Keith Nevols

Remembering the Lib-Lab Pact 1977-78

2012-01-25T13:25:00.000Z

Two parties working together at a time of economic crisis? An arrangement meeting scorn and abuse from the media? A new Prime Minister accused of dominating his junior partner? One party attempting and failing to achieve electoral reform? Yes, this is not 2010 – it is 1977, the year of the Lib-Lab Pact.
In 1976, the country was in economic and political crisis. Inflation ran at 25%, the country was in huge deficit, unemployment continued to creep upwards, and spending cuts were installed as a condition of a loan from the IMF. The Labour government had lost its' majority in parliament. The Conservative Party, under the leadership of Margaret Thatcher, was riding high in the polls. It was not a good time for Jim Callaghan to enter Number 10 as the successor to Harold Wilson.

The new Liberal party leader, David Steel, had worked with various Labour members on the EEC referendum campaign the year before and, using these contacts, his views were sought regarding some sort of deal to sustain the government in office. At this stage, after two general elections in 1974, the Liberal party were every short of cash and did not relish yet another election – especially as it seemed likely to send Mrs Thatcher into power with a landslide.

Like one of his successors, Steel emphasised the importance of providing a stable government at a time of economic uncertainty. For their part, the Labour cabinet generally approved the idea with some misgivings. Both sets of party members were unsure but gave the suggestion a cautious welcome.

After final negotiations, the Pact was declared in March 1977. The 13 Liberal MPs would vote with the government for the rest of the parliament in return for various policy initiatives. Mrs Thatcher immediately tabled a motion of no confidence, which the government won by 20 votes.

The media absolutely hated the Pact. The popular press hurled abuse at both parties – Steel was portrayed as a puppet in awe of his master (not for the last time!) – both leaders were accused of being scared to face the electorate. Indeed, in 1977 and 1978, local election results for both parties were very poor with many hundreds of councillors losing their seats.

For the Liberals, while a few policies were in place, there was no direct involvement in the government, apart from some cabinet committee places. The main prize of proportional representation for the first European parliament elections of 1979 was frustrated and was not achieved until 1999.

Economically, the Pact was a big success. Inflation rapidly came down, the balance of payments significantly improved, unemployment had steadied, and with Labour riding high in the polls in the autumn of 1978, the PM was widely expected to call an election. Callaghan and Steel had even discussed continuing with the Pact after the election should the result be unclear.

However Callaghan lost his nerve, the moment passed, and hence the Pact came to an end in October 1978. The winter of discontent with its' industrial unrest, was followed by the no confidence vote of March 1979 and the Liberals voted against the government - which fell by one vote. At the subsequent general election Mrs Thatcher became Prime Minister and the rest, as they say, is history.

Had the election taken place in the autumn of 1978, had Labour and the Liberals continued to work together, had Mrs Thatcher been kept out, then the subsequent years, indeed society today, could have been very different.

What lessons can we learn from that experience? The main problem the Liberals had at the time was, despite 25% of the votes at the election, its' lack of parliamentary presence. With only 13 seats there was little scope for any talk of ministers. Hence the emphasis became building up seats, not votes. Equally the fact that the two main parties had combined to frustrate any ideas of voting reform was remembered. And also the Liberal party failed to get across their own specific achievements to the electorate. But this was the only example of different parties with different beliefs working together in the national interest between 1945 and 2010.

It is said that history is written by the winners. For this reason, the Lib-Lab pact has gone down in history as a failure – the Thatcher government and the media successfully hammering home this myth throughout the 1980s – whereas in fact it was a success – by reducing the political uncertainty and providing a stable government, the markets were steadied and the country rapidly began to recover.

So while we are now again in a situation we may be reluctant to accept, we must remember to learn the lessons, hold our nerve, and emphasise the benefits we are providing by our role in providing a stable government.

(This article originally appeared in the Sittingbourne and Sheppey Liberal Democrats Members' and Supporters' Newsletter - November 2011).

Be loud and be proud. The Liberal Democrats are the party of the poor.

2012-01-17T14:23:00.001Z

In the old days it was simple, you had two political parties, representing two different views and classes, at two ends of the political spectrum – a clear choice to make.

The Conservative party were the party of the wealthy, the privileged, the gentry, the business leaders, the chief executives and the managers. They believed in small government, low taxation, low public spending, the free market, sink-or-swim, privatisation and, above all, nothing should ever change.

Meanwhile the Labour party were the party of the poor, the workers, the pensioners, the unions, the sick. They believed in big government, high taxation, high expenditure, interventionism, subsidising industries, nationalisation – an active administration creating jobs and building houses. Aiming for a more just society

But times have changed. The Conservatives have not, of course. They still back their vested interests as much as ever. But since the days of Tony Blair, Labour have moved away from their traditional beliefs, ditching nationalisation and Clause Four, and moving towards traditional Tory ground – they now talk of the ‘squeezed middle’ and matching Tory economic policies.

The traditional choice that voters had is gone – but all is not lost. In my view, it is the Liberal Democrats who are now the party of the poor. It is the Liberal Democrats to whom the workers and the disadvantaged can look to for help. Low income households, pensioners, children in poorer areas, are all now benefiting from having the Liberal Democrats in government. We should say it loud and say it proud – the Liberal Democrats are now the party of the poor.

For example, let us look at what the Liberal Democrats have brought into the coalition government, and ask ourselves in each case – who does benefit from this?

The threshold at which tax starts will be £10,000 (and hopefully higher) by 2015 – taking a million out of tax completely. Main beneficiaries: those on lower incomes whom pay less tax or no tax at all..

The pupil premium puts money aside specially for disadvantaged areas. Main beneficiaries: children and schools in poorer areas.

The pensions to earnings link has been restored – with a ‘triple lock’ system to ensure pensions never fall behind again. Main beneficiaries: anyone, present or future, on a state pension.

A green investment bank to invest in projects and create jobs. Main beneficiaries: the unemployed and those who care about the future environment.

We are fond of saying that these and other measures would never take place under a Conservative government. But we have to also ask, had Gordon Brown won the election, would these measures take place under a Labour government? I am not so sure. The pensions link, for example, was never restored in 13 years – and it took us a week.

Would the next Labour government continue to raise the tax threshold and take the poorest out of paying tax? Would they retain the annual pupil premium? Would they continue Lib Dem efforts to improve social mobility? We await Ed and Ed’s answers to these questions.

But, I hear you ask, what about the tuition fee raise and the abolition of the EMA? Do these measures not hit the poor? Well, I would agree, and have said much on this elsewhere. But in coalition you can’t get everything you want – clearly under a Liberal Democrat government these measures would not have happened.

And what do we hear Cleggy talking about recently? Measures to improve social mobility – campaigning for interns to get a wage so that they are open not only to wealthy families – abolishing school names on application forms to avoid the old school tie syndrome – pushing for workers to have shares in companies and being able to decide on the salaries of directors and chief executives. He is constantly coming up with the sort of ideas and proposals that should have come from the Labour party – but they will no doubt line up alongside the backbench Tories in opposing them.

Our record is quite good considering the small role we have in government. The media obviously won’t thank us – they have never forgiven Nick for winning the first debate or for getting in the way of a Conservative majority.

So it is up to us to get the message out there, to be loud and to be proud. The Liberal Democrats are now the party of the poor – and while we are in government, we will continue to look out for their interests.

And that was 2011

2011-12-21T14:14:00.001Z

This is my last entry of 2011 to conclude another interesting year.

The coalition government is generally on the right path. We are seeing more liberal democrat policies coming in – raising the tax threshold, the pupil premium, political reform, green investment etc – as well as maintaining our interests in other areas such as the NHS where we were able to make some, but not many, modifications to the Conservative programme.

No single politician has ever been so hated by the media, but Nick Clegg stands firm. They will never forgive him for winning the first debate, nor for getting in the way of a right-wing Tory agenda – but he deserves admiration for sticking it out whereas lesser men would have crumbled under the daily pressure.

I think David Cameron also deserves some credit for, most of the year, keeping his more ‘loony’ segment of the party at bay. For example, he has so far resisted the usual Tory desire to cut taxes for the wealthy. However, the black mark is his blunder at the European talks recently and the choice to isolate Britain within the EU. I fear we will see the repercussions of this throughout 2012.

There have been other mistakes, of course. The tuition fee blunder rumbles on, the attack on public sector pensions was petty, and I would like to see more to encourage growth within the private sector. Unemployment is far too high, especially youth unemployment, and I hope we see more to address this most major of issues.

We got an expected bashing in May, losing nearly 700 councillors, including both our Sittingbourne representatives, and the AV referendum resulted in a convincing defeat. My second attempt to join Swale council saw me come last - a poor reward, I felt, for my hundreds of hours work in Murston over the last two years. We must be prepared for similar bashings in the next few years while we remain in government.

Blog-wise I was delighted to make my debut in the Total Politics top blogs lists. OK, it was only Number 54 in the Lib Dem blogs, and 62nd Lib Dem blogger, but I was pleased with my first appearance.

Two of my entries made the weekly Lib Dem Voice Top of the Blogs list. One was my last entry ‘Welcome to the year – 2030’, in which I told of a gloomy future for England following an isolationist policy. The other ‘We need a different ‘Lib Dem Voice’' from April where I criticised the lack of debate within the party – this was my mostly-read article of the year.

I would like to give an honorary mention to ‘Human Rights for Pot Plants’ in October which was my response to Theresa May’s daft use of a cat to promote repealing one of the most important pieces of legislation. I enjoyed putting that one together.

The personal low of the year has been the situation with my best friend of 23 years, who has been seriously ill with liver disease, and in and out of hospital throughout the last few months. As I type he is once again in intensive care. There is also my cousin, and a friend at work, who have both been having treatment for cancer, although thankfully both seem to be on the mend. And I have a minor eye operation coming up which promises not to be much fun.

In 2012, we have the Olympics, the diamond jubilee and the European football championships – and doubtless more news stories and political events to keep us all occupied. Much to look forward to.

So I conclude by thanking you all for reading my blog – and, whatever your party, whoever you support, I wish you all a happy Christmas and a good new year.

Welcome to the year - 2030

2011-12-10T22:50:00.001Z

As King William V prepares for his coronation, it seems an appropriate time to reflect on a couple of tumultuous decades in the history, not only of England, but also of the former United Kingdom. Following the difficulties the country has had, politically, socially, economically, and, of course, with our football, the coronation presents a rare opportunity for the English to let their hair down and forget their troubles for a few days.

The happiest amongst us are, of course, the Conservative party and its supporters having won yet another general election. Removing the seats of Wales and Scotland from parliament hit the opposition parties hard, and, despite a scarcity of Tory MPs in the north, political commentators conclude that, by retaining first-past-the-post, and a plentiful supply of safe seats, it is hard to imagine anything other than a Conservative majority government in England for decades to come.

It is well over a decade since England and the European Union parted company, and remains a hotly debated topic ever since. While the EU struggled in the 2010s, England’s self-imposed isolation saw her miss out on the subsequent economic recovery and boom that the European countries continue to enjoy. Reminders from the media about Churchill and who-won-the-war-anyway seem to grow more hollow each year.

It is of course a different story for Scotland – now celebrating ten years of independence followed by a timely re-entry into the EU. Access to the wider markets, without tariffs, and considerable goodwill from the major EU states, meant Scottish industries soon boomed and the loss of trade with England was soon replaced.

Edinburgh continues to enjoy a cultural revival, its universities overflowing with students from all over Europe enjoying subsidised fees (except those from England, of course) and the wealth generated has ensured the Scots continue to enjoy a first class health and education system.. The Prime Minister of Scotland is looking forward to welcoming the new King to its opening of parliament at the Salmond Hall.

Once Scotland got independence, that of the other nations was inevitable but so far not as successful. Northern Ireland remains mostly dependent on their cousins south of the border, while Wales continues to struggle. (After changing to first-past-the-post, Wales is now permanently Labour-run much as England is permanently Conservative-run). However, it is still early days for Wales, having only recently re-entered the EU and adopted the Euro.

Having left the EU, the then-UK continued to trade with Europe but of course there now existed extra expenses across the EU-boundary. This meant the price of imports went up which was passed to the customer and hence fuelled inflation. Increases in fuel prices were a bitter blow. And the export market reduced as European countries found alternative sources within the EU. Trade continues of course but at a fraction of the rate that we saw in the 2000s.

Economic experts continue to question the wisdom of breaking off from the EU at a time of economic difficulties – and point to the fact that the unemployment figure has never gone below three million ever since. Cynics point out, however, that while the bulk of this unemployment is in areas which do not tend to vote Tory, there should be no danger to the Conservative majority.

On the more basic level, many people bemoan the loss of skilled help and relatively cheap labour from eastern Europe. Once the government imposed work permit requirements on all non-UK citizens, the exodus began but left the country critically short of skilled labour in agriculture and the NHS. Complaints about builders and plumbers have soared to record levels, and, despite the high level of unemployment, many employers say they struggle to get willing applicants to do the most basic of jobs.

(You may recall the scandal of the northern MP who smuggled a Polish plumber across the border from Scotland – using the excuse that he felt British plumbers did not provide sufficient skills and customer service. The Sun’s constant accusation of being ‘quisling’ and reminding him of Poland’s war record forced him to step down).

While the countries of the former UK continue to have different fortunes, mass apathy continues to remain. Political party membership is at all all-time low, turnouts for general elections are down to 40% with others in the 20s. And the restrictions on party funding make it virtually impossible for anyone, other than the Tories, to mount any sort of campaign.

Some would argue that football is more important, and we well remember the rejoicing in 2022 as Scotland qualified for their first world cup in 24 years. On the other hand, having left FIFA at the demands of the government and the media, England are, of course, ineligible for such events.

As for the continent, there were very difficult times in the 2010s, the Eurozone crises, the constant relaunches of the Euro - but they got there at last. The continent may be dominated by the larger powers, but all 35 states within the EU are enjoying continued growth and prosperity, the Euro continues to hold its own against the dollar, the yen and others, and the social unrest is just a memory.

Because of the waiting list, there are even suggestions of renaming the European Union to incorporate those countries from western Asia and north Africa who wish to have some sort of associate membership.

So King William may reflect on the contrasting fortunes of his commonwealth. Canada, Australia, Scotland, and, above all, India, continue to soar. England and Wales continue to struggle with seemingly permanent recession.

But the new King will no doubt hope that his reign will be far more peaceful than that of his father – so let us rejoice in his coronation, let us look forward to the new age, and let us pray for a new beginning and a break from the mistakes of the past.

Why I am pro-EU and pro-referendum

2011-12-05T13:22:00.000Z

One afternoon, as I was strolling though Westminster, I was approached by a smartly-dressed young lady who was holding a clipboard. She explained they were collecting signatures for a petition to demand a UK referendum on membership of the European Union.

‘Do you think the UK should leave the European Union?’ she asked me.
‘No,’ I explained, ‘the EU is far from perfect but I think it is in our interests to stay in.’

She then politely thanked me and wandered off – no longer interested in my signing her petition. Presumably she thought I would not be interested in calling for a referendum – and in this she would be wrong.

Like most Liberal Democrats, I think the UK should be an active member of the European Union. The EU is a bureaucratic monster, a complete shambles, in dire need of cost-cutting reform – the Strasbourg building can go for a start – and we, the British, should be in there kicking backsides and rallying the members in sorting it all out.

However, I also believe we should have an immediate in-out referendum on UK membership of the European Union. Eurosceptics assume they have the monopoly on such a demand (a Facebook campaign for a referendum bombards me with anti-EU propaganda). But in this they are wrong.

There are many who would welcome a referendum and then to campaign to stay in. Paddy Ashdown, then Lib Dem leader, called for a referendum on the Maastrict treaty in 1992. Nick Clegg, at the time of Lisbon 2007, called for an in-out treaty. In both cases, the Conservative and Labour parties closed ranks to shout down such ideas. Presently Labour’s Keith Vaz is a prominent MP calling for a referendum – and defied his party whip to do so – even though he would support staying in.

There are many problems in today’s society where we need international co-operation – terrorism, organised crime, drugs and the environment are just some examples – no one state can effectively fight these issues on their own. And there are case in worker’s or minority rights where the EU has protected those that the state has let down.

It frustrates me to see the Eurosceptics leading the EU debate and that we are in but not in. Every time there is a new treaty or initiative we follow, we do not lead.

So why are pro-EUs calling for a referendum? My reasons are as follows.

1. The topic is far too important to be just another issue at general elections. During canvassing, hardly anyone referred to it with the main issues being prices, jobs and immigration. (The immigration issue is, of course, an EU effect despite impressive Tory slight-of-hand at the election).

2. There was a referendum in 1975 on the then-EEC – but this was 36 years ago, and Britain and Europe has changed much since then.

3. The domestic split weakens any British Prime Minister. Whereas Angela Merkel can carry the full weight of the German people, a British PM lacks this authority because of constant snipes amongst his own domestic front. A solid Yes vote from the British people would give the PM greater authority to battle for Britain’s share of the EU cake.

4. Once the Yes vote is carried, we can then get to the business in hand – we can all think of how we can make the EU better, less bureaucratic, more streamlined, and how it can work better for us. We can take the initiative instead of just following along.

5. A Yes campaign would make people more aware of the benefits the EU gives us. At the moment, the only information they get is from the newspaper media – hardly a balanced view. The EU is in desperate need of a good PR campaign.

6. If the vote is for No, then we give our two years' notice (as per Lisbon) and make preparations accordingly. This would be preferable to the ‘in-out-shake it all about’ situation we have the moment.

7. Whatever the result, it would be the end of UKIP. If we vote to stay in, then UKIP have lost the argument. If we vote to leave, then UKIP can say they have won, but then there is no point in carrying on.

Europe is a minor issue for the British people. Whereas other countries send their top people to the EU, we instead send rejected politicians and civil servants, and have a very low turnout in European parliament elections. How many people can name their MEPs? (The majority of whom have decided to exclude themselves from the centre of European policy).

People need to know that the EU has a great effect over their own lives. A national debate and a referendum will give them that knowledge – and further referendums over future treaties will increase that public participation.

So let’s back Britain, let’s back the EU, and let’s back a nationwide referendum.

Preparing for the day of action

2011-11-28T13:21:00.000Z

As I type, I am currently making plans at work to cover my absence on Wednesday when I, and most of my colleagues, will be out on strike. In a previous blog entry in June, I had mentioned this as a possibility, and, indeed, there was a strike ballot and I voted in favour.

Four of my colleagues have moved on recently, so, because of the recruitment freeze, I am now doing three jobs. We have not had a pay rise for three years. Many positions, including mine, are due to disappear over the next year or so. And now the government have decided that the deficit is all our fault and we’ve got to pay for it, either by losing large chunks of our pensions, or pulling out of the scheme completely. And they wonder why morale is low.

But, I hear many of you say, things are much worse for the private sector. Indeed they are! Only a third of private sector workers have made provision for their retirement – a frightening figure. But instead of wanting everyone to ensure that we are all suffering equally, does it not make sense to raise the private sector levels of pensions? Maybe some sort of compulsory insurance scheme? There were all-party talks last year about the future funding of elderly health care until the Tories pulled out. I would like to see these resumed.

