Category Archives: Lib Dem

Clegg placates his troops… for now.

Nick Clegg has faced mixed reviews this morning, with some papers talking of a defensive performance whilst others prefer to concentrate on his growing similarity to a young Tony Blair. What is clear however is this was no victory speech to the adoring crowds.

The speech started with the now customary video montage of what the great leader had been up to over the last twelve months. There’s Nick on his holidays; him and the family on a day-trip to the Zoo; hang on a minute what is he doing on the steps of Number 10? Hasn’t he done well? Cue balloons, standing ovations and whoops of joy you would think. Far from it – you could have heard a pin drop as the hall filled with an uncomfortable silence.

And here is the problem – the Lib-Dems are a nice party. Not having to deal with the baggage of power for 6 decades does that to you. They are the most democratic party, the party whose membership are closest to the leadership and the party who take pride in thoroughly debating policy (as anyone who listened to the passionate debate about ‘lines 16 and 17 of green energy motion’ can attest to). But power, even at the best of times, doesn’t respect any of these Lib-Dem traditions, and this is not the best of times. The Lib-Dems are a junior member of a coalition government implementing eye-watering across the board spending cuts. Power in this context is about compromise – The swallowing of some pretty bitter pills (spending cuts, free schools) in order to make a little progress on your own agenda (electoral reform).

No wonder then that Clegg’s tone was muted. Following an early defeat on free-schools his job was to the steady the ship, to reach out to the party faithful and remind them he was still one of them. This time it worked – conference duly responded with a rousing standing ovation, relieved and reassured that he understood their worries. But if this is year 1, what about year 5? Or year 2 come to that? Next year, with spending cuts biting across schools and town halls up and down the country and a possible defeat in the AV referendum, what does he say then?

‘Hold your nerve’ he repeated again and again – it was unclear whether he was talking to the hall or to himself.

Why Nick Clegg must be thinking ‘What have I done?’

I was listening to Evan Davis interview Nick Clegg this morning. I like Evan Davis by the way, he sounds like such a comfortable, companionable interviewer. Then suddenly he chucks in a beast of a yorker. And so it was this morning – after 10minutes of matey chat he asked (and I apologise for this not being verbatim, but I was travelling to work, and using a pen whilst travelling along the A4 on a Vespa is less than ideal):

So, think forward a year – you have lost the AV referendum, your party is at 15% in the polls and you are co-conspirators to the most comprehensive rebalancing of the state since Lloyd George 100 years ago. How do you feel?

Credit to Nick, he answered as any good politician should, in that he didn’t really answer it at all. But Evan’s analysis must be the thing that keeps him awake at night.

The polls now have any referendum on AV as too close to call. Remember for most Lib-Dems this is seen, at best, as a stepping stone – if they lose this one, then the issue of electoral reform is dead for another generation – and with it you might assume the Lib-Dems chances of remaining a force in British politics.

Evan is being generous in his 15% poll rating. Most recent polls have had them down at 12-13%, one even had them in single figures. This is not because the Lib-Dems are doing anything unpopular, it is because no-one really understands what they are doing at all. Early Lib-Dem achievements such as the Freedom Bill have been hi-jacked by Tory ministers much more au fait with what it takes to be in power. As for the rest, well you only have to look at the likes of Vince Cable and Simon Hughes to see what senior Lib-Dems think about Free Schools, the scrapping of Primary Care Trusts and the wider dismantling of the welfare state. And there is the problem facing Clegg, for without AV the Lib-Dems have given up everything, including their identity, for nothing.

Lembit offers Clegg some sage advice

If Nick Clegg is wise he will avoid consuming any media whilst he is on holiday. But, being a politican, it is unlikely he’ll be able to resist taking a sneak peak at the latest polls. But Nick, if you are sitting on your sun-lounger wondering if you have just killed not only your own political future but that of one of the oldest political parties in the western world, then fear not, Lembit is back to help.

