomatic avenues have been exahausted. Moreover, the UN Security Council did not authorise war. Iraq neither attacked the United Kingdom or its allies, nor threatened to attack the United Kingdom or its allies.

    (2) Dr John Vincent Cable MP foresaw the banking crisis and gave numerous warnings.

    So, wrong on both counts, Voter.

  • I have just searched the 2005 Lib Dem PDF manifesto for the word “crisis”.

    I cannot find any banking crisis mentioned. If the Lib Dems thought that the crisis was likely, its omission from the manifesto seems unjustifiable.

  • Voter, remind me when the crisis happened? 2008, wasn’t it?

  • Reading The Times, I see that Mr Cable asked a question in 2003

    The growth of the British economy is sustained by consumer spending pinned against record levels of personal debt, which is secured, if at all, against house prices that the Bank of England describes as well above equilibrium level. What action will the Chancellor take on the problem of consumer debt

    This was prior to the 2005 election.

  • I am with Leah Darbyshire on this one.

    Lembit Opik on Radio 5

    The guy does not even begin to understand that thinking the public purse should buy his two-and-a-half grand telly is wrong. He gives the distinct impression we should be grateful he slummed it with a TV for just under £800

    This issue transcends the parties and has shown that even good people can allow themselves to be enticed into a morally corrupt system. Equally some not very nice people emerge unscathed.

    Some of the Telegraph’s shots WILL be wide of the mark but I didn’t see anyone here sharing the indignation of any Labour and Tory MPs who claimed they were portrayed wrongly.

    I have never worked in the public sector so I don’t know what the prevailing attitude is towards expenses but I do recall last year the allegations that the Manchester office of the Quango that is supposed to keep a tight rein on pharmaceutical costs organised a Christmas bash in London at a swanky hotel, booked 1st class rail tickets, overnight stays etc and then half the buggers did not even make the trip.

    My own work experience has always been private sector in small companies and self-employed so I leave others to shed light on troughing in the multinational companies.

  • Alix Mortimer 14th May '09 - 4:53pm

    “I didn’t see anyone here sharing the indignation of any Labour and Tory MPs who claimed they were portrayed wrongly.”

    Well, no, we don’t know enough details of the cases – but I’m sure some of them were. I understand the moat thing may not actually be true, for a start.

  • (Just saw Alix on BBC NEWS, although credited as “Alex Mortimer”.)

    I think the test to apply in the case of the economy is: would it have been better with a Lib Dem government in place rather than a Labour one?

    I fear that economic systems (like computer systems) are difficult to modify without knowing the precise problems.

    Mr Salmon seems to agree with me that Mr Cable did not know the precise problems.

    Because of this, I would find it understandable that the average voter would not be incentivised to vote Lib Dem.

    Now, if I am wrong and there is a strong case to vote Lib Dem for economic reasons, I think that case should be emphasised.

  • “Mark Williams Says:
    14th May 2009 at 11:10 am
    Meanwhile it seems Norman Baker is paying himself rent for his constituency office.

    Actually not so. The story in short is that he rented the office/shop first, then when the house above it came up for sale, he bought it. He could have rented out the shop as a shop but chose to maintain the office there. The full explanation is in the Worthing Herald – I think the Argus has chosen not to publish the truth behind the allegation because they dislike Norman because of his opposition to the choice of Falmer as the site for the new Brighton and Hove Albion stadium.

  • This is the Andrew George story yesterday in the local paper, the Cornishman.

  • “he has a second home at cardross an hours drive from his own home in dunoon so he wont have to get the calmac ferry 20min from Glasgow airport or spend the nighgt in the hotel at the airport if hes on a late flight o by the way its near a good golf course”

    OK, according to the AA it’s 1 3/4 hrs from Dunoon to Cardross, but more to the point it’s on highland roads (from memory, single track at some points, definately single carriageway and not roads you’d want to drive at night.)

    But the point the Torygraph was making is that he was using B&Bs while on a constituency tour. Perhaps, donald, you might be able to tell me how you would get from Mull or Gigha to Cardross if a meeting ran on past the time the last ferry sailed? Or, for that matter, whether it would be wise to drive for over three hours following an evening meeting in Campbeltown? Craig Murray, in his blog, described the Torygraph journalists who wrote that particular piece as “English idiots” – not sure I quite like the unintended undertones of that phrase, but I do agree with Alix’s assessment that the assumptions were made because of the London-centric world of the Torygraph.

