30 Comments

• Eddie Sammon 28th May '15 - 11:47pm

  Good video, but personally I believe Lamb needs to throw caution to the wind. It all still seems a bit safe. Maybe that is the way to win it though.

• Eddie Sammon 29th May '15 - 2:06am

  By the way, I was following the hustings on Twitter and Norman made a great point about not becoming an “adjunct” of one of the other parties. I saw this as a polite critique of those who want to drag the party to the left.

  He actually went further and apparently said “we must consider coalition again… with either party”.

  This is the bold approach I think we need to see. However if Labour move firmly into the centre-ground then it all changes. However it needs to be firmly in the centre – it can’t be where the left think the centre is.

• AWills 29th May '15 - 8:46am

  He comes across as a throughly decent person, and a safe choice.

• JohnTilley 29th May '15 - 9:19am

  Eddie Sammon, interesting comment from you.
  It begs the question – ” If Norman “threw caution to the wind” – would there be anything left? ”

  I have done a completely unscientific e-mail survey of a random list of people I know who are not members of the Liberal Democrats.
  The question I asked was – “Do you know who Norman Lamb is?”

  I will leave it to you to guess what percentage of those responding even knew his name.
  Or you might like to do a similar survey of people hou know outside politics and see what response you get.

  I think you will find that outside the Bubble of Liberal Democrat activists and political nerds, more people associate Alan Partridge with North Norfolk.

• malc 29th May '15 - 9:54am

  He seems a decent man, but the LibDems need someone far more inspirational as their leader.

• Alun Williams 29th May '15 - 10:20am

  I think we all know what the result will be!

• TCO 29th May '15 - 10:42am

  @Alun Williams do we?

  @malc – not just decent but prepared to put his head above the parapet too.

• Mavarine Du-Marie 29th May '15 - 10:45am

  I didn’t know any of them (past or present) until they became leaders of their parties. So I don’t think that should be the bases of deciding. Has it been already decided as a foregone conclusion too that what the Libdems need is an inspirational leader and no other kind? Just wondering.
  Cordially,

• Nicholas Starling 29th May '15 - 11:09am

  Silly comment from John Tilley about “Do you know who Norman Lamb is?” Outside of the Westminster bubble, nobody knew who Nick Clegg was before he became leader. Most people didn’t know who Natalie Bennett was until 2 months ago either.

• Alun Williams 29th May '15 - 11:23am

  TCO – well, I think it seems that for all of Lamb’s good qualities, Farron will most likely win. Don’t you?

• TCO 29th May '15 - 11:30am

  @John Tilley and I’m sure if you replaced the words “Norman Lamb” with “Tim Farron” your unscientific survey of non-political nerds would throw up the same result.

• TCO 29th May '15 - 11:34am

  @Alun Williams I have no idea who will win; that’s why we have an election.

• Alun Williams 29th May '15 - 11:48am

  Very funny TCO!

• TCO 29th May '15 - 11:58am

  @Alun Williams and experience of Lib Dem elections tells us that the initial favourite can only go one way when people start to take an interest in the alternative.

• Alun Williams 29th May '15 - 12:03pm

  Fair enough TCO. Who do you think would be best for the job?

• Simon Boyd 29th May '15 - 12:21pm

  A welcome start. Now need to see more passion and a setting out of what the Lib Dems are for.

• TCO 29th May '15 - 12:24pm

  @Alun Williams my criteria would be as follows:

  – does not favour one wing of the party or one viewpoint
  – has practical experience of government
  – can appeal to all parts of the electorate
  – is pragmatic
  – is prepared to take on party vested interests
  – will undertake an independent evidence-based review of policy and strategy and adopt its recommendations
  – is open minded regarding working with other parties where its mutually beneficial
  – is unavowedly Liberal in his approach

• Tim13 29th May '15 - 12:28pm

  Tco I had been thinking seriously about supporting Norman – however, your support has given that idea a severe knock!

  I am not sure what you are quoting with regard to initial favourites. Let’s be honest, rather like the Labour Party (up till Brown), our members have gone faithfully with the media favourite each time. However, I haven’t yet seen media knocking of Tim as the “left” candidate (of which I am very unsure anyway). Perhaps they think this time there isn’t much to play for?

• TCO 29th May '15 - 12:33pm

  @Tim13 I haven’t made a choice yet. I’m waiting to see what each candidate comes out with in terms of reassurance about objectivity.

