tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22777465911744655802024-03-14T04:18:42.679+00:00Liberator’s blogThe blog by the editorial collective of <em><strong>Liberator</strong></em> – the magazine for liberals of taste and discernment...<br> <br>
<strong>Website: https://liberatormagazine.org.uk/</strong><br>
Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.comBlogger465125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-24424516574363011192021-02-11T11:00:00.002+00:002021-02-11T11:00:34.141+00:00Read Liberator online for free!<p> You can now <a href="https://liberatormagazine.org.uk/" target="_blank">read Liberator online for free</a> via our <a href="https://liberatormagazine.org.uk/" target="_blank">website</a>. In 2020 we took the decision to make Liberator an electronic publication. Why not sign up to our email newsletter so we can keep you in touch?</p><p><br />This blog contains historical material covering the previous decade.</p>Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-60976135232975766292018-03-16T18:45:00.000+00:002018-03-16T18:45:00.244+00:00Why are we sending election monitors to Russia?<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
By the time you read this the election for President will
have happened in Russia. Writing in the middle of February we can all say
exactly what will happen in the election and what the result will be. The election
during the election period will be entirely free and fair – it will comply with
domestic laws and international standards for elections (the latter is the
phrasing that professional international observers actually use) and Vladimir
Putin will be elected with an overwhelming majority over ‘rival’ candidates who
mostly take care to praise the President during the election as well as after
the result is declared. Those candidates include Grigory Yavlinsky leader of
the Liberal ‘Yabloko’ party (apple) who is a genuine opponent. Alexei Navalny, outside
of Russia the most well known Kremlin critic, is barred from standing by a
dubious conviction.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
On the 18 March Vladimir Putin could be rewarding himself
with a glass of Imperial Russian stout, rather than Arthur Guinness’ black
stuff.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE) is the main international organisation doing election observation
(election monitoring) in the ex Communist countries of Eastern Europe and the
former Soviet Union, as well as on a much smaller scale in Western Europe and
North America. Britain is contributing 4 Long Term Observers (like regional
coordinators who observe before and during the whole election period) and up to
40 Short Term Observers (who cover what actually happens on the ground in the
days immediately before, during and after the election).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Why. What on earth is the point? The OSCE was set up at the
end of the Cold War to facilitate relations between the former Cold War rivals
and includes all of the former USSR, Europe, the USA and Canada. It came out of
the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, part of the Helsinki
process during the period of détente in the mid-1970s. The OSCE works on political-military,
economic and environmental and human rights issues (the human dimension). It is
now best known for providing monitors of the war in south east Ukraine but does
much work at intergovernmental level and European and national conferences and
seminars and with political missions in places such as Macedonia, Georgia and
Kosovo (and Central Asia). That work includes promoting professional policing,
justice, anti-discrimination and protection of minorities, good governance and
media freedom. Russia, as the most important former Soviet state is a core part
of OSCE. Here you see the problem.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Whatever the faults of British, French, American foreign
policy outside of Europe they have not directly engaged in the brutality that
Russia has in Syria or its own former empire territory of Chechnya, nor have
they or any other European countries engaged in war in Europe (Slobodan
Milosevic’s Serbia / Yugoslavia the exception). Russia has changed the de facto
borders of a European state by force for the first time by a European state
since World War 2, and is engaged in a nasty vicious entirely pointless bloody
war in south East Ukraine where Russian soldiers kill their fellow slavs and
‘orthodox’ Christians. This by a country that pretends to stand for European
(‘White’) Christian values. Yes, the clear majority of people in Crimea want to
be part of Russia. Yes it was Russian territory longer than Ukrainian, as part
of the Russian empire then USSR when taken from the Ottoman Empire. This is no
excuse for military occupation. This is the illness of Putin, he could no doubt
have achieved his aims peacefully but for a swaggering bully like that peace
would not befit his macho image. Hence ten thousand people have been killed and
two million people have been displaced by the war in Ukraine. (In 5% of the country).
The economic damage has caused misery to millions more in Russia and Ukraine
(and producers in countries affected by the sanctions and Russia’s retaliatory
boycotts). All on the altar of Putin’s image and keeping his people inside the
bubble with the spectacle of Russophobia and Russia standing against barbarians
– this kleptocrat state’s version of bread and circuses.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
At any stage Putin could have chosen peace, he has chosen brutal
violence. London’s 2012 Olympics was a celebration of the UK with the World.
Putin’s 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics could have been a bridge to the civilised
world but was a display to Russia and the World before Putin’s regime’s
military occupation and invasion of Ukraine.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The politics of OSCE election
observation.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Several of my good friends are observers and they will do an
excellent, professional, independent and impartial job. But it is a huge waste
of public money and a huge waste of credibility for the OSCE to send an
election mission. Russia is a leading member of the OSCE and its democracy and
society development wing, the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights (ODIHR). ODIHR, headquartered in Warsaw, organises the election
observation missions (EOMs). Where they go is based on a Needs Assessment
Mission by experts, which makes recommendations. The 21 December report for
Russia concluded “Most of the OSCE/ODIHR NAM interlocutors emphasized the value
of an OSCE/ODIHR election observation activity for the presidential election.
Many of them also stressed the importance of a long-term and regional presence
to cover all aspects of the process.” All the work is subject to the fact that the
OSCE is a diplomatic intergovernmental organisation, (yes of course nothing to
do with the EU, though I erroneously thought it is related to the Council of
Europe) that has its own Parliamentary Assembly of elected representatives of
the member states.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Other international election monitor organisations include
the Carter Center of former US President Jimmy Carter, and the American NDI
(National Democratic Institute) and IRI (International Republican Institute) as
well as African, Asian and other regional bodies. My experience of the former is
that they operate in a highly professional independent manner, I haven’t worked
outside of Europe so have no experience of the other bodies.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In actual monetary terms the cost of Britain contributing to
a large EOM like Russia is relatively low – flights, and fairly generous
expenses but no payment for STOs and a token payment only for LTOs. British
contingents on missions have reduced compared with a few years ago. Then the UK
commonly contributed 10% of observers, now it is often half the former number.
(The UK also continues to send a small number of observers on the smaller
European Union election observation missions that support democratic elections
in Africa, Asia and Central and Latin America). Where Britain sends observers
now seems to be clearly dependent on internal Foreign Office politics,
determined by the priorities of each Embassy and affected by budget. Entirely
understandable but not necessarily consistent or principled, unless the
principles on which observers are deployed is made clear. The UK, however,
contributes to many missions, Russia now sends observers only when it appears
strategically of use for Russia. Montenegrin elections when Russia hoped and
failed to get a more favourable government; Moldova where it fared better, and
Ukraine when it elected President Petro Poroshenko who proved a far less
compliant leader than Viktor Yanukovych. These are among the recent examples. Obviously
Russian monitors might be shy in the neighbouring countries it has gone to war
with, and its money (reduced with oil prices) is being spent on wars. It is
telling though that Russia sends monitors only in its geo-strategic interests.
Usually, not always, directly from the Foreign Ministry (as with many European
countries, not the UK) and often ex-FSB.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Isn’t it time to call a spade a spade and to call Russia
out. You can’t be a member of club promoting Enlightenment progressive human
values if your State activity in and outside of Europe is entirely turned to
destroying and subverting those values. Russia’s military supplied the missile
launcher used to murder the 300 European and Asian passengers and crew of MH17.
The rest of Europe should have acted decisively then. It must be time for this
dancing around the issue to end. It is a shame for the hard work done in the
OSCE by all the people who work hard to make the World a better place. If the
structure falls apart because Russia is thrown out (and perhaps the dictators
of the former Russian empire may walk as well) then it may make reconciliation
in the future more difficult. Putin, the dictators and his far right fans like
Orban thrive on never having consequences, on the double standards of ‘the
West’, by dividing Europe, by exploiting hypocrisy (like the words of Boris
Johnson versus his actions which have fundamentally undermined security and
stability in Europe, same for Liam Fox). Britain should not be wasting
taxpayers money in Russia and nor should we let the cosy pretence continue that
Russia can remain a member of a club for civilised nations.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">The writer.</b> Kiron
Reid has been an OSCE LTO election observer in Ukraine, Georgia and Macedonia.
He is an honorary volunteer professor at Zaporizhzhia National University in
south east Ukraine (visiting Ukraine five times since 2014) and a member of the
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Liberator</i> collective.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">March 16 note.</b>
The poisoning in Salisbury of Sergei Skripal in March 2018 makes no difference,
whether Russia is blamed (the UK Government line) or we should await for the
outcome of a full investigation to establish the facts (the Jeremy Corbyn,
Leader of the Opposition, Labour Party, line). The Russian State had passed beyond
the pale a long time ago. The only thing the poisoning and outrage might do, along
with the impact of fact based drama like ‘McMafia’ is lead to the British Government
finally tightening up on Russian (and other dodgy) money stashed in London.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />Kiron Reidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02483780931989805429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-69894296330066611192017-09-12T21:20:00.001+01:002017-09-12T21:20:05.230+01:00Lib Dem leadership stifles debate on Europe - and U-turns on a promise?After 400+ party members signed a petition to trigger a special conference to debate a Stop Brexit policy, the powers that be in the Liberal Democrats agreed to a compromise where they would enable the policy to be debated at autumn conference in Bournemouth in exchange for the petition being withdrawn.<br />
<br />
But now, at the last minute, it seems that the party’s Federal Conference Committee (FCC) has broken a promise to remain neutral in a crucial conference vote this Saturday and will now oppose the attempt to suspend standing orders to allow a Stop Brexit policy motion to be debated in place of a scheduled “consultation” session on Brexit.<br />
<br />
In a <a href="https://andrewhickey.info/2017/09/12/why-are-the-lib-dem-leadership-so-keen-on-brexit/" target="_blank">blogpost, Andrew Hickey</a>, one of the organisers of the special conference petition, has detailed how the organisers reluctantly agreed to cancel the demand for a special conference (in order to save the party the estimated £15,000 cost of holding it) after the FCC proposed the standing orders vote as a potential solution.<br />
<br />
In an email to the organisers, Andrew Wiseman, Chair of the FCC, promised that:<br />
<i>“FCC has said it will not oppose the suspension of standing orders. Some members are in favour and other are against, but as a committee it has said it will not oppose and will be neutral. When I speak to the FCC report I will make it clear that FCC do not oppose this.”</i><br />
<br />
After the organisers reluctantly agreed to this compromise, nothing further was heard until last week when someone in the higher levels of the party briefed against the Stop Brexit policy motion to that well-known organ of Liberal opinion <a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/lib-dems-braced-huge-brexit-11104248" target="_blank">the Daily Mirror</a>.<br />
<br />
Then, on Saturday, FCC voted to oppose the suspension of standing orders in a 5-4 vote – with at least one FCC member claiming they had not been told that Andrew Wiseman had promised the petition organisers that FCC would remain neutral on the issue.<br />
<br />
FCC also voted for a wrecking amendment to be debated alongside the Stop Brexit policy motion (should said debate take place) which would replace the heart of the motion with a policy of wanting a second referendum to accept or reject the government’s Brexit deal – the same policy that saw the Liberal Democrats score their lowest post-World War II vote share in this year’s general election. Wrecking amendments cannot be taken for debate according to Conference Standing Orders.<br />
<br />
Liberator Collective member George Potter, a supporter of the motion, tells us that:<br />
"<i>Once again it seems that, rather than risk members democratically deciding whether the party’s policy should be principled opposition to Brexit completely or just calling for a second referendum, the Liberal Democrat leadership would rather use underhand and deceitful tactics to stop the debate from even taking place.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>If they are successful, not only will the party’s members have been robbed of their say on one of the most important issues of the time, but the party won’t have another chance to decide a Brexit policy until the end of 2018, less than six months before the UK is due to leave the EU."</i><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
All of which will be a new test for Cable's new chief of staff Sarah Olney, who as a post-2015 member is unlikely to have seen any proper Conference rows (until now). Did she encourage FCC leadership drones into this U-turn - or was she given lessons by those who led the party into its Coalition-era car-crash on the NHS Bill?Liberator Collectivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02796953425426831553noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-73025444017523858672017-07-01T20:02:00.001+01:002017-07-01T20:02:54.113+01:00Paddy Ashdown: stranger than fictionPaddy Ashdown's been at it again.<br />