Over the weekend, we’ve seen stories about how the improved offer will be withdrawn unless we play ball. However, I am not sure if this ‘offer’ has actually been made – which does make it difficult to accept. Presumably a government PR game for the benefit of the media.

One disappointing aspect of the whole saga was the turnout for the strike ballot. Only 29% of Unison members could be bothered to vote in a free postal vote. This gives ammunition to those amongst the Tories who are advocating passing a law to say that strikes are only valid if a majority of the members approve it (as opposed to a majority of the voters) which would effectively outlaw strikes forever.

This measure presumes that those who have not voted must therefore be voting against a strike – and I would be concerned about any electoral method where the views of those who didn’t vote are counted one way. Introducing strike ballots was one of the few good ideas of the Thatcher government – but even she did not go this far.

On top of this, some in the Conservative party are advocating methods by which it would be easier to offload people, such as ending maternity cover and limiting access to tribunals. Although Vince Cable and Danny Alexander are wrong about the pensions dispute, at least one can be glad Liberal Democrats are in the government to attempt to keep such daft ideas at bay. At a time of high unemployment, reducing the rights of workers is not what is needed.

Research shows that productivity is highest when employees are happiest - not when they are constantly in fear of unemployment. And, in difficult times, we need greater productivity.

So there is much at stake in this dispute. The government, the media, even the opposition parties, are all joining in the campaign to make the public sector workers into the villains – but trust me, folks. Nurses, teachers, dinner ladies, office workers and so on - we are the good guys! And, as I said in June, much of the public sector is ‘magic’.

The economy comes home ... again.

2011-11-02T14:37:00.000Z

The country’s economic situation got closer to home recently with the news that my job is likely to disappear sometime over the next year. Most of the public sector has been ordered by the government to make cuts in spending, and, for me, a draft plan involves staff cuts. It is only a draft for now but any refinement is not likely to be in my favour.

The silver lining is that I have plenty of notice – many have little or no notice of redundancy – once I turned up to work to be out of a job by lunchtime. But as one enters his 45th year, it does give pause for reflection.

It was in August 1992 when I left Aberystwyth with my shiny new Masters degree to add to my upper second graduate degree, and I settled back in with my parents near Portsmouth ready for the next chapter in my life and to continue the job search. I was then unemployed for the rest of 1992 and then for all of 1993.

This was a very depressing experience. A recession was in full swing and Norman Lamont was in Number 11 with his famous statement that unemployment was ‘a price worth paying’. Businesses closed everywhere, unemployment hit the roof, times were hard all round. And as for us graduates, my counterparts were either with me on the dole, or were doing low paid job in burger bars and supermarkets. I travelled around, had a few interviews – but getting that final handshake remained elusive.

I well recall one morning, having been notified of a new vacancy, getting on the phone and being told that 600 (!) people had already called so they had closed the vacancy.

When Nick Clegg said recently that Labour must never again be trusted with the economy, I remember similar thoughts in 1993, as I walked down Commercial Road in Portsmouth, to the job club, past numerous empty shops and closing down sales, and thinking that the Tories must never be trusted with the economy again. In fact, as soon as Chancellor Lamont moved on, the country began to recover. Coincidence? (He is now Lord Lamont – so clearly he was not one of those who had to pay the price).

In my lifetime, it is clear that both major parties have mismanaged the economy. Unfortunately, for the foreseeable future, at least one has to be trusted with it!

I recall a statement by Tony Benn, who said that capitalism needs unemployment – it keeps the workers quiet and the unions inactive. At the time this was dismissed as leftie-rubbish, but now one does wonder. Earlier this year, in fact, Oliver Letwin said that public sector workers needed ‘discipline and fear’. Is low growth and unemployment a ploy by the ruling and political classes to keep the status quo in place? Are workers more motivated and productive when fearing for their futures? I guess that is a topic for others to discuss and theorise about.

In my case, I eventually got a job in the summer of 1994 working for a political magazine and have managed, more or less, to stay employed in various roles ever since. But now it is time to dust off and update the CV and see what jobs are out there. Hopefully this time it won’t take me so long.

Human Rights for Pot Plants!

2011-10-06T12:55:00.000+01:00

Yes, it’s true. A violent criminal was saved deportation because he successfully argued that without him around there would be no-one to water his pot plants. Oh, and he had a cat too.

OK, I made that all up although one cannot rule out the possibility that a story like this will be on the front pages at some stage. But this does show the ridiculous level of debate that human rights in this democratic country has sunk to - especially when even our Home Secretary has to resort to a kitty story to play to the crowd. Cats don't have human rights, Ms May, because, er, well, they're not human!

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is quite a small document. You could read it in under 15 minutes. The purpose of the Human Rights Act (“the Act”) is to install it into UK law. Human rights, and the rights of the individual, have historically been of prime importance to British society, and so you would have thought that this issue would be of such importance that it would be above party politics.

We all have the right to hold different political views, to criticise the government without fear of arrest, to practise whichever religion we want, and to live peacefully in our own homes without interference from the authorities.

Hence people all over the world, especially in eastern Europe who had to fight for decades for their human rights, and many across Asia and Africa who hope to enjoy the freedoms we take for granted, must be amazed to find that a major British political party, and large sections of our media, want to do away with an Act which enshrines us with that most basic of protections.

Let’s get one thing straight – the ECHR says nothing about not deporting criminals and it says nothing about cats. In fact, I find it amazing that the Home Secretary, of all people, has not read it! What she, and others, refer to is how judges have interpreted the law, not the law itself.

For example, Article 3 bans the use of torture. The British authorities should not practise torture. Surely we can all agree with that. Judges have taken that to say that if the government were to deport someone to a country in which they would be tortured, they would be guilty by association, and hence breach Article 3.

We have a free and independent judiciary – and they interpret the laws as they will. That’s how it should be. Yes, they make the odd daft verdict, and say the oddest thing, but would we have it any other way? Should the judges have to base their judgments on what The Daily Mail will say in the morning? Dozens of criminals get deported yet the one that does not is guaranteed to get on the front page.

It may be the case that the Act does not work as well as the government would wish – in which case, the Home Office should provide advice and guidance to the judiciary. But can we really repeal the Human Rights Act, at a time after the Arab Spring and when millions still dream of having one of their own?

The Conservative proposal of a British Bill of Rights may be a reasonable idea – but it should work alongside the Act, to further clarify and reinforce our basic liberties. It would also be helpful if the Tories published a draft of what they had in mind.

Not for the first time, the people have more sense than the politicians – in three years of door knocking, not one person has mentioned the Human Rights Act to me as a major issue. And polls show no eagerness to repeal the Act.

So let’s stop the headline grabbing. Britain has always been proud of its human rights record and of opposing injustice and tyranny around the world. Let’s keep that pride and keep the Act.

Now it is Labour's turn (again) to kick the students

2011-09-26T12:51:00.000+01:00

When I entered university in Aberystwyth, many years ago, the then Thatcher government had just ended housing benefit for students, were bringing in the poll tax, were slashing grants, and introducing student loans. We thought things could not get any worse. How very wrong we were.

This weekend’s announcement by the Labour party that they would have tuition fees of £6,000 completes the circle. Student grants are just a memory, the Labour government introduced tuition fees and then ‘top-up’ fees, the Conservative party want unlimited fees, the Liberal Democrats backed a policy of trebling fees, and now Labour are back saying that instead they should be doubled.

It seems that no-one is prepared to back the students. Even former NUS President, Aaron Porter, who initially impressed last year, has now abandoned his opposition to raising fees and is backing the new Labour party policy – perhaps putting his own ambitions before principles (ironically something Lib Dems are often accused of).

The years of higher education are a great experience. For many, it is the first time they have lived away from their parents, where you can meet new friends, enjoy studying topics of interest, and get a sense of independence. Students make mistakes in life, as do we all, but most former undergraduates look back on those years with very fond memories – especially if you went somewhere as nice as Aberystwyth.

Student life is not for everyone, of course, but it should be an option for those of any background who is prepared to work hard enough to get there and stay there.

The country, in return, gets a generation of graduates whose talents and skills have been proven and developed by study and academic qualifications – doctors, lawyers, businessmen, even politicians, all go on to play their part in the country’s future.

Fees, simply put, are a deterrent. £3,000 a year with a final debt of £9,000 to pay off does not sound too much – but remember you also have your living costs, hall fees, books, food, bills – and that is before anyone thinks of any socialising.

The priority should be simple – the best potential students should not be deterred from entering university whatever their background.

The short term aim should be to freeze tuition fees at no more than £3,000 a year.
The medium term aim should be to abolish tuition fees completely.
The long term aim should be to restore some sort of maintenance grant.

The question that we should be discussing is: how can we as a country find the money to invest in our future? Not to compete with each other, or play party politics, by discussing how much debt with which we can lumber the brightest amongst our future generation.

Number 54 - Thank You

2011-09-19T14:02:00.000+01:00

This is to thank all of you who voted for my blog in the Total Politics Blog awards 2011. I was delighted to make my debut in the lists and come in at Number 54 in the Lib Dem blogs – thus allowing me to use the button on the left.

The approach I have taken on my blog is not to repeat Lib Dem policy, indeed I have often disagreed with it, but simply to put forward my opinions.

Others will, of course, have their own opinions – that’s what makes politics so interesting. I am simply a Liberal Democrat because their views are the closest to my own.

For example, my interests are:
- Mass political reform, including a written constitution, voting reform and an English parliament.
- Fair taxation for all – with cuts in VAT and the top rate of tax when feasible (i.e. not now!)
- Investment in higher education – the abolition of tuition fees across the UK and, in the long-term, the return of a maintenance grant.
- An active and positive involvement in the European Union (but not to include a single currency).
- Pro-family, supporting measures to strengthen marriage and the family unit, including restoring the marriage tax allowance.
- Pro-Clegg and pro-coalition – agreeing with the equidistance principle that we should be prepared to work and co-operate with any other party. Power is not a dirty word, we should not be here just to run a few councils.
- Opposed to everything the Daily Mail says (this is the national paper I read more than any other for sheer amusement value).

Thanks again for voting. To those of you who agree with me, I hope you join the cause. To those of you who don’t, please feel free to comment. And I would encourage everyone to join a political party, whichever is closest to your views, and get involved.

After the coalition - some thoughts for the 2015 election

2011-09-14T12:44:00.000+01:00

Some Tories have turned their thoughts to the next election and are putting ideas on paper to open a discussion about how David Cameron can win a majority government. Of course it would be a brave man to predict events of the next few years, but this seemed to be a good idea so these are my own thoughts from the Lib Dem point of view.

Many in the party are dreading the next election. Our poll ratings are in single figures, we will be losing many councillors over the next few years, and we will be hit by boundary changes. The media are hoping for our MPs to be reduced to at least the six the Liberals had in 1970. But I think there are some reasons for optimism.

So let’s assume the coalition lasts its full term and we prepare to do battle on Thursday 7 May 2015. I think there are two main points to make.

Firstly, for the first time since the 1920s, we will have a record of government to defend. We need to produce a list of achievements and how much of our manifesto has been successfully implemented (which will be about 75%). Examples will include taking the lower incomes out of tax, the pupil premium, the green investment bank, linking pensions to earnings – and so on. You know the list.

We must hammer at this list again and again. This is what we have achieved. It would not have happened without us. (For example, at the time of writing, many Tories seem more interested in reducing the tax of the higher paid rather than the lower). Hopefully by 2015 the economy will have recovered and we will have returned to growth and job creation and take the credit for that.

Secondly, our 2015 manifesto assumes greater importance. Never again can anyone say that Lib Dems can promise the earth because they will never be a position to put it to the test.

Of course we aim for sole government, but it is possible that after the election we may be in coalition or some sort of agreement with either of the big two. We can put across the message that the more votes we get, the more policies we will be able to implement.

Thus in our next manifesto we need some new and exciting ideas to build on to capture the public's imagination. Further development of the economy, improvement to the public services, and continued job creation will be the main topics – and we mustn’t forget our old friend, political reform and moves towards a fairer voting system.

What we have done – and what we will do. These should be the two pillars of our campaign.

And what of our leader? No-one can have had such a spectacular rise and fall as our Nick Clegg has over 2010. But as deputy Prime Minister for five years he will have grown in stature, if not in popularity. (Mrs Thatcher was never popular but it didn’t stop her winning three elections).

There have been some who have suggested a change of leader before the next election but I disagree. I am sure in the debates that Cleggy will be able to out-debate Cameron once again and he can return to being an asset to the party.

The 2015 general eletion will be a big test, certainly the party's biggest test in the history of the Liberal Democrats. It is also a challenge, one we must not be afraid of.

Overall, if we can fight an active campaign, be proud of what we have done, and put forward a positive programme for further change and fairness, then I think we have nothing to be afraid of.

Our mistakes in government - a personal view

2011-09-05T13:06:00.000+01:00

As we end the summer break and approach the conference season, it is an appropriate time to give ourselves an assessment of what has gone wrong and how we can improve. Recently ConservativeHome ran a piece on David Cameron’s ten biggest mistakes – an article which caused much debate. In the same sense, I would like to list what were, in my view, our biggest mistakes over the last 18 months.

Tuition fees:
No problems identifying the biggest error. This will rank alongside the poll tax as one of the greatest political blunders of our time.

We had rightly made this a flagship issue during the campaign, and got a great deal of support from students and their families as a result. We could have nurtured that confidence, maybe even developed it into the presence of new young members and campaigners. And then, at a stroke, an entire generation of potential supporters was wiped out!

Given the economic circumstances, and the fact we are in coalition, I think we would have been forgiven for putting the timetable back a bit – we could have frozen the fees for now with the intention for at least a partial reduction by 2015. But to see the fees triple, and our guys leading the way in defending this, gave rise to the belief that the Liberal Democrats are a party that breaks its promises – a belief the media will only be too eager to perpetuate and will take many years for us to break down.

Yes, the resulting system is a fair one and many students will benefit, but we cannot get around the fact that fees have been increased. Many members of the party, including myself, were very unhappy about this.

The National Health Service:
It is a well-known fact that you cannot trust the Tories with the NHS – so there must have been particular care at negotiating this part of the coalition agreement. It was a bombshell therefore when the proposed NHS changes were announced to let the market into the system.

What for me was a sickening spectacle was the immediate photo call – where we had our leader, Nick Clegg, join David Cameron and Andrew Lansley on a televised walkabout of a hospital – thus implying that they were at one with the proposals. This gave us a few arguments during the canvassing earlier this year.

During the election campaign, nurses told me about the bureaucracy and over-management of the NHS, so reductions here were necessary – but to jump on board the Tory plan so quick is blunder number two. Fortunately, the party members and the admirable Shirley Williams are leading the way in calling for a rethink, so this cause is not yet lost. But it would have helped if we had not been so eager to endorse the reforms in the first place.

Public sector pensions:
The Tories do not like the public sector or those who work in them. That’s OK, as we don’t like them much either. However it was a mistake for Danny Alexander to join in the attack on public sector pensions – again it is us doing the Tories' work for them. It is agreed that the funding of pensions need to be looked at, especially in the private sector, but we must seek a fair settlement here. When I see the Daily Mail congratulating Liberal Democrat ministers, then I get very worried.

Boundary reviews:
I think agreeing to this concession will come back to hit us very hard. If you look at a map of England coloured by constituency, you will see swarms of blue and seas of red, with a few dots of yellow here and there. These are areas where local Lib Dem parties have gradually built up constituency support over a period of time primarily on local issues.

However, boundary changes will result in blocks of Tory or Labour voters being moved onto these areas and upsetting the balance. The last estimate is that we would lose a quarter of our seats on these moves alone. Sarah Teather successfully held off a fellow MP but are others prepared to work just as hard?

People will always choose to have fewer politicians – but I fear such drastic changes will hurt us.

AV referendum:
In return for an agreement to equalise the constituencies, we got a possibility of a voting system we didn’t really want. Not a fair exchange.

Anyone who follows European politics knows that referendums are never reliable and are inevitably decided on completely irrelevant issues (as became the case with the AV referendum).

Our Scottish colleagues demanded STV for local council elections in return for a coalition with Labour. As many council wards are multi-member, this would have been possible to implement. I think this should have been our demand in England. It would benefit us, further our representation, avoid having councils with over 90% from one party, and get people used to voting 1-2-3.

Immigration:
Finally this was one from the campaign itself. Immigration was one of the most common issues raised on the doorstep, and we adopted a good workable but politically disastrous policy. The words ‘illegal’ ‘immigration’ and ‘amnesty’ were enough to have the media screaming. The Tories ‘cap’ (although not possible) won them support while we should have adopted Labour’s no-policy policy.

Conclusion:
This is an entirely personal view of our mistakes. The decision to form the coalition, however, was correct given the result of the election. There is 75% of the manifesto in place and no longer can people dismiss Lib Dem policies on the basis they will never be put into practice.

Nick Clegg and the party leadership still deserves much praise for the successful work they have done over the last 18 months. But we can do better, and must do so, to recover the trust of the electorate.

No, let's not abandon fairness of taxation!

2011-08-15T13:16:00.000+01:00

One of the media’s favourite themes is to promote and foster the notion that the Liberal Democrats have broken all our promises. This is obviously because of the tuition fees saga and despite the fact that 75% of our manifesto is in place. However I am concerned that another of our key promises is on the way out - which will further this perception.

Fairness in taxation is one of our biggest flags. Moving the burden of tax away from the lower and middle incomes and further onto those with the broadest shoulders and ability to pay. During the last campaign, I discovered that the tax policy, of no tax paid on the first £10,000 earned, was very popular.

So it is with complete dismay that I learn that the 50% top rate of tax is under consideration. The media, Boris Johnson and the Tory right wing are all in favour of this notion (obviously) but in my view, not only would this be wrong, but it will be another shot-in-the-foot disaster for us.

In happier times, I would have no problems with reducing all the tax rates – indeed a 50% tax rate in the long term is unsustainable. But presently the public sector are on a three year pay freeze, the public sector are losing jobs and business, prices of fuel, travel and goods are rising faster than we would like, the economy still struggles to grow, and we have yet to do anything about banks.

Is anyone seriously suggesting that now is the time for a tax cut (and hence a pay rise) for the very-wealthy – while the standards of living for most people are being reduced?

If the media are correct, negotiations are going on about a quid pro quo – a mansion tax, for example – and I am aware of the argument that a lower rate might bring in more money and allegedly make London more competitive – but the bottom line is that the media and the Labour party will point at us and say that, despite our promises of shifting the tax burden, we gave more money to the rich while many of the poor are worse off – we were not all in this together after all - and we can’t say no.

Here and elsewhere I have been critical of those former members who have deserted our party at its hour of greatest need – but it does get more difficult every day.

Danny Alexander is right to say that those who want this are living in cloud cuckoo land - and I hope that he sticks to his guns.

If the Conservatives want to cut taxes for the wealthy there are other ways of doing so – for example, the threshold at which the 40% comes in is, in my opinion, too low. And of course we gave way on capital gains tax, a good way for the wealthy to avoid tax.

But we must not give way on the 50% rate while so many are still struggling. We should make a clear signal that it is our intention to scrap the 50% rate, but only when the recovery puts us in a position where we can reduce ALL rates - and we can keep working towards genuine fairness of taxation.