‘Don’t Panic – Keep the faith’ is Lembit’s advice to the Lib-Dem leader, followed by ‘Actions speak louder than polls’.

Wise words from the ex-darling of the Lib-Dems. And something he has personal experience of – the constituents of Montgomeryshire certainly acted very loudly indeed in May, when they chose to vote for a Tory rather than face another 5 years of him.

Perhaps not the help Nick Clegg needs right now.

Tory plans keep me awake at night – but where is the opposition?

So here I am sitting on a train that is currently winding it’s way to London from Glasgow. I should really be catching up on sleep but every time I start to doze an uncomfortable thought jolts me back to reality. The thought? That the Tories are in complete control of the political agenda, they are already drawing up the battle lines for the next election and by the time the other parties wake up to the threat it may be too late.

The dominant Conservative element of this coalition government are determined to learn from the mistakes of the 1997 Labour Government. Not for them a timid first term, patiently fighting one battle at a time whilst all the while keeping one eye on the polls and focus groups. We are witnessing an object lesson in the exploitation of power by a party that sees the last 13years as an aberration, a temporary lapse in the electorates collective judgement.

Crippling cuts in public expenditure, the effective decoupling of education from LEA’s, the largest overhaul of health provision since the inception of the NHS. Promises of prison reform and welfare reform, not to mention a proposal to significantly reduce the size of the House of Commons and of course a referendum on AV. All this, and it is only August. Once Parliament returns from the summer recess it is time for the spending review and that is when the real fun begins. Don’t let yourself fall for DC’s easy charm – this government is working with an ideological zealotry that Thatcher would be in awe of. Under the cover of ‘necessary cuts’ we are about to witness a dramatic and permanent cut in the size of the state, with those on the margins of society hit the hardest.

And what of the other parties? Nick Clegg and his band of Lib-Dems have gambled all on an AV referendum, ceding all power and voice in an attempt to make progress on their most treasured policy. I fear for a party that now has no identity beyond the coalition itself and could suffer a catastrophic demise at the next election. Regardless, they are in no position to do anything but offer tacit support to the Tories for now. As for Labour, could there really be a worse time for a long drawn out leadership battle that is struggling to maintain interest from it’s own membership let alone from the wider electorate? What we need are Labour’s biggest and best minds working together to build public campaigns, raise the level of debate and hold this un-mandated government to account.

The Tories and their agenda have stolen a march and currently there is no one to stop them. That thought alone is enough to keep me from sleeping.

Ken Clarke – The Liberal

IMG_0002.JPG

The first thing to say about Ken Clarke is that he is clearly not one to get hung-up about opinion polls. Populism dictates that politicians taking power denounce the feeble, wooly attempts of their predecessors on crime before promising more prisons, tougher sentencing and the return of the cane for feral youths (ok, so I made that last one up). Ken comes to power and announces just the opposite.

In what has to be one of the most liberal speeches of the new coalition the Justice Secretary will today declare that ‘many a man has entered prison without with a drug problem and left it drug dependent’ and that short-term sentencing risks making ‘petty criminals into serious ones’.

The admission that short-term sentencing doesn’t work is key, all too often petty crimes are dealt with by locking away troubled people for anywhere between 3-12months. In this time they lose their job, their home and often suffer from relationship breakdown, not to mention the psychological pressure a prison regime puts them under. They will also mix with more hardened criminals, substituting benign friendships on the outside for more malignant ones inside. Lastly, the short nature of the sentence means there is not enough time to offer any significant rehabilitation or training. All this adds up to the highest per Capita prison population in Europe and one of the highest reoffending rates. If we keep going as we are we will have over 100,000 people languishing in jail by the turn of the decade.

So, Ken will today outline ambitious plans to ban any sentence under 3months and put pressure on the judiciary to dramatically reduce the number of sentences under a year. Instead he will promote the use of more community orders, more drug rehabilitation centres and closer ties with the third sector, who are continuously delivering creative and effective solutions to reoffending.