<br />
He has reportedly embarked on a new career writing fiction. This, however, proves the old adage that truth is often stranger. Not the reports of involvement in plotting to depose Tim Farron as leader (for more of that, <a href="https://liberatormagazine.org.uk/en/page/subscribe" target="_blank">subscribe to </a><i><a href="https://liberatormagazine.org.uk/en/page/subscribe" target="_blank">Liberator</a> </i>and read Radical Bulletin in the forthcoming issue).<br />
<br />
The Federal Board was, to say the least, surprised to receive a paper from the former leader which had to be seen to be believed. Putting aside his frequent Mark Twain quotation of not interfering - "don't speak to the helmsman, don't spit at the floor", the noble Lord railed at the party's democratic structures and its now one-member, one-vote Conference. Scrap it all, he says - and replace it with a 38 Degrees-style direct democracy organisation, free of values in which anyone can join, free of charge, vote on a key matter and then not so much leave as merely log out.<br />
<br />
In the interests of transparency, <i>Liberator</i> is publishing the text here, in full.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately for Paddy, the Board did not like his proposal much. Following the fiasco of his tenure of the 2015 "Wheelhouse" and his current stint as local party chair in Yeovil - seeing the return of a 15,000 Tory majority, last seen in 1979 - it may be that he heeds the advice of one member that "the Board thought a pile of horse manure would be a more cogent and realistic statement", and presses 'Delete'. Or he might just send it to his friend Tony Blair instead.<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoTitle" style="text-align: center;">
<b>TheLibDems.org</b><o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
Here is Ashdown’s second rule
for the internet age: “If you see a business model that takes no account of the
new technologies, you see a business model which is failing”.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
This applies to most newspapers,
some old fashioned businesses and nearly all political parties.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
Conventional political parties
remain immovably stuck in the 1870s. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
They are vertical hierarchies,
when the paradigm structure of our time is the network. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
They are high overhead, narrow
membership, high cost of entry, limited participation organisations, while
successful social and commercial structures are based on a low overhead, mass
membership, low (or no) cost of entry and instant participation model. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
They are festooned with
lumbering committees and a tangle of elections which pretend to provide
accountability and transparency, but actually obscure both, when direct instant
democratic participation is the rule for the most successful modern civil
society movements and political structures (think Cinque Stella, Momentum, More
United and En Marche). <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
In order to play a full part,
today’s conventional political party requires its members to be obsessives
prepared to spend evenings in damp village halls and bright September days when
they could be on the beach, in stuffy conclaves at faded seaside resorts,
passing obscure amendments to policies no-one will ever hear of again. But most
ordinary people nowadays conduct their internet lives, not through consuming
singular obsessions, but through multiple daily transactions which mix what
they believe in, with earning a living and having fun.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
Political Parties, as
institutions are dying (except those who have in some form or another adopted
the internet in their internal structures, like Momentum and Labour). This is
one of the reasons why our politics seems so bewildering and senseless to
ordinary people and voters. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
Our Party is in an extremely
hazardous condition. Unless we do something radical and different soon, our old
members will become disheartened and our new members will fade away.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
Here is my proposition. The
Party Board should commission a study which would report in short order (but
before the end of July) to investigate whether and if so how and in what time
frame, the Lib Dems could be converted into a modern, internet based political
organisation (LibDems.org), structured around a low overhead, low cost of
entry, mass movement model in which a one person one vote internet enabled
democracy, was the normal way of taking all our key decisions.<span class="MsoFootnoteReference"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-left: 42.55pt; margin-right: 39.3pt; margin-top: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
Liberator Collectivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02796953425426831553noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-61072332853269804412016-11-08T19:24:00.002+00:002016-11-08T19:24:24.529+00:00Are the Lib Dems conning the 48%?<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">The media and right-wing demagogues are attacking the independence of
the judiciary - and, by extension, the rule of law. An element among them
appears to be suggesting vigilante action against Gina Miller and those seeking
to uphold Parliamentary democracy.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 9.5pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">What exactly is the Liberal Democrat leadership doing?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 9.5pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">In the Witney by-election some activists claimed the party's pro-EU
message was concealed from literature to all voters. It certainly was
kept off centre stage while used heavily in targeted mailings.
Anecdotally, this strategy was electorally successful. Time will
tell whether similar strategies work in the much more pro-Remain territory of
Richmond Park.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 9.5pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">But a Liberal party that seems finally to be agreed on the need for a
core vote does not seem to be using this golden opportunity to seize that
pro-EU territory. Nick Clegg - still a divisive figure - now appears to
support EU withdrawal if it means remaining in the single market. Other
Lib Dem MPs remain off-message, or would do if only the party were clear what
message it had.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 9.5pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">There has been some lip service paid to welcoming the High Court
judgment - but nothing more. No Liberal vision of what an Article 50
negotiating position- nor a critique that in fact no sustainable position is
possible. Perhaps that is because of the
contradiction at the heart of that position.
While saying the Lib Dems are the 'party of remain', or saying 'the Lib
Dems are the party that wants the softest Brexit possible' are both coherent
positions, mixing them is not.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 9.5pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Surely the Liberal position is to trenchantly oppose mob rule?
That should mean both holding the Government to its commitment to respect
the independence of the judiciary, and to remind all that incitement is a
criminal offence - and that far-right extremists running papers or in the form
of UKIP leaders who incite violence face jail.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 9.5pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">And on the subject of mob rule, the extremist-legitimising mindset of the
broader media must be challenged. After all, the Liberal Democrats will
hardly lose much coverage over such challenge.
For example, the party has for years taken a stance on the BBC that is
inherently conservative - even Conservative; the party does not challenge
broken British institutions, as a rule. Party figures have clamped down on any
challenge to the established orthodoxy. As the corporation has retrenched
into being part of Britain's problem, it as with other failing institutions
deserve robust challenge.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 9.5pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">But back to the Lib Dems. It is pretty much the worst of all
possible worlds to pay lip service about being the voice of Remain voters while
at the same time leaving open the possibility of voting to trigger Article
50. The ordure heaped at Labour for its
muddled position demonstrates that if you want to become politically active to
fight EU withdrawal, it is not the party.
For the Lib Dems to do the same in that context is tactically stupid as
well as politically wrong.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 9.5pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">The idea that you can fight your way back onto the political map with
only 8 MPs as part of a non-existent political orthodoxy is, to use a technical
term, bollocks. When fighting a must-win by-election against a plutocrat
fraudulently portraying himself as an independent outsider, it is doubly
bollocks. Even some <a href="https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd1Wprzg0gQD41YyXVQSzlULQcVu9EhHuf77rZvspfPzosJfQ/viewform?c=0&w=1">activists are
threatening to take action</a> to help the party hit this gaping open goal.
As nobody else will do it, it is up to Tim Farron to point out when this
system is rigged.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Liberator Collectivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02796953425426831553noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-85584994439694939812016-10-24T10:26:00.001+01:002016-10-24T10:26:08.298+01:00Reflections on Witney<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">It is evident that the Lib Dem performance in Witney was an overwhelmingly positive occurrence. The biggest swing in a Conservative-held seat since the freak Winchester by-election of 1997, the campaign was also remarkable for its positive and welcoming atmosphere. The party has learned to have fun again; it has been a unifying experience.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">To what extent, though, has it contributed to the party's recovery from the long-term damage sustained under Nick Clegg's leadership? This is more debatable.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">The starting base was a local party in decline for a decade: a track record of campaigning that was patchy but had covered most of the district at some point or another. Only the unusual </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.6667px;">stronghold</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.6667px;"> of </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">Charlbury & Finstock ward could now be described as fertile territory; however, there was potential to grow support in a Remain-voting, affluent seat. Local councillor Liz Leffman - who in May recorded the ninth-best council ward result in the UK, and whose partner is a former Red Guard Young Liberal - was quickly selected.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">A good opportunity, then, for some campaigning innovation - especially with large numbers of activists old and new ready to descend on an easily-accessible location. A well-located HQ and a notably friendlier team than that of by-elections past made a big difference; people wanted to come back.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">While some innovation did take place, visitors did question whether more could have been done. A seat with over 100 different settlements could have lent itself to this. The campaign, however, did use a local issue (housing development) and localised strong stories about the NHS. This was made easier as the candidate (one of an all-local shortlist) had a good campaigning track record on the issue, and more or less neutralised the damage done to the party’s reputation by the Health & Social Care Act.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">The mood among the various pro-EU '48%' groups was channeled although reports of the kind of strong pro-Europe messages that made it onto literature - for the first time in decades – were mixed. Apart from in the partly military community of Carterton this seemed to resonate. Where it worked particularly well was in galvanising campaign support which came from outside the party as well as a significant quality from the post-Clegg membership. This led to a particularly heavy blizzard of literature, questioned by some on the campaign.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">Also questioned was the campaign’s stance on housing. West Oxfordshire contains the first Community Land Trust in the country (set up in Stonesfield in the 1970s) and Lib Dems in the district had a good reputation in pushing for provision of affordable housing to enable local people to stay in the area. The Tory Council had failed to renew its Local Plan, creating a free-for-all for developers, leading to NIMBY campaigning in an area with sky-high house prices. As a pro-housing party, it was surprising to see campaigning take that NIMBY line, although it was undoubtedly effective.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">The Tories tried to select a dull, play-it-safe candidate; a solidly pro-hunt and anti-EU local councillor. What they didn't count on were some wooden hustings performances in a constituency where such things still mattered; a toxic combination for the largely soft and pro-EU Tory vote.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">The result was a massive swing - bigger than Romsey or Bromley, but unfortunately the 2015 starting base left simply too much to do. A vast number of stakeboards demonstrated momentum. It is said that the notoriously poor by-election aftercare support will be ramped up.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">Nonetheless the Labour vote held up; indeed it seems they increased their share in Witney town itself while it fell everywhere else. Their candidate was also local and anti-Corbyn. The Greens' local celebrity Larry Sanders ensured that the progressive anti-Tory vote was firmly split. This should be a lesson for those seeking anti-Tory pacts. Equally, it is a reminder that some will not forgive Lib Dems for Clegg.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background: white; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 9.5pt;">Liberal Democrats should not get ahead of themselves. In other local by-elections on the same day as Witney the party's vote remained as low as 3 percent. In parts of the UK less sympathetic to a ‘drawbridgfe down’ pro-European agenda, the message may not be so well-received. The Witney result will be ignored by most of the national media in its glee at the party’s fate. It will take several Witneys and a few wins to make a difference. But the party now knows it can happen, and it is getting its self-belief back. It has – if not a strategy – a vision. The next step is anticipated with some zeal.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Liberator Collectivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02796953425426831553noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-50924276229307703022016-06-19T19:59:00.000+01:002016-06-19T21:22:52.770+01:00What more can be done to improve the EU after the referendum? The debate that we are not having.What more can be done to improve the EU after the referendum? This is the key debate that we should be having that we are not having. That remainers should be having with antis even now - we can disagree, they can vehemently oppose and want out of the EU but we can still find out what they don't like and try to change some of those things (any that are actually real and factual) for the better. This is the debate that Stronger IN and David Cameron have failed to have. SI because the political strategists are only focused on winning the referendum - not how or afterwards - and Cameron because he's hung by the split and hostility in his own party. I hope that after a winning vote David Cameron can be more reasonable with his Ministerial opponents - at least the less nasty ones - than he was with libertarian David Davis after his leadership win. Conciliation will be needed but so is quick very quick action and results on reform. The campaign group Avaaz sent a survey to their members at the start of June about what more Avaaz could do, I think after the EU referendum to help in the UK on this issue. They are a great movement but they also missed the need for reform to take account of genuine concerns.<br />