Total Politics Blogs - Vote for Me!

2011-08-13T11:10:00.000+01:00

I have now returned from holiday (has much been happening over the last week?) and noticed that the Total Politics Blog Awards are in process - hence my plug to vote for me!

If you have liked reading my views over the last year, whether you have agreed or not, please click here and your vote would be much appreciated.

Is it time to say 'au revoir' to the Euro?

2011-07-22T12:46:00.002+01:00

During the election campaign last year, a lady angrily approached and accused me of wanting to ditch the pound. I calmly explained that, while it is Liberal Democrat policy to join the Euro, this would only be when the economic circumstances were correct and after approval in a referendum. The lady considered my words and then decided the best option was to hit me with her umbrella.

Being a major trading nation, we in the UK cannot ignore events elsewhere in the world – but I sometimes feel our xenophobia prevents us from rational discussion. Depending on which paper you read, the EU is a German plot to succeed where the war failed, a French scheme to cover up for their inefficient farmers, a Spanish intention to grab the UK fishing grounds, or a combined European ideal to keep those British in their place. No-one actually wants to discuss how to make the EU work, let alone refer to the benefits of our membership. That lady obviously felt that even the thought of joining the Euro made you some kind of traitor.

While all our attention has followed the hacking scandals, the Euro is heading for yet another crisis. At the time of typing, Greece are set to receive a huge rescue package, Ireland and Portugal have had their problems, Italy and Spain are on the brink of joining the queue, and Bulgaria have decided to delay their entry.

Many in the UK , especially the media, look on, with barely concealed joy, at the troubles our EU partners are facing, smug at the fact we stayed out of the scheme, and, in a few cases, even praying and willing for one or two states to go bankrupt to confirm our feelings of superiority.

As I said, this kind of attitude makes discussion difficult. It is certainly not in our interests to see Europe go under – the knock on effects could result in destroying our already frail economy leading to business collapses and massive unemployment – not to mention having unsavoury elements on the rise throughout Europe. Having the southern states becoming virtual colonies while the northern states fund them will cause resentment amongst all peoples.

Despite its many faults, I have always favoured membership of the European Union. It is however a huge bureaucratic mess and we should be more involved with a positive approach, using our weight to reform and streamline and turn the EU into the powerful internal trading bloc we know it can be.
However I have been a bit unsure about the Euro as I was never sure how you can have one common currency and one common bank across national borders. When troubles strike in the past, a government has the option of devaluing its currency to make its exports more attractive. But how can you devalue your currency if it is not yours to do so?

I cannot claim to be an economic expert, so am not qualified to offer a detailed solution, but it seems to me that the problems hitting various European countries are because their currency was locked in to a certain rate and not able to float to find its natural level. Therefore would one solution be to temporarily break-off membership of the Euro for various states, introduce a ‘Greece Euro’, ‘Portuguese Euro’ etc, and then in the future, once things have calmed down a bit, put it all back together again?

I don’t think a two-speed Europe is the answer – (i.e. those in the zone speed up their integration) – as this would virtually permanently lock out those who are not currently a member. We have to think long term. If and when it will be to our advantage to join the Euro, as with other states currently outside the zone, then it must be made feasible to do so.

Whatever the solution it is clear that Europe, ALL of Europe, is in crisis. If we are to move towards a cross-European currency, there should be in place measures to allow such temporary suspensions to address specific problems – and this is an area where the UK could come forward with ideas and reforms.

If it is time to say au revoir to the Euro, however temporarily, let us put that case forward and get back on track to the Europe we want to see.

Prime Minister's Questions - 50 years old - and the scores are ... ?

2011-07-18T13:25:00.000+01:00

This week is the 50th anniversary of Prime Minister’s Questions. Over the years PMQs has seen many controversial moments and gladiatorial contests – but many argue that it shows the best and the worst of British politics.

I have decided to score the various contests. They are from my own impressions since the Commons was heard (from 1978) and seen (since 1989) and, earlier than that, I have had to judge from other accounts. The below scores are my views alone and are just for fun – and I am only counting the leaders themselves rather than stand-ins.

1961-1963
Harold MacMillan 1-0 Hugh Gaitskell
A far gentler duel than what we are used to now, but old Mac was confident he could hold off Gaitskell's attacks – (hence the introduction of PMQs in the first place).

1963
Harold MacMillan 0-1 Harold Wilson
Gaitskell’s sudden death gave rise to the great debater, Wilson. Just eight months opposite each other was enough to see the confident Harold gain an edge over a government weakened after Profumo and the Long Knives.

1963-1965
Alec Douglas-Home 1-2 Harold Wilson
Harold again confident over a typical old-school Tory. However he did not have everything his own way, Home was able to lead a late spirited Tory fight back.

1965-1975
Ted Heath 3-6 Harold Wilson
A contest lasting ten years – hence the high score as many points were scored. There was great disappointment in Tory ranks at Heath’s early appearances when Wilson easily outmatched him but Ted made some advances at the time of Labour’s troubles in the late 60s. However Heath was never confident at either side during PMQs.

1975-1976
Margaret Thatcher 0-1 Harold Wilson
Like Heath, Mrs Thatcher struggled at first to deal with the slippery Wilson – but they only faced each other for a year.

1976-1980
Margaret Thatcher 2-2 Jim Callaghan
From 1978, the Commons could be heard, and a now confident Mrs T was up against the old warrior James Callaghan. A well-matched contest as both in turn faced economic difficulties as PM.

1980-1983
Margaret Thatcher 3-2 Michael Foot
Michael Foot was a master of the Commons, a ferocious debater, but became leader too late in life. Although he often scored during the difficult times of the early 80s, he was let down by his own party troubles. A post-Falklands Mrs T rapidly grew in confidence.

1983-1990
Margaret Thatcher 6-0 Neil Kinnock
Over seven years, this was a complete mismatch. Mrs Thatcher was full of confidence and dominated the Commons in the mid-to-late 1980s, and Neil Kinnock just could not compete. Even open goals such as Westlands were missed.

1990-1992
John Major 0-0 Neil Kinnock
A bore draw. John Major had little of Mrs T’s dominance and both sides were just marking time until the election.

1992-1994
John Major 1-2 John Smith
Major now with his own mandate and more confident but bested by the former QC who sadly died too early.

1994-1997
John Major 0-3 Tony Blair
The start of the unstoppable force. John Major was often weakened by revolts from his own side while Blair and the confident ‘New Labour’ party began to dominate.

1997-2001
William Hague 3-3 Tony Blair
Blair was now a confident PM with a huge majority but Hague was able to match him all the way – this was an excellent contest.

2001-2003
Ian Duncan-Smith 0-3 Tony Blair
Oh dear oh dear. The quiet man unable to cope as Blair regularly won the day.

2003-2005
Michael Howard 1-1 Tony Blair
After the invasion of Iraq, Blair looked as if he could be on the ropes but Howard’s support for the invasion weakened his position. The two leaders looked too alike in a quiet contest.

2005-2007
David Cameron 2-2 Tony Blair
The fifth opponent for Tony Blair became his most formidable. Best known for his opening line ‘you were the future once’, Cameron looked confident – but Blair still able to defend himself.

2007-2010
David Cameron 4-1 Gordon Brown
Gordon Brown, at last the PM, started well, and had his ‘Brown bounce’ as Cameron suffered a lack of confidence. However as the troubles began, Brown struggled and Cameron triumphed regularly.

2010-
David Cameron 1-0 Ed Miliband
This match has only just started but Cameron has won the opening exchanges. However at the time of typing, Ed has the ball in his opponent’s penalty area. Will he be able to hit the back of the net?

Concluding, the most effective at PMQs that I have seen is Tony Blair, who saw off a succession of opposition leaders and always maintained his confidence. Margaret Thatcher, like Blair, was able to dominate the Commons but she was fortunate that, for much of her premiership, she was facing Neil Kinnock. As for Harold Wilson, this relies on the accounts of others, but most testify that he was formidable at one-to-one debating in the bear pit of British parliament.

But, as I said, this is just my opinion. What do you think?

The Swale Campaign 2011 - Part Two

2011-06-26T16:00:00.003+01:00

On 1 March 2011 the campaign proper began – and I settled into the routine of an evening’s canvassing after my day’s work in London. It certainly became very tiring.

Far from the aggressive campaign I had originally envisaged, we were conducting a defensive campaign aiming to protect our two seats on Swale Council. The wards in which we spent all our efforts were Murston and Milton Regis. They were both double member wards, both where we had one councillor in place, both where the councillor was in place for a long time and had gained a good personal vote, and both amongst Swale’s poorest areas off the island.

In Milton Regis, my own local ward, the other seat was held by Labour – a well known councillor who also had a good personal vote. The picture was very different in Murston, where the other seat was held by the Conservatives for only a year, a seat they were surprised to win last year, and which subsequently their councillor had been virtually invisible leaving our guy to do all the work.

There was never any danger of Labour losing their seat in Milton Regis but it was obvious they would aim to win both. The Conservatives have never won a seat in that ward. Murston, on the other hand, was Swale’s only three-way marginal, with two parties holding a seat but with Labour not far behind. Curiously the Conservatives only put up one candidate in Murston. In both wards the Tories put in minimal effort.

Our top non-Councillor candidate (me) was selected for Murston – mainly because I had stood for the ward last time and had done a lot of work there over the last two years. We also judged the ‘other’ councillor would be easier to unseat.

Both wards hence were a straight fight – the Liberal Democrats campaigning on the record of their local councillor versus Labour’s campaigning on national issues. History shows that national issues usually win out but we’d have a go.

Every evening, our very small team would be knocking on doors in either of the wards. At first the response was ‘what elections?’ but as the date got nearer people seemed generally a bit more clued up. There were some who knew and had been helped by our local councillor, others who raised valid local issues, some who were dedicated supporters of someone else, and of course some who were unhappy with the coalition.

And of course the occasional oddball that makes canvassing so worthwhile. One lady voted Labour because red was her favourite colour, another was convinced that David Cameron was standing personally, and a chap who said he would wait until the day for how The Sun told him to vote. One lady said she had voted for me at the general election last year because I was the best looking candidate – well, I wasn’t going to argue with that.

We didn’t forget the referendum and held two Saturday morning stalls to promote the Yes vote – in Sittingbourne and in Faversham, where we generally got a good response. This was before the campaign descended into farce – but more on that another time.

The results from the canvassing were similar – Labour were doing well, our vote was more or less holding up, there were very few Tories.

Labour were of course working hard as well. In Milton Regis we often found ourselves canvassing streets that they had canvassed the day before – and probably vice versa. In Murston, they held an ‘action day’ where about 20 of them were out and about. I was very envious seeing them all, when we could, at best, get five out in one go.

The last few days were very busy – I spent many hours delivering the eve of polls and the final canvassing. The day itself was up at 4am, and getting the Good Mornings out. During my wanderings I came across fellow blogger Ashley Wise, who I could see had a bundle of leaflets with Nick Clegg on.

In the evening it was then knocking up time and then finally at 9pm, time to call it a day. Another campaign was at an end.

I had not enjoyed this campaign as much as last year – mainly because the climate last time was more favourable, and also, last time, I was the ‘star’, shall we say, the parliamentary candidate! But this year my summing up was that I did not think I was going to be a councillor and felt our best chances were in our two guys holding on.

The following day, at the count, to our surprise, the Conservative vote held up well in those wards and, as in my earlier entry, we lost one seat convincingly and the other on a random draw. As for the referendum, the less said the better.

So what lessons could we learn? Apart from getting more people out to help, I am not sure there was much more we could do. We did a full canvass of both wards, several leaflet drops, identified voters and possible voters, had tellers in position, and the few of us worked exceptionally hard. If just one more Lib Dem voter had bothered to go to the polling booth in Murston, we would still have a councillor. But the bottom line is the overall tide was against us, as we saw nationally.

There are now no more elections to Swale council until 2015 (apart from any by-elections) which, annoyingly, might coincide with the next general election. If the national party then goes into opposition, as I think we will, then we may have to wait until 2019 for a revival – if we still have a local party by then.

Overall, the results were good for Labour, and UKIP did very well, but the results were best of all for the Tories. There are many parts of Swale where only the Lib Dems have been able to challenge the Tories. With no Lib Dem activity, the Conservatives can look forward to enough safe seats to control Swale council for 20 years or more – and, who knows, by 2031 the Council may even had made a start on developing the town centre.

The 'Magic' of the Public Sector

2011-06-18T19:45:00.000+01:00

A friend of mine used to own what he called a ‘magic basket’. He was very proud of this magic basket which was in his bedroom. At the end of each day he would put his shirt in this magic basket and, the next time he saw it, it would be cleaned and ironed and hanging up in his wardrobe – all by itself.

Of course this was all in jest. His wife washed and ironed his shirts for him. But I was reminded of this tale by the latest attack on the public sector workers – of which I am one - whose work, like my friend's wife, is mostly unseen.

The media lead the way with regular reports on how many public sector workers there are, although for a nation of 60 million there are not that many, and then casts doubt on what they actually do. People will believe this thinking that we all get generous pensions and salaries and that we all sit with our feet up all day. Meanwhile, roads magically mend themselves, benefits are mysteriously paid, and children venture into schools and come out strangely knowing things they didn’t know before.

Public sector workers are very easy to attack – because people simply don’t see what they do, nor do they realise how many jobs (e.g. nurses, teachers, librarians) are actually part of the public sector. So when a government decides to hit ‘the public sector’ they get glorious approval from the media and much of the population. ‘We pay your wages’ is an expression that every public sector worker has heard countless times.

This is not to say the public sector is perfect. There are too many quangos and, especially, too many people earning too much money. Reforms are certainly necessary. But when the sector is attacked in this way, it is not those at the top who suffer but always the vast majority at the lower end of the scales.

Now the latest attack comes from the coalition government in terms of hitting pensions. The plan is to increase workers contributions to the pension scheme and increase the retirement age. This is on top of a three year pay freeze (which would be OK if there was also a freeze on food prices, fuel costs and travel commuter fares) and also a recruitment freeze, which makes sense in some cases, but is so inflexible that it often means one person doing the work of two or three people.

The result will be to force people out of the pension scheme because they can’t afford the contributions. This would reduce employer contributions but leave many facing an uncertain future. This won’t of course affect the overloaded top end of the sector who can afford to make alternative provisions.

At this point, I should correct two myths. Pensions in the public sector are certainly no more generous than the private sector, and there is no more job security – as dozens of my former colleagues made redundant can vouch for.

I have great respect for Vince Cable and Danny Alexander, two talented Liberal Democrats who have much to offer the party and the country, but on this occasion I think they are wrong, and I hope they have the good sense to retract these intentions and hold talks instead of threatening and frightening people. I am sad to say this threatens to un-do much of the other good work our party has done in government. And if I hear Vince threaten the bankers one more time instead of actually doing something …

Of course the unions sometimes don’t help themselves. Talk of ‘the biggest strike action since the general strike’ just winds people up – nor does it help when unions such as the RMT hold regular strikes on the underground for the most obscure reasons. I hope there will be common sense on both sides in this dispute.

Yes, the last government left the country with a massive deficit and an economic crisis. No-one can deny that. The last Labour administration expanded the public sector far beyond what is justifiable. Cuts and reforms are necessary and times will continue to be tough. But I cannot agree with the attack on the pension rights of the lower paid workers within the public sector on top of the changes that have already been made over the last year. I find it at odds with our belief in fairness.

Although I find it hard to say, if the government carries out its threats, if I am on the opposing side to a government of which my party is a part, if my union asks me to vote for industrial action - then I will be voting Yes.

The Swale Campaign 2011 - Part One

2011-05-28T18:15:00.001+01:00

I first started thinking about the Swale ‘all-out‘ elections of 2011 during the general election campaign last year. The awareness brought about by the campaign, plus the effects of ‘Cleggmania’, had resulted in a number of new members and interest and I was receiving many emails from people wanting to know more about the party both locally and nationally.

I was especially pleased to get some interest from younger people in the Isle of Sheppey – both young people and Sheppey members are a rarity in our local party – which even gave me the idea of setting up a branch of Liberal Youth on the island.

Swale council is Tory dominated and, as of the start of 2010, we only had four seats. The strategy I had devised involved certain targets we could aim at and the ultimate ambition of getting about 8-10 councillors in Swale’s council chamber. That would double our numbers and give us a good presence to build on. However I had made one rather large miscalculation.

I had assumed that the Conservatives would win the election – either with a small majority or by winning a second election in October 2010. So that by May 2011 they would be at each others’ throats over Europe and that the policy of starving the area of investment would increase unemployment, stagnate the economy and cause hardship all round. The Conservative party would be unpopular and this, coupled with the fact that the local council is famed for its dithering and inactivity, meant that their council seats would be ripe for the plucking.

What I did not envisage was, of course, the coalition. The national party making a deal with the Conservatives, along with the dropping of the tuition fees policy from the coalition agreement, meant, at a stroke, we had lost virtually all of that interest I referred to earlier. Subsequent events, with VAT, child benefit and increased tuition fees, saw the rest of our local work completely undone. We were firmly back at square one - or not even back at square one but further back if possible, maybe square minus ten. From increasing the party’s profile in the constituency, the emphasis was now on the local party merely surviving.

Swale Council crosses two local parties – ourselves in Sittingbourne and Sheppey, and our neighbours in Faversham. Here in Sittingbourne and Sheppey, we had two councillors to defend in the wards Milton Regis and Murston and these would be our priorities. I was, again, to run in Murston to build up on my campaign last year. But I didn’t want to just aim to sit still – I also wanted to move forward.

I drew up a new strategy with some ideas to take in the revised circumstances and put it to my colleagues at the next Executive Meeting. In order for the Tories to lose control they needed to lose ten council seats. As I thought no individual party could do this, I put forward the idea of approaching other parties with some sort of deal. This proposal went down like a lead balloon. There was a preference for going down fighting (although my preference was not to go down at all) and, as time went on and our poll ratings sank, it was clear the idea was a non-starter anyway as we were too weak to offer anything.

It soon became obvious that Labour would make our seats top of their target list and give the Tories a free ride. They correctly understood that we were weak and that, in Swale, the Tories were virtually untouchable, so the best Labour could hope for was a small gain of seats. However I noticed in council by-elections around the country that, while we were getting a thumping from Labour, we were holding our own against the Tories, even winning a few seats in surprising areas. So as well as defending our two seats I wanted to attack where possible.

There were two areas I had in mind. I wanted to campaign on the Isle of Sheppey and so looked at the triple member ward, Minster Cliffs – we had success there in the (distant) past and, with the principle that islanders will only vote for islanders, also had three good local candidates.

Unfortunately one of these candidates was a student (need I say more?) and the second decided to withdraw his help in protest at the coalition with the Tories – thus helping the Tories (doesn’t it annoy you when this happens?). So, unable to fight such a large ward with only one person, that was the end of the Isle of Sheppey campaign.

The other ward I had in mind was St Michaels. This was a double member ward where the Tories had won one seat narrowly from us while the other was a Lib Dem hold (although our councillor had defected to Labour). As Labour were unlikely to figure, and again we had two good candidates, I fancied our changes in a straight fight with the Tories.

