Tim has just posted this comment on his Facebook page:
I despair at Labour’s meltdown. Britain needs a progressive liberal voice that can actually challenge the Conservatives and offer an alternative that understands real people’s lives.
Just this week, when a party is needed to challenge the Housing Bill, shine a light on the UK’s shady relationship with Saudi Arabia and highlight the worrying consumer credit bubble, Labour are nowhere to be seen. Labour is not that credible alternative. It is split from top to bottom.
While Britain is being let down, Liberal Democrats will fight to do all we can to protect those in need, the small business struggling on the high street and the family worried about cuts to Universal Credit. We will stand up for them. We can be that alternative.
If you, like me, are looking at the Labour division and rancour with despair, join us. Liberal Democrats can offer an alternative. 2016 can be a year of hope and opportunity. Britain can be a fairer, less unequal and more optimistic place, true to its values. Join Us: http://www.libdems.org.uk/join
* Mary Reid is a contributing editor on Lib Dem Voice. She was a councillor in Kingston upon Thames, where she is still very active with the local party, and is the Hon President of Kingston Lib Dems.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Why non-fiction books need their indexes
Changes in status: Local Elections wrap up
What should the Liberal Democrats stand for?
Ben Wood
Ed Sanderson
Jack
Matt (Bristol)
John Grout
48 Comments
….”shine a light on the UK’s shady relationship with Saudi Arabia… Labour are nowhere to be seen……
“Guardian”….Lib Dems and Labour urge Cameron to withdraw Saudi Arabia support…..The leadership of the Labour party, under Jeremy Corbyn, has been increasingly critical of Britain’s links with Saudi Arabia…..
“Independent”….Saudi Arabia executions: Labour demands ‘secret’ UK-Saudi deal be published and scrapped….
Even the “Mail”…….. The shadow human rights minister, Andy Slaughter, condemned the relationship and wrote to the justice secretary, Michael Gove, asking him to confirm that discussions of judicial cooperation were continuing with the Saudis and calling for them to “cease immediately”…
I’m all in favour of opposition to the Tory’s ‘uncritical’ relationship with Saudi but please let’s not dilute the message by pretending we are ‘going it alone’
“highlight the worrying consumer credit bubble”
Yes the consumer credit bubble is a big problem. It could burst and crash the economy again. But, if Britain imports some 5-6% more stuff than it exports someone has to fund the purchase of that extra amount by borrowing.
It can be government. Traditionally it has been, but the conventional wisdom for some time has been that Government borrowing is too high and needs to be reduced. So both Labour and Tory politicians and governments, with some Lib Dem support, have looked for everyone else to do the borrowing instead. They, or their so-called independent central banks, have reduced interest rates to encourage that, stimulating the economy and at the same time trying to make their books look good. But, at the longer term cost of ever increasing levels of private debt. So, what happens when interest rates are so low they can’t do that any longer? Abolish cash and have negative interest rates? Some economists would say exactly that!
Their’s no point any party being united about the wrong policies. Neither is “highlighting” the problem, or “worrying” about it, going to do any good if there’s no understanding of why it has arisen in the first place.
It’s high time we had some positive and distinctive radical policy instead of knocking others all the time.
We might have had only seven MP’s in the 1960’s, but the party was humming with innovative radical policy under Jo Grimond. The great Harry Cowie was in charge of research (do we have a research department now ?) and Jo had the knack of tapping the best thinkers in the Universities to help with new ideas. Time to do this again instead of writing essay long conference motions which are sleep inducing.
You can still get Harry’s book, Why Liberal, on the non taxpaying Amazon site.
Why Liberal? author Cowie, Harry
Cowie, Harry Published by Penguin Books Ltd. (1964)
Used Softcover
Quantity Available: 1
From: World of Rare Books (Goring-by-Sea, WTSX, United Kingdom)
Bookseller Rating: 5-star rating
Add Book to Shopping Basket
Price: £ 2.49
Convert Currency
Shipping: £ 2.99
Within United Kingdom
If the dismissal/resignation of four people who even most politics geeks have never heard of represents a “meltdown”, someone had better come up with a much more dramatic neologism for what has happened to the Lib Dems recently.