<br />
The last question in the survey was:<br />
<br />
"5. Here is a list of possible changes that could be beneficial to the EU. Tick the 3 boxes that you personally think would make the most difference."<br />
<br />
They listed 11 changes. I agreed with two of them, and ticked those two, I partly agreed with others and disagreed fully or partly with many.<br />
<br />
The problem is that Avaaz hasn't tried to include those who are sceptical about or anti-the EU project. There was nothing in the list to help win those people over. The list in the survey seemed to be about increasing the central coordinating role of the EU, not taking seriously the concerns of people who don't want this. Other measures might appeal to political geeks and those already active in working for NGOs etc. (voting for a President of the Commission, citizens' initiatives and registers of lobbyists and transcripts of meetings). I doubt they would appeal to many who were not already active or paid to work on these issues.<br />
<br />
The language of the Avaaz survey is, like that of Nils Röper in an article in The Conversation*, inherently in support not just of the current political project but further integration. I support the former to a large extent, and the latter a bit. However, the point I am arguing is that real concrete steps need to be taken to engage Antis to feel they have not been cheated by the EU 'project'. This passage by Roper is more helpful<br />
<br />
“Discourse should mean constructive dissent. .. The EU surely depends on grand visions and zealous europhiles, but the sacred pursuit of an ever closer union might have undermined the EU’s cause. Taking deviating voices more seriously and allowing for more skirmishes should be the motto of the future.”<br />
<br />
On Friday 3 June, interviewed on Bloomberg TV Europe 0850 UK, Günter Verheugen (a former Commissioner) concluded that regardless of an IN or OUT vote that significant reforms of the EU are needed that don't need treaty change. Eg more subsidiarity, transparency. Avaaz could usefully ask people for their ideas in support of reform and other improvements - even if some might reply based on misinformation, misunderstanding or lack of understanding, this can all help improve the EU. Avaaz and other independent or neutral organisations (like Change.org and 38 Degrees), Liberals, Trade Unionists, can all be having conversations about real reform -from a range of philosophies or ideologies. So could charities if they aren't banned by the Tories from talking about changing policies and 'politics'. But most of all if we have a statesmanlike Prime Minister this is a conversation that he or she should be leading - across Britain and beyond.<br />
<br />
* Why EU referendum voters are like disgruntled commuters in Nigeria, 1 June 2016.<br />
<br />
“According to Hirschman, the appeal of exit not only increases with the level of discontent about the organisation, but also with the creeping feeling you are unable to change it. In the UK we find both growing unease with the EU and a perception of impotency to change it.”<br />
<br />
“Considering the complexity of a system that accommodates 28 member states, EU law making has actually become laudably transparent and accessible.”<br />
<br />
“The nub of the matter for the UK-EU disconnect is an ill-informed public. Britain’s path to European detachment has been paved by a dismissive domestic media.”<br />
Nils Röper Why EU referendum voters are like disgruntled commuters in Nigeria<br />
June 1, 2016<br />
http://theconversation.com/why-eu-referendum-voters-are-like-disgruntled-commuters-in-nigeria-59644<br />
<br />
Postscript; what kind of changes in the European Union would I like to see. Really I want a change in emphasis. Less regulation, less law, less attempt to direct from the centre. At the same time it is utterly reasonable that countries can reserve benefits to their own citizens until residency and / or work criteria - timescales - have been met. I'd like Britain to take the work element seriously for its own long term unemployed as well but both of these should be for decision at UK level. I also want to see the EU abide by the principles it claims to be founded on in its foreign policy where they are often ignored in action - with neighbours and further afield. Of course this is hypocrisy of the Commission and the Member States - all our countries. (The much maligned Nick Clegg raised the need for the EU to actually stick to its values in dealing with the Middle East and North Africa countries in a speech in 2011 about the Arab Spring before the term had even been coined). Here is a flavour, what I said in feedback to Avaaz, on that change of emphasis.
Avaaz survey responses.<br />
<br />
3. What do you think are the most negative aspects of the EU?<br />
<br />
A desire on the part of some in the centre to standardise unnecessarily and to look for an EU level rule or law when none is needed. Though no Governments say they support this many governments and ministers (or their civil servants) must tacitly do so for perceived economic or security reasons, or they fail to put a stop to sensible sounding but unnecessary standardisation. .. National parliaments could also use their consultative positions to put a stop to unnecessary legislation but they fail to scrutinise sufficiently and fail to do so.<br />
<br />
4. In order to support the EU more strongly, what kind of changes would you like to see?<br />
<br />
After hopefully Britain votes to stay in a clear statement by EU leaders, the European Parliament and especially the EU Commissioners that they will look at ways to reduce any real bureaucracy and unnecessary standardisation and to make clear concessions when so and efforts to engage with those in many countries who feel that the European Union centrally interferes in too much. Leaders of the EU engage people by cutting it back a bit. Show the antis that they are listening and acting by being conciliatory and acting. Give the antis something so they can say "we won that" "we got that".Kiron Reidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02483780931989805429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-5404753560080521392016-06-19T17:47:00.000+01:002016-06-20T14:45:09.571+01:00Can Cameron Do it - Post the EU referendum? What is needed if Yes are Victors.Not can Cameron win the EU referendum, if he loses then his, and the Tories' reckless gamble with our future will have failed, as it nearly did in Scotland. The official Yes campaign, Stronger IN, have been determined to repeat many if not all of the mistakes of the political campaigning and British establishment class from the Scottish referendum. If we lose, then many of us will be angry and in despair because Britain will not have voted to be the kind of country that we want it to be, it will not have voted for the shared cooperative European future that we want and believe in.<br />
<br />
But if the Remain campaign wins. Then hard work starts to pull the country together, to unite bitter wounds – among the people rather more importantly than among the Conservative Party (and Labour Party to lesser extent, as with the different views within the Greens and SNP also), to show antis and those who genuinely thought a better Britain lies out of the EU, that they are not ignored, that their views are listened to and acted upon, and for Cameron or whoever to achieve a better improved less centralised EU to try and avoid this rift continuing. Can Cameron do this? I'm not at all sure that he can, given his failure to present much vision in the referendum campaign, and given the bitter splits in his party so that if he wins his Eurosceptics will continue to put knives in his chest as they did with John Major. Only in a speech on security has Cameron put a principled and positive vision for Europe, one not based on the Stronger In political hack majority narrative of economics and fear.<br />
<br />
I'm not sure David Cameron can achieve this, but someone has to, and Liberals have to support them. We have to try. Many principled, progressive and educated modern young (ish) Britains from varied backgrounds have worked together on the ground and in the central campaign to keep Britain in the EU because they believe it is better for our future. Those people don't believe – like some of the EU elite appear to – that the EU is perfect, they want a better EU. We mustn't ignore on the anti side that there are reasonable disagreements with EU policies - different opinions - about the CAP or EU fisheries policy. There is no monolithic EU elite - the 'Left' use similar dismissive collective language to ignore anyone they don't like or want to blame - but there are some in positions of power and influence within the EU institutions who are genuinely out of touch and who should listen to ordinary people more.<br />
<br />
<i>That</i> EU elite includes in my experience some starry eyed Lib Dems and some of those with vested interests from the funding (from MEPs to academics – who want to keep their positions or keep the expansion of centralised influence going, needlessly). At the same time experienced Anti-EU membership voters do have a point. They never <i>have</i> been given a vote on the creation of the European Union or on the EU as a political project. Yes the European Community project has always been political. <i>Yes</i> they have had votes for Governments and parties (well not really, though they don't care about that), <i>Yes</i> many democrats are dubious about referendums, but the antis' point made by many older voters is perfectly valid that they voted for a Common Market, they didn't vote for this. As I wrote months ago "If people feel after the referendum that they’ve not had a fair vote – like in Scotland, or in the previous referendum on membership of the European Economic Community, people feel somehow cheated – then there will be limited acceptance of the result and regular renewed calls for a new referendum leading to more instability in our national political debate of the kind that undermined John Major’s government and has bubbled as a hot and cold war in the Tory party under Cameron. People need to feel they are making a well informed positive choice." https://kironreid.co.uk/2016/02/14/what-the-in-campaign-is-doing-right-and-what-it-is-doing-wrong/<br />
<br />
It has been great to be a part of a non-party and all party campaign on a very important issue instead of the parochialism and self-interest of British local and national politics with its divisive confrontational party political style. Let us put that energy to supporting campaigns for a better Britain in a better European Union. If Cameron wins, if he can vanquish the Johnson Jabberwock, then he has a once in a lifetime chance to build wide support in Britain for working with a wide range of parties from across Europe – especially those in central and Eastern Europe who share concerns about too much central dictat – to make the European Union better. Just because it is this way it does not have to stay this way. Cameron achieved a few small concessions in his negotiations (hardly mentioned in the referendum campaign – the avoiding this hardly being very honest, hiding the issue of reform). If he can lead after 23 June then together a British led coalition can reform a better Europe. We can show the antis, the reasonable moderate Brexiters, that they have been listened to, and we will be Stronger In.Kiron Reidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02483780931989805429noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-78174516963435527072016-05-20T19:13:00.002+01:002016-05-21T08:58:10.662+01:00A Zip for Europe....... in EnglandRecent arrivals to the Liberal Democrats might have thought that the conclusive vote at Federal Conference on remedying inequality in candidate selection had resolved things. However, one of the party's less transparent bodies, the English Council, is debating a series of resolutions as to how the party's candidate selections in England will be run.<br>
<br>
For the uninitiated, the English Council is a body of around 160 representatives, normally elected by regional parties [and the renamed Young Liberals]. The obscureness of the electoral procedure ensures that party bureaucrats are best placed to attend. Nonetheless it takes decisions on substantial issues including membership and candidate selections. Its next meeting is in early July.<br>
<br>
The English Candidates' Committee has put forward proposals on candidate selection for Westminster and Europe. The proposals for the latter reserve places in the top 2 of the lists for women and in the top 4 for BAME candidates, provided 'sufficient' candidates apply. [No definition of 'sufficient' is given]. The motions don't take up the full range of measures passed in the York motion, which may give rise to some debate. News of the Welsh Party's position is awaited with interest given its historic opposition to any positive action measures.<br>
<br>
One proposal that will attract significant opposition, however, has been tabled by Liberal Democrat Women chair Liz Leffman, Belinda Brooks-Gordon and Kirsten Johnson. It proposes full 'zipping' for women candidates. However, it proposes nothing to address other under-representations in the party addressed in the York motion, and merely asks that some provision be made. It is also worded in a gender-specific manner.<div><br></div><div>The motion is very unlikely to be received well by those campaigning for the party to meet the non-representation of people with disabilities or from BAME communities, or for LGBT+ campaigners seeking to improve current representation levels; scathing comments from members of Ethnic Minority Lib Dems [EMLD] have already started to appear. Its submitters have evidently not learned from the behind-the-scenes row between the movers of the York diversity motion and those from EMLD and others furious that the original motion effectively proposed positive action only for white middle-class women. It seems some Liberal Democrats still think that equality doesn't apply to all protected characteristics.<br>
<br>
The 'zipping' motion reads in full as follows:<br>
<br>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The English Council notes:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->The
passage of the Electing Diverse MPs Policy at the Liberal Democrat Spring