But .. again circumstances worked against us. Our top candidate for the ward withdrew from the party in protest at the child benefit changes (which I thought a little unfair as they were a surprise to us as well) – and we had to move our second candidate. That was the end of the St Michaels campaign. Although we did find a paper candidate to run, we put no effort in and were well beaten anyway.

It felt like every time George Osborne spoke, or Nick Clegg appeared on TV alongside David Cameron, we lost members. It was ironic that our attempts to fight the Tories were being undermined by people who don’t like the Tories.

Equally, on a larger scale, my attempts to campaign against the tuition fee policy were not helped when people who agreed with me kept leaving the party so I found myself in a minority.

Eventually we dusted ourselves down, gathered who we had left, and said, right, what’s in the pot? The agreed campaign was to concentrate everything we have on Murston and Milton Regis. Of the active widespread campaign I had hoped for, it was all we could manage. And of course we are always short of funds - a problem not shared by our two main opponents.

As we prepared our schedule I heard stories around the country of people refusing to canvass – for fear of receiving a hostile reception. That wasn’t a problem with us, as we hardly had any people to go out canvassing anyway.

But on Tuesday 1 March, two months before polling day, I came home from work, and then went over to Murston at about 6.40pm to knock on my first door of 2011. The campaign had begun!

Muscles!! Flexed or strained?

2011-05-14T10:04:00.000+01:00

Defending the latest soundbite is always difficult. After a long and bruising local election campaign, what do I see in the news? The advent of ‘Muscular Liberalism’. ‘Muscular’ seemed appropriate as my first reaction was ‘give me strength!’

At first I thought it might just be a term which the media invented – but now see that Nick Clegg used the expression in a speech to mark one year of the coalition.

‘You will see a strong liberal identity in a strong coalition government’. Yes, no problems there but I take an issue with the sentence before that. ‘We will stand together, but not so closely that we stand in each other’s shadow.’

I admire Nick Clegg and always try to defend him. Nick Clegg has shown remarkable resilience against the biggest onslaught against any politician in recent years. Many of us would have folded under the pressure – but Cleggy goes on. However sometimes I feel he is his own worst enemy.

After talking about a distinct identity, what do I see? A joint appearance with David Cameron – where they continue to joke with each other like old mates. This, to me, looks like standing ‘in each other’s shadow.’

I wish, time and again,that he wouldn’t do these joint photo ops. The 'Cameron and Clegg show' just looks ridiculous. I was particularly angry a few weeks ago when Nick toured a hospital with Cameron and Andrew Lansley at a time when we are trying to save the NHS from the latest daft Tory ideas. Even the expression ‘muscular liberalism’ was used by David Cameron not so long ago.

There is nothing wrong in a close personal relationship with business partners but, in my view, this contradicts talk about maintaining one’s own identity.

I want to see Nick Clegg away from the Tories and pursuing our agenda on his own or with Liberal Democrats. I want to see him talking about things that matter to Liberal Democrats, such as political reform, civil liberties, fair taxes, the environment, and social mobility. If we make it clear that we still believe in the things we stand for then, in time, our supporters will come back.

But for now, please, no more soundbites, no more grumbling. The elections are over, the referendum campaign is finished. We took a beating but it’s done for another year.

Let’s stop worrying about opinion polls and just get on with the job. Let’s see our ministers get on with it, keep a stable government in place to ensure recovery, keep aiming for growth and jobs, keep pursuing our initiatives in education and the environment, and keep working towards fairness in society.

Respect will be regained by less soundbites and more action on the issues important to liberal democracy. That is the best way to flex your muscles.

Voting reform - where now?

2011-05-09T12:43:00.000+01:00

The referendum was a clear rejection of the Alternative Vote method. The No campaign convinced enough people that, although they can set their Sky+ box, work out housekeeping budgets, set out saving and pension plans, and download apps to their phones, that when it comes to voting, they are only capable enough to mark an X with a pencil tied to a string.

So where does the campaign for a fairer voting system go now? We must bear in mind the following.

Firstly, voting reform is no longer just a Liberal Democrat issue. UKIP, the Greens, the Nationalist parties, even many in the Labour party, campaigned for a Yes vote. As more and more parties arrive on the scene, they all recognise that an electoral system designed for two party politics is way out of date.

Secondly, the First Past the Post (FPTP) system remains a bad voting system – which is why all new democracies over the last 30 years have kept it at arms’ length. Having minority rule and domination is, in some cases, something the new democracies have been trying to get away from for decades.

Thirdly, let’s not forget that the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly, Northern Ireland Assembly and the London Assembly, are all new bodies set up over the last 12 years and all stayed well away from FPTP. Many British people are at present using other voting methods and using them well.

Fourthly, the Conservative party will NEVER accept voting reform. They have fought against every political reform since 1832 including votes for women, the House of Lords reduction in powers, and the regional assemblies. With their allies in the media, this presents a formidable obstacle. Although we would like the Tories to participate in the debate, we may have to go ahead without them.

Hence the question is – if AV is not the answer, what is? The Liberal Democrats policy is for Single Transferable Voting (STV) as used in Northern Ireland and for Scotland’s councils. Other parties might have other views.

In the 1990s there was a Scottish Constitutional Convention – involving people from various parties and other groups such as the church and unions - to discuss Scotland’s future. This helped lead to Scotland’s parliament.

As voting reform is now a multi-party issue, I would like to see something similar set up, with representatives from all parties and parts of society, to decide, once and for all, which would be the best and fairest system to elect our parliamentary representatives.

In the meantime, our only hope is for a hung parliament at the next election. As I’ve mentioned before, David Cameron deserves great credit for being the first Prime Minister to voluntarily give up the right to call an election whenever he chooses. Having fixed terms, along with the increase in votes for ‘other’ parties (13% at the latest poll), make hung parliaments all the more likely in future. And Lib Dems should argue for more this time, such as STV for council elections (which would be easy to set up as most council wards are multi-member).

If first-past-the-post fails, again and again, to produce a single party government – then even its biggest supporters will struggle to defend it.

Swale Borough Council - my result

2011-05-06T19:47:00.000+01:00

Swale Borough Council:
Murston ward - two councillors

Nick Williams (Labour) 482
Ed Gent (Conservative) 420*
Dave Banks (Liberal Democrat) 420
Paul Williams (Labour) 369
Keith Nevols (Liberal Democrat) 236
(Nick Williams and Ed Gent elected)

*settled by drawing of lots.

A very long election day was followed by a longer than expected day at the count which started at 9am and didn’t finish until gone 6.30pm. Murston was the last result to call mainly due to the fact that seven (!) recounts were needed to decide on the second place. Firstly, Ed Gent was one vote up, then Dave by one, then it was even. Then another table took over. After three more counts showing the vote at 420 each, the returning officer declared a tie and put two names into a box – and drew out Ed’s!

This was a very disappointing way for Dave to end his eight year tenure as a Murston councillor and the good work he has put in over the years. We concentrated the campaign on local issues but sadly it was national issues that decided – Labour focusing a negative campaign around Nick Clegg, and too many people unable to tell the difference along with the Conservative vote surprisingly holding up. This was a pattern repeated across the country where good councillors were lost because of the national party’s blunders (of which more another time).

As for me, considering the many hundreds of hours I have sent in Murston over the last two years, talking to people, helping Dave on local issues, leafleting, canvassing, attending meetings, helping where I can etc, I was very disappointed to come fifth with barely a third of the votes from last year. I can safely say that I won’t be working in Murston again and hope that over the next four years that Nick and Ed take care of Murstonians at least half as well as Dave did.

The Swale elections overall were also disappointing. Virtually all Swale’s councillors retained their seats, so the Tories kept their healthy although slightly reduced majority. The main exception was that we lost our leader, Elvie, after 24 years in the chamber – all sides agreed she had been an excellent councillor over the years and her loss is a major blow. The final scores were Con 32 (down one), Lab 13 (up three), Lib Dems 1 (down two) and one Independent (no change). The Conservatives look set to dominate Swale council for many more years to come – which is bad news for all of us.

Coming soon: my story of the campaign, the highs (if I can remember any) and the lows.

Election day tomorrow - and a good week so far for people in yellow

2011-05-04T14:43:00.000+01:00

Another election campaign nearly reaches its end. This has been a longer than expected campaign, we have been canvassing for over two months now and the good weather has meant we were out almost every evening. As always it has been an enjoyable experience, discussing politics with people, and as always there have been some surprises.

At the very start, we were told by the media and others that everyone hates us, Nick Clegg is the most unpopular politician since Oswald Mosley, and that we should go canvassing with crash helmets on. Naturally this was all nonsense – canvassing in 2009 during the expenses scandal was much harder – and there are always people who hate all politicians regardless of party.

Where we have sitting councillors, the reception has been good mostly based on the personal vote (and some people feeling sorry for us). Of course some Liberal Democrat voters have switched to Labour but, to my surprise, some Labour voters have switched to Lib Dem – they argued that they had never taken us seriously until we entered government. One lady told me she had voted Lib Dem last year but, because she was happy with the coalition, she is voting Tory this time (oops!).

In Swale we are only defending three seats, which does make the allocation of resources much easier, although we had some other targets in mind – but that’s a story for later.

Tomorrow then it’s an early start, a long day and a late finish, as local party activists all around the country will be getting their voters into the booths. The results will be on Friday and then, well, who knows, I may even be a councillor by then!

Everyone, regardless of who you support, get out and vote!

Footnote: being born in Norwich, I have always followed the Canaries so the week has got off to an excellent start with City’s promotion to the Premier League. At Fratton Park on Monday the yellows beat the blues – let’s hope it is a good sign. On The Ball, City!!

We need a different 'Lib Dem Voice'

2011-04-21T12:39:00.001+01:00

It is ironic that the party which has a long reputation for distrusting its leaders, and is most democratic about letting members choose its policies, should also be the one where there is so little debate about its recent activities. Over the last year there has been much for party members to discuss but in the excitement of government this all seems to have been forgotten.

For example, the 2010 general election was a failure for us. We had a great bounce with the debates and a lot of interest in our policies, but we were unable to deal with the inevitable media smears, failed to get across our message, and in the event made a net loss of seats for the first time since the party was founded in 1988, also losing some good MPs like Susan Kramer and Julia Goldsworthy.

We should be asking ourselves what went wrong and discuss what lessons we should learn for next time.(After all, the Labour/Tory strategy of just waiting for your turn is not open to us).

At this stage we should be discussing how we can make our presence felt in the coalition, get our message out there, the fact that we are not a ’human shield’ but a party of government with over 60% of our manifesto being put into practice.

One of the best blogs I read is ‘Conservative Home’ – here there are a series of well written articles often presenting good arguments. And of course the ‘nasty’ party is not afraid to turn on its own – nobody gets more flak than David Cameron. I disagree with most of what is said, of course, but admire the way the discussion is carried out.

'Labour List' also puts forward some interesting views about how the party should move on from its defeat and the New Labour era, and provide an effective opposition to keep the government on its toes as well as formulating an alternative strategy ready for the next election.

'Lib Dem Voice', on the other hand, with some exceptions, is quite dull. Some carefully chosen writers putting out selected articles which more often than not closely follow the party line and just act as cheerleading rather than frank debate.

Equally the party’s official newspaper, ‘The Liberal Democrat’, while often a good read, also contains very little debate about the party’s future and strategy and instead trumpets the triumphs of the coalition. All very laudable – but we were going to vote for us anyway.

Whereas any Conservative and Labour leadership critics stay within the party, and often have entertaining conferences as a result, Lib Dems who are unhappy with the leadership’s actions seem to leave more often than not – and this can’t be healthy for the party. For example, how I can continue the fight against tuition fees if those who agree with me have left us and so I am now in a minority? It can't help if members feel they can't convey their unhappiness to the leadership and their party colleagues.

We need another 'Lib Dem Voice'. We need somewhere where we can have frank discussions about what we should be doing better, what went wrong at the last election, why our poll ratings are in single figures, how should we approach the next election, how can we make the coalition work and our own role within it, and, above all, where we can criticise our party’s leadership and have a proper debate and exchange of ideas?

The Battle of Murston

2011-04-18T13:26:00.000+01:00

Apologies for the lack of blogging lately. This is due to a number of factors. I have been very busy in the local election campaign, work has been very busy because we have implemented a new database, on which I have taken a lead role in its development and training. Worse of all, I then get ill – of all the times to get unwell, mid-April is the most inconvenient. Having said that, I was once ill during Christmas and that wasn’t much fun.

Having now recovered I have resumed my election campaign in my efforts to be elected to represent the good people of Murston in Swale Borough Council. This ward has attracted much attention from the local parties – not because it will decide the election (the Conservatives will remain in firm control) but because it is Swale’s only three-way marginal, will be a good test of how the three parties face up to each other, and forms part of Labour’s strategy to wipe us out.

Indeed Labour had an ‘action day’ last Saturday and I met two groups of Labour people as we were wandering about. They seemed to recognise me and we exchanged cheery hellos.

Murston is situated towards the east of Sittingbourne – in fact, true Murstonians consider themselves a separate town. The main issues we have worked on include the problems of incorrect road signs, small roads and insufficient parking, a new estate nearby, relief roads, and crime and anti-social behaviour. I have enjoyed meeting many people over there in the last two years and hope I can work for them in the council chamber.

There are five candidates on the ballot paper for this double-seater ward. We have a good team of an experienced local councillor, with a good personal vote, and our parliamentary candidate (me). Labour are putting up an ex-Lib Dem (who went over to the dark side in 2009) along with his son. The main surprise is that the Conservatives are only putting up one candidate – the other defending councillor. Maybe there was a mix-up in their nomination papers rather than some subtle strategy.

Overall, in Swale, in two of our three seats, Labour are the main challengers, while in the third, Labour are aiming to pick up enough Lib Dem votes to allow the Tories to win. Can’t blame them for targeting us, of course – if the tables were turned we would do the same – and as their resources are enormous compared to ours, then they probably have good chances of closing us down. It is up to us to continue to work hard so that whatever happens we can say at least we did our best.

Meanwhile the AV campaign continues. Sadly I think we are going lose this as the combined power of the establishment, the mass media and the Conservative party looks like it will be too strong. The argument about every MP getting over 50% of the votes has been lost amidst a fog of bulletproof vests, the BNP and coalitions.

The No groups’ tactics, not to defend FPTP but to make the issue confusing, seem to be working. After all, what Murdoch wants, Murdoch gets – including every PM for the last 25 years. But the battle must go on. Maybe there will be some surprises to come.

Will compulsory voting set us on the way to reform?

2011-03-24T13:04:00.000Z

In the 19th century political reform was a hotly debated topic that often captured the imagination of the public. The various reform acts, the Chartist movement, the suffragettes etc all played their part as Britain’s political system attempted to transform itself into a modern democracy.

The establishment and the Conservative party resisted every change but step by step, through genuine people power, change gradually happened. By 1928, every adult over 21 had the vote and the powers of the unelected House of Lords were restricted.

The most alarming aspect about the recent political system is the now complete disinterest shown by most of the electorate.

We have an electoral system where most people’s votes do not count, where the majority of seats have been held by the same party for over 40 years, where a government with a large majority can be formed with 36% of the votes (2005), where a party can get nearly a million votes but nothing to show for it (UKIP), and where the votes of 1.6% of the electorate can decide the entire election (IPPR) – but people don’t care.

Turnouts for general elections are going down, those for other elections are usually around a third. Even the recent Welsh referendum, the most important vote in the history of Wales, only got a turnout of 35%.

And of course the upcoming AV referendum – a recent poll shows that while 84% are aware of it, only 46% know what it is about. And while I am campaigning for the Yes vote, I fear that on the day the combined power of the mass media, the Conservative party, the remnants of old Labour, and the apathy of the electorate, will win the day to get a comfortable No vote. The establishment will be overjoyed and voting reform will be put to bed for 20 years or so.

How did we get to this state of affairs? Why is it that people will rush to vote in the X- Factor and Strictly Come Dancing yet can’t be bothered to make important decisions which will affect their lives? If they abolished voting tomorrow, how many people would be marching down Whitehall in protest?

Part of the problem is of course with the politicians themselves. People are generally disenchanted with politics. ‘You’re all the same’ we often hear on the doorsteps. All the main parties report reduced membership. Communication and spin is carefully managed whereas one small slip can end a career. People feel distant from politicians. As the saying goes, whatever the vote, the government always wins.

There is also the disinterest and selfishness of modern times. As Mrs Thatcher famously put it, ‘there’s no such thing as society’ – and she is right. Not only in politics - all voluntary, charitable and church organisations report a lack of interest and participation. Many people simply want to shut the front door, switch on the TV and hope the world leaves them alone.

Many times I have heard that people are angry about the expenses scandal, angry about getting a Council full of Tories with only a fraction of the votes, angry when their preferred party has no chance so is a wasted vote. Yet when you mention changes to the voting system, the reply is ‘oh, it’s all right as it is’.

It is a vicious circle. We can only win back people’s interest in politics through wide political reform. Yet major political reform won’t happen because of people’s disinterest.

So I have a suggestion. For a one-off experiment, let’s make voting compulsory at the next general election.

Each ballot paper can have an extra option ‘no vote’ for an abstention, and we must bring in ways to make voting easy by post, by phone and internet. If we can make the census compulsory, why not the ballot paper?

With the aim for as close to a 100% turnout as possible, the disinterested and apathetic will have to give it some thought, even if it is to spoil their paper. And some of those may develop an interest, join a party or campaign.

This may speak off interest amongst others – and what we all want to see is greater political involvement amongst communities, a greater quality of debate, more ‘real’ people rather than professional politicians, and higher membership of all political parties. And hopefully, we will eventually see some genuine political reform.

This way, we may finally break the circle to bring politics back to the people – whether the people want it or not!

Libya - am I wrong?

2011-03-20T19:24:00.000Z

Over the last couple of days, Libya has grabbed our attention. Allied coalition forces are enforcing a no-fly zone, actions which have been approved by the UN. British forces are in action, our Prime Minister solemnly told us, Gaddafi must be stopped from killing his own people, all the political parties are behind this action, the media are generally in favour, and a rare air of consensus has reached our political scene.

So why am I uneasy? I feel I cannot join in this general air of using military force against an evil dictator. There is no argument that Gaddafi heads an appalling regime and is guilty of crimes of sponsoring and supporting terrorism throughout the world, and attacking his own people. But surely a golden rule of military strategy is that you don't start a war without knowing how you are going to end it?

The Kuwait war 1990-91 had a defined objective. It was to liberate Kuwait and push Iraqi forces back to the borders. This was successful. However British forces have been in Afghanistan for nearly nine years now - with no idea of how to get them out. Wouldn't it be nice for a Prime Minister's question time not to begin with a sad note on the latest casualty?

So what is the objective of this action? Is it to overthrow Gaddafi? How will you do this? With the exception of a well-aimed bomb, the only way is either to invade the country or rely on the Libyans to overthrow him - and someone who has exerted a tight grip for over 40 years won't go quietly.

Let's say coalition forces bomb the country for six weeks. Then what? Keep bombing? What if the coalition forces say the lesson is learnt, all go home, and then Gaddafi waits for a few weeks before attacking the rebels again?