Critics from the right may argue this is just another example of us going soft on crime, whilst those on the left will suggest he is being forced into it because of Osbourne’s budget. I have a little more faith in the old boy, I get the feeling prison numbers and how we deal with them has been nagging at him sine he was Home Secretary in the mid-nineties and now, finally he is back in a position to do something about it. For me it is one of the single most important speeches since the coalition was formed. At last, a Tory I could grow to like.

A personal tragedy for David Laws – but what does it say about us?

I am not going to write much this morning – partly because it has already been covered by many people more eloquent than I. Partly because last night I was out in town and am feeling a little delicate this morning.

Anyone who has followed David Laws personal tragedy unfolding in their newspapers and on their TV screens cannot help but to have been saddened at the downfall of an honourable man who was trying against all odds to protect his privacy. This is not like the expenses scandal that captivated us last year – Laws did not make money through the claiming of rent, he lost it. Had he been honest about the relationship he was in he could have claimed more without any questions being asked. This is a rare occassion where an MP breaking the rules actually increased value for money.

That he broke the rules looks only too clear. So soon after the formation of the coalition and with the expenses scandal still clear in the minds of the press and public David Laws had little choice to stand down – that he did it in such a timely manner and with candour and humility was of great personal credit to him and should ensure his smooth transition back to cabinet status in the not too distant future.

The real question we all have to grapple with is why he felt he had to hide his sexuality at all. As a straight, white man working in the charity sector I honestly believed that we as a society had moved on, surely being gay is no longer an impediment to anything anymore – personal or private? This whole episode suggests otherwise. News reports this morning suggests his close family are practising Roman Catholics, with all the connotations this confers. You only had to listen to The Big Questions on BBC1 this morning to know that the liberal gay friendly world that exists within my immediate sphere does not neccessy expand across the rest of the country, let alone the world.

So farewell to David Laws, for now at least, I wish him luck and happiness in a world that has changed dramatically for him in the last few days. I hope he and his partner’s relationship flourish and his friends and family continue to be there for him. For the rest of us it is time to look again at how liberal we really are and redouble our efforts against any group or individual that continue to promote homophobia and bigotry in our society.

My First Lib-Dem meeting

The slight musty smell of a church hall, the hushed chatter amongst  early arrivers and the squeak of cheap plastic chairs as they are laid out ready for the new members, who inevitably then never materialise. This might have been my first Lib-Dem meeting, but it wasn’t my first ever political meeting and I felt gratified to know that some things seem to remain the same whatever party you choose to support.

It has been a relatively short, though exciting journey for me as I made my way from Labour activist through a state of political confusion and then out the other side into a fully fledged member of the Liberal Democrats. So, as I arrived at my first meeting of the Hounslow Branch ‘Executive Meeting’ I don’t mind admitting that I was a little nervous. Is it true that all Lib-Dem activists have beards and wear sandals? Will I be bullied for my recent membership of  ’the enemy’? Or, worst of all, will they just  ignore me?

I needn’t have worried – the people were lovely, properly lovely. Everyone I met shook me by the hand and welcomed me whole-heartedly to my new political home, there was sympathy about ‘the Labour thing’, with many admitting they too used to be members – and there was barely a beard, or sandal, in sight.

The meeting itself was an eclectic mix, far more so than I have ever been used to – the chair, who grew up in Llanelli and still has a hint of Welsh about him, admitted to being a Conservative in his younger days (a lonely thing for a young man growing up in South Wales you would imagine) whilst two seats down was a proud member, and huge fan, of the PCS and Mark Serwotka respectively. It took me a while to work out what brought them together – how could someone on the centre-right sit so comfortably alongside a woman who I am sure would have described herself as a ‘Bennite’ in previous decades? The answer it turns out is simple, and the same reason that I was there – they believe in fairness, in social equality and in liberalism – the right for people to make the best of their lives in the way they see fit. If you can agree on that, the rest seems somewhat frivolous.