Conference 2016, and the agreement to adopt a range of measures to improve the
diversity of our Parliamentary Party;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->The
need to ensure the diversity of our candidates for the European Parliament
elections in 2019;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->3.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->That
the European Parliament has recently published draft legislation calling on
member states to take all necessary
measures to promote the principle of equality between men and women throughout
the whole electoral process, emphasising in this connection the importance of
gender-balanced electoral lists;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->4.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->That
in the same draft legislation, member states are encouraged to take measures to promote adequate representation of minorities;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->5.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->That the Equality Act (2010) enables
parties to take action to promote diversity.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Council believes:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->That
the diversity of our current elected representatives at Parliamentary level is
unacceptably low;<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Council calls for<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 90.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->1.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->All
regional lists for the European Elections to be zipped, as in the 1999 European
Elections, with the gender of the candidates alternating down the list. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 90.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->50%
of regional lists for the European Elections to be topped by a female
candidate, with regions paired with others of similar winnability to determine
whether the list is topped with a man or a woman.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 90.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->3.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->Provision
to be made for candidates from under-represented groups (those with
disabilities, BAME, LGBT+) to ensure adequate representation.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 90.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<br></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 90.0pt; mso-add-space: auto; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -18.0pt;">
<br></div>
</div>Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-60483001682116621762016-05-10T19:41:00.000+01:002016-05-10T22:19:37.748+01:00Liberal Democrats to scrap Nationbuilder?<i>Note: posts on this blog are published by a small team. Therefore the name listed as the author of the post is not necessarily the person who wrote it, but rather is the person who was responsible for publishing it.</i><br />
<br />
Sources inform <i>Liberator </i>that Liberal Democrat HQ has decided to scrap its arrangement with Nationbuilder at the end of the year.<br />
<br />
Nationbuilder is an American company which provides campaign websites for organisations like political parties which include features such as mass emails, event management, volunteer recruitment and online donations. The national Lib Dem website and the SNP national website, for instance, are both built with Nationbuilder.<br />
<br />
In place of Nationbuilder, LDHQ apparently intends to build its own in-house replacement with the help of volunteers. How well this goes will remain to be seen - not least given the disastrous experience of previous in-house projects like the membership system.<br />
<br />
While this will no doubt come as an annoying disappointment to the local parties and activists who have spent a lot of time and money setting up Nationbuilder websites and learning how to use them, one key an upside to an in-house website system is that it will actually be able to talk to the party’s Connect election software and its Salesforce membership database. This was one of the big drawbacks of Nationbuilder which is a major rival of the company behind Connect.<br />
<br />
Of course, the real reason for this decision might just be cost. The off-the-shelf price of Nationbuilder for an organisation wanting to store and use up to 81,000 email addresses is almost $1,000 a month - with an additional charge of $20 a month for every extra 2,000 email addresses. While this is quite steep even for the cash strapped Liberal Democrats with a large national email database it’s even steeper considering that this same monthly charge was also applied to every single local party with a Nationbuilder website.<br />
<br />
So is this a case of common sense cost-saving coupled with a new willingness to use tools that actually meet the party’s need rather than the latest slick, high-price American product?<br />
<br />
Perhaps.<br />
<br />
It’s worth noting that the company Prater Raines, which was set up by Liberal Democrats for Liberal Democrats in 2002 to provide affordable websites, has long provided a service which, if not quite as slick as Nationbuilder, is significantly cheaper and can do most of the same things that Nationbuilder can and a few it can’t, such as checking whether someone is a paid up member of the party or not.<br />
<br />
Indeed, it’s telling that the party leader, Tim Farron, uses Prater Raines for his constituency website rather than Nationbuilder. Some might wonder if, rather than creating something new from scratch, HQ might be better off working with Prater Raines to improve what’s already available.<br />
<br />
Nonetheless, scrapping an expensive system far too sophisticated for most local party’s needs and replacing it with a system that actually talks to the party’s other systems is in itself a promising step. Whether this change of approach will actually last is something which can only remain to be seen.<br />
<br />
UPDATE: <i>While we have no reason to doubt the truthfulness of our sources, Jake Holland from Lib Dem HQ has made the following statement in response to this post on facebook:</i><br />
<br />
<i>"Contract is up for renewal later this year, but there is no plan to ditch it. It's still the best platform out there for local parties. </i><br />
<div>
<i><br />We are looking at how we can build a platform for volunteers to develop new tools and apps on, that is true, but so far we are looking at building out a set of (for the technical out there) APIs. For example, we worked with a few volunteers (thank you Fred Fisher) to build a telling app, which we'll be looking to test out soon, based on an API we made available."</i></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-66744943723009635142016-04-18T14:47:00.001+01:002016-04-18T14:47:13.857+01:00What chance of a radical welfare policy?Sources who’ve had sight of documents for the Lib Dem working group developing welfare policy report real cause for concern to <i><a href="http://liberatormagazine.org.uk/en/">Liberator</a></i>.<br />
After Tim Farron’s oft-repeated comment that the party shouldn’t be afraid to stand up for what it believes in, even if it makes 75% of the population hate them, as long as it makes the other 25% love them, there had been hope that policymaking would break from recent trends and seriously consider radical ideas. Alas, this appears to have been a hope too far according to our sources.<br />
With the draft policy paper due by the end of the month, the agendas for the Social Security Working Group, chaired by Jenny Willott, are dedicated to multiple examinations in detail at specific areas of the current welfare system to consider how best to manage things.<br />
Rather than consider a big idea as to what a Liberal welfare state would look like, the working group seems destined towards making many small suggestions on how to improve different benefits. But, while proposals to tinker with childcare provision and eligibility requirements for JSA might be worthy, they will inevitably be so detailed that no one will pay any attention to them. Once again, Liberal Democrat welfare policy will be without a big idea capable of grabbing attention.<br />
Apparently big ideas such as Negative Income Tax, Basic Income and a Social Insurance system were considered at earlier meetings. However, no concrete decisions were made either way and all subsequent meetings have focused on tinkering with the existing system.<br />
This is particularly concerning given the substantial levels of support in some sections of the Liberal Democrats for the concept of Negative Income Tax/Basic Income - one of the few issues that people on both the left and the right of the party can agree on. And certainly the concept of giving every citizen a minimum level of income with no strings attached is a radical one which would meet the “big idea” criteria.<br />
Given the idea’s popularity it would be an absolute travesty if the party conference didn’t at least get a chance to discuss the concept or not. Unfortunately, however, given the working group’s current direction of travel it seems very unlikely to feature in the policy paper. If so conference won’t even have the option of discussing it.<br />
Of course, in pre-coalition days one solution to this kind of issue where opinions were divided was for a working group to present two policy papers to the Federal Policy Committee so that the membership could make a genuine choice between two options. While this practice was largely abandoned under Clegg’s leadership in favour of insisting on a single, uncontroversial report from working groups, it is ripe for being revived.<br />
If the working group were to do so then they may well be able to present party members with a choice between the tinkering-around-the-edges approach it seems to be on the verge of recommending and a radical, ‘big idea’ on welfare reform. That would certainly be best in terms of democratic policy making and escaping the old working group problem of only producing policy recommendations acceptable to their most small-c conservative members.<br />
Whether this actually happens or not remains to be seen. But given the current schedule of meetings for the working group we wouldn’t hold our breath.Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-19198274601062174432016-03-08T12:55:00.001+00:002016-03-08T13:03:49.311+00:00Ralph Bancroft<span style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;">It is with great sadness that we share news of the passing of our friend Ralph Bancroft: head of the Liberal Whips' office during the Lib-Lab Pact, member of staff for the party in local government for many years, member of the Liberator Collective and Liberal Revue team, for many years compère of the Glee Club and above all an instinctive Liberal. Ralph was in his mid-sixties.</span><div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;">Based in Harrow for many years, Ralph was a Young Liberal and went to Sussex University before being employed in Parliament, in the heady days of there being 14 Liberal MPs. He rose to work in the Whips' Office during the 1977-8 Lib-Lab Pact. He subsequently used his considerable political acumen to advise Liberals and Liberal Democrats in council administrations, and was particularly proud to become Head of Office of Andrew Wiseman's administration in Harrow in the 1990s. Ralph was also a champion on online engagement and of the cix online conferencing system that was an integral part of party activity at that time.</div><div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;">Together with his good friend the late Liz Rorison, Ralph and his ever-present pipe were also for many years the linchpin of the Glee Club as it transformed from an informal gathering around a hotel piano to the unique event it is today. He also appeared in many memorable sketches at the Liberal Revue.</div><div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;">In recent years Ralph had suffered from ill health and in particular severe visual impairment. Friends and colleagues had asked: 'How is Ralph?'. The answer was that he was spending time listening to Radio 4 and keeping pace with current events. Thanks to Liberator colleague John Bryant, Ralph had been able to join Liberator Collective members from time to time at social events and relished talking about politics with friends over a pint of ale. The most recent occasion was barely a fortnight ago.</div><div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: UICTFontTextStyleBody; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Funeral arrangments will be advised later by the family.</span></div><br><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDpfKl06RmcuVJ2UpbkE46IN6bQT3GdoGM4ykHu4FTWHxkdXNgOfD6fwNPdm9SzdmaKH1Yerf37LCBvyHoO2d9ao0YVh5GvPZwJWTBnQWhuSIfBeT2WekOt4IclGFXJ6gtA4LXrc6xVpMF/s640/blogger-image--261206719.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDpfKl06RmcuVJ2UpbkE46IN6bQT3GdoGM4ykHu4FTWHxkdXNgOfD6fwNPdm9SzdmaKH1Yerf37LCBvyHoO2d9ao0YVh5GvPZwJWTBnQWhuSIfBeT2WekOt4IclGFXJ6gtA4LXrc6xVpMF/s640/blogger-image--261206719.jpg"></a></div>Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-5162889750688525142016-02-11T22:36:00.004+00:002016-02-11T22:36:57.765+00:00Jim Gave The Land To The Landlords<div>
Land reform and support for the rights of crofters and tenant farmers has for over a century been a keystone Liberal value; a symbol of what the party has stood for. "The Land" with its clarion call for reform is the anthem of Liberalism. Since the days of Gladstone, the party has stood up against landowner vested interests, backed invariably by the Tories.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Until now. This week in a Scottish Parliament committee on the Land Reform Bill, Jim Hume MSP for the Liberal Democrats voted with the Tories against enhanced protection for tenant farmers. As Scottish commentator Lesley Riddoch put it, <span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;">"</span><span style="background-color: rgba(255 , 255 , 255 , 0); font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; text-align: justify;">shameful for the party that introduced land rights for crofters in 1886".</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: rgba(255 , 255 , 255 , 0); font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; text-align: justify;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;">Hume has form, having recently voted against introducing Marine Protection Areas.</span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;">But what this serves to emphasise is not only the disastrous decline of the Lib Dems in Scotland and in particular rural Scotland; but the party's total lack of vision and direction.</span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;">Since at least the 2014 referendum, the battle of ideas in Scottish politics has been vacated by Labour and the Lib Dems. Astonishing in a country with a proud history of radicalism, the work of groups like the <a href="http://www.libdemvoice.org/liberal-futures-publishes-the-little-yellow-book-27345.html">Liberal Futures group </a>is sadly ignored by too many. Radical politics is alive and well; but exclusively on the pro-independence side of the divide through groups like Common Weal. As <a href="http://www.thenational.scot/comment/lesley-riddoch-the-land-reform-bill-is-a-win-but-theres-still-ground-to-be-gained.13551">Riddoch points out</a>, </span></span>the opportunity even exists for Scotland to deliver the Liberal holy grail of a Land Value Tax; it was one of three options set out by a cross-party commission on local taxation which reported in late 2015, alongside a local income tax. The Scottish Lib Dems have been silent on the subject.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