@Expats, Tim’s comments are clear about Labour being absent on being a strong opposition and references examples of where they are failing THIS WEEK. You go on to use examples of Labour mentioning stuff about the Saudis since May last year. There is no attempt to pull the wool over peoples eyes. Tim and the Lib Dems have taken the lead on this consistently and not this week – when a large group of people were executed by Saudi Arabia, it was Tim and the Liberal Democrats on the news and in the papers calling for a change in our relationship, whilst Corbyn and co carried on with their petty internal squabbling.
@David Raw
Fantastic thought about reintroducing a research department. We need to be speaking to leading lights in various areas about the best ways of tacking the major issues that are affecting this country and ten world today and base our policies on what people need rather than what people expect to hear.
“Britain needs a progressive Liberal voice.” That may be the case, Tim; but what we desperately need at the moment is an OPPOSITION!
This week we have seen another small widening of the cracks in both major parties. Labour have provided the most entertainment today but that can disguise the seriousness of their splits. So far Labour Centrists have shown no sign that they grasp the enormity of their defeat or have any ideas what to do next. The latest bright idea is a letter calling on Corbyn to resign, to be signed by Labour backbenchers. They dont understand that The Left would simply use it as evidence of disloyalty & of them being Tories in disguise.
At some point Centrist Labour MPs will realise that they have no place in The New Labour but its going to take a long time, they are overwhelmingly still in the “Denial Stage.”
Kev Walsh – You support the claim that Labour is an ineffective opposition and dispute Expats rebuttal based on one of his examples re Saudi Arabia’s Human Rights issues. You stated “Tim and the Lib Dems have taken the lead on this consistently and not this week – when a large group of people were executed by Saudi Arabia, it was Tim and the Liberal Democrats on the news”.
Yes, but it was Jeremy Corbyn who used his first conference speech in September 2015 to highlight the plight of one pro-democracy demonstrator facing execution and demanded the British Government act to stop a £5.9M contract to provide prison expertise to the Saudi’s. [He made not one jibe at the expense of the LibDems re the GE debacle]. In fact, Corbyn wrote to Cameron on this issue. Subsequently, Gove confirmed this would be done. Looking back in Hansard, Corbyn raised Saudi Human Rights concerns in July 2015 and in June 2014. I have never heard Corbyn ever claim personal credit for this change of policy. I have heard him use any such concerns or disputes with the Tories as some rather crude ‘we care more than you’ point scoring exercise with the LibDems either.
Yet, there seems to be an irresistible urge with some LibDems, even when sharing common concerns with Corbyn, to have to differentiate themselves e.g. the LibDem’s cared more about Mental Health or Tax Credits etc etc. Isn’t it all a little childish? Can’t we agree that a strong opposition to the Tories could mean LibDems and Labour and others working together in debates and on issues where this is common ground? Wouldn’t that not be the definition of a STRONG opposition?
So I find the attack on Labour by Tim Farron more opportunistic than sincere and given that he leads an annihilated Parliamentary Party (when they turn up) a bit rich. Surely he can do better than this.
Dave,
Saw Tom Brake on PMQS today. That was about it. To borrow your famous namesake’s song, is it a case of ‘Only the lonely’?
Is there any point in anyone listening to or attending the absurd farce of PMQs ? Corbyn has improved things but the Prime Minister still does not take it seriously. If MPs had the courage to boycott this nonsense it would soon come to an end.
The radical policies of the 1960s were enacted and brought improvements but there were downsides and we are now having to cope with them. Throwing out the baby with the bathwater or ignoring reality and practicality is not very helpful.
Dave Orbison 6th Jan ’16 – 6:53pm
Thank you for defending my stance….Sadly, no matter what the subject, it seems few LDV articles/comments are complete without reverting to an ‘isolationist’ view….
Considering our near wipe-out in May one might imagine that seeking allies to oppose this government might be a priority; instead we seem more interested in scoring cheap political points (possibly learned at Cameron’s knee) than addressing the real issues….