• theakes 29th May '15 - 12:49pm

  During those three years we have to get the local government base in the Midlands, North, Scotland and Wales moving forward, it does not have to be dramatic but there needs to be a positive message, the word GAIN is good, the word Loss is bad. We have to recover against and defeat any further attack by the Greens and be in a position to score off the SNP once their star begins to wan, as it will at some time. Unfortunately he does not appear to have the charisma, inspiration, style or gravitas,( that strange word that seems to have evolved), to lead in a situation when the party will be almost solely dependent on the leader, where his personalty, background, presentation and communication skills over the next crucial three years of active out of London campaigning will be crucial, if we are to rebuild. He is also stuck with the Tuition fees question vote.

• Phyllis 29th May '15 - 1:14pm

  People commenting on John Tilkey’s comment by pointing out that no-one had heard of Clegg or Bennett until they became leaders of their respective parties, should remember that, unlike Clegg and Bennett, Norman has been a post holder in the last government for the last five years. So people should have at least heard of him if he is leadership material. The fact that they haven’t suggests that he does not have the personal leadership qualities which are required at a time of diminished media interest in the Lib Dems.

• Eddie Sammon 29th May '15 - 2:13pm

  John Tilley, thanks. Norman Lamb has the respect of journalists, so I think he can get his name out their quite quickly, if it is lacking.

  I am not going to pretend I don’t want to see more from Norman though, I do.

  I also thought I would get told off by some for my suggestion that “the left” doesn’t know where the centre is. But this is true of nearly all politicians. We all get sucked into our bubbles and need to get our heads out of them.

• Mavarine Du-Marie 29th May '15 - 2:37pm

  @Phyllis: I was taking the word *Know* literally to that of the personal level, as suggested by postings on here which some members inside the bubble *know* both candidates, and this bias as implying that is a criteria for deciding even to those non-members outside is misleading. Rather than the objectively *Known* by their public stance, as in their activism on issues outside of the bubble, would have been a better stance, wherein personal privy knowledge of candidates isn’t necessary for deciding. However, most Libdems in government during 2010-2015 have been let down to bad Public Relations and Media exposure, as I still hadn’t known much of what Norman was doing, as it was a silent front. Whilst Tim has only just become a media-luvvy which is a dangerous position to be in, as nothing good as ever come out of it, political media-luvvies are never taken seriously!

• Paul Holmes 29th May '15 - 2:47pm

  Eddie, when Norman says we ‘should not be an adjunct to another Party’ you say you see this as a ‘polite critique of those who want to drag the Party to the left’.

  Of course it could also be seen as a polite critique of those who dragged the Party to the right and sought to make us into Liberal Conservatives who would prefer not to deal with Labour. That was a message that came over strongly from the Leadership during the recent General Election campaign.

  During the last ‘New’ Labour Government Bob Russell used to regularly declare in Parliamentary Party meetings that the country already had two Conservative Parties and that we should not be seeking to become a third one. Given the disastrous results on 7th May it is indeed clear that such political ground is overfull already and that the voters will vote for the ‘real thing’ rather than second best.

  By 2005 we had elected our highest number of MP’s since the Liberal Party collapse of 1922. The majority had been won from the Conservatives -but not with policies that were simply predicated on being managerially better economic liberals than the Conservatives with some pro Civil Liberties and pro EU icing on the cake. Paddy was wrong as Leader when he got carried away with his ‘Project’ of realigning the left by blending us in with Labour. The recent experiment in creating purist economic liberal party drawing on a core vote of supposedly ‘proper’ liberal voters has been equally wrong as well being an electoral disaster.

  As Liberal Democrats we need to regain our distinctive and anti establishment identity. Neither can we win elections under FPTP by narrowing our appeal to a core vote or tightly defined ‘market share’ as we heard so much of at campaign briefings over recent years. Even under PR systems such a narrow appeal can be very dangerous as we discovered in the 2014 Euro elections and the economically liberal FDP discovered when wiped out in Germany.

• Eddie Sammon 29th May '15 - 3:07pm

  Paul Holmes, sorry you are right that this criticism can equally be applied to those who wished the party to become more aligned with the Conservatives. I do not want an FDP party either.

  However I don’t agree that the centre-ground, if that is what you are talking about, is already too crowded. I think Labour and the Conservatives are too stuck in their ways and are too damaged as a brand to occupy this position properly.