With only tentative steps taken towards the reform of Scotland's land laws (the land is in the ownership of fewer people than in any country in the developed world) under the Lib-Lab government in Holyrood from 1999-2007, the Nationalists have moved from inertia to <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35353760">strengthening legislation</a>. It appears this political territory has been entirely ceded by the Lib Dems, in spite of the party's consistently strong support in rural Scotland through the darkest days of the last century and until the recent SNP landslides.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Liberals have since last May's catastrophe talked (though not always acted) about clarifying and defining Liberal values in order to give the Liberal Democrats an identity and detoxify the party from association with hated Tory policies. In Scotland where the party alienated 45% of the population by identifying itself as 'unionist' and where the Tories are hated even more, learning from past mistakes is at least as important.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Instead - and with the right wing political market crowded and a relatively popular Scottish Tory leader in Ruth Davidson, the mistakes are being compounded and repeated.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The party in Scotland has an opportunity to partially redeem itself in March by voting the right way. However, the obituary for its abject performance in May's election and possible wipeout could be written now. It urgently needs to present a coherent picture of what it stands for.</div>
Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-13255546178426254292016-02-10T12:57:00.000+00:002016-02-14T17:15:05.037+00:00What the In campaign is doing right and what it is doing wrong.<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">The
pro-staying in EU campaign has avoided some key mistakes from the AV
and Scottish referendums but is still making some significant errors.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>What
it is doing right.</b></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">1)
It is not fronted by politicians.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">2)
It is not <i>only</i> talking about economics.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">3)
It is talking about issues that people care about.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">4)
It is talking in language that people understand.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">5)
It appears united, as much as it is so far getting any coverage or is
visible.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>What
the In Campaign is doing wrong.</b></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">1)
It is not talking about ideas, positive ideals, principles or vision
but almost entirely about economics.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">2)
It is being negative – in some if thankfully not most of its
literature.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">3)
It does not say who they are.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">4)
It does not say who is funding the campaign or where their money
comes from.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">5)
It is talking mostly about money and cost-benefit, if not the
directly the economy and jobs.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>What
it is doing right.</b></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>1)
It is not fronted by politicians.</b> This was a blunder of the
pro-AV campaign (which would have been a pretty insignificant voting
reform in any event), and a blunder of the Better Together campaign
to prevent an artificial break up of the United Kingdom.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Britain
Stronger in Europe is headed by the former boss of Marks &
Spencer, Stuart Rose. He is a genuine successful businessman who has
been head of a thoroughly British company (founded by Jewish
immigrants). Karren Brady the football manager and business woman is
also a key figure. The agent is Will Straw, son of Labour minister
Jack Straw and one of the current generation of Labour Party dynastic
scions. But it makes sense to have an experienced campaigner running
the campaign. Though the ones running the AV and Scottish referendum
anti-breakaway campaigns were pretty hopeless. The populist nasty
right wing press and politicians, and populist anti-political
establishment Scottish nationalist establishment politicians ran
rings round them.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Lord
Stuart Rose does look like another old man in a suit, but nothing
like as badly as the old Tory politician who is a figurehead for the
antis. I don't dismiss the experience of age but here is where I
would have preferred some populist celebrity culture.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>2)
It is not only talking about economics. </b>The campaign is also
talking about Britain's role in Europe (the visionary part of its
message), security, about opportunity and sometimes about the
environment, about peace. The <span style="color: navy;"><span lang="zxx"><u><a href="http://www.strongerin.co.uk/">http://www.strongerin.co.uk/</a></u></span></span>
website has the headline “Britain is stronger, safer and better off
in Europe than we would be on our own.” “More jobs and
opportunities” and these key phrases repeated “The benefits of
being in—a stronger economy, stronger security and stronger
leadership on the world stage”. If you click on the Menu button it
only has those tags along with “A Stronger Britain”. I happen to
agree; and maybe these key slogans will convince the undecided or
some antis that Yes, in reality, is the right answer. But they are
also the same slogans that the Leave campaign will be using, and
their brainwashed recipients of <i>Daily Mai</i>l and <i>Daily
Express</i> propaganda (and many Labour supporters and figures
believe it too) are likely to agree with them deployed by the antis
because they say what they want to hear.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>3)
It is talking about issues that people care about.</b> Jobs, mostly
jobs, prices, and security and sometimes the environment. Its emails
include the slogan “Thank you for being a part of the campaign to
keep Britain stronger, safer and better off.” Sir Hugh Orde, the
former top police chief, argues that the EU is good for security. By
contrast, the pro-AV campaign both failed to explain what the
proposed reform was for and greatly exaggerated the possible
benefits. They sloganised and failed to explain either the detail or
get across why a change to the vote system was relevant.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>4)
It is talking in language that people understand.</b> The recent
newspaper that was distributed around the country was well put
together and clearly written, with a variety of stories on different
relevant issues affecting people. (<i>The Guardian</i> reports that
10M newspapers were to be delivered – presumably paid delivery by
the Royal Mail. I know copies went out in London, and city centre and
suburban Liverpool).</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>5)
It appears united,</b> as much as it is so far getting any coverage
or is visible. The anti-EU campaign meanwhile is split and arguing
amongst itself over who or which faction is top dog. I don't believe
in unity being needed for the sake of unity. The press, party
leaders, and opponents are obsessed with that – genuine
disagreement and debate is normal in any group. The antis however
seem to like fighting amongst themselves almost as much as they like
hating the EU, presumably because they are such a coalition of people
with completely different ideas about what they believe in, and only
agree on what they are against. Hopefully the In campaign can put a
positive vision of a modern, pluralist, tolerant, thriving country
that plays a key part in Europe and on the World stage. The best of
Britain, not the best of mythical 1950s Britain.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>What
the In Campaign is doing wrong.</b></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>1)
It is not talking about ideas, positive ideals, principles or vision
but almost entirely about economics.</b> It is almost entirely
talking about jobs – rational arguments about the cost to people of
leaving the EU and the financial benefits of being in. But making
almost the same mistake that the Better Together campaign made of
leaving the idealistic, principled, visionary side to the breakaway
campaign. True it will be hard to make creating a pro-reformed
European Union a romantic vision, unlike the wilful nostalgia and
rose tinted glasses of the antis, or the 'all things to all people'
Independence campaign, but for some of us the vision of a peaceful
united Europe is a romantic vision we would like to see. Living life
in peace. Instead of the anti-vision of constant conflict (albeit not
literal conflict thankfully).</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Stronger
In fails to adequately promote the successes, and extreme present
necessity of European countries to all work together in a grown up
way. Further it fails to promote reform or the need for reform. Sure
this referendum cannot deliver reform but the Yes side cannot ignore
the flaws of the EU and the areas where reform is badly needed. The
tabloid anti-European Parliament and bloated Brussels bureaucrats may
be completely awful myths but some of the criticism is fair. There is
nothing on the In website answering lies about the EU or
misinformation. Where are people likely to look to fact check? Where
can they? – there aren't even links here. Yet the campaign is
already failing to be completely truthful, by overegging the pudding.
The newspaper and website cite the EU abolishing mobile phone roaming
charges but it hasn't abolished them yet, as customers obviously know
if they travel abroad. Why on Earth didn't they just tell the truth –
the very good truth that the EU has massively cut mobile phone
roaming costs and is going to abolish them. I think it was MEPs who
did most on this (but it may have been the Commission).</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">There
is a Mythbusters page in the newspaper, but it is a list of
simplistic generalisations. A list of 6 'UKIP MYTH' statements with
typical statements like those UKIP and their parrots come out with,
but no answer to real specific anti-EU myths. The criticism and bad
reputation of the EU is most undeserved but partly deserved –
failure to acknowledge the latter being a key problem of official
pro-EU material. (There's no search facility, making the website of
limited use).</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>2)
It is being negative – </b>in some if thankfully not most of its
literature. The advert on Facebook is negative – immediately apt to
be designated as 'scaremongering' by the antis. “What would leaving
Europe mean for YOU and YOUR family?” “there will be pain”. It
exposes the negative possible consequences identified by leading
Leave EU figures, but it simply seems negative. Negative arguably
worked for anti-AV, and for the anti-England, Wales, Scotland, NI
split, but it is unlikely to convince the stuck in a 1950s idealised
Britain older generation, and ignorant anti-difference younger
people, that there is something good to vote for. The website does
promote more positive messages. While I am no fan of NUS it is good
to see the NUS President represented as the EU has been great for
generations of students having more opportunity to widen their
horizons than ever before. Many others on the Facebook group have
called for more positives in the campaign.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>3)
It does not say who they are.</b> The campaign newspaper does not say
who the people behind the campaign are – to that extent, a glossy
newspaper, it looks like party political or marketing PR. They miss a
trick by failing to mention prominent supporters, although some
business people and ordinary people are included. It looked like
glossy political marketing even if the content was quite good. There
is no human touch to encourage you to get involved. There is nothing
about who set up the campaign (because presumably it was mostly
actually lead by party political activists, as well as a few
pro-Europe activists). Whereas the antis will eagerly roll out their
populist figureheads. Worse, the website fails to include this
information where there is no excuse for a lack of information and
lack of openness. The Facebook group under 'About' is a blank.
There's also no address. Ok, it's online and points you to the
website but it would take seconds to put up the information.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>4)
It does not say who is funding the campaign or where their money
comes from.</b> Neither the newspaper or the website includes this
information. There is nothing about where the money to fund the
campaign came from or comes from. Sure, failure of the anti-electoral
reform funders to out themselves as rich Tory donors, corporate
raiders and newspapers barons didn't harm the campaign because the
public believed the drivel they spouted. But the pro-EU campaign has
to be totally above board – because of the bad reputation of the
EU, and because the antis will show their nasty anti-social
tendencies. Articles <span style="font-style: normal;">in </span><i>the
FT</i><span style="font-style: normal;">, on the BBC, and on Sky
inform that it has received large amounts of money from big financial
institutions and banks.</span></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><b>5)
It is talking mostly about money and cost-benefit,</b> if not the
directly the economy and jobs. See (1) above. A case about economics
is not going to win people over in hearts and minds. If people feel
after the referendum that they've not had a fair vote – like in
Scotland or in the previous referendum on membership of the European
Economic Community, people feel somehow cheated – then there will
be limited acceptance of the result and regular renewed calls for a
new referendum leading to more instability in our national political
debate of the kind that undermined John Major's government and has
bubbled as a hot and cold war in the Tory party under Cameron. People
need to feel they are making a well informed positive choice. The
evidence on prices is important. I'm entirely convinced that prices
in real terms for most things now are cheaper than at any time in my
lifetime because of our membership of the EU. But is that enough to
get people out to vote For?</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">I
entirely agree with the reforms that David Cameron is trying to
negotiate. I think his recent agreement announced by Donald Tusk is a
good place to start for a fairer, more cost effective, improved EU.
Maybe when (I hope) Cameron achieves a better deal, some real wins,
the In campaign will at least promote these reforms as a victory for
Britain and for reformers and genuine pro-Europeans everywhere. After
all, Mrs. Thatcher's win on Britain's rebate helped her and the
Tory's image for years. Concessions from those who do not want to
relinquish excessive EU level standardisation may be the defining
achievement of David Cameron's Prime Ministership, just as Tony
Blair's sealing the peace in Northern Ireland was his most important
positive historic legacy.</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">I will reproduce this post on my website with a few extra notes, omitted here.