Question one is what's the objective? Question two is what is the post-war strategy? If Gaddafi is overthrown, is there an alternative to take his place? Will this a stable regime or will it have to be propped up by Allied forces as we saw in Iraq?

Either way, I can't get over the certain scenario that, sooner or later, there will be British forces on the ground in Libya - they will be attacked, and some will be injured and killed - and will be there for longer than we intended.

Very well, I hear you say, what would you do? Would you leave Libyan people to their fate? This is a very good question and I can't pretend I have an easy answer. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe Gaddafi will be overthrown soon, a stable democratic regime take his place, and then all will work out well. But Gaddafi is not the only evil tyrant out there.

Britain cannot afford nor should it desire to be amongst the policemen of the world. In Afghanistan and Iraq it was Britain and the USA which led the way, and suffered the most consequences. And now here we are leading again. By all means we should support the action - but not by involving British forces.

My main question is - am I wrong? I have not found anyone who agrees with me. As I said, all the political parties and most of the media are raring to go. Lib Dems were right to oppose the Iraq war, but I think we might be incorrect to do so here.

In the 1960s, the then PM Harold Wilson got great criticism for not involving British troops in the Vietnam campaign. With hindsight, we might say that he was right to keep out. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but it provides lessons - my worry is that these lessons are being ignored.

Spreading the word - canvassing and AV

2011-03-14T13:07:00.000Z

The early stages of our local election campaign are going smoothly. We’ve knocked on many doors in the cold and dark nights and we are looking forward to when the clocks change and it gets bit lighter.

We’ve found support for us and also support for Labour but the biggest response is ‘don’t know’ or ‘oh, is there an election on?’

We haven’t yet found any support for the Conservatives – but then we didn’t find much in the local election canvassing last year – and that didn’t stop them winning everything. (Voting Conservative is a bit like watching adult films, or gorging a huge bar of chocolate in one go. There’s nothing wrong with it – but you would not admit it to a stranger).

Of course there is the usual anti-politician, slam-door-in-the-face types, but contrary to my last post, people have generally been polite, including those who were unhappy with the national coalition.

Many, of course, are unable to tell the difference between local and general elections. I had a long conversation persuading one lady that David Cameron wasn’t a candidate while another gentleman was angry that ‘you and the Lib Dems have taken us back to the days of Neville Chamberlain’ – a reference I am still unsure about. Tuition fees have not come up at all but the NHS changes and fuel prices are frequently mentioned.

As usual, though, it is enjoyable talking to real people about their concerns and questions. Despite what the media say, there are some people who still like us, and those who don't like us are still generally happy to chat. Whether all this will turn into votes, we’ll find out soon.

This last Saturday we decided to do our bit for the Fairer Votes campaign and set up a stall in Sittingbourne High Street to promote the Yes to AV cause in the upcoming referendum. This went surprisingly well. We received a lot of interest, ran out of leaflets and pens to give away, answered some questions and discussed the options.

There were some who were not interested and some who did not agree (although no-one raised the £250k myth) but overall we raised awareness of the campaign so hopefully some people will give the topic a bit of thought.

We are now planning a second stall with our colleagues in Faversham down the road.

Back on the doorsteps

2011-02-28T12:46:00.000Z

This week we will be back on the doorsteps for the May 2011 council elections. A rather later start than last year, but then I’ve only got one ward to work on instead of the whole constituency.

I have been looking forward to knocking on those doors again and seeing if we are as unpopular as we keep being told we are. There are stories around the country that some Lib Dem activists are refusing to canvass for fear of the reception they may get from previously loyal supporters. Well, I’ll guess I’ll find out – but two years ago, when we were canvassing during the expenses scandal, there were some fairly hostile receptions then so it can’t be much worse.

It is only ten months since we were last knocking up – and a lot has happened since then.

Last year the main complaint was having an election! People were not happy that their news was full of elections. One person suggested we abolish all parties ‘except the big two’ and let them take turns for five years each. Then we ‘won't need to bother the people with elections.’ I don’t think I’ll campaign for that.

The main issues raised with me last year were immigration, the local economy and Gordon Brown. Well, Mr Brown has moved on. And our cause was not helped by adopting an immigration policy which, while workable, was easy to shoot to pieces and, in my view, was a major cause in our fortunes falling away in the last few days. It would have been wiser to adopt Labour’s policy of not having a policy.

I anticipate that raised with us may well be the fact we went into coalition with the Tories, the tuition fees saga, and possibly the health service. None of these are local council issues, of course, but many people can’t tell the difference. Local elections nearly always reflect national showings, which can be a shame for good councillors of all parties.

We can’t do much about anyone who is angry about the coalition – after all, there is no coalition in the council, the Tories are in firm control, and we are fighting them as best we can. As for tuition fees, we can’t defend the indefensible. We got this badly wrong and have to hold up our hands and say so.

Where possible, I will aim to stick to local issues. We are defending two very experienced hard working councillors who have done a lot for their wards. We are also putting in the field a number of experienced ex-councillors and, of course, me! And I think I am good! We are hoping to get as many Lib Dems into the council chamber as we can to fight on local issues.

And we are opposing a lethargic and apathetic council which regularly releases long term plans which get quietly dropped before the next plan comes along. I make no apologies for repeating the fact that Swale is predicted to return to its pre-recession levels of employment in 2025 – far later than most of Kent – and the Council’s disinterest doesn’t help.

So off we go onto the streets in good old-fashioned political tradition. It will be much easier once the weather gets warmer and the clocks go forward but for now we’ll venture out in the cold and dark to seek every vote we can.

The AV referendum - the stakes have never been higher!

2011-02-17T09:26:00.000Z

We are currently preparing our local campaign to promote the Yes vote in the upcoming Alternative Vote (AV) referendum and hoping to counter the apathy and negatively that the No side are attempting to foster.

There is no doubt that our electoral system is woefully out of date. It was designed for a two party system – and there has never been any change because the two parties have both done very well of it.

But in last year’s general election, over a third of the vote went to other parties. There are now ten political parties represented in parliament, and three others outside who got a sizeable vote. Our system desperately needs updating to cater for the people’s wishes.

AV is not the final answer – it is not proportional and doesn’t get rid of safe seats, although it does reduce their number. However it is not as bad as First Past the Post (FPTP) and has some advantages (see below). It also opens the door to other systems.

There are some, including many Lib Dems, who say they will vote no to AV because they support proportional representation or other systems. But this makes no sense. If FPTP wins the referendum then that’s it, the end of the debate – we’ll be stuck with the system for 30 years or so – and a very large chunk of the electorate will remain disenfranchised and resentment of politics will continue to increase.

We badly need a system that connects the people with their representatives so they feel their vote makes a difference – and for now voting Yes to AV is the best option.

Those who love a good political debate must be disappointed at the antics of the No2AV camp. They could campaign for, defend and argue the merits of FPTP and ask the public to back their case. Instead they have resorted to negative spoiling tactics such as attempting to sabotage the referendum in the Lords, making claims about the cost of AV which have quickly unravelled, and focusing on Nick Clegg. Whatever you think about Cameron, Clegg and co, politicians come and go very quickly (remember Gordon Brown?) – it is the system itself that must be looked at.

The Yes camp is leading in the polls at the moment but must not be complacent. The establishment and the mass media are all on the No side – they hate the idea of letting ‘people’ having more power instead of keeping it with the political classes – so the Yes people must keep getting the message out there.

So why is AV an improvement on FPTP? I will use three main reasons.

1. Every MP can stand up in parliament and say ‘I have the support of the majority of voters in my constituency.’ Presently only about a third can say that. Under the current system, with more and more candidates, it is quite possible to get elected with around 20%. (This is why the BNP support FPTP).

2. Under FPTP, voters tend to be negative. We heard last year ‘I will be voting Conservative to get the government out ‘ or ‘I’m voting Labour to keep the Tories out’. People are not voting for who they want – they are voting for who they don’t want! AV allows you to vote positively – this is my first choice, this is my second etc.

3. Above all, for the first time in our history, a majority of the voters can say ‘my vote counted!’ Presently most voters are wasted, they needn’t have bothered turning up (and many don’t). But if votes were thought to make a difference we would see an improvement in turnout.

AV puts more power in the hands of the voter and away from the politicians. It reduces the numbers of safe seats, making the candidates work harder and become more accountable. If FPTP wins then most MPs can continue to sit happily in their safe seats for as long as they wish.

Hopefully AV will win the day, we can then extend fairer voting systems to council elections in England and Wales (Scotland already have) and FPTP will finally be finished.

The stakes are that high! If AV does not win, then it will be final. Nothing will change! Ever!

Oh Lordy. The Establishment Fights On.

2011-02-11T08:50:00.000Z

In all my years following politics, I can’t say the House of Lords has ever grabbed my interest. It’s a bit like Morris dancing – a national embarrassment that we would rather do without, but is somehow comforting to know it is there. It is the bumbling old uncle you only ever see at Christmas soundly asleep.

It is quaint, historical and very British. After all, how many democratic countries have a non-elected legislative chamber consisting of bishops, failed and has-been politicians, and descendants of men (and women!) who did favours for various Kings?

There have been attempts to reform the House, but, as the Lords so often cry in triumph, they are still here. The Blair government, to its credit, made a start on reforming the House by getting rid of most hereditary peers, but then they didn’t see further reform through!

What has got my anger now is the recent deliberate attempt by the House of Lords to interfere with the Alternative Vote (AV) referendum – for example, in specifying there must a turnout of 40% to be binding on the government. Most council and European elections rarely get about 33%. If it is a yes without such a turnout it goes back to the Commons for the MPs in safe seats (the majority) to wait for a convenient moment (e.g. a big news story) to quietly vote it down.

Overturning this amendment, as well as the other filibustering the Lords have attempted, may well mean that the referendum is delayed – and holding it at another time will be much more expensive.

Some argue that the Lords object to the constituency size element of the bill. I can sympathise with that – but why all the amendments re: the referendum? If certain Lords are opposed to AV, why don't they just campaign for a No vote?

My objection to this 40% stipulation is that people should have the right to say ‘don’t know’ or ‘don’t care’. Under this amendment, if they don’t vote, it is assumed they are supporters of First Past The Post (FPTP).

It is a typical spoiling amendment deliberately designed to sabotage the people’s right to be able to choose their own voting system. What is wrong with just Yes or No?

It is sad that defenders of FPTP are not able to defend the system but instead seek to get their way by such tactics or by posters having a go at Nick Clegg. I can respect anyone who wants to defend the present method on its own merits but not if their campaign takes on these tactics.

The Lords’ defenders argue that is a chamber that can leisurely consider the actions of the government on a non-political basis – especially as there are so many crossbenchers. This argument has been blown out of the water by recent events. It’s actions may well lead to the end of the coalition, a general election, and a Labour government. Of course, Labour supporters will applaud this – but it could be their turn next time round.

It has historically been an ambition of the Labour party to abolish the House of Lords. Proposals for an 80% elected house will arrive soon and I hope that Labour will support these.

What replaces the Lords is the big question but the bottom line is that the Lords has lasted too long for its own usefulness, it is an anachronism in the 21st century, and it is about time it was consigned to the history books.

Swale Elections - Preview

2011-02-04T12:43:00.000Z

A member of Plaid Cymru once criticised my blog for saying too much about ‘a tiny part of Kent’. Maybe so but I did run for parliament in that ‘tiny part’. So here’s my warning – this entry is all about Swale in Kent.

In May, we have the Swale Council ‘all-out’ elections. Both the Conservative and Labour groups decided to move to all-outs rather than thirds in terms of electing the Council. This of course gives the Liberal Democrats and other small parties a lot of difficulties (probably not a coincidence) who don’t have the resources of the big two – hence can only run very limited campaigns.

The current composition of Swale council is Conservatives 33, Labour 10, Lib Dems 3 and Independent 1. There are 25 wards returning one, two or three councillors. For the Conservatives to lose control, they need to lose ten seats.

The Conservatives are mainly strong towards the Faversham area and rural parts of Swale and have controlled the council for many years now. They have not impressed with lethargy combined with long-term plans lasting a short while before the next long term plan comes along.

The local party may well repeat their ‘do nothing’ campaign which has been very successful over the last few years. They have every county councillor, dominate the borough council and won the parliamentary seat (to be fair, our new MP did work very hard in the election campaign last year – but no other Tories were seen).

If the Tories do have a strategy, it will be to hang on to their many safe seats. They can expect to lose a few marginals that they were surprised to gain - but can plan for governing with a reduced majority.

After a quiet general election campaign, the local Labour party are expected to campaign hard across the area. They’ve started to knock on doors already!

Labour are strong on the Isle of Sheppey and the town areas of Sittingbourne. To get control, Labour will need to gain 14 seats. There are areas where they will comfortably regain seats, and they will no doubt target the Lib Dems, but to get control of the Council they will need to work in some Conservative strongholds as well.

Around the UK, there have been some strange by-election results lately, with Tory votes crashing, the Lib Dems holding their own against the Tories and collapsing to Labour, and Labour’s candidates winning in places like Gloucestershire and Cornwall. Ed Miliband’s future as Labour leader is often debated but the votes have definitely been going his way. Labour may well surprise all of us (and themselves) in winning some unexpected seats.

The Liberal Democrats’ three councillors each have the advantage of a personal vote gained over many years of work locally but the disadvantage of the national poll rating. Our strategy will simply be to battle hard and defend the seats. With a bit of luck, we will add to our total, but I think it is fair to say we are unlikely to be the biggest party!

Other parties will put up some candidates – we have an active UKIP party buoyed by the recent visit of Mr Farage himself, the BNP are about, and there is a rumour of a Green or two. The local Loonies and their bananas will be present. But of course all small parties are punished by the electoral system. Under any other system, UKIP might get a few seats.

So what will the result be? My money is on a reduced Conservative majority.

However if Labour do well against the Tories, and the Lib Dems can hold on, then there may be a hung council! Then there is the possibility of a Lab-Lib Dem administration and the Tories gone at last. (Although it is possible that Labour would prefer to see a Tory council than do any deal with the Liberal Democrats).

My own campaign will be in the ward of Murston, a two-seater ward to the east of Sittingbourne. The current councillors are my colleague Dave Banks and a Tory but last year Labour were only just behind – so Murston will be interesting as it is Swale’s only three-way marginal. I am looking forward to talking to the voters again. We will do our best in this campaign and see how we get on.

On top of that, we have the AV referendum so there is much to do!

Strategy - General and Local - some thoughts

2011-01-24T12:43:00.000Z

Strategy in politics is a very difficult science – in many ways, you have to foresee the unforeseeable and even then deal with what had been unforeseen once it arises.

In the election last year, for example, no-one predicted ‘Clegg-mania’ and the Lib Dem poll rating of 33% – hence the lack of a strategy to exploit this sudden surge. On the other hand, Liberal Democrats did have a strategy prepared in the event of a hung parliament (as did the Conservative party but not, astonishingly, the Labour party).

So it was with a heavy heart that I saw the Guardian report the party’s executive had compiled a strategy paper for the next general election to put to the spring conference. Being prepared is one thing but preparing a strategy for an event in four years is something else – we cannot possibly predict the political environment in 2015.

Now of course anything in that newspaper to do with the Liberal Democrats must be taken with a pinch of salt. The Guardian is like an embittered girlfriend whose partner has dumped her in order to further his career. Hell hath no fury like Guardian readers scorned – or something like that – but then to be fair it's not the sort of paper to make things up.

According to the report the strategy consists of:
- Fight the election as an independent party (Yes)
- No preference for future coalition partners (OK, so far)
- Present a manifesto as a clear programme for government (no problems there)
- No pacts with other parties on local, national or European elections (so far, so good)
- Spell out which coalition polices were derived from the Lib Dems (er)
- Identify policies which had been changed due to Lib Dem pressure (not sure now)
- Identify policies which were Conservative and nothing to do with us (D’oh!)

The emphasis on the party’s independence is welcome. However the plan to go into an election with a strategy of ‘not me, guv’ strikes me as weak and buck passing and I don’t think the electorate will buy it.

In my view, we don’t want to say (i) these are the changes enforced on us by the nasty Conservatives and (ii) this is what we wanted to do but the Tories wouldn’t let us. You can already hear the two Eds rolling in laughter (and they won’t be the only ones) if we went down this path.

We must go into the next general election with two clear and simple messages:

1. These are the changes that Liberal Democrats have put in place by way of being in coalition (I gave a few examples in my last entry – and there will be some more by then).
2. This is our plan for a five year government from 2015.

There may be a case for a strategy for a snap general election should the worst happen but any thoughts about 2015 can wait for now. The world will be very different by then.

What we need now is a strategy for 2011 – the elections to the Scottish parliament, the Welsh Assembly, and most English local councils. And, depending on the Labour dinosaurs in the Lords, the AV referendum.

I would like to see us grab the initiative by a publicised launch of our local campaigns simultaneously in London, Cardiff and Edinburgh. The message should go out about how Liberal Democrats are very strong an experienced in local government, how we control more major cities than any other party, and a list of the benefits those cities have gained as a result – especially in environmental terms.

Presumably our Scottish and Welsh parties will launch a manifesto and Tavish Scott and Kirsty Williams will be there to lead the way.

Why not every local party put together a local manifesto, with ideas and proposals, and publicise it as far and wide as possible? If they can afford it, to post it through every door. It can be just a small document of four or eight pages – but it will shift the focus onto local issues and get people thinking.

With the regional media, our local leaders could hammer the message again and again. These are the issues we believe in, this is what we will do if we take/keep control of the council, what do you think? Regular press conferences, documents, advertising, marketing, we must show the electorate that we are still full of ideas and energy.

Of course, people will refer to the national picture, the fact that we went into coalition with the Tories, the tuition fees blunder – in which case we must be open and honest – we are getting the best deal we can (with examples) and we have made mistakes, but we are prepared to work with either party or independents to form a stable administration at all levels if necessary. This is grown up politics not the yah boo kind we are used to and which the media love.

This may be a gamble but I would like to see Nick Clegg take a back seat for the campaign proper. His energy and enthusiasm would be a great asset but I think the non-government Lib Dems (yes, there are some) should take the lead for the local election campaign. Simon Hughes, Tim Farron, Charles Kennedy, for example. And before anyone says so – yes, Nick Clegg’s current unpopularity, although undeserved, is another reason for putting him to one side.

I would like to see the big names out on the streets for our key and target councils. As a party, we need to work harder than ever before.

Obviously the other parties, especially Labour, will sense easy pickings – and we will have to be prepared to accept considerable losses around the country.

But if we can act fast, act positive, act energetically – if we can get a good start and keep momentum rolling – I think we could still hold our own and be well prepared for the year ahead.

One day ......

2011-01-21T14:36:00.000Z

One day the Liberal Democrats will be back in opposition. We’ll be back to raffles and quiz nights, back to local campaigning to keep libraries and post offices open, back to being ignored by the media, back to watching our two big brothers make all the important decisions.

Oddly many members would prefer this. Many deserters may even drift back once they no longer have to dirty their hands with power and responsibility. Those who told me ‘I didn’t join the party to form a government’ will be relieved.

But why can’t we make the most of being in government while we can? We are the junior partner in a business arrangement to run the country and form a stable administration at a time of economic crisis to steer the UK through recovery.

And we are making changes. I could list them all but here’s just a few.