What struck me most however was the willingness to debate and the candour and honesty that emanated from everyone in the room. Most of the meeting was taken up with a round-the-room debrief of how the election went  and what it meant – every person listened politely, even when they did go on for a bit, or offer a clear minority opinion. People responded with courtesy and most of all everyone wanted to listen and learn from their friends and colleagues experiences. Even a disagreement between the two parliamentary candidates was an opportunity to debate and explore ideas rather an entrenchment into political ideology and a way to score a political point or two.

It was a breath of fresh air to be amongst people whose priority was to debate policies and ideas rather than procedures and it has made me want to do more – I can see how I might be able to help and support the branch in their campaigns and now I have been inspired and energised to actually do it.

So as I left into the cooling night air (for this was not a short meeting) I reflected on what had not only been an engaging evening, but an enlightening one too – The new politics is thriving and you can find it in a church hall near you.

A dire warning for School leavers – there are no jobs, no training and no university places left.

Well £6.2billion down – only £887bn to go. But what do the coalition decisions to date really tell us about the direction of this government?

Well first, they are serious about protecting and enhancing civil-liberties – which is something we can all cheer about. Secondly, the other thing that is keeping Lib-Dems happy (or at least quiet) right now, there is to be significant constitutional reforms – with a likely elected second chamber and a referendum on AV for the commons. So far, so good.

But listening to George Osborne and David Laws yesterday my thoughts turned to another area – that of the future of our current crop of school-leavers.  Already worried about the unenviable choice between going to University and facing a mountain of debt on graduation, or entering a jobs market where 1 in 6 of their peers cannot find work, yesterdays announcements should come as a dire warning that things are going to get a lot worse.

We already know, or at least fear, that the Lib-Dems are likely to drop their long-standing opposition to tuition fees – preferring to preach from the safety of the fence, rather than risk undermining the coalition. Early indications suggest that not only are differential fees here to stay they are likely to face sustained increases, particularly if you fancy studying on a popular course at a decent university. However, cuts to the Education, Business and Work and Pensions budgets now mean that the next generation of workers (the ones that will be looking after us in our old-age) are now hit with substantial cuts in the following areas:

- The training and development agency for schools – saving achieved by cutting the scheme to attract the brightest and best graduates into teaching.

- Efficiencies in the university budgets – actually this is just a nice way of saying that 10,000 university places will be cut in September.

- Higher Education Funding Council for England – inevitably leading to a drop in the grants given to our Universities – so, even if you do manage to get a place at University, chances are that less is going to be spent on you.

- Cuts in reforming vocational qualifications - a long-overdue piece of work looking at how best to deliver high-quality vocational training at a level perceived to be equivalent to that of a degree.

- The Future Jobs Fund - cuts of over £1/4 billion in a scheme which finds work for unemployed 18-24year olds.

In all over £500million of the proposed £6billion directly impacts on programmes that help to educate, train or employ young people. This isn’t the end however – both Osborne and Laws made it clear that yesterday’s announcements should be seen as a statement of intent rather than a one-off cut. It can be easy to pull funding from schemes and programmes that many people have not heard of, but we should be aware that there is nearly always a consequence to it. Taking money away from educating, training and employing young people now does not just impact in the immediate term but risks leaving us with a lost-generation similar to the legacy left by the Thatcher and Major years.

It is true that there is a need for a grown-up debate around what we  as a society are willing to pay for, and how much we are willing to pay in tax to get it – but in the absence of that, I like to finish with just one thought – yesterday, at the same time as cutting the funding mentioned above the government made a guarantee that no-savings would be sought in the MoD budget this financial year – when did the cost of war become of greater value than that of educating and employing our children?

Too nice a day to sit in and write – so here are my ‘twitter’ length views on the last few days.