</span></span></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
Kiron Reidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02483780931989805429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-42978481070602377272015-12-31T17:43:00.001+00:002015-12-31T17:43:41.858+00:00Perhaps not the best of years: Lord Bonkers in 2015<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyXSey-r84M8axVWJPFhfbhYFgFna9Ta90PAd2wE3EMVHkwSIgjIs__IpUHFU156wu_vivahsYlfxWWRGgxY5MOxERhLpWHlywXhLNLobcM5NOybbXkz5pdOTbwhgmrZfXeO9mo_wKWEXp/s1600/bonkers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgyXSey-r84M8axVWJPFhfbhYFgFna9Ta90PAd2wE3EMVHkwSIgjIs__IpUHFU156wu_vivahsYlfxWWRGgxY5MOxERhLpWHlywXhLNLobcM5NOybbXkz5pdOTbwhgmrZfXeO9mo_wKWEXp/s1600/bonkers.jpg" /></a></div>
<b>January</b><br />
<br />
An article by Paddy Ashdown in which he spoke of his love of the poetry of <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/beith-be-not-proud-though-some-have.html">John Donne</a> led Lord Bonkers to remember the first Liberal Democrat leadership election:<br />
<blockquote>
Many though Alan Beith was the frontrunner, but Ashplant began his speech to the first hustings by looking his opponent in the eye and declaiming: </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<i>Beith be not proud, though some have called thee</i><br />
<i>Mighty and dreadfull, for, thou art not so. </i></blockquote>
<blockquote>
This was widely counted as something of a zinger, and poor Beith's campaign never recovered from the blow.</blockquote>
<b>February</b><br />
<br />
Looking forward to the general election, Lord Bonkers was confident that our leader would <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/lord-bonkers-diary-there-can-be-no.html">hold his seat</a>:<br />
<blockquote>
Some reason that he has upset the student vote because, after waving that wretched pledge of his at everybody last time round, he stung them for a small fortune when he got the first whiff of power. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
However, given that the polls closed as early as 10pm, one has to question how many students actually made it into the booth to vote for him last time.</blockquote>
<b>March
</b><br />
<br />
Lord Bonkers reacted to the news that the police were taking an interest in <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/lord-bonkers-on-harvey-proctor.html">Harvey Proctor</a>, secretary to the Duke of Rutland, in characteristically measured tones:<br />
<blockquote>
A quiet day on the Bonkers Hall Estate. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
In particular, I don’t have the police turning over the cottage of one of my employees – unlike another Rutland aristocrat I could mention. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Ha ha. Ha ha. Ha ha ha. Ha ha ha. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Oh my! Oh my!</blockquote>
<b>April</b><br />
<br />
The reburial of <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/lord-bonkers-diary-richard-iii-twycross.html">Richard III</a> in Leicester Cathedral was beamed around the world:<br />
<blockquote>
I won’t pretend to have agreed with every detail of the celebrations: whilst I agree it was a nice touch to give the old boy a ride round on the Sunday, I couldn't help feeling that taking him back to the battlefield at Bosworth was a trifle tactless. Couldn't he have gone to Twycross Zoo or Foxton locks instead?</blockquote>
<b>June
</b><br />
<br />
The <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/theyll-eat-you-for-breakfast.html">Revd Hughes</a> was determined to undertake missionary work among the tribes of the Upper Welland Valley:<br />
<blockquote>
he tells me he has arranged for a locum vicar to take Divine Service and visit the sick whilst he is away. “He’s young and keen and believes every word of the Liberal Democrat manifesto is the literal truth.” I eye him levelly: “It’s not Farron, is it?”</blockquote>
The next day Lord Bonkers' <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/lord-bonkers-diary-unless-its-alan.html">fears were confirmed</a>:<br />
<blockquote>
It is Farron. I find him in St Asquith’s taking down the signed photograph of Leicestershire’s 1975 County Championship winning team from behind the altar. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
"Let me make a few things clear from the start," I tell him. "We are not going to sing 'Shine, Jesus, Shine,' you are not removing the pews from the church and I am not going to kiss the person next to me – unless it’s Alan Beith, of course."</blockquote>
<b>August
</b><br />
<br />
Relations with <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/lord-bonkers-diary-choirboys-rifle.html">Tim Farron</a> remained a little strained:<br />
<blockquote>
This morning, when I pass by St Asquith’s to make sure that no more gargoyles have fallen, he stops me to ask why I insist the choirboys have rifle practice every week. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
What a question! He wouldn’t be asking it if a snap by-election were called.</blockquote>
And Lord Bonkers also met <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/lord-bonkers-diary-who-told-you-that.html">Alex Carlile</a>:<br />
<blockquote>
"I hear you’ve been asked to serve on the committee that is going to review freedom of information legislation," I say brightly. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
He looks at me suspiciously: "Who told you that?"</blockquote>
<b>September
</b><br />
<br />
As the Revd Hughes returned to St Asquith's we learnt more of Lord Bonkers' involvement in the <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/lord-bonkers-diary-straight-outta-nick.html">film industry</a>:<br />
<blockquote>
Today I attend the Oakham premiere of a film I helped finance: ‘Straight Outta Nick Compton’. It tells the story of an opening batsman who is unjustly treated and records the controversial single “Fuck tha Selectors” as a result. I see from its evening edition that The High Leicestershire Radical (which I happen to own) has given it five stars.</blockquote>
While his foreword to the new Liberator songbook referred back to the general election:<br />
<blockquote>
I don’t know about yours, but here in Rutland our election night party Fell a Bit Flat. It was barely past midnight when the band struck up the Dead March from ‘Saul’ and things did not get much more cheerful after that.</blockquote>
<b>November</b><br />
<br />
Complaints about 'political correctness' on The Great British Bake Off led Lord Bonkers to spill the beans on <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/lord-bonkers-diary-mary-berry-is.html">Mary Berry</a>:<br />
<blockquote>
I can exclusively reveal, ‘Red Mary’ has been behind every politically motivated strike, every violent demonstration and every act of industrial sabotage in Britain for decades. And who do people imagine baked the macaroons for the Angry Brigade?</blockquote>
<b>December</b><br />
<br />
The tradition of <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/christmas-traditions-at-bonkers-hall.html">decorating the domestic staff</a> for Christmas was maintained at Bonkers Hall.<br />
<br />
<i>Lord Bonkers opens his diary to <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/">Jonathan Calder</a>.</i>Lord Bonkershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14547787038561650422noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-37619510572315505532015-12-02T13:50:00.001+00:002015-12-02T14:04:15.166+00:00Is there any longer a point to the Liberal Democrats?A question many people are asking after the rump of 8 Lib Dem MPs agreed they would all vote to prop up David Cameron's latest attempt to bomb Syria.<br />
<br />
As a Liberator Collective colleague put it.... ' I have no idea where to start - I fluctuate from anger to despair. Even if you put the arguments about Syria themselves to one side...'. And on the basis of <a href="http://www.libdemvoice.org/farrons-five-tests-to-secure-lib-dem-support-for-uk-action-in-syria-48390.html">the tests by which the Lib Dems said they would decide</a> whether or not to back air strikes in Syria, they have absolutely not been met. In particular, there is no post-Daesh plan that would even fill the back of a fag packet, and no sign of British efforts to lead an international diplomatic consensus.<br />
<br />
Both Farron and Clegg have changed their tune in barely two months. Take Clegg (no - please, please do. Preferably to his natural home.) <a href="http://www.libdemvoice.org/liblink-nick-clegg-britain-should-stick-to-diplomacy-if-it-really-wants-to-help-syria-47806.html">In October he wrote in the Evening Standard</a> that 'dropping bombs on a country without a workable military approach on the ground made little strategic sense. On the substance on which we based our collective decision in 2014, nothing has changed. If anything, the evolving circumstances make air strikes less justified. All there is on the ground in Syria is chaos, blood and anger. We would simply be throwing more bombs into a furnace..... playing catch-up with other people’s bombing raids is hardly the most effective way of doing so.' Yesterday he jumped the gun on the whole party by blurting out to Sky that it would back the Tories, as if he were still leader. I am told that colleagues were furious. My response is that his behaviour is at least consistent for him.<br />
<br />
The damage to the Liberal Democrats, however, is political. "The Conservatives... with support from the DUP and the Liberal Democrats..." is what the media will record of today's debate and vote. The toxic accusation that the Liberal Democrats are simply propping up the Tories will still apply. Not a single Lib Dem MP is recognising that <a href="http://www.libdemvoice.org/ldv-members-survey-on-syria-67-oppose-airstrikes-now-butand-its-a-big-but-48468.html">almost three to one Lib Dem members currently, as it stands, oppose</a> action at this stage; the party is the only one (apart from the DUP) whose name is absent from the counter-proposal on the order papers today. While we should not be fooled by claims about the late Charles Kennedy's actions in 2003, the public will see the Liberal Democrats trashing the political legacy on intervention and Iraq, while backing action that repeats the same mistakes.<br />
<br />
It seems Liberal Democrat MPs have learned nothing of the mistakes of action in Iraq and more recently Libya; nothing of their mistakes from the Coalition Parliament; and have understood nothing of the gaping chasm in opinion between them and the party members that have worked hard to get them elected. The reaction of those members - many of whom didn't receive a single email from the party on how it would approach the issue - is of utter dismay.<br />
<br />
It is no surprise so many party members are asking: what's the point?Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-78182927527591619432015-09-25T16:21:00.002+01:002015-09-25T16:52:25.910+01:00Glee Club: 'the best night ever' (Sky News)This week's <a href="http://www.libdemvoice.org/introducingthe-glee-club-47493.html">Glee Club</a> was a great success, with the biggest attendance ever. Our supply of the Liberator Songbook sold out in record time. Onlookers <a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/liberal-democrats-glee-club-inside-6497378">seemed to enjoy it</a>. Even a journalist from Sky News called it "the best night ever" (and on being challenged she did not say she was being sarcastic).<br />
<br />
We have remembered two good friends at Autumn Glee Clubs who have recently departed us. Simon Titley was on the front cover of the <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/sirajdatoo/the-lib-dems-have-a-glee-club-where-they-sing-a">2014 Glee Club</a> Songbook and Charles Kennedy was remembered on the front page of the 2015 Glee Club Songbook. Charles was remembered fondly. We spoke to his family to see what their view was about the many songs about him before printing the songbook. They said that he would have wanted us to keep on singing about him. We did sing the song "Song in Praise of Charles Kennedy" although we did not sing any of the other songs. We did remove the Skye Boat Song from the songbook we did not get a response from the family before the songbook went to press. The "Song In Praise of Charles Kennedy", written by another dear, departed friend (Harriet Smith) was sung with passion and genuine affection. Charles was always 'more singed about than singing'. He will be sorely missed.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyTTAJCCxJhyQ8MBYqFMxRrhTsTygkds-zN4OTy_1AUiSM1iekRF8nFjtTsNXJh-7RjGB8B1lBYmo4NzdPh_GtCP696Cfm9azkNDz0mTNKQFVrnbt-drtU_jaE7ryrUQjkjvBulfv_CoU9/s1600/Cover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyTTAJCCxJhyQ8MBYqFMxRrhTsTygkds-zN4OTy_1AUiSM1iekRF8nFjtTsNXJh-7RjGB8B1lBYmo4NzdPh_GtCP696Cfm9azkNDz0mTNKQFVrnbt-drtU_jaE7ryrUQjkjvBulfv_CoU9/s320/Cover.jpg" width="223" /></a></div>
Members of the Glee Club will now find a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/855251654590766/?fref=ts">Facebook group</a> they can join. There will be more - much more - in 2016 as a certain famous song celebrates a significant birthday!<br />
<br />
Those after a copy of the 26th and biggest ever Liberator Songbook should <a href="http://liberatormagazine.org.uk/en/document/liberator-songbook/liberator-songbook.doc">click this link for details</a>.Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-22861907758526802702015-08-14T11:18:00.001+01:002015-08-14T11:18:26.737+01:00London Lib Dems reveal Assembly shortlistThose with connections to the more enterprising candidates may already have noticed this, but the party in London has released the shortlist of candidates to be London Assembly members in 2016. Liberator understands this was due to a delay after one excluded candidate was reinstated on appeal.<div><br></div><div>The list is:</div><div><div>Adrian Hyyrylainen-Trett</div><div>Annabel Mullin</div><div>Ben Mathis</div><div>Brian Haley</div><div>Caroline Pidgeon</div><div>Dawn Barnes</div><div>Duwayne Brooks</div><div>Emily Davey</div><div>Marisha Ray</div><div>Mark Platt</div><div>Merlene Emmerson</div><div>Pauline Pearce</div><div>Rob Blackie</div><div>Stephen Knight</div><div>Teena Lashmore</div><div>Zack Polanski</div></div><div><br></div><div>It includes at least 6 candidates from a BAME background and the gender split is 50/50: two encouraging signs. Most of the names will come as no surprise including the two incumbent AMs.</div><div><br></div><div>Notable by their absence are libertarians who have been making a lot of noise about policy in the London Assembly about the stance to the taxi business Uber. It will be interesting to see whether this becomes an issue.</div>Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-7562254866487038432015-05-09T14:24:00.001+01:002015-05-09T17:29:00.229+01:00Guest post: How To Win The Fightback<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">What a depressing time for Liberalism <a href="x-apple-data-detectors://0" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="calendar-event" x-apple-data-detectors-result="0">Thursday night</a> was. I believe strongly that we as a party should now all get behind Tim Farron to be the new leader and begin the fight back.<br><br>However, the first step must surely be to admit where we went wrong. Going into a coalition in itself was not a mistake as it showed we were prepared to put our money where our mouths were. But we voted through so many awful policies, such as tuition fees and secret courts that we should have blocked, while allowing the Tories to veto all the key reforms we proposed - electoral reform, Lords reform and minor changes to the treatment of drug users.<br><br>Giving up our historic position as a party on the centre left who back well-funded public services along with a strong commitment to individual freedom, and swapping it for a vague, mealy-mouthed, neither one thing nor the other approach was also intellectually weak and tactically inept. When I spoke to voters on the doorstep over the election period, many naturally Tory and Labour voters who had previously lent us their vote said they would be unable to this time for fear that we put the other ‘lot’ in. To regain the trust of voters we must be prepared to stand up for what we think and what we would achieve in Government, not just what we would try to block.<br><br>Our current obsession with cutting taxes must also surely now come to an end. Not only does it go against the fundamental principles of progressive liberalism to continually want shrink the state, it is economically illiterate. By continually ‘taking people out of tax altogether’, not only do we take away people’s stake in the public services they use, but we have also punched a huge hole in the UK’s income tax take, thus worsening the structural deficit that those supporting tax cuts claim to want to cure. The misguided Tory pledge to enshrine 'no tax rises' in law naturally creates the space for this debate.<br><br>We must also reverse the process of watering down our policy commitments; if the swing to UKIP tells us anything, other than a huge dissatisfaction with modern politics, it is that voters like politicians who say what they think, rather than say what is acceptable to focus groups. The Liberal Democrats used to back the legalisation of prostitution and of soft drugs, for the obvious reasons that it is not the role of Government to ban personal activities, but merely to regulate them properly to reduce harm. But the former is now never mentioned at all and the latter has been replaced by a commitment to stop treating drug users as criminals and start treating them as patients.<br><br>The road back to relevance and power will clearly be a long one, but rediscovering our soul and purpose must be the first step. I dearly hope that under Tim's leadership, the points I make above can be addressed. If they are not, I fear for the future of our party.</span><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><i>Nic Bourgueil is a Lib Dem member and former member of staff in London, writing under a pseudonym for work reasons and expressing a personal view.</i></span></blockquote></div>Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-58729964672122469312015-03-20T18:08:00.001+00:002015-03-20T18:08:50.437+00:00Nigeria 2015 Elections Postponement and its Effects by Donald Inwalomhe. Part 2.<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Already attention
has been shifted away from core economic programmes to politics and
campaign, bad enough, the 2015 budget is yet to be considered and
approved by the National Assembly as a result of these activities. We
are faced with worst scenario especially if the legislature decides
to politicize its legislative assignments. The budget might end up
not being passed until after the May 29th transition period. It is
not pleasing that the President is currently financing the 2015
budget outside appropriation, considering the fact that the current
exchange rate of the naira would make such expenses risky. What is
most worrisome is that if the budget is not timely passed so as to
become law, it would pose a great challenge for the incoming
government to reconcile expenditure already made outside the budget
and those approved from the budget. The effect of the election
postponement has already suggested uncertainty in the economy, it has
lowered investors confidence in the nation’s stock exchange.