Expats: Seeking allies does not seem to have done us any good in the past so why should it do so now ? However I am against point scoring exercises whether against Labour or the Conservatives. The sort of voters we might attract would not find it very helpful.
I do not think Tim Farron is avoiding the real issues but he does have to offer something different from Labour and be seen to do it, otherwise people will not see the point of voting for him.
Like it or not whilst the Labour leadership, which I recognise from my days on Camden Council as being extremist and being concerned with issues peripheral to most people, take an isolationist and divisive course, the media will be obsessed with a divided party rather than any attacks on this awful government. This gives us a huge opportunity to put right the damage done by the coalition. I think Tim is the man to do that. A huge open goal is opening up in British politics. Come on Lib Dems-put the ball in the back of the net !
nvelope2003 6th Jan ’16 – 9:27pm…………..Expats: Seeking allies does not seem to have done us any good in the past so why should it do so now ?…………..
What harmed us was not seeking allies but allying ourselves with policies that were not liberal (secret courts, top-down NHS reorganisation, bedroom tax, etc)….
There is no loss of our unique identity if we support ( and accept support) for policies in which we believe…
Let’s hear much more from you Tim, in the media on all these issues
How about the need for a progressive Social Democrat voice? Perhaps we need to remind ourselves that this Party contains Social Democrats.
Dangerous comment about Lbour meltdown? It rather invites comparisons with us?
Why not take up a popular and very controversial issue like Palestine and take the country with you. Israel has to be challenged.
Do we really want former Labour ministers to join us? Wouldn’t that hurt us more than Labour is currently harming itself? We should work with those Labour MPs who can help us to hold the Tory government to account. Take Vince’s discussions forward but not join their MPs in a membership sense until we see how former Labour ministers and others can work with us. The in-fighting within Labour is revealing disloyalty which we do not need to import into our party.
But if we are joining ordinary members in our constituencies they will work with us enough to know the difference between our two parties and make better judgements for themselves – hopefully to work with us for their life-time.
In Labour’s shadow cabinet reshuffle Angela Eagle was moved. Does she still have her job of shafowing George Osborne when he deputises at PMQ? She is widely considered to have done a good job at her first outing, so did she paint a target on her back?
Perhaps Labour’s Deputy Leader should deputise next time? He has said that he “has his own mandate” having been directly elected to that post.
There is a standard to live up to. Perhaps he remembers our Deputy Leader saying that the then Prime Minister had moved from being “Stalin to Mr Bean”.
Stuart: the Liberal Democrats have had no meltdown. The term must mean a disaster that destroys identity. Instead of which, we’re up and fighting, relatively united and determined. Whereas Labour’s surge of new members brought in large numbers of people at odds with the direction of the party for a very long time and deepened divisions, ours brought in people who might have been unhappy during the coalition, but were not very different from those who joined in the Ashdown or Kennedy years, except that they were younger.
The sacking of relatively low-profile shadow ministers is indeed no huge deal on its own, though the Deputy Leader attacking the Leader is; but what has come across to the general public is chaos and deep division. That does matter because in 2020 people will be asking themselves who can provide a competent and decisive government. Because I loathe the prospect of the present wretched bunch in power till 2025, I’m sorry the main alternative is tearing itself apart. And any one who thinks this business is a storm in a teacup is dreaming.
As for Tim’s slight hyperbole, yes, Labour has spoken up about Saudi Arabia etc. That’s good. But it’s got almost no attention because the news has been RESHUFFLE CHAOS.
Simon Banks 7th Jan ’16 – 10:06am………Stuart: the Liberal Democrats have had no meltdown. The term must mean a disaster that destroys identity. Instead of which, we’re up and fighting, relatively united and determined. Whereas Labour’s surge of new members brought in large numbers of people at odds with the direction of the party for a very long time and deepened divisions, ours brought in people who might have been unhappy during the coalition, but were not very different from those who joined in the Ashdown or Kennedy years, except that they were younger……….
“We’re up and fighting relatively (lovely word) united and determined”….And we are achieving what?…A LibDem MP ( an endangered species) admits that it’s not worth attending HoC debates..our ratings are lower now than in May… Oldham West and Royton by-election we failed to improve on the 15% fall in support that we received in May….etc.