I’ll be honest – I was going to write a blog yesterday, but was far too hungover, so delayed it until today. But now I look outside at the amazing blue skies and it feels like a day to spend out by the river with my Wife and baby. But what about the blog? Well, it would be rude not to write anything – so I am going to attempt ‘twitter’ style responses to the main headlines of the last couple of days.

Barack Obama hails vote on tightening regulation of Wall Street’s banks – Good thing. Will hopefully give the new coalition opportunity and purpose to do something similar here.

BA counts strike costs as it posts record loss – Despite my support for the right to strike, I can’t help thinking that Unite have got this one very wrong. Better a cut in perks than a cut in jobs.

Torture Claims investigation ordered by William Hague – More promising early signs from the new government that restoring and protecting civil liberties are right at the top of the agenda.

Coalition Agreement – Only briefly read, but it likes the Lib-Dems continue to have significant influence – a very good thing.  The challenge, of course, comes when the numerous commissions report.

Synthetic Life Created – Wow! I understand the ethical issues that now face us – but, for a moment, can we just applaud the incredible achievement that we have just witnessed?

Malawian Gay Couple Jailed – I almost wept. It is beyond any sense that this terrible abuse and discrimination can be inflicted on people because of who they are. There should be global uproar about this, it is an indictment on the global community that there is not.

May changes mind on Gay Adoption – Yeah right. It is amazing what proximity to power can do.

Diane Abbot runs for Labour Leader – Ha ha ha – that is funny, properly funny! What, you were not joking? Oh dear god! There are a lot of talented politicians both male and female in the Labour Party – Abbott is not one of them.

Sorry everyone – promise to be better next week and write more. Right – time to go and enjoy the sunshine! x

Progress on Civil Liberties – something all liberals can agree on.

Apologies. I haven’t posted in a few days – I like most of you who are reading this was glued to the TV listening to the cabinet and ministerial appointments and just generally trying to get my head, and heart, around our ‘new way of doing politics’. I still don’t have answers on that front, but having read and re-read the pithily titled ‘Conservative – Liberal Democrat Coalition Negotiation Agreement‘ there are some areas where I can whole-heartedly agree, not least that of Civil Liberties.

As a former member of the Labour Party one of my biggest disappointments was the gradual but continual attack on our civil liberties. Over 13years the last government chipped away at our freedoms – curtailing the right to protest, holding DNA profiles of innocent people (including children), the introduction of ID cards, even the finger-printing of children at school. It is a depressing fact that we are now the most watched country on earth – with more CCTV cameras per head than any other nation. Liberals, by definition, have to abhor this state of affairs – and now, with liberals in government, there is an opportunity to do something about it.

It seems likely that later this month the Queen’s Speech will announce the Con-Lib coalitions intention to put forward a ‘Great Repeal’ or ‘Freedom’ act to parliament. Not all details of this act have yet been finalised, but it seems likely that it will include the following.

  • Scrapping the ID card scheme – along with the National Identity register and the next generation of biometric passports.
  • Scrapping the Contact Point Database – a register of all 11million children in the UK
  • Outlawing the finger-printing of children at school without parental permission
  • Extending the remit of the Freedom of Information act to improve transparency of all public bodies
  • Ensuring that only those found guilty, or charged with a serious sexual/violent offence are placed on the DNA database
  • Ensuring that trial by jury remains at the heart of our justice system
  • The restoration of rights to non-violent protest.
  • Safeguarding freedom of speech through a review of libel laws
  • Safeguards against the misuse of anti-terrorism legislation.
  • Further regulation of CCTV.
  • Ending of storage of internet and email records without good reason.

Not bad for a first bill and, in a stroke undoing much of the negative legislation brought in by successive home secretaries over the last decade. True, there is more to do – I would like to see a commitment to cutting the number of days suspects can be held pre-charge as a start. It is however an example of what a Liberal-Democrat government can do in office – and an answer to all of those who argue they have not ended up with what they voted for.