Foreign investors are already withdrawing their investment from the
Nigerian stock exchange.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The process of
implementing economic growth policies would be slow; since the
incoming government will not be known until after March 28th. In the
face of dwindling oil funds, this is certainly not the time for
Nigeria to toy with any activities that would revamp its revenue
profile; not even the 2015elections. In a special report titled
‘Nigeria: Postponed Polls: Protracted Uncertainty Weighs on Naira’,
the international investment and financial advisory firm, Renaissance
Capital said by postponing the election, the authorities have further
exposed the weakness of the local currency in the face of continued
depletion of the nation’s foreign reserves.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Besides, the
postponement is in line with the provision in section 26 sub section
one of the electoral act 2010 amended. Basically, the insecurity
occasioned by the Boko Haram insurgents in Adamawa, Yobe and Borno
States were among reasons why the security agents advised INEC for
the postponement, saying that it cannot guarantee the security of
voters, personnel and materials for the elections under the
circumstance.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
According to Prof.
Jega under such circumstances, INEC had no option than to postpone
the elections. However, INEC had been contending with the
distribution of the Permanent Voter Cards (PVC), as millions of
registered voters have been unable to collect their PVC as at the
time of the announcement of the postponement by INEC Chairman,
despite the extension of the collection exercise.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
With the
postponement of the elections due to insecurity in parts of the
country, it therefore means that the Boko Haram insurgency which has
been treated as a non issue by the military and Federal government
has become a serious issue over night.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The postponement
reminds Nigerians of the thankless role of the judiciary in the
annulment of the 1993 general elections must necessarily become a
warning in the light of the myriads of pre-election lawsuits
currently pending in court ahead of the March 28 and April 11 polls.
There are no fewer than five lawsuits seeking declaration that
President Goodluck Jonathan of the Peoples Democratic Party is
ineligible to stand re-election. As many as 10 separate suits are
pending, wherein the court has been urged to disqualify the All
Progressives Congress presidential candidate, Maj. Gen. Muhammadu
Buhari (retd.) from the election.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Nigeria deserves
this democracy, which, in the words of a prominent professor of Law
and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Itse Sagay, has become the minimum
standard for a civilised existence. Indeed, democracy has been
equated to the most basic fundamental human right of a people.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Inwalomhe Donald,
Researcher, Benin City, Nigeria. <a href="mailto:inwalomhe.donald@yahoo.com">inwalomhe.donald@yahoo.com</a>
</div>
Kiron Reidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02483780931989805429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-25599600871138376122015-03-20T18:08:00.000+00:002015-03-20T18:08:21.993+00:00Nigeria 2015 Elections Postponement and its Effects by Donald Inwalomhe. Part 1.<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The Nigerian
Presidential election rescheduled to 28 March has been beset by
controversy. This special report for the <i>Liberator</i>
blog is by Donald Inwalomhe, a journalists for several national
Nigerian newspapers, who works with a network to monitor the
elections, and has been warning for several years of the threat in
the north posed by Boko Haram.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
THE general election
earlier scheduled in February, 2015 has been postponed by the
Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC to March 28
(Presidential and national assembly) and April 11, (governorship and
state assemblies) 2015, Announcing the postponement on Saturday 7th
February, 2015 in a press briefing, the INEC Chairman, Prof. Attahiru
Jega told Nigerians that the postponement was due to security report
by the Service chiefs of the security agencies in Nigeria. The
postponement is already having some cost implications on Nigerians.
If not well managed, we might lose much of our economic projections
for 2015 and further plunged into more hardship. With the
postponement, various stakeholders have incurred several forms of
loses.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Boko Haram leader
Abubakar Shekau has vowed to disrupt Nigeria’s general election in
a new video released recently, after several suicide attacks in the
northeast blamed on the Islamists killed many people. In the ninth
minutes of the video which lasted for 11 minutes 57 seconds, Shekau
began to talk about Nigeria’s 2015 election, stating that, it will
not hold in peace. “This election will not be held even if we are
dead. Even if we are not alive Allah will never allow you to do it,”
Shekau said in the Hausa language, presumably referring to the polls
scheduled for March 28. The video appeared to be the first message
released by the group on Twitter, a sign of its changing media
tactics after previous messages were distributed to journalists on
DVD. Shekau was shown in unusual clarity in front of a solid blue
background, dressed in black and with an automatic weapon resting to
his right.</div>
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
The international
and local observers had already counted their losses. The
apprehension which might arise from the outcome of the February 14,
2015 elections also made companies to suspend major profitable
ventures during the election period. Some traders closed their shops
or rather refused to replace their stocks thereby recording low
turnover. The political parties have deployed massive funds in all of
the 36 states. However, with the six weeks extension, the political
parties would need to continue the engagement process with their
supporters in various cost-driven activities. More town hall
meetings, rallies and air time would be paid as adverts in the
electronic and print media. This extension would definitely be a cost
burden on the small parties. The economy also has its own share in
the cost of election postponement.</div>
Kiron Reidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02483780931989805429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-4770357469383594712015-03-16T14:10:00.001+00:002015-03-16T14:10:56.410+00:00Election PreparationsThe extraordinary public attack on Tim Farron and his judgment by the Liberal Democrats' General Election Chair Paddy Ashdown was viewed with raised eyebrows by those who remembered his desperate attempts to pursue "The Project" with Tony Blair in 1997-8.<div><br></div><div>This has quickly been followed by an orchestrated attack on Farron in today's Times [paywalled] after a pretty innocuous piece in the Mail on Sunday. Meanwhile a lot of people have been working to generate publicity for Norman Lamb after the intrusive tabloid piece about his family members yesterday.</div><div><br></div><div>Lamb appears to have handled this very well, gaining momentum for his work to transform mental health care. What Tim Farron hasn't said so far (but others can) is that perhaps Lord Ashdown's focus should be on voters in key areas, as Tim's is on his constituents; and that winning as many seats as possible on 7 May is perhaps more important.</div><div><br></div><div>After all, it does rather seem that the election preparations going on in some places are not being made with the General Election in mind.</div><div><br></div><div>Whoever authored the attack on the handling of the foreign affairs brief was not thinking of the leadership's judgment in staying almost entirely silent on international issues this Parliament; in forsaking Ministerial roles at the FCO and MOD; or indeed in appointing Tim Farron to the foreign affairs role.</div>Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-71117916964520492792015-03-01T18:37:00.005+00:002015-03-01T18:37:56.454+00:00The half truths of apologists for Putin's agression in Ukraine.After my article on
Ukraine was published in February's <i>Liberator 370</i><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;">,
Liberal colleague</span></span> Geoff Woodcock asked what I made of a
review of a book in <i>the Guardian</i><span style="font-variant: normal;">
</span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;">on
the Ukraine crisis.</span></span><br />
<div style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm; text-align: left;">
<br />
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;">'Frontline
Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands by Richard Sakwa review – an
unrivalled account' Jonathan Steele, 19 February 2015.
<a href="http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/feb/19/frontline-ukraine-crisis-in-borderlands-richard-sakwa-review-account?CMP=share_btn_link">http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/feb/19/frontline-ukraine-crisis-in-borderlands-richard-sakwa-review-account?CMP=share_btn_link</a>
</span></span>
</div>
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;">The
review appears to </span></span><span style="font-variant: normal;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">show
a lot of the ideological and political assumptions behind it – for
me it is typical of the more thought out excuses given by 'left wing'
and 'right wing' commentators to make excuses for the Russian state's
war in South East Ukraine.</span></span></span></div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%;">
I think
many of the basic points in this review are correct. But as with most
of the articles that are basically hostile to the Kyiv government and
make excuses for the fighting in the East, it is very one sided. I
don't know whether the book is like that but the review is. The war
in two parts of SE Ukraine, and the terrorism in other cities, would
not be happening without the Russian state fuelling it. It is not a
civil war (as some commentators like to overstate it) or popular
uprising, it is an orchestrated destruction of government control
over a major industrial region. A Lib Dem commentator called Matthew
Green wrote a blog on Putin / Ukraine recently where he detailed a
Facebook argument with a critic of the Kyiv government. He made the
point I've just repeated "This is interesting because it is
largely accurate on the core facts." There is elements of truth
in criticisms of the 'Ukrainian side' and certainly of how NATO / the
EU and US have handled things, but all of this is used to wash over
the fact that Putin's Russia is fuelling a war in a neighbouring
country that is not what people in that country want.</div>
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Matthew Green's blog is here: <a href="http://thinkingliberal.co.uk/?p=1574">http://thinkingliberal.co.uk/?p=1574</a>
'How far will liberals go to defend their values? Putin poses the
question.' I don't agree with all of it as it makes some of the kind
of sweeping statements that the Putin apologists make on their side.