And still such complacent articles appear…
@Tony Rowan-Wicks
“Do we really want former Labour ministers to join us?”
Er …. Yes!
I don’t think it’s going to happen, but (looking at the last Labour Cabinet in 2010 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_ministry ) if people like Alastair Darling, David Milliband, Alan Johnson, Tessa Jowell, Peter Mandelson or Ben Bradshaw wanted to join us, what’s not to like?
Simon – I admire you ability to rewrite history. If you truly believe the LibDem’s current position in the last five or so years is not a meltdown I do not know what one is. Labour have had an influx of some 60,000 members who very much support Corbyn’s approach, in the same way the LibDems lost members who disagreed with Clegg.
There are some 40/60 individual MP’s who think they are the Labour Party and that they should dictate policy rather than the membership. If you want these authoritarian egotists, as it appears Tim wants so desperately, you are welcome to him. As for your claim that Corbyn’s position has not got no attention see:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/29/the-uk-interest-in-saudi-prisons-and-why-corbyn-opposes-it
and
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-arabia-attacks-jeremy-corbyn-over-lack-of-respect-a6708671.html
We clearly do not read the same papers.
expats: Fair comment. But I was thinking further back than the coalition. The alliance with the Labour Party before 1914 allowed it to grow and may have contributed to it replacing the Liberal Party as the principal opposition and alternative government party. Lloyd George formed a government with Conservative support which caused the Liberal party to split even though it implemented Liberal policies. Participation in the National Government of 1931 was the final blow for hopes of a Liberal revival for 30 or 40 years.
We should not get too close to any other party except possibly for an electoral pact in a few constituencies.
@Dave Orbison
(Recognising that the Simon you were addressing was Simon Banks)
“There are some 40/60 individual MP’s who think they are the Labour Party and that they should dictate policy rather than the membership. If you want these authoritarian egotists, as it appears Tim wants so desperately, you are welcome to him.”
I think you are seriously wrong there. It’s not a case of 40 or 60 MPs “thinking they are the Labour Party”. In fact it’s 100+ Labour MPs who recognise that Corbyn is leading (I use the word advisedly) them to electoral disaster in 2020.
Your comment about Labour Party policy and who “dictates” it is quite amusing. It’s Corbyn who wants to be the Dictator and override the Labour Party’s constitution. Are you unaware that he’s just spend 48 hours trying to sack his Shadow Defence Secretary on the grounds that she has teh temerity to support agreed Labour Party policy on Trident but which he opposes?
@nvelope2003
“We should not get too close to any other party except possibly for an electoral pact in a few constituencies.”
No way!
Dave Orbison: It is most unlikely that any Labour MPs will join the Liberal Democrats unless they are deselected or expelled (sounds familiar ?) I expect Tim Farron knows that but he has to be welcoming
Jeremy Corbyn represents the majority of the individual members of the Labour Party but does he represent the majority of Labour voters ? Maybe he will win back some traditional voters who had switched to other parties or stayed at home but he might lose others who dislike his policies, though I doubt if they will all vote Liberal Democrat. Many are more likely to vote UKIP or Conservative.
The sort of policies you like and which are supported by the Guardian and Independent are not necessarily supported by the majority of voters and that is the problem for left and left of centre parties and also for those two newspapers whose circulation is extremely modest. They have their supporters but it is not the whole story as you seem to think. Just because people moan that does not mean they are willing to support things they perceive as too radical or dangerous.
Although there has been a slight decline in support in opinion polls that might be explained by those who liked the coalition – yes there were some – and those who voted tactically in May 2015. There has however been an increase in support for Liberal Democrats and Labour in local government by elections and a drop in support for UKIP and Greens despite their national opinion poll ratings.
There is everything to play for.
Simon Shaw: Well there are not going to be any electoral pacts but in principal I would not be against a small number if that resulted in more Liberal Democrat MPs even if it helped the Greens elect another MP but it will not happen. Maybe just as well.
