9 Comments

• Malcolm Todd 14th Jun '15 - 1:47pm

  Superb.

• Andrew 14th Jun '15 - 2:26pm

  Yes, such a contrast with the Labour Party “what did the focus group of Daily Mail readers say?” approach. And with the exception of Corbyn all the Labour leadership candidates will go further down that route…

  Mind you, with a pint in his hand he is in danger of looking like Farage!

• Tony Dawson 14th Jun '15 - 6:18pm

  You will have seen that the courts have recently thrown out Teresa May’s madcap mess of proposals to ‘accelerate’ asylum seekers’ exclusion’. An event which was so predictable even to people with no legal training. These pronouncements by Ms May before the election did, however, do their cynical job of pulling sufficient votes from UKIP to make the difference in a few key seats. I cannot believe that Ms May and colleagues ever had a hope in hell of believing that these measures (which they will now appeal) would pass our courts. It is worrying that our own Party did not make more of a fuss over the proposals at the time.

• Geoffrey Payne 14th Jun '15 - 7:03pm

  Agree, but there is a massive job to be done to win over public opinion, and that needs to be carefully considered.

• Charles Rothwell 15th Jun '15 - 7:44am

  Great stuff which is exactly spot on in answering THE crucial question in the current post-election calamitous situation we have been led into: “What are the Liberal Democrats for / what is the point of such a party any more?” Only makes me even more convinced that this is the man to take us forward as Grimond did with the Liberals all those decades ago. Go, Tim, go!

• Liz Needham 15th Jun '15 - 10:55am

  To be fair, Andrew, he was answering questions at an event called “Drinks for Democracy”!

• Raddiy 15th Jun '15 - 5:17pm

  Compassionate words Mr Farron, but what is the answer to the widerr question.. How many?

  It is fine and dandy to shed a few tears and say that if they have made the effort we should embrace them. Tell us how many, put some meat on to the bones of your compassion. There are countless millions in sub saharan Africa who will come if we make it easy for them. Ethiopia just one country in 1985 during Live Aid when it couldn’t feed itself had a population of 40 million, with a birth rate of over 4 per female that population is growing by some 2- 3% per year. The population in 2015, only 30 years after Live Aid has doubled and some, to 98million. Just one country amongst many similar basket cases in the region.

  http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/ethiopia-population/

  So tell us Mr Farron, how many should be allowed to come, if they manage to get on a boat somewhere, 1 million, 10 million, 100 million, is there a limit in LIbDemland. Will the Libdems not be happy until the current population is doubled with 70 million uneducated, unskilled welfare dependents, wrecking our economy and standard of living. We already know what will happen, we only have to look at the Somali population in areas like Tower Hamlets, 70% of them unemployed and on benefits.

  http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21583710-somalis-fare-much-worse-other-immigrants-what-holds-them-back-road-long

  Wake up and smell the coffee Mr Farron, because unless you are prepared to accept every single one who comes knocking on our door, then you are always going to have to make choices. If you are seriously prepared to accept unlimited numbers long as they have decided they don’t want to work to grow their own country, then perhaps you could be kind enough to tell the British people without any equivocation the next time you ask for their vote, that you are happy to turn our country into an economic basket case by embracing with a tear in your eye, millions of economically useless people.

  This video I have no doubt will be grist to the mill for your opponents.

• TCO 15th Jun '15 - 5:36pm

  He’s completely missed the point.

  No-one is arguing that we shouldn’t have compassion for frightened people on rickety boats. That’s not the issue. The real issue is what do you do to stop people climbing onto rickety boats, and where does that lead?

  Somewhere between the extremes of putting up and impregnable fence and allowing free, assisted entry, is a middle.

  Where does Tim Farron pur himself on this scale? And if its not free assisted entry for anyone who wants to come, where does he draw the line? And what are the consequences for this country of where he’s drawn that line?

• Richard Underhill 22nd Jul '15 - 3:49pm

  In this party the conference decides policy. Every leader is overturned occasionally, for instance Gatwick was added to the policy on Heathrow.

  Unfortunately what Tim Farron said is inconsitent. He talked about the conditions in the countries of origin and then said he does not care about the motivation of the migrants.

  What migrants mainly want is sometimes described as a better life. In more detail this often means better governance in their countries of origin.

  Liberal Democrat MPs in the coalition pushed through an international aid legislation of 0.7% of GDP, of which we should be proud. Other countries of similar levels of prosperity have not done that.