In the Jonathan Steele review of Sakwa it is typical 'us against
them' rhetoric.</div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
I have always blamed Thatcher and Bush for the collapse in the former
Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War, a great crime that they
failed to support Mikhail Gorbachev with a Marshall Plan. I also
think the expansion of NATO is ludicrous and that the EU failed to
sufficiently take account of genuine Russian interests. But NATO, the
US, the EU have not caused a war in Ukraine.</div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
"Even today at this late stage, a declaration of Ukrainian
non-alignment as part of an internationally negotiated settlement,
and UN Security Council guarantees of that status, would bring
instant de-escalation and make a lasting ceasefire possible in
eastern Ukraine." This seems totally naïve as it involves
trusting Vladimir Putin and you cannot trust Vladimir Putin. He has
already breached such an agreement.</div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
"Russia’s angry reaction to provocations in Georgia in 2008"
means Russia's retaliatory punitive invasion of Georgia - provoked by
Georgia but a grossly disproportionate response. "the EU has
become little more than the civilian wing of the Atlantic alliance."
is simply left wing ridiculous conspiracy nonsense. He (Steele or
Sakwa) are entirely correct that crimes / war crimes committed
against separatists supporters or on civilians by the Ukrainian army
are not apparently acknowledged or investigated. That is appalling. I
agree that there is this fictitious national myth by the Ukrainian
state of some idealistic historic Ukrainian nation. A myth, a
construct, like all the nation myths in Eastern and South Eastern
Europe.</div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
From my experience in a large Russian speaking city in the South East
I entirely agree with this passage:</div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
"The alternative “pluralist” view emphasises the different
historical and cultural experiences of Ukraine’s various regions
and argues that building a modern democratic post-Soviet Ukrainian
state is not just a matter of good governance and rule of law at the
centre. It also requires an acceptance of bilingualism, mutual
tolerance of different traditions, and devolution of power to the
regions."</div>
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Delivering this would not satisfy Putin and his agents though as
their work appears to be to fundamentally undermine independent
Ukrainian statehood. There are many reports of industrial plant and
equipment from Donetsk and Luhansk being systematically dismantled
and taken back to Russia. The voices of the million and a half
displaced people (as many of them, maybe more to Russia as to other
parts of Ukraine) and pro-Ukraine people in Donetsk and Luhansk are
silenced by the mercenaries' take over of those regions.</div>
<br />
<br />
<div align="left" class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Kiron Reid.</div>
<br />
<div class="western" style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br />
</div>
</div>
Kiron Reidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02483780931989805429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-30374681255775268452015-02-17T08:36:00.001+00:002015-02-17T08:36:11.233+00:00Liberator 370: out now!Subscribers to Liberator should have received or be about to receive issue 370 of the radical liberal magazine Liberator.<div><br></div><div>Initial feedback has been strikingly positive.</div><div><br></div><div>Aside from the regular features including RB and Lord Bonkers' Diary, the magazine includes a range of perspectives on the coalition experience as it draws to a close. Michael Meadowcroft gives an insiders' view on the life and leadership of Jeremy Thorpe which as Tony Greaves puts it 'is in itself worth the sub and a good counter to a lot of the spin and nonsense that has been written since he died about his leadership of the party.' </div><div><br></div><div>And more - including a witty guide for candidates by Roger Hayes.</div><div><br></div><div>Take a look at the Commentary and find out more at our new website: <a href="http://liberatormagazine.org.uk/en/article/2015/1013289/less-of-the-same-commentary-liberator-370" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">http://liberatormagazine.org.uk/en/article/2015/1013289/less-of-the-same-commentary-liberator-370</a></div>Gareth Eppshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18198368251505541728noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2277746591174465580.post-81476992855218689162014-12-21T22:12:00.000+00:002014-12-21T22:20:08.387+00:00A mixed year: Lord Bonkers in 2014<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4WrPuaSJXj0maYUCKqPJxN3v2xV_zgaIg4CVlAk7uKQdJU46cEgOY3SQjO8069rZOE0Msw3b4A04dDtkIZPUACXpJ67_v_33UVUkqfd6q9lFWXtCfDEB9oBolUcXCoLO4KYDXFIn_BC_R/s1600/bonkers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4WrPuaSJXj0maYUCKqPJxN3v2xV_zgaIg4CVlAk7uKQdJU46cEgOY3SQjO8069rZOE0Msw3b4A04dDtkIZPUACXpJ67_v_33UVUkqfd6q9lFWXtCfDEB9oBolUcXCoLO4KYDXFIn_BC_R/s1600/bonkers.jpg" /></a></div>
<b><span style="color: red;">January</span></b><br />
<br />
A headline from a 1922 edition of the New York Times returned to prominence:<br />
<br />
<b>Three Englishmen Saved from Boiling Pot By Cannibal Chief, Who Was Friend at Oxford</b><br />
<br />
At dinner one evening Lord Bonkers <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/three-englishmen-saved-from-boiling-pot.html">commented</a> to me:<br />
<blockquote>
That is the great thing about public school and varsity: your friends will help you out in later life if you find yourself in hot water. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Incidentally, too much is made of cannibalism in the South Pacific. In my experience of those lovely islands, it was rare. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
The same, unfortunately, cannot be said of the Upper Welland Valley.</blockquote>
That same month, Lord Bonkers took up his <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/lord-bonkers-diary-i-am-lib-dems-new.html">new role</a> as the Liberal Democrats' new pastoral care officer. He wrote:<br />
<blockquote>
Reading from my early volume Frank Chats for Young Canvassers, I say: “Now that you are growing up, I expect you find yourselves doing things like cutting out photographs of Megan Lloyd George from the News Chronicle. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Let me reassure you: there is nothing wrong with such feelings. However, it is important that we do not allow them to get in the way of our Liberal activism. So rise early, take a cold tub, exercise with Indian clubs and then, if you still find yourself troubled by impure thoughts, ask your branch secretary for an extra Focus round to deliver. I assure you that, after that, you will have no energy left for beastliness of any sort.”</blockquote>
<b><span style="color: red;">March
</span></b><br />
<br />
His lordship acquired a new <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/lord-bonkers-diary-future-leader-of.html">heroine</a>:<br />
<blockquote>
At a reception this evening I find myself talking to a charming lady by the name of Miriam-Gonzalez-Durantez. She turns out to have trenchant views on the public schools. “Some people from some of these top schools are fantastic but there are lots of people from these top schools who are unimpressive,” she tells me. “Quite right, my dear,” I reply. She goes on: "I know far too many that come out of there without speaking a single foreign language." </blockquote>
<blockquote>
As I am observing that speaking a lot of languages isn’t everything and pointing to that fellow Clegg as a case in point, she suddenly recognises an old friend on the other side of the room and disappears from view. Nevertheless, I am convinced she is Sound. Why does one never hear her spoken of as a future leader of the Liberal Democrats?</blockquote>
<b><span style="color: red;">April
</span></b><br />
<br />
The mysterious disappearance of a Malaysian jet put Lord Bonkers in mind of an <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/lord-bonkers-diary-disappearance-of.html">incident</a> from the 1920s:<br />
<blockquote>
One bright April morning the 11:15 for Northampton Castle left Nottingham London Road Lower Level as usual, but it never reached its destination. It was seen to call at Melton Mowbray North, and there were unconfirmed reports of it reaching Clipston and Oxendon, but one thing is sure: it never arrived in Northampton.</blockquote>
<b><span style="color: red;">May
</span></b><br />
<br />
Despite Lord Bonkers' best efforts, the Liberal Democrats fared badly in the month's European elections. He is <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/lord-bonkers-at-this-evenings-leicester.html">pictured</a> here, during the campaign, with our East Midlands candidates Phil Knowles and George Smid:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLEYgzBCW0YMKaLmUqfzLHirDn7QfXDEy2woz-0cbpwFnebSR5lPvL4Mu_bZiXSFyCRVAxkFbxILRbbb-tWO0hSlbRThv-2n2AMz_5C68qT-tSMYFk8UZvZqnkLKaYZVqpqYPaej9TTSaB/s1600/BonkersLeicester.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLEYgzBCW0YMKaLmUqfzLHirDn7QfXDEy2woz-0cbpwFnebSR5lPvL4Mu_bZiXSFyCRVAxkFbxILRbbb-tWO0hSlbRThv-2n2AMz_5C68qT-tSMYFk8UZvZqnkLKaYZVqpqYPaej9TTSaB/s1600/BonkersLeicester.jpg" height="300" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
Later that month Lord Bonkers gave his <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/lord-bonkers-on-death-of-lawrence-of.html">recollection</a> of the death of T.E. Lawrence:<br />
<blockquote>
It later transpired that he died in a motorcycle accident after, uncharacteristically, swerving to avoid two schoolboys.
</blockquote>
<b><span style="color: red;">June</span></b><br />
<br />
This months Lord Bonkers <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/lord-bonkers-diary-nick-clegg-and-vince.html">met</a> Freddie and Fiona from Nick Clegg's office:<br />
<blockquote>
“We’ve been told to organise a press event in a pub this morning so that Mr Clegg and Vince Cable can have a drink together and show they are really best friends despite what everyone says,” they explain. “But the trouble is, we don’t know how to do it.” “Why ever not?” I ask. “Because we are too young to go into pubs.”</blockquote>
<b><span style="color: red;">August</span></b><br />
<br />
And he met them <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/lord-bonkers-diary-inflatable-julian.html">again</a> a couple of month later:<br />
<blockquote>
They are taking turns with a bicycle pump, attempting to get some air into a large balloon that has had a collection of bristles stuck on it. “Whatever is that, you two?” I ask. “It’s an inflatable Julian Huppert,” they explain.</blockquote>
<b><span style="color: red;">September </span></b><br />
<br />
Events in Cardiff attracted the old brute's <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/lord-bonkers-diary-abolishing-trolls-on.html">attention</a> this month:<br />
<blockquote>
I am delighted to read that the Welsh Liberal Democrats are proposing to abolish the trolls on the Severn Bridge. For many years I have been urging just this move upon them, but without any joy. “The time is not right,” said Mike German. “There are other priorities,” said Kirsty Williams. “Wibble, wibble: are both those feet mine?” said Lembit Opik.</blockquote>
<b><span style="color: red;">December</span></b><br />
<br />
We were treated to some <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/lord-bonkers-diary-confessions-of.html">memories</a> of the glory days of Oakham Studios:<br />
<blockquote>
I helped win a contract from the Association of Liberal Councillors to make a number of training films. More than one prominent member of our party learnt electioneering from watching ‘Confessions from a Committee Room.’ ‘Confessions of a Canvasser’ and ‘Confessions of a Knocker Up’.</blockquote>
And Lord Bonkers also offered some <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/lord-bonkers-on-sacking-of-alastair-cook.html">thoughts</a> on (I think) the fall of Alastair Cook:<br />
<blockquote>
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjycCI3R3PqspZqHncgLjroYqdumFZK3CJiNo0qgLj5HaxHj7G2xB3JALrM1hq9rNGdmkVI6pBuM6zbMIvqVintaCHgE9jW8_gFg3FNQRughjX1y_iW5OsTpSZpTKERwAbleyfAGwJ8XSzi/s1600/bonkerspizza.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjycCI3R3PqspZqHncgLjroYqdumFZK3CJiNo0qgLj5HaxHj7G2xB3JALrM1hq9rNGdmkVI6pBuM6zbMIvqVintaCHgE9jW8_gFg3FNQRughjX1y_iW5OsTpSZpTKERwAbleyfAGwJ8XSzi/s1600/bonkerspizza.jpg" /></a>One has to be prepared to act decisively. For a leader who impressed people only a few years ago may no longer cut the mustard today.</blockquote>
Finally, he has asked me to assure you that there is no truth to the absurd rumours currently circulating about the financial position of the Bonkers Hall Estate.<br />
<br />
<i>Lord Bonkers' literary secretary blogs at <a href="http://liberalengland.blogspot.co.uk/">Liberal England</a>.</i>Jonathan Calderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00730157683743989696noreply@blogger.com0