• Michael BG 29th May '15 - 3:43pm

  If the purpose of this video was to get people to sign up to his campaign as others have said it was not very inspirational, it didn’t inspire me to say he will be a great leader I want to go out on the streets and knock on doors for him. He is an effective MP, but he believes everyone should be treated the same, everyone should be given the same opportunities, but while he recognises the NHS doesn’t work for everyone, he didn’t speak about other groups where the system doesn’t work and they get left behind. In the race of life there will always be winners and losers and we have to address what we do about the losers, what help we will give them to increase their freedoms, not just educationally but support across all fields of life and during their whole lives when it is required.

• Gordon 29th May '15 - 3:50pm

  Norman comes across as a thoroughly decent man. The story he tells of the little boy from Cornwall with autism illustrates his compassionate side in action and his point that everyone should be treated the same way is obviously right. What’s not to like?

  Well, a properly liberal system would be one where the professionals concerned had the necessary resources and autonomy to do their job and the management structures to ensure that they did in fact do so. Having MPs, let alone ministers, act as social services ombudsmen tells us that everyone simply isn’t being treated alike; very few have the luck or the clout to gain access to a minister (although gaining access probably isn’t a problem for those that went to Eton so perhaps the cabinet doesn’t understand this). The dysfunctional administration that lies behind that story are the inevitable result of the top-down control-freak approach to government we have had since Thatcher.

  Part of the task ahead is remaking the economy in particular and the way the country is run in general. I had imagined that the supposedly more ‘economic liberal’ candidate would have something important to say but apparently not, or at least not yet (which may prove only that the conventional faction labels are pretty poor). That’s especially true since we know that, “It’s the economy, stupid” when it comes to elections. In the (statistically) much poorer time of the 1960s when I was in primary school my local authority could afford a big new library. That same library, long since devoid of most books, is now seen as an unaffordable luxury and is about to be sold off for building land. The growing demand for food banks is another canary in the coal mine desperately signalling that something is badly wrong. It is trying to tell us that Thatcherism simply doesn’t work – except of course, for around 1% of the population for whom it works outstandingly well. And, as Norman’s story indirectly illustrates, we urgently need to end the top-down approach to running everything from schools to social services to the NHS.

  Another part of the task ahead is a complete overhaul of the way the Lib Dem party is run. For those who like an evidence-led approach this is an inescapable conclusion because, despite all the many successes at local level, the national party organisation has comprehensively and repeatedly failed to deliver. It consistently subtracts value rather than adding value. It has for too long complacently relied largely on the none-of-the-above vote and offered little by way of alternative to the majority who aren’t primarily motivated by minority concerns like identity politics. That strategy has now reached the end of the road. The lesson of history is that small but well led forces can defeat much larger and more powerful opponents. It’s time we took that lesson on board. The next election could easily be as great a success as the last one was a disaster but only if we are prepared to learn from our mistakes.

  I don’t expect any leadership candidate to have ready-made answers for how to overhaul the party organisation or how to remake the economy and government but I do expect them to identify these as the key strategic issues they seek answers for and a mandate to change. And I want to see evidence of an openness to new thinking, of freedom from, ahem, conformity to party orthodoxy in seeking out those answers.

  Norman has work to do to persuade me; he’s still in with a chance but needs to raise his game.

• nvelope2003 3rd Jun '15 - 12:38pm

  Do we need a safe choice ? Well maybe not an unsafe one but the party needs someone brave and bold who is prepared to take some risks and has popular appeal and charisma. We have had such people before – Jo Grimond, Jeremy Thorpe (despite his faults) and of course Charles Kennedy. No one is perfect and it is going to be very hard to get the attention of the public with only a small number of MPs but we have been in this situation before, though there was no UKIP or Green Party to compete for protest votes which help to win by elections and get publicity. It will take some time. The German Liberals, the Free Democrats, have not really recovered after their defeat in 2013 though they have recently moved up from 3% in the polls to 5% or 6% and the anti Euro Alternative for Germany has dropped from 7% back to the 4% or 5 % they scored at the 2013 election.

• Anna 15th Jun '15 - 1:43pm

  I’m impressed by Norman Lamb’s message and delivery. He is persuasive and sounds honest. I’d assumed Tim Farron would be the more charismatic choice, but having watched both videos I think Norman Lamb would be the best speaker. I’ve also read articles interviewing each gentleman. Tim Farron is likely to appeal to hardcore Labour voters more, but they are less likely to vote for us at least until after the deficit and austerity are removed. I want socialism within what we can afford, but I think Mr Lamb can attract more swing voters to our renewed alternative party.

• Anna RWP 15th Jun '15 - 1:45pm

  Also, thank you to both candidates for being candidates and being willing to take on the job. It is essential we have at least two!