These Labour MPs that some seem to want are the same MPs who, between 2010-15 we didn’t have a good word to say about (and vice versa)….If you want to see the LibDems disappear as a party that would be the quickest way to achieve it…Thankfully these 100+ won’t jump, after all by “rats never join a sinking ship” and they are realistic enough to realise that their constituents are extremely unlikely to re-elect them as LibDems when faced with an official Labour candidate…Instead they’ll continue to undermine Corbyn and hope for his removal as leader..
Sadly, the UK media, including the current BBC, are supportive of this government and the most blatant of lies (This morning Osborne denied that Cameron ‘u-turned’ over a Cabinet free vote on EU membership) are passed over for such nonsense as the, media generated, ‘Revenge Reshuffle’ hysteria over the last few weeks….
I want an independent, left of centre, LibDem party who will work with Labour ‘where we agree with them’ and oppose them ‘where we don’t’…Instead we seem determined to decry everything they do even when we actually support their stance….
As Dave Orbison wrote…”Yet, there seems to be an irresistible urge with some LibDems, even when sharing common concerns with Corbyn, to have to differentiate themselves e.g. the LibDem’s cared more about Mental Health or Tax Credits etc etc. Isn’t it all a little childish? Can’t we agree that a strong opposition to the Tories could mean LibDems and Labour and others working together in debates and on issues where this is common ground? Wouldn’t that not be the definition of a STRONG opposition?”….
Simon Shaw – Trident is just a policy, it is not part of the Constitution of the Labour Party. You seem to think Labour should be as forever wedded to Trident every much as the gun lobby in the USA rely on a 200yr document. Times change and failure to move with the times risks extinction in many cases. Corbyn is looking to ensure that Labour Party members have an effective say in what the party policy should be whereas Tony Blair stripped the Labour Party Conference of having a meaningful say in determining policy and gave himself almost total control. I think of the two it is more fitting to describe Blair as the dictator.
The suggestion that somehow Corbyn is acting as a dictator by changing his team is laughable too. Reshuffles are a way of life for all parties in Government and Opposition, even the LibDems do it. The current media hype around this is ludicrous – one the one hand Corbyn is a dictator because he makes changes and on the other he is weak when he doesn’t.
nvelope2003 – I agree everything is to play for. I do not accept the ‘given’ that Labour party members have no connection with Labour party voters any more or less than this applies to any other party. In any event we know there are many, many potential voters who do not see themselves aligned to any one party and have simply become switched off by the whole Westminster village roadshow or have become disenfranchised. Many are not interested in listening to parties prattling on claiming to be so different to the others when in reality there are few differences in approach on many things. So I think there is a new target audience out there that could be reached beyond existing voters and hence it would be a mistake to overlook this though what effect this will have is hard to say.
Many claim to know what will happen if Corbyn stays or goes etc etc But the truth is that they don’t know, it is just conjecture. Many of these political sages laughed at the idea of Corbyn being elected. Following his election, they mocked the idea that tens of thousands would join rather leave the Labour Party. They were wrong again. In fact, some of these people were also cocksure that the Coalition would be seen a great thing by the electorate and would serve the LibDems and the nation well. You will have to pardon me if I am a little reluctant to rely on any of their forecasts going forward.
“There are your guns” waves hand in the direction of the wrong valley.
If Labour are having a meltdown and are not providing an opposition , why aren’t we trying to provide one?
The problem with Labour, as with all parties, is that it’s not its members that get it into power, it’s the voters. The chances of that happening with its current political stance are minimal at best. The Tories have a core support of around 30% come what may and know how to play FPTP. Last year’s General Election proves that.
Unless the economy goes way off course and the EU referendum proves to be more divisive than envisaged, I can’t see how any single non Tory party could replace them in 2020. It’s time for like minded politicians in the opposition parties, including the Welsh and Scottish Nationalists, to get together to forge a common agenda. It won’t be easy; but it’s not impossible.
@Dave Orbison
“Simon Shaw – Trident is just a policy, it is not part of the Constitution of the Labour Party. You seem to think Labour should be as forever wedded to Trident …”
No I don’t, and I never said it was part of the Labour Party’s Constitution.