Raising the tax threshold, the pupil premium, linking pensions to earnings/inflation whichever is higher, raising capital gains tax, an elected House of Lords, fixed term parliaments, a green investment bank, a referendum on voting reform, and so on. None of these would happen without Lib Dems in government. Even if the AV referendum is lost, it will be difficult for subsequent governments to overturn many of the changes that have been or will be made.

True, the tuition fees saga was a blunder. And there have been some things we did not like (VAT, free schools) but then that’s the price of partnership. Isn’t half a glass better than no glass at all?

Much has been said about May’s elections in that around the country we may lose many councillors. Indeed we probably will – government parties usually do in mid-term. We will of course campaign as best we can, but if the results go against us there is no need for panic – we are in government – government! – for four more years.

What about Nick Clegg? Every day I read somewhere that Nick Clegg is finished, that his days are over – yet equally every day I read of some new initiative or opinion from Nick, every day he continues to show his energy and enthusiasm for the role, every day he proves that he was after all too big for just the role of leading the third biggest party.

Previously when Liberal Democrat leaders spoke, it might get a mention on page 7 of the Guardian. But now things are different. Rarely a day goes by without a prominent picture of our Nick.

I think history will remember Nick Clegg for being a man of courage and vision. He was the first Liberal Democrat leader to adopt an equidistant position between the two other parties, he was the first to have the genuine ambition for power, and, given all the knocks over the last year, and the fact that he carries on regardless, has proved to possess great courage and resilience.

Would any other Liberal Democrat leader have had the vision to go into coalition with the Conservatives knowing that many party members would be opposed? Would any other leader know that this was the best way to make at least some changes, and to show that the Liberal Democrats are prepared to be a serious party, responsible for governing?

David Steel told his party to go back to their constituencies and prepare for government – and he was mocked for it – but it came true (although probably taking longer than he had imagined).

What is wrong with ambition? Nick Clegg had the ambition to take his party into power – not controlling a few councils, not being known just for being nice people, but to have Liberal Democrats around the cabinet table putting policies into practice.

I didn’t join the SDP and then the Liberal Democrats to always be in opposition, to always be watching on while others played politics. I want us to be in power – again and again – to put into place as many of the policies I believe in. I want to see a Liberal Democrat Prime Minister in Number 10. I want to see Liberal Democrats no longer as the ‘joke’ party or the ‘wasted’ vote but to be taken just as seriously as the other two parties as an option for the voters to consider when choosing a government. What is wrong with all that?

One day, when we are back in opposition, I think many party members will miss having the Liberal Democrats in power. I know that I will.

My Welsh Assembly Campaign - Part Three - The Hustings

2011-01-17T15:47:00.001Z

It’s always a pleasure to meet Liberal Democrats from other parts of the country and meeting those in Ceredigion was no exception. Before and after the hustings, I met some new faces and answered questions – I was surprised to meet a former history lecturer from my university days. I also tried to calculate how much support I might get – to this end I was a little disappointed not to see more students present.

After the returning officer had arrived, it was down to business. I was first up and all eyes were on me.

Like I said in my last entry, I decided to give the ‘no-notes’ method a try and I don’t think I did too badly for a first go. (Practising to the seagulls of Aberaeron an hour previously had helped – although the seagulls didn’t seem too impressed). I managed to remember most of my speech but still tended to speak too fast – something I am working on.

As I addressed the meeting, I could see that my ideas were getting a mixed response. Some were met with a few nods, others a stony silence, while one person found the ceiling more interesting – which I thought was not a promising sign.

Speeches over, on to the questions. Unfortunately there were not many of these – so much of my preparation was not required. And at the end, the returning officer gathered all the votes and I was well beaten.

The successful candidate is a local councillor, Elizabeth Evans. On meeting her, I was instantly impressed, she was very well known and experienced locally, had great energy and enthusiasm, and has excellent people skills.

Ceredigion would have no better champion in the Welsh Assembly than Liz Evans and I hope she will be taking her seat next May. It is a consolation to know that, although I was not successful, I was beaten by a candidate of such high calibre. A by-election shortly after confirmed a large swing to the Lib Dems from Plaid Cymru, so, although the polls may say otherwise, I think with an effective campaign to add to a good candidate, there may well be a surprise in the Welsh Assembly election of Ceredigion.

That evening, I consoled myself in some old Aber pub favourites while watching Wales play the All Blacks and strolled around the old town on a bitterly cold evening recalling many happy years living in the town. The next morning, an early start to get to the station, and I left Aberystwyth once more. But anyone who has lived, worked or studied there can vouch for the fact that ‘Aber’ never leaves you.

Even though I was not successful, the whole experience of returning to Wales and applying for the nomination was enjoyable - and hopefully it will provide useful experience for when I try to find a seat to run for the next general election.

A Happy New Liberal Democrat Year

2011-01-07T13:14:00.000Z

A Happy New Year to you all – and it promises to be a good year indeed.

We have a year of Liberal Democrats in government – and, hopefully, many of our policies to look forward to. Much of our manifesto is in the government’s programme – it is a refreshing change to use it as a reference for our role in government instead of throwing it away as we usually do after each general election.

The argument about forming the coalition still goes on – so let’s all go to a parallel universe. Let us imagine that we did not talk to the Tories at all – and that instead the Conservative party formed a minority government.

1. The Liberal Democrats would once again be accused of being scared of power and responsibility (considering the number of members who have left the party over the last year then in many cases there may be a point here).
2. David Cameron would call another general election.
3. In this second election, the Liberal Democrats would not be able to campaign effectively (as we have spent all our money on the first election). Labour, temporarily under Harriet Harman, would remain shell shocked. And so the Tories would pick up seats from both parties to get a handsome majority.
4. We then enter 2011 with a ‘pure’ Tory government – which would still mean increased VAT and spending cuts but the main differences would be (i) no tax cuts for the lower incomes, (ii) no pupil premium for disadvantaged children, (iii) no cap on tuition fees which would go to £15,000 and beyond, (iv) absolutely no constitutional change at all (voting reform, House of Lords etc) and (v) helping the environment? You’re having a laugh!

The Lib Dem poll rating would hover around its usual 15% mark and many party members (now ex-members) would resume their sense of self-satisfaction in the purity of opposition.

The media would go back to ignoring us, there would be no Liberal Democrat ministers nor any of our policies in government.

By 2014 the PM would call an election at a time of good poll rating (no fixed terms). Our opponents and voters all say to us ‘you had the chance of power and you blew it – why should we waste our vote?’ With recovery under way, the Tories increase their majority.

Moving back to this world – we did talk to the Tories, we did do a deal, and we are changing things.

One world with Lib Dems in government, another with an exclusive Tory government. I think I know which I would prefer. Let's hope it is a Happy New Liberal Democrat Year to everyone.

And that was 2010

2010-12-20T09:09:00.000Z

This is my last blog entry of 2010 – and what a year it has been.

My own highlight was running for parliament – from selection in January, through the campaign, to standing on the stage for the result. This was very hard work but also great fun – and I am already looking forward to my next campaign – whenever and wherever that might be.

The general election was of course the main political highlight of 2010 – an airbrushed Cameron poster, Bigot-gate, Cleggmania, the usual twists and turns of any election, but resulting in some firsts. The first hung parliament since 1974, the first coalition government since 1945, the first Liberal Democrats in government, the first leaders’ debates, the first Green MP, the first BBC exit poll to be spot on etc.

Nick Clegg must be the political man of the year. How many people have been ‘more popular than Churchill’ and had an effigy burnt within a few months of each other. From the debates, to becoming Deputy Prime Minister, to the tuition fees row, it has been an eventful year for our Nick – the most eventful for any Liberal leader since Lloyd George.

The pace shows no sign of slowing in 2011. The Oldham by-election, the voting referendum and council elections, the impact of the cuts, the continued speed of the government’s programme – it is all very interesting for the political fan.

Blog-wise, my most read entry was ‘My Welsh Assembly Campaign – Part One’ (29 November) possibly because the title brought me to the attention of some people in Wales. My entry ‘When the going gets tough, the weak go running’ (18 September) also got a good readership – plus the sequel (9 October).

The most commented entry was ‘It must be with the Tories or without’ (11 May) when I said we should not enter a deal with Labour. This got a mention on the BBC news web site but, alas, I missed my chance to go on The World at One. (I was in a meeting when they called).

My own favourite entry was ‘We’ve lost the Generation Game – but can the next contestants win?’ (20 October) – on which I join others in reflecting about how the last generation have let down this one. I have further thoughts on this which I might put in another entry.

In all I have blogged 67 times this year – and not only about politics. Radio shows, England’s world cup flop and the second world war have all got my attention. But of course the political landscape and my own small part in it is the main theme of this blog – and as ever all the views are mine alone.

I hope you have enjoyed reading my thoughts of 2010, that you will continue to spare me your time in 2011, and in the meantime I wish all of you, whatever your politics are, a merry Christmas and a happy new year.

My Welsh Assembly Campaign - Part Two - Preparation

2010-12-13T08:58:00.000Z

Before I progress with my tale, I should clarify something which seemed to cause some confusion elsewhere. I was not successful in my application and so will not be representing the Liberal Democrats at the Assembly elections next May. But I still hope to help in some small way.

My application did cause some comment in the Welsh media. One called it ‘entertaining’. I will say this to the nationalists. Ceredigion is a beautiful part of the country with some wonderful people – you do not have to be born in Wales to appreciate that fact.

To return to the story, things were progressing well. I was successfully interviewed to join the list of Welsh approved candidates, my application was approved, and I was invited to the hustings – now to prepare.

To address the obvious question which would come my way (and indeed did). Why would the good people of Ceredigion elect an Englishman to represent them in the Assembly of Wales? I would argue that just because someone comes from Wales does not guarantee good representation (Plaid Cymru’s recent failure to back the Welsh language is just one example) and that you should consider the candidates, the parties and the policies on their own merits. (I had other arguments along these lines).

The theme of my campaign was to emphasise how Ceredigion can play an active role across Wales and the UK to generate recovery. Whereas Plaid Cymru wish to drill through Offa’s Dyke and have Wales sail off into the Irish Sea, in my view I did not think that isolating Wales was the answer to Ceredigion’s problems.

Ceredigion has a high number of public sector workers and small businesses – it had suffered during the recession and with cuts on the way could suffer further. So the regeneration of business and the development of the private sector to create jobs was my top priority. I had some ideas and proposals towards this objective.

The other themes I planned to talk about were suggestions re: maintaining the provision of health and education services, boosting tourism, and the protection of rural communities. I also hoped my campaigning against tuition fees might win over a few student votes (NB: the hustings were before the recent Welsh government’s announcement on fees).

If selected, I was planning to wage an active campaign throughout the area using traditional methods such as canvassing by door and telephone, and regular high street stalls in the towns, as well as new social media methods such as Twitter, Facebook, blogs, web sites etc.

This all went in my manifesto. I then wrote to all the local party members and prepared my speech. Looking back I am thinking I should have telephoned the party members too (there were a lot of them!) so that’s a lesson to learn for any future applications.

After arrival, I visited two of my favourite Aberystwyth pubs – Rummers and The Scholars Arms, got an early night and then the next day it was off to Aberaeron, an attractive village about 16 miles down the coast. Admittedly I had not been to Aberaeron for some time but it was refreshing to see that it had hardly changed.

I read somewhere that David Cameron had impressed his hustings audience by speaking entirely without notes. Both Cameron and Nick Clegg have done this several times more recently of course and so, while I am not in their league in public speaking terms, I thought I would give this method a go.

So after a quick sandwich, a final rehearsal of my speech, and last minute items of research, my preparations were complete. I arrived at the hall ready to give it my best shot.

Can we stop digging please?

2010-12-03T12:40:00.000Z

Let’s face it – the tuition fees issue has been a disaster. We have handled this very badly. The only consolation is that our poll rating can’t get much lower. Amongst students our poll rating has fallen from 45% at the election to 15% now – and even that’s higher than we might expect.

Unfortunately we are still digging .. and it’s time to stop.

I have great respect for Vince Cable. He has been a great Treasury spokesman over the last few years and is proving to be an astute Business Secretary. He did a brilliant speech at regional conference. But as I said earlier, he and I differ on this one point in that I felt we could have done more for students.

So I was astonished to read that the Lib Dem MPs are seeking a 'common position' for all 57 MPs which might involve Vince abstaining on his own policy! There can’t have been a precedent for this. Equally Danny Alexander, who is proving to be a good Chief Secretary, got into a mess in justifying this view on BBC’s Question Time. This doesn’t help things, chaps.

There is no problem with one party voting different ways, as the others have done occasionally, so the solution is clear. The Liberal Democrats which are part of the government should vote in favour of the policy under collective responsibility. The MPs who are not in the government should honour the pledges and vote against. If the opposition get their act together (unlikely) we may send out a clear message even if we don't defeat the plan.

The government of Wales have decided to freeze the tuition fees and make up the difference from their budget. I welcome this but remain suspicious of mischief making. Wales is run by Labour and Plaid Cymru and there is a general election in five months. I think their crafty plan is to use this against the Lib Dems, see them off at the election, and then afterwards, should they still be in power, they will then put the fees up anyway and blame the Westminster government. Hopefully I will be wrong.

Initially I was impressed by Aaron Porter, the NUS President, in his campaign. But after seeing his recent TV appearances I am now concerned he is becoming a Labour stooge. He is right to condemn the government’s proposals but wrong to target the Liberal Democrats so ferociously. He should remember that we are split on this issue and hundreds of parliamentary candidates (including myself) have signed petitions calling on the government to think again. He should also remember Labour's record on fees.

Had Labour won the election this year, and Gordon Brown still in Number 10, would Labour have rejected the Browne report, considering they set it up and their previous enthusiasm about fees?

And surely no-one seriously thinks a Conservative government would have given a better deal? In that case there would have been no cap, and fees of up to £15,000 and beyond.

So although we have let them down, the fact remains that of all the major parties, the Liberal Democrats remain the most student-friendly party. We abolished fees in Scotland, we are still committed to abolishing fees throughout the UK, and the vast majority of the members still back that view. Many of us intend to keep the campaign going and hopefully, in financially better times and a budget towards the end of this parliament, we can make a start on lowering and abolishing fees.

I would like to see our new president and party leadership in close discussions with the NUS to establish where we can go from here. But if the NUS think they will get better deal by wiping us out and putting one of the others in, then they might be in for a shock.

However we have done ourselves no favours by continually working away at the hole we are in. Let’s stop digging and start thinking.

My Welsh Assembly Campaign - Part One - The Background

2010-11-29T12:48:00.000Z

While browsing the 'Liberal Democrat' newspaper this summer, an advert leaped out at me – candidates wanted for the Welsh Assembly elections in May 2011. One word came into my head – Ceredigion. My campaign had begun.

I spent some happy years as a student at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth and have frequently gone back to the area. Ceredigion is a beautiful part of the country and is well recommended for holiday breaks – whether you like walking or cycling, driving around the area or just lazing on the beach. It is also an excellent place to study.

‘I’m applying to be a Lib Dem candidate for the Welsh Assembly’, I told my wife.
‘How much money do they get?’ she replied – which I guess most wives would ask if one is contemplating a career move. Having looked it up and satisfied her that we would not go broke, I put my application together.

There was a long road ahead, of course, but there was nothing to lose by trying. Having now wound down from the general election campaign I had itchy feet to get moving again.

Welsh affairs are shamefully ignored by the London media so a bit of background. The National Assembly for Wales opened for business in 1999 and has 60 Assembly Members (AMs) and, like the Scottish Parliament, is elected every four years by a form of proportional representation (PR).

Why PR? Because otherwise there might be no Conservatives at all – there were no Tory MPs in Scotland or Wales after 1997 and even now they only have one in Scotland. (PR to benefit the Tories? Oh, the irony!)

Since 2007 Wales has been ruled by a Labour-Plaid Cymru coalition. The First Minister is Carwyn Jones (Labour) who answers every question with ‘it’s the UK government’s fault’. The leader of the Welsh Liberal Democrats is Kirsty Williams who is a very impressive campaigner and constantly has the First Minister on the run during questions. And the proceedings of the Welsh Assembly are far more polite and professional than the House of Commons (which isn’t difficult).

Ceredigion has a Liberal Democrat MP (Mark Williams) who had a tremendous result at this year’s election increasing his majority from over 200 to just over 8,000. Ceredigion’s current AM is from Plaid Cymru.

I obtained and completed the application form and off it went. Two questions came to mind for which I would need answers – one, why should Ceredigion’s voters elect an Englishman to represent them and, two, how could I lead a campaign while living elsewhere? (My answers in the next chapter).

Initially I also applied for the regional list of Mid and West Wales (these are the ‘top-up’ AMs to ensure a proportional balance in the Assembly) but decided to withdraw as it became impractical and I wanted to concentrate on Ceredigion.

The regional list selections were all carried out first and meanwhile I kept in touch with events and what was happening in Ceredigion.

Finally I was delighted to get the invitation to the hustings. I was on my way.

Millbank Tower - The Day After

2010-11-11T08:59:00.000Z

I am sitting here at my desk on the 11th floor of Millbank Tower where I work each day – except yesterday when, in my absence, my workplace became the subject of headline news.

I refer of course to yesterday's riots following the student demonstration against tuition fees in the Millbank concourse where there are two main buildings. One is Millbank Tower, which is 32 floors high. Next door is 30 Millbank which is six or seven floors and is where the students got on the roof. This building suffered the most damage.

Although not at work, I managed to keep in touch with my colleagues. There is an emergency evacuation procedure for fires and bombs but we don’t have one for riots! It was all a scary experience apparently, especially for the reception staff on the ground floor, and took a while for the office to be closed down and everyone to be evacuated down the stairs at the back of the building.

There were continuous alarms and regular security alerts and, when you halfway up the building, you can’t see too clearly what is happening on the ground floor. People were phoning home to ask people to watch on BBC News or getting news by contacting friends on Facebook.

While everyone is cleaning up downstairs, a few thoughts occurred to me.

Firstly I had kept in touch with the organisation of the demo as I was intending to participate. (In the end, illness prevented me from going anywhere).

But, during the preparations, never once did it say the march would go near Millbank Tower, which is ten minutes walk along the Thames from Parliament. The focus was to be Trafalgar Square and Parliament Square. So did someone, as some stage, say, come on chaps let’s go down the road to storm Millbank Tower, and everyone went along on a whim?

We all knew that the demonstration was scheduled, but up the road in Westminster, not outside our front door. The shock of my work colleagues, and those in other offices, testifies that this was a completely unexpected turn of events. It is difficult for us to blame the police who must have been as surprised as anyone.

Secondly, the anger of the students is directed at the Liberal Democrats – in my view, understandably. So why then attack the HQ of the Conservative party? Is it because no-one knew how to get Cowley Street?

Tories are no friends of students, less still of those on lower incomes. They are there to protect the rich and a pure Tory government would have put fees up higher and higher to keep the poor kids out and make it easier for rich kids to get in. As the Tories were behaving entirely in character, why attack them?

Thirdly, the riots took the attention away from the main event – a well organised, largely attended, mostly peaceful demonstration. All the TV pictures were of the Millbank area.