  • “Except he’s paying back the money for the moat now.”

    Are you sure? I thought the story was that he hadn’t claimed for the moat in the first place.

  • Martin Kinsella 15th May '09 - 8:53pm

    George owes us an apology. The Telegraph owes no one nothing.

    Anonymous1, the Hoggmeister General made some stupid statement to the effect that the moat clearing had not been excluded.

    That’s alright then !!!!

  • Alix Mortimer 15th May '09 - 9:45pm

    Donald, this is copied and pasted from the Telegraph article on Alan Reid:

    “in 2004-05 Mr Reid lived in Dunoon, within his constituency, and did not claim for a second home.”

    If he does have a second home near his main home as you say, he doesn’t appear to be claiming for it.

  • Alix Mortimer 15th May '09 - 9:47pm

    Ah, no fair enough, he later designated another home in his constituency as a second one. I don’t think there’s anything necessarily wrong with having a second home in the same constituency – provided it was purchased to minimise the cost of B&Bs. Are you suggesting this is not the case?

  • Alix Mortimer 15th May '09 - 9:51pm

    Strange, you know, I could have sworn those paras are new in that article. I don’t think I’d have missed that – can anyone else who took this up confirm?

  • edward drummond 19th May '09 - 12:07pm

    I can understand why alan reid would require to live somewhere when in London when at his work, but why is he allowed to have a home in Dunoon (as reported in the local paper) and a second home in Cardross for which he claims 2nd home allowance and is also claiming hotel bills for when in London. B & B’s in a constituancy like Argyll & Bute are understandable but a second home in Cardross which as the crow flies can’t be any more than 12 miles from Dunoon. Admitedly if in Dunoon to reach the airport it is easier to cross the Clyde by ferry but is possible to drive by road, and the distance from Glasgow Airport to Cardross is comparable to the distance from the airport to the ferry terminal and the ferries run until 11.30pm. Instead of claiming for a 2nd home in Cardross which he states he uses when he cannot get back to Dunoon it would be much cheaper to stay in an Hotel on these odd occassions.

  • coldcomfort 20th May '09 - 6:32pm

    Let’s face it. The ethos of the Telegraph has been to dish the dirt on Labour and promote the Conservatives. The LibDems can be ignored unless they might just possibly attract some support. This so called ‘newspaper’ has had this political stance for all 50yrs of my adult life.It will NEVER give the LibDems what my Aussie friends call ‘a fair go’. We are doing the right thing by using technology to appeal to the electorate over the heads of main stream media but we just need to be careful not to drown them in too big a torrent of words.

  • Alix Mortimer 20th May '09 - 7:06pm

    @Donald, don’t apologise, it’s a perfectly good point.

    I can’t edit the map (well, I could, but only with big splodgy hand-drawn arrows) cos it’s off Wikipedia, but I will include Alan in a “possible questions outstanding” post either tomorrow or Friday. The delay is that we don’t know how the party machine intends to investigate the allegations against Lib Dem MPs, but some decisions are expected (not before time) on Friday.

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.

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 ...?


Recent Comments

  • Adam Robertson
    @Peter Martin - How many seats did the Lib Dems win simply because the Tory/Reform was split? Yes we won seats because the Tory/Reform vote was split. However, ...
  • David Raw
    @ Tristan Ward I'm afraid Winston Churchill came a thousand years later than, "the early 10th century Liberal Party", and I'm afraid the good folk of Dundee...
  • Peter Martin
    @ Alex, “How many seats did the Lib Dems win simply because the Tory/Reform vote was split?” "Probably not very many actually." "Actual...
  • David Raw
    @ Tristan Ward Lessons of History ? Not advisable to ride on the back of an alligator, no matter how vulnerable and docile it may appear at first sight ....
  • Tristan Ward
    @David Raw Yes it was the alliance between liberal forces and conservative forces that led to the decline in the early 10th century Liberal Party. But liber...