What I did say was that the current Labour Party policy on Trident has been arrived at constitutionally and it is Corbyn who is refusing to accept it. It was he who sacked Maria Eagle as Defence Secretary for having the “temerity” to disagree with the official Party policy!
That’s why I say he is acting like a Dictator. He believes HE should dictate the policy and anybody who gets in his way will be removed (so long as he thinks he can get away with it – which in the case of Hilary Benn, for the moment, he didn’t). But that’s how the Hard Left operate so neither you nor I should be surprised.
Bearing in mind Corbyn has rebelled against his own party over 500 times in his career it would really be quite amusing, if it wasn’t so tragic for the Labour Party.
Expats. You have obviously never tried working with Labour! They are fine as long as you roll over and agree with them, but vitriolic and vicious if you don’t. They are Lib Dem haters because we don’t automatically act as Labour Mark 2, as shown by their response to the formation of the coalition and since.
Even if we wanted to work with them [and I have at local government level] they don’t know the meaning of compromise [at least on their side, though they expect it of others]
Simon Shaw,
Labour elected Corbyn under its rules and he can reshuffle under its rules. The reality is that for the best part of at least three decades they had a mechanism for bypassing candidates favoured by their rank and file. When Multiband was elected it was put down to the power of the Trade Unions now they’ve opened the electoral system up they found out it’s membership were more Left wing than they thought and went for the most left wing candidate as their leader and his next nearest rival was also more left wing than the PLP wanted. I suspect that the real problem is that some of the PLP feel adrift and are refusing to see the obvious, which is that they are not that popular with the Labour Membership.
I’m not a labour voter so I don’t really care who gets reshuffled or why.
Sorry auto correct changed Milliband to Multiband. Curse you modern technology.
Look, I am generally someone who feels our party has / had a more natural overlap of interests and policies with Labour than with the Tories. There are many labour politicians I have admired, and I am not too afraid to sporadically flirt with calling myself a ‘social democrat’.
But whilst ‘meltdown’ is maybe a bit strong (and as has been said above, ‘meltdown’ could also describe our 2014 and 2015 election results), the slow-motion-collapse-cum-mutual-hate-fest Labour are having is impeding their ability to be an effective opposition and it’s not wrong to point that out. There are however, areas where we can make that opposition more effective by working with them, and it’s also not wrong to do so. Tim therefore has the difficult position of trying to ride two horses at once – Labour are an impaired and failing opposition, but we must work with them to oppose what the Tories are doing.
So far, if a Labour split comes (and as of now I cannot see that it will come this year, or until the splitters are convinced that they cannot regain control or influence – it could take until after 2020 for them to genuinely throw in the towel), I don’t see evidence that many of the politicians who are opposed to Corbyn will join our party as our democratic politics will look too much too them like that which they are rejecting, as that is how Corbyn justifies what he is doing.
Corbyn is effectively redefining Miliband and those who backed him as the moderate centre-ground of Lbaour politics, and I suspect it is this group who will be the longterm victors. Whether that makes Labour a party that can again definitively lead a government under the two-party system is something else entirely. That is sad in many ways, as I don’t think Miliband was that far away from the ‘historic centre’ of British politics as many (including many of us) wanted to portray him as being.
The question for this parliament remains – how to undermine and oppose the Tories without
a) Relying on them doing it to themselves for us?
b) Them stealing or constructing an inferior copy of each new politicy idea their opponents throw at them, and then claiming they represent the centreground (see the very Farron-like noises now being made about housing)?
@BrianD said: “How about the need for a progressive Social Democrat voice? Perhaps we need to remind ourselves that this Party contains Social Democrats.”
Thanks for that, BrianD.
In case you didn’t know, a Social Democrat Group is being formed in the party. Do visit our facebook page and post a comment:
https://www.facebook.com/SocialDemocratGroup/
We’d also love to hear from people outside the Lib Dems, who would like to see a strong moderate progressive alternative to the Tories. And if there are disillusioned members of the Labour party who aren’t yet ready to leave, Momentum can’t expel you if you just post a comment.