One could argue that had the demo been entirely peaceful, it would have been ignored by the media and politicians – at least this way it gets noticed. But on the other hand it does the cause far more harm than good. But I was pleased to see Aaron Porter of the NUS condemn the trouble so quickly.

I am informed that it was a spontaneous riot when demonstrators, walking on their way home, suddenly realised that they were walking past the Tory headquarters. Another possibility is that the demonstration was hijacked by those with other motives – to discredit the students and the intentions of the protest.

As a Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate, I signed the pledge to oppose tuition fees – and I intend to continue to campaign against tuition fees. I think we have let the students down and should admit to it (see my earlier entry). This could be a setback but we must continue and lobby all our MPs to vote against any fees increase.

For now, though, it’s back to work. We are open for business as usual. Life goes on.

Swale Council elections 2011 update

2010-11-08T13:46:00.000Z

It’s now six months to go until the 2011 ‘all-out’ Swale council elections – the most important local elections for many years.

I have suggested to my colleagues that we put together our manifesto. We should ask ourselves – if the Liberal Democrats won 24 council seats (!) and took control of Swale council, what would we do? I would like us to produce a short document setting out our ideas. (Ideally this document would go through every door in Swale but of course that won’t happen).

Naturally we won’t win 24 seats – it’s proving difficult to get 24 candidates – but a document of ideas will show we have the energy and enthusiasm to get our message across.

The idea of a manifesto is shamelessly stolen from Swale UKIP (link below) who have come up with the interesting proposal of a devolution of power to Sittingbourne, Sheppey and Faversham and greater influence for parish councils. This division of power down to another level is, dare I say it, quite liberal, and I think is one we can support. My main reservation is that Swale already has a large number of committees (29! For only 47 councillors!) and I hope this would not mean three planning committees, three standards etc unless we offloaded some of those in existence.

Sittingbourne and Sheppey Labour meanwhile are dozing along, happily celebrating Lib Dem setbacks, yet to wake up to the fact that it is the Tories who are in control. Labour would be very happy if they wiped us out – even if it meant sitting in opposition surrounded by Tories for another four years.

Labour need to win 14 seats to control the council. They will make some gains but I don't think they will make enough. If we were to work together, then we might pick off enough Conservative seats between us to deny the Tories a majority and set up a Lab-Lib Dem administration. Unfortunately that won’t happen.

I expect the Conservatives will repeat their ‘no campaigning’ policy which has been so successful in recent years. And, let’s face it, with Labour unwilling and the rest of us unable to provide strong opposition then Conservative control for many years looks assured – and that is bad news for Swale.

But let us not be downhearted. We few, we happy few, (we very few) will give it our best shot. After all, six months is a long time in politics.

STOP PRESS: As I was typing this, I am happy to report that I have been invited to Ceredigion to a Hustings in a few weeks to find a Liberal Democrat candidate for the Welsh Assembly elections. I am now busy preparing and am very much looking forward to my visit.

Out with the old. In with the new.

2010-11-04T09:14:00.001Z

(An edited version of the letter below has been sent to the magazine, Total Politics).

One aspect of the Liberal Democrats in recent months which deserves a mention is how the party membership has transformed to be better able to face its future challenges. It is out with the old and in with the new.

Some Lib Dem members became deserters. They lacked the stomach for power, responsibility and unpopularity and, instead of fighting for the party’s values locally and nationally, decided it was easier to head for the hills.

Some Lib Dem members became defectors, mostly to Labour. Obviously these people were never Liberal Democrats in the first place, have been wasting our time and resources, and we are better off saying to them good luck and good riddance.

But these weaklings and cowards have been more than replaced by new and welcome members, attracted by the fact that the Liberal Democrats are now a party which is serious about its politics and is prepared to form working relationships with other parties – as in Scotland, Wales and various councils and now the UK – in order to work together to solve the various problems we face.

The Liberal Democrats are still its own distinct party, of course, and will campaign for its own policies – and the best way to get more of these policies in place is to get more votes, more councillors and more MPs. Running away like a spoilt child will not help towards this.

No longer the party of permanent opposition, the Liberal Democrats have displayed the ability now to get policies in place and make a difference.

The decline in public support is more serious, but with welcome new and strengthened membership and the chance of making changes based on fairness, the future of the party looks good to face the challenges of the years ahead.

Report: South East Liberal Democrats Regional Conference - Eastbourne

2010-10-25T13:27:00.000+01:00

On Saturday I found myself in Eastbourne at the South East Lib Dems Regional Conference. In the recent election campaign, this was our main target seat in the south east – I received numerous emails saying ‘never mind your constituency, come and help out in Eastbourne’ or words to that effect – but the campaign was a success and now Eastbourne joins Lewes next door with a Lib Dem MP.

The conference was sold out weeks in advance and took place in a school a few miles from Eastbourne – lots of signs saying ‘always walk on the left’ did give some cause for comment.

After a drive where the sat nav took me round several motorways, I was in the main hall in time for the opening address where the new MP, Stephen Lloyd, welcomed us all and told us how he is settling in.

He made a good point that amongst the Tories there was a group of 30 or so who could fit John Major's description of the ’loony’ element. This is a group on the extreme right, look-after-the-rich, hate-the-poor, hate-foreigners, privatise-the-NHS, abolish-all-benefits etc – you get the picture. If the Tories had won the election with a small majority, this group would have controlled the agenda, like when John Major was given a hard time. Instead, people are saying thank god the Lib Dems are there to keep these guys on the fringes (for now!)

Chris Fox, the Chief Executive, took over, pointing out the difficulties we now face (not least the loss of £2m state grant) and how we could face the future. Having received numerous emails from him, it was good to see him in person and learn more about the party's approach.

At which stage, I sneaked off to the first training session, that of the new website to be launched soon. Our local party doesn’t use the web site very well and I am keen to get it going, as well as Facebook, Twitter etc to build up a dialogue and communications.

One ploughman's lunch later, I was back in the main centre to see Vince Cable – the hall was packed for this session. I had been concerned about Vince recently, as on television, such as Question Time, he had given me the impression of not enjoying government very much. However here he fully returned to form – putting in a bullish performance and rallying the party well. On business policy and the banks I felt he was spot on. But I still disagreed with the tuition fees decision, although he made an admirable defence which won some people over.

Back to training to hear about the new ‘Winning Teams’ initiative – an idea to encourage every local party (not just those in target seats) with training and mentoring to develop further. I got some ideas to take to our next executive meeting.

Then our deputy leader, Simon Hughes, arrived and spoke optimistically for the future. I've a lot of time for Simon and he too spoke well and raised spirits. He also made a very valid point - that we can't keep blaming Labour for the deficit - it was partly Labour's actions over the years but also the world recession and the behaviour of the banks. He praised Gordon Brown for his quick actions at the time of the banking crisis.

This is a fair argument, and I have said how I would like to co-operate further with the local Labour party to try to get the Tories out of power in the council. Unfortunately Labour have decided to concentrate all their fire on us - reading their blog you wouldn't believe the Conservatives exist - so there's not much prospects there.

There was some audience participation – Simon asked us (1) should our MPs back Vince Cable and vote for the Browne Report, (2) should they go by the coalition agreement and abstain or (3) should they honour the pledge to the NUS and vote against the Browne report? The vote was almost exactly split three ways - which is typically Liberal! (I voted for option 3).

As well as the various events and training, there were stalls from local parties fund raising and leafleting, both the candidates for Party President gave hustings which, unfortunately, I couldn’t fit in, and Lib Dem Image was there with their merchandise.

Finally, after the debate on tuition fees, I decided to call it a day and see how the sat nav was going to take me back home. The direct route from Eastbourne up to north Kent, with hardly an A-road in sight, was an interesting experience.

Overall, an interesting day which flew by. There’s only so much you can do in one day but hopefully next year I can make it to either the spring conference in Sheffield or the main conference in Birmingham. A lot will have happened by then!

We've lost The Generation Game - but can the next contestants win?

2010-10-20T14:35:00.000+01:00

On a day where cuts are the topic being talked about, I thought I would reflect on an issue which others have taken up – that of how the ‘baby boomers’ – those that were born in the 40s and 50s – have squandered the resources of the nation through the Thatcher-Major-Blair years – and as a result are probably the first generation to actually make life much more difficult for the next.

This first came to mind when I was reading the memoirs of John Simpson, the BBC reporter. After leaving university in the mid-60s, he married his girlfriend, purchased a house in Regents Park (Regents Park!!) and had the choice of three job offers (three!!), one of which was from the BBC which he accepted. He was only 22 years old!

Had he left university now, he would have had debts of up to £20,000, would have been very unlikely to be able to afford to buy a property – never mind anywhere in London – and as for three job offers, well, after 20 applications, you might get an interview.

In case you think this is a special example, my parents decided to buy a property in the mid-60s and decided on East Anglia as prices were reasonable and it was a nice area. Indeed they got a bungalow just outside Norwich where us kids were all to be born. I asked my Dad how many jobs did he apply for before being successful? One, he told me. So they were able to purchase a good property, near good schools, in a good area, be confident of getting a job – and they were not yet 27!

What is it like now?

- Students leave university with high debts (which are set to increase further) which could take them up to twenty years to pay off.
- Getting a job is a long and difficult process – and, as they say, there’s no such thing as job security. The days of settling down and waiting for your carriage clock are long gone.
- Getting onto the property ladder is even more difficult, forcing many to borrow beyond their means or give up the idea of buying forever.
- Pensions? Forget it – if you’re under 40 you’ll work till you drop. Unless you can afford a big chunk of savings to put aside (after you’ve spent money on all the above, that is) then you can forget about getting a pension sufficient to retire on.
- The environment is ruined – but then those over 60 are not worried as they won’t be around when the worse effects hit.
- Hospitals are falling to pieces while politicians blame each other.
- Education standards have fallen due to lack of investment and competing ideologies. Have you seen the questions on kids shows in the 1950s/60s?
- The economy goes through boom and bust cycles with regular recessions to keep us all on our toes and making long term financial planning almost impossible.

My niece is four years old. By 2030, she will have left university (if she can afford to go) and be making her way in the wide world. By 2050, she may have a family and teenage children. What sort of world will she grow into? When she looks at the state of the country in 2050 and remembers the previous generations, what will she and her contemporaries think of us?

The only plus point our parents are leaving behind is the lack of war. We won’t have the threat of invasion or have to live through a total war environment although terrorism and cyber-crime are of course now major threats.

But it’s all right to grumble – what can we do about it? How can our generation repair the mistakes of the last? This is the topic that has been written about again and again. Will we ever return to the days of a stable economy, free education for the most gifted, full employment, mass property ownership, job security, a protected environment, and secure pensions?

That is the challenge to all politicians present and future. The question is – will we meet it?

Tuition fees - a way ahead?

2010-10-13T12:20:00.000+01:00

The Liberal Democrat blogosphere has been overheating with the anger felt at the tuition fees announcement – and quite rightly so.

During the campaign, many parliamentary candidates, including myself and all our MPs, signed a pledge to the National Union of Students not to increase tuition fees. Indeed in an earlier entry about the coalition agreement, I expressed concern that there was not enough about tuition fees – being allowed to abstain was insufficient.

Labour introduced fees and bankrupted the country, the Tories are happy to see bigger fees to make it easier for rich kids to get in, and yet Liberal Democrats will get the blame! Such is politics! But it is fair to say that our party has not done enough and we have let many of our supporters down.

Anyone who is prepared to work hard enough should be entitled to a university education. I myself had some happy years studying at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth. For most people it is their first experience of living away from home, giving a feeling of independence and teaching you self-discipline and responsibility – as well as the chance to meet fellow students from around the country, develop a great social life, and study a subject you enjoy.

The year before I started university, the then Thatcher government removed the right of students to claim housing benefit and introduced the poll tax. Neither went down well. We had no fees, of course, and a modest grant which could be topped up by reasonable loans.

But if I were a student now I would certainly be having second thoughts. Having a degree, a large debt of up to £40,000 and no job – all at the age of 22 is not attractive. And of course in the subsequent years many graduates then get married, have kids and a mortgage, and face an entire livelihood on debt. And, as is often said, you can’t live on debt.

If university attendances were decided by ability rather than finance, then the best minds would develop in topics such as law, medicine and science which would be of the benefit of society as a whole. However if only those from well-off families could go to university then not only would standards decline but it would be waste of some of our best minds and, as we Lib Dems like to say, it is not fair.

So what should we do?

Firstly, I would hope as many Liberal Democrat MPs as possible vote against the government. There’s enough Lib Dems as part of the government to join the Tories (who will of course happily vote for higher fees) and get it through but at least the point would be made.

Secondly, we should recommit our party to the principle of abolishing tuition fees. We have not been able to do so because we did not win enough votes but we should indicate it remains a principle to phase them out in the medium term.

Thirdly, as many Lib Dem candidates and members as possible should publicly make it clear they stand alongside the students and join the campaign against tuition fees for the sake of our universities and education standards.

Fourthly, the party should set up a policy committee to establish how the funding could take place for this commitment so that in 2015 we can come forward with costed proposals and a timetable.

These are just some ideas, and there will no doubt be many more which will arise. But we have to hold up our hands and admit we have let young people and their families down. We must work out how we can regain that trust.

When the Going Gets Tough 2 - Feedback

2010-10-09T22:18:00.000+01:00

My earlier blog entry on defectors and deserters got my biggest readership so far (thanks to all) and I have received some comments and feedback from various sources.

To re-cap, I was critical of two of our former Councillors who, because of the coalition, have decided not to continue the fight against the Tory giant, but to leave. This weakens our local party and so ironically helps the local Tories. I would have thought this point would have been obvious but alas no.

When Conservatives are unhappy with their party, they secretly plot and conspire.
When Labour people are unhappy with their party, they openly plot and conspire.
When Liberal Democrats are unhappy with their party, they run to the hills.
Internal debate is good and healthy - but people leaving doesn't help anyone.

So what have been the comments?

‘Liberal Democrats are afraid of power – that’s why they join the Liberal Democrats.’

This charge has been levelled at us for many years – mainly because people thought we’d never get any power. We have shared power in Scotland and Wales and control or share control of numerous councils but of course no-one thought we’d get in the UK government. Had we refused to even talk to other parties, the charge of being scared of power would be given more credence.

Power does bring unpopularity – and unpopularity requires strong wills and stomachs. But some do indeed prefer the cleanliness of opposition to the responsibility of power. Maybe this process will weed out the weaklings and toughen up the party for the long run.

‘I did not join the Liberal Democrats to see a Conservative government.’

Nor me. I didn’t want a Labour government either. But both those two parties got more votes than we did. The bottom line is – if we want a Liberal Democrat government, and get more Liberal Democrat policies, then we have got to get more votes. Leaving the party is not going to help.

‘The deserters probably don’t have the stomach to knock on doors to defend government policy.’

There are many parts of Lib Dem policy in the coalition agreement. Of course we didn’t want 20% VAT nor the free schools nonsense – but we’re not defending them. We can knock on a door and proudly defend raising the tax threshold, linking pensions to earnings, getting rid of ID cards and, hopefully, moving towards a fairer voting system.

‘The Liberal Democrats will be wiped out at the next election and we will be back to two party politics.’

It’s amazing how much time has gone into discussing the result of the next election. BBC’s Question Time seems obsessed with this topic. I don’t remember discussing the 2010 election in 2005 – and we would all have got it wrong anyway.

If a week is a long time in politics then five years is an epic. At the next election, the Liberal Democrats will produce a manifesto for the future term – as will the other parties – and then people can make a choice. We cannot possibly forecast what will happen between now and then.

‘I disapprove of this ‘lust’ for power.’

More than one person has said to me about our ‘grab’ or ‘lust’ for power as if it is a bad thing. I’m sure none of us went into politics to stay in opposition forever. Isn’t having the power to change things the point of all political parties?

‘They [referring to the two ex-councillors] will probably return next year when they feel it's time for a bit of work, but first they'll enjoy some time free from the tedium of meetings, doorsteps and the cold weather of autumn.’

I hope they do but there is much to do in the meantime such as campaigning on local issues, fund raising and a membership drive. Help with this would have been appreciated.

‘Once the Tories have got what they want, they will end the coalition and call an election.’

Obviously either party can end the coalition at any time so we can’t predict this. The Tories are famously ruthless dumping their leaders Thatcher and Duncan-Smith (and nearly Major) when the going got tough. If Cameron is also overthrown then all bets are off.

But what are Liberal Democrats supposed to do about this? For the moment, we should just do our best to form a stable government to get through the financial crisis. We can’t possibly predict the future plots and machinations of the Conservative party.

‘As there was no definite result, we should have immediately had a second election.’

And what if it was another hung parliament? Do we have a third election and keep going until someone gets a majority? Or should our politicians grow up and work together as they do in European countries with coalition governments?

As for the Liberal Democrats – we have no money. Labour have far greater resources than us and the Tory resources dwarf everyone. Lib Dems raise money, not through businesses and unions, but via quiz nights and boot sales. We always reach the overdraft limit at elections and then gradually pay it back over the next few years.

So with leaderless Labour in disarray, and Liberal Democrats having no money, only the Conservatives would have the resources and ability to campaign – and they would win comfortably.

‘We should have made a coalition with Labour to keep the Tories out.’

If I had a pound for every time I have heard this. Firstly, we had promised to talk to the party with the greater mandate. The voters are the kingmakers not us. Second, did we want to keep Gordon Brown in power? If not, we would be propping up another unelected Labour Prime Minister. Thirdly, are we saying we will only form coalitions with Labour - which will reduce our bargaining power in future?

But most importantly, Labour and ourselves combine 315 seats. Even with Sinn Fein’s non-participation it is still short of a majority and dependent day-to-day on the votes of the Northern Irish MPs and the Nationalists. Such a coalition would have been very fragile and would not survive the unpopularity that the cuts will bring. Far from keeping the Tories out, this scenario would have strengthened them to win with a landslide in 2011.

What was the Greatest Battle of the Second World War?

2010-10-05T22:32:00.000+01:00

Tonight I went to the Imperial War Museum (of which I am a Friend) to attend a debate amongst three historians ‘what was the greatest battle of the second world war?’

Stalingrad, I hear you cry. No, Kursk, says someone else. What about Midway, says another?

OK, say the organisers, there’s a word missing. Which was the greatest BRITISH battle of the second world war? And the choice is Battle of Britain, El Alamein or the D-Day landings.

Controversy straight away. Is D-Day a ‘British’ battle? There were a lot of Americans and Canadians there. And if you could ask Winston Churchill, he would have said that the Battle of the Atlantic was the most important – it was the one that gave him the most sleepless nights. To be fair, this point was raised, but no-one thought of Kohima – an overlooked but very important battle, certainly the greatest British battle in the Far East. But I digress, on to the debate.

The Battle of Britain has been in all our minds recently. The argument was that had we lost it, then there would have been no El Alamein or D-Day. We were literally fighting over our own territory where the price was high. At the end, this was my own choice. It must have been frightening to be living at the time – when a ruthless and powerful enemy had conquered all Europe and was only just across the channel, wanting to enslave you, while you had to go to work and get on with normal life. The responsibility on the RAF pilots must have been immense.