I wholeheartedly agree with David Raw and Alex H who want to see a research group set up. I think that this is particularly vital with regard to economics. Do either of you have the contacts within the party to get this going? The obvious person to lead this would be Vince Cable. We need this so that we can base our social policies on economic theory so that critics can be answered robustly. If research proves that we can’t afford our social policies then so be it but I have seen others talking on LDV about economies benefitting from supporting those in need and being endorsed by a Professor but I am afraid I can’t remember who they are ( I have ME which affects concentration and memory)
I think it would be so much more valuable for Vince to lead this rather than trying to get close to Labour Party rebels. At the moment I fear that if we had some sort of formal relationship with them we would be in danger of losing our remaining supporters who were fine with the Coalition. I think Corbyn resonated with those who want more help given to those in need but who didn’t realise that there was also a lot of very left wing baggage about him. In my view we should be looking to attract those people who joined the Labour Party to vote for his social policies rather than those who didn’t do much to help the poorest, particularly the huge deficit in social housing provision, when they were in power.
I joined the SDP because they were quite strong on defence as well as social policies and it seems to me that we can fill the present political gap where those two policies are joined. Strong defence doesn’t necessarily mean replacing Trident.
What Matt (Bristol) said.
Sure, the Tories and their tabloid toadies have thrown the kitchen sink at Corbyn and savaged Labour with a flood of half-truths and distortions. Tim has had the sense not to join in. What Tim has said is perfectly fair comment, and the fact that we are low in the polls ourselves does not make it any the less fair comment. Yes, it would be good to make common cause with Labour, but there is no point in lending credence either to a failing Labour leader, or to his discredited opponents from the Blair – Mandelson era.
The plain fact is that real opposition to the Tory government, not only in Parliament, can only be achieved by building an effective progressive alliance which would include Labour, the Greens, Lib Dems and a host of extra parliamentary campaigns and movements. The question is how can this be done? Simply concentrating on the bear pit of parliament will not help anyone.
@ Simon Shaw,
” if people like Alastair Darling, David Milliband, Alan Johnson, Tessa Jowell, Peter Mandelson or Ben Bradshaw wanted to join us, what’s not to like? ”
I wouldn’t expect Lib Dems to have too much of a problem with most of these. But, Peter Mandelson?
Did you really mean to include him or was that just an oversight?
@petermartin2001
No, Peter Mandelson would be absolutely fine with me.
Just because a lot of people in the Labour Party have always had a problem with Mandelson doesn’t mean that the rest of us have to take a similar view.
@Simon Hebditch
I agree.
How can it done?
I’d encourage everyone to start by thinking about what the economic possibilities are from both a left and a right perspective.
Let’s put aside this notion that the Govt is like a household. As an issuer of the currency the Govt has enormous power to wreck the economy by overusing those powers and creating too much inflation. We need to be aware of this of course.
But it also can underuse those powers and create recession as it does now.
Whatever our political views we can at least try to understand how our economy works. The Government simply cannot tax away more money from the economy than it has issued in the first instance. We aren’t going to do the economy any good whatsoever if our economic policies, of whatever political hue, are aimed at achieving the impossible.
“I despair at Labour’s meltdown. Britain needs a progressive liberal voice that can actually challenge the Conservatives and offer an alternative that understands real people’s lives.”
The implication of this sentence is that Tim thinks the Labour Party should be this progressive liberal voice. An odd thing for the Lib Dem leader to say. Presumably he feels, in the interests of equity and fairness, that having been in coalition with the Conservatives in Government for five years it should now be in coalition with Labour in opposition.
The fact is, we all know (and have for 30 years) that Jeremy Corbyn is an unreconstructed, illiberal socialist. This seems now to be a surprise to Farron that Corbyn as leader is acting exactly the same as Corbyn the backbench rebel leftie.
Simon Shaw 7th Jan ’16 – 10:40am David Miliband is not an MP and is doing an important job at an international charity. He could have been leader of the Labour Party. If he were to become an MP would he accept our leadership? or would he cause a leadership election? Would alternative techniques be better for the Liberal Democrats?