The argument against was that Hitler never wanted to invade Britain. Had the Battle of Britain been lost, the war would not yet have been over – Germany would have had to mount a seaborne invasion which took the Allies over two years to organise. Hitler's heart was never in invading Britain. He might have chosen to enforce a peace settlement, disarmed Britain, and then turned everyone round to march East. We know this now, of course, but at the time the British people didn’t.

The argument for El Alamein was that it was the first time the Brits stopped retreating - a major turning point. British forces took on the German army in a major battle and defeated them for the first time. Had the battle been lost, it would have put the North African campaign back a year. It was argued that victory at El Alamein had persuaded the Vichy French forces to go easy on the American landing in north west Africa whereas British defeat and they might have resisted further.

My own view: the German forces were at the end of their supply lines, Rommel was home on sick leave – had Alamein failed then there would have been another go a few months later. And the American landings would still have been successful.

The argument for D-Day took the, in my view, rather ludicrous line that had D-Day failed we would all be speaking Russian! Without the Allied landings, the Red Army would just keep on marching westwards to the channel and then hop across to Dover.

My objections were that with Berlin falling and Hitler dead, wouldn’t the Germans in west Europe dash off home and then the Allies could liberate France? And, by D-Day the Allies were halfway up Italy and preparing to invade southern France – which was not as well fortified as the north. Might we not have invaded Germany from a different direction? I raised this point and it was dismissed rather discourteously I felt. The Germans would hold onto the Alps, I was told. Even with Russians occupying Berlin? And if D-Day failed, what would we be doing with the troops over there – might we not have another go or at least wheel them round to the south?

The vote at the end was Battle of Britain 31, D-Day 28, El Alamein 3 so I was on the winning team – which doesn’t happen very often. But an interesting evening, some nice sandwiches and wine, and a debate which will of course go on.

Interview with 'Your Swale'

2010-09-30T14:39:00.000+01:00

Keith Nevols, the Liberal Democrat who ran for office in Sittingbourne and Sheppey in the last general election, talks to Jill Hurst about the campaign, what he has been doing since May and what his plans are for the future.

-Tell us a little bit about yourself?

I have lived in Sittingbourne with my wife, Mary, for six years. I’m 42 and work in Westminster in local government. I enjoy watching football, films, history and travel. I am also involved with church activities as a member of the social committee.

-You ran for MP in the last election in May. There’s been a little bit of time for reflection since then. What are your conclusions?

Despite our very limited resources, we had a good campaign, which increased our vote to get our best local result since 1997. I especially enjoyed meeting people on the doorsteps and the debates with my fellow candidates.

The major issues we came across were the local economy and concerns about immigration. While we came up with a workable policy about illegal immigration I felt we did not put it across very well and should have had a non-policy like our two opponents.

The Conservative win was no surprise. We found that the Tory vote was holding firm while the Labour vote was collapsing.

I hope to stand again at the next election, although I am not sure where.

-How did you get involved in politics and what keeps you interested?

I was first involved in the 1980s with the then SDP. I saw the injustices of Thatcherism all around me while the Labour party were more interested in fighting each other. I also felt (and still do) that the entire political system was in desperate need of modernising.

The SDP offered something new and fresh and policies that I generally agreed with. I am kept interested by the variety of the topic and the motivation that there must be something better for people. I especially want to see a more fair political system and hope the AV referendum will be just the first step.

-What’s your view on the coalition Government – do you think it will last?

I am pleased to see Liberal Democrats in government and that some of our policies are being put in place. We must however ensure our distinctive voice and position get across. Like many Lib Dems I was unhappy with the VAT rise and the free schools policy, but then we are the junior partner. I would be opposed to any form of electoral pact with the Conservatives.

I think the coalition will last at least until 2014, as it is in the interests of both parties to stick together.

-Are you disappointed with party central?

No, the central party were a great help during and since the campaign in keeping candidates informed. Simon Hughes is an excellent deputy as a sort of ‘leader outside the government’.

-The whole of Swale council is up for re-election next year – do you think the Conservative stronghold can be broken?

We will be working as hard as we can and I hope the local Labour party will as well. Unfortunately I think the Conservatives will retain firm control of Swale Council up to 2015 but I hope that the opposition parties will at least make some progress and that we see more Liberal Democrats in the council chamber.

-Will you run for local office yourself?

Yes, I am running for the double-seater ward of Murston with Cllr Dave Banks.

-What are your hopes and fears for the district?

I hope that a rejuvenated council will work at regeneration in the area, encouraging development, and that in a few years we will see a vibrant local economy.

My fears are that the council will continue to stagnate, businesses will continue to close, and the people of Swale face a long and grim future.

-And finally….anything you want to add?

Politicians have a bad reputation but it is a subject where you can do good and make a difference. I would encourage everyone to get involved. A healthy democracy is one in which as many people as possible participate.

Congrats to Ed - here's to fair votes and the triumph of youth

2010-09-25T21:28:00.000+01:00

‘A horse is a horse of course of course .. ‘ yes, here comes Mr Ed.

Congratulations to Ed Miliband on being elected as the new leader of the Labour party – and use Google if you don’t get that last reference – I am sure you’ll be hearing it again.

Two things come to mind with Mr M junior’s success.

Firstly, had the Labour party used the first-past-the-post system then it would be David Miliband who would be celebrating tonight. Using the Alternative Vote method has ensured that the winner has a majority of the votes unlike over two thirds of the Members of Parliament. I hope that Ed Miliband now joins the referendum campaign so the rest of us can work towards fairer votes as well.

The second important point is that, for the first time, a leader of a major UK political party is younger than me. Ed Miliband is 40 years old, whereas I am 42. Not only that, but Nick Clegg is only nine months older than me. And David Cameron only three months older than Nick.

At the next election in May 2015, Cameron and Clegg will both be 48 while Ed will be 45. However the ‘youngest’ general election was in 2001 when Tony Blair (48) took on William Hague (40) and Charles Kennedy (41).

If, as they say, policemen look younger every year, what’s the expression when all the political leaders are?

Any Labours of Love?

2010-09-24T10:20:00.000+01:00

Tomorrow we will know the new leader of the Labour party. From an onlooker’s point of view this has been the most interesting Labour leadership contest in years – because of the range of candidates and that, unlike the contests with Kinnock, Smith and Blair, we don’t know who will win.

My money is still on David Miliband. However I am swinging to Ed Miliband who has had an excellent campaign – he would be a difficult opponent for us, the main advantage would be any grievances David would feel working under his younger brother. Andy Burnham has had a good campaign and Diane Abbott has been endearing. Ed Balls has been his typical bullying self but would be useful to his boss.

Mrs Thatcher famously said ‘Every Prime Minister needs a Willie’ referring to Whitelaw. Under the same principle – every Labour leader needs Balls.

Locally, I have appeared a couple of times in the press (Your Swale) on the local recovery and on votes for prisoners – and have been in agreement with the Labour view. The local Labour party and ourselves agree on a lot of things – no surprise when we have such a dire Tory council in place. Labour are actually very good when attacking the Tories but unfortunately they spend most of their time attacking us and giving the Tories a free run – as we saw in the general election campaign.

It’s a shame we can’t do a deal with Labour for the council elections to try to knock a few Tories off. Labour will probably make progress next May but leave the Tories firmly in sole control for another four years - and that's bad news for Swale. But I have to admit to being tempted to enter a team in their upcoming quiz to try to improve anti-Tory cross party relations. But somehow I don’t think we will be allowed.

And we all wait to see the new Labour leader’s view on the Alternative Vote referendum. I have been in contact with the Take Back Parliament group to see how we could help but I want this to be a multi-party campaign not just Lib Dems.

The Tories will obviously be against any change. All the other parties are in favour. So Labour’s view will be crucial.

If the new Labour leader is prepared to break down the Con-Lab coalition which has consistently blocked genuine reform since 1945 – then at last we could be on the road to genuine change for a modern democracy.

When the going gets tough, the weak go running

2010-09-18T10:59:00.000+01:00

Maybe I’ll get in trouble for this entry – but then this is my blog and my views, so here goes.

Today I am angry. It’s our conference and I am angry. What is the reason for my anger?

Here in Sittingbourne and Sheppey we have a small local party. Like many of our local parties we are extremely short of resources, of money, of manpower. We have an entrenched solid Conservative council to fight and the local Tory and Labour parties have wealth we can only dream of. We have very few council seats. We have a referendum to work for in which our MP has said he would vigorously campaign against us. These are indeed difficult times. So I am trying to involve and increase our membership and profile across the constituency.

This week I was informed that two of our long-standing members, both former councillors for many years and well-known locally, both experienced campaigners, exactly the sort of chaps we want out knocking on doors and running for council, have both decided to quit the party. Why? They are unhappy with the coalition – so they have chosen to withdraw any help. I believe this scenario has been repeated around the country.

Sometimes you really want to get hold of people and give them a good slapping – it makes you so angry. OK, many of us are not happy with some of what the coalition is doing – so as a result you want to punish the local party and bring us closer to extinction? You want by your actions to help strengthen a Tory council which you are supposedly against? We criticise the media and the Labour party because they lack the maturity to accept the concept of coalitions which is the norm in most of Europe (and Wales), and indeed in many councils. Yet we find this same sort of immaturity within our own party.

It seems the fact of power has made many of our members run for the hills – scared stiff at the responsibility and of the possibility we might become unpopular. They much prefer sitting in opposition with clean consciences, or leaving the party so they can smugly cleanse themselves and watch the local party struggle. It seems with many Lib Dems, when the going gets tough, the weak go running.

The election result meant we did not have the numbers to do a deal with Labour (and did we really want to keep Gordon Brown in Number 10?) so the only alternative to the coalition was a minority Tory government which would result in another election.

We have no money left, so with Labour in disarray, the Tories would have an open field and romp home with a big majority – then there would be no Lib Dems in government, no referendum on the voting system, no reform of the House of Lords, no tax cuts for the lower paid, no freedom bill or local enterprise partnerships, no banking levy etc. But there would still be high VAT and spending cuts.

Let’s get some things clear – none of us are happy with the 20% VAT rise, none of us are happy with the spending cuts programme, I wasn’t happy with the daft immigration policy we adopted at the election, or the equally daft ‘free’ schools or ‘big society’ policies that are now in place. But you don’t just walk off in a sulk. What’s that going to achieve? In our case, a very difficult local campaign becomes even more difficult.

Instead you stay, you fight and you campaign within the party. For this I congratulate our MPs Charles Kennedy, Bob Russell and our excellent deputy Simon Hughes. They have made it clear there are aspects of the coalition they are not happy with – but I know that if they lived in Sittingbourne and Sheppey they would be out campaigning with us for Liberal Democrat votes.

The coalition won’t last for ever – and if, one day, we get fair votes than coalitions might become the norm here too. We might find ourselves in a coalition with Labour – I wonder how many people we would lose then?

I congratulate and thank all the members who have stuck with us and are showing great maturity in difficult times. I urge them to keep battling, keep campaigning, both locally and nationally, for Liberal Democratic principles of social justice and fairness in society. If necessary we will campaign against our own government but we should certainly campaign against Tories (and Labour) wherever they may be.

If our weaker members want to run away then so be it – but let the rest of us keep up the good work and, at every level, let’s fight hard for every vote.

Swale estimated to recover by 2025

2010-09-14T09:29:00.000+01:00

A recent report from the South East England Development Agency shows that, while the global and national recovery continues, the area of Swale, which includes Sittingbourne, Faversham and the Isle of Sheppey, will see a much slower pace taking up to 15 more years!

Some parts of Kent will reach a full recovery over the next year or two. For Swale, however, output is estimated to return to pre-recession levels (2007) in 2015, while the level of employment to recover is expected to take until 2025!

These are, of course, estimates but what is clear is that the area is recovering much more slowly than the rest of Kent and desperately needs help. The local economy and jobs were issues raised with us time and time again during the election campaign. Sheppey especially has amongst the highest levels of unemployment in Kent.

So what does Swale Council plan to do? Does the Tory-dominated council plan to take advantage of the government’s schemes to set up Local Enterprise Partnerships which would encourage business to invest and create jobs? Er, no. The government received 56 proposals, including one from Kent and Medway. From Swale, not a whisper - despite the obvious need.

OK, so what have the Council done instead or are intending to do? The answer seems to be absolutely nothing. The Council continue to sleepwalk happily oblivious to the problems of Swale. The Sittingbourne ‘Masterplan’ continues to be awaited while shops and businesses continue to close. I mentioned in a previous entry that the local transport plan is scheduled for 20 years. One wonders how badly the situation has to get to inject some urgency into the Council.

We can only hope that our new MP brings this report to the attention of his colleagues and tell them to get a move on and do something. Otherwise, the future does not look bright.

Letter to East Kent Gazette

2010-09-08T12:51:00.000+01:00

Next year there will be a national referendum on the way we elect our MPs. The proposal is to replace the current 'first-past-the-post' system with the 'alternative vote' whereby voters can list candidates in order of preference. I hope we can have a debate about this important subject.

In my view, Alternative Vote (AV) is a superior method. Every candidate will have to win the support of the majority of their voters, and not just a fraction as is the case in many constituencies. AV encourages voting positively thus eliminating 'tactical' voting. Above all, AV reduces the number of wasted votes and makes every vote count. Currently, the vast majority of our votes make no contribution at all.

Candidates would have to work much harder for our vote, including those in 'safe seats', and not just those in marginals. The voters, all of us, would have greater choice and power over our elected representatives.

That's my view. What do others think?

Tony Blair: brilliant politician who changed politics

2010-09-01T23:08:00.000+01:00

In one way, Tony Blair was the most brilliant politician the UK has ever had. That is the way in which, during his time, politicians became more anonymous and less in possession of character. He won three general elections, was Prime Minister for ten years – the fifth longest unbroken stretch of any Prime Minister – yet I always felt we never really knew him. He threw up a mask and has kept it to this day.

In the case of his predecessors, Margaret Thatcher and John Major, whatever you thought of them, you knew the sort of people they were even if you had never met them. You knew the issues they cared about, the issues they didn’t care about, and their position on most topics.

Yet whenever I watched Tony Blair being interviewed, including his interview with Andrew Marr, I always got the impression of a pre-rehearsed script, that he would never be caught out because we could guess his answer to every question. He was very well prepared for every interview he ever had – and as such I felt we never got to know the real Tony Blair - and probably never will.

In British politics, principles and courage tend not to get you very far. Enoch Powell and Tony Benn are just two examples of highly intelligent, highly capable people who stuck with their beliefs regardless of the party line – and neither ever got near Number 10. In the current Labour leadership race, Diane Abbott is another example of a principled politician who can be popular with the voters but has absolutely no chance of the top job.

Tony Blair took this to the next level. In taking his party away from socialism and moving towards the centre ground, he successfully removed character from our politics and our politicians. Peter Mandelson and Alastair Campbell became household names more than the cabinet, because of expert media manipulation. David Cameron is the natural heir to this in becoming Prime Minister while portraying only the image not that we see but that we ought to see and keeping most of his colleagues anonymous.

Gordon Brown moved away from this. As a strong character, he re-introduced principles and beliefs to the top job. Yet much like John Major, the one we knew was dumped for the one who we only knew as much as we told. (And we only knew of Gordon Brown’s colleagues when they were plotting against him. Had anyone heard of David Miliband until the banana?)

Some may regret the decline of the character politician. The days of Heath, Wilson, Callaghan, Healey, Whitelaw and so on. But let’s face it – we liked the fake image of Blair and so maybe we have got what we deserved. Also, of course, by removing character, politics became even more boring, turnouts decreased, less people were interested, and hence the Blair government was rarely in danger of toppling.

As ever, popular culture has it right. The Thick of It is a brilliantly updated version of Yes Minister with the added factor of public image management.

And Spitting Image was cancelled mainly because of the lack of characters. In the 1980s we had Ken Clarke, Michael Heseltine and of course Norman Tebbit with his leather jacket. Now in the cabinet, of the same rank, we have Andrew Lansley, Michael Gove and Caroline Spelman. Never mind the puppets, would you recognise the cabinet ministers if you met them in the high street?

Keeping busy in England and Wales

2010-08-31T20:41:00.000+01:00

Things are quiet at work at the moment but the Liberal Democrats and the church are both keeping me busy.

On becoming membership secretary I was sent a list of the local party members, many of whom I did not recognise. So, along with Elvie, our local leader, I am going ‘on tour’ around the constituency to hopefully meet a few members and/or supporters each week. This weekend, bank holiday, was a bad one to start with – as many people were away – but hopefully on the next few Sundays I can meet a few new friends to say hello.

Unfortunately I wont be able to make it to the conference in Liverpool (a shame as it promises to be a lively gathering) but I am hoping to attend the regional conference in Eastbourne.

I am on the shortlist for consideration to be the Liberal Democrat candidate for the Welsh Assembly seat in Ceredigion. Hopefully I’ll be invited to a hustings over there. As I mentioned in an earlier entry, I spent some happy years living in Aberystwyth, and it would be a pleasure to represent and campaign for the people of Ceredigion in the Welsh Assembly in Cardiff.

Like many parts of the country, the area has suffered as a result of the recession with job losses in agriculture and manufacturing. There are many self-employed businesses so a priority would be to reduce red tape to allow them to expand and develop, and also to protect the area from any cuts coming that way – especially as, according to the Centre of Economics and Business Research, unemployment could hit Wales badly – up to 10%.

Other issues include the provision of health care (including the future of Bronglais Hospital in Aberystwyth), public transport and tuition fees – so there will be plenty to campaign about if I am selected.

Meanwhile I am also co-organising a Forties Night for 11 September for my local church – with authentic wartime food, music and raffle. The Britain at War Experience at London Bridge kindly donated some tickets as prizes. Hopefully it will be a good turnout.

IFS Report: Must Do Better

2010-08-25T14:21:00.000+01:00

Just before the election debate with my fellow candidates in April, the Institute for Fiscal Studies released a report in which, although criticising all three parties, praised the Liberal Democrats for being clearer than the other parties about where cuts could come and plans for government. Naturally I gave this report a mention during one of my replies.

Hence we can’t really now criticise the latest report which says the budget will hit the poorest hardest. Instead we should welcome this word of warning and see what we can do about it.

Of course as the junior partner there is only so much influence we can have – but we must not be afraid to speak out. We should greet this report with alarm bells, and ask ourselves what can we do about it? We have made some small steps but can we do more? Can we move quicker towards that £10,000 threshold (which was popular on the doorsteps)? Can we clamp down further on tax avoidance by increasing capital gains tax on higher incomes? Can we increase the tax rates at the top end and use the money to invest and create jobs?

The Conservative party aren’t bothered about the report. Looking after the status quo, keeping everyone in their place and protecting privilege is what they are there for, after all. And, over the last 30 years, this has essentially been a conservative country. Labour could only get in by ditching socialism and becoming more ‘Tory’ – as soon as they tried to be Labour again, the sky fell in.

The Liberal Democrats are the only hope for those on lower incomes and those who may be suffering hardship. We must use what influence we have and get more progress made because, at the moment, we are letting them down.

FUNNY BIT AT THE END: It has been suggested to me that, to work towards my political ambitions, it might be a better idea to defect to Labour. I only mention it to show we have not lost our sense of humour. Like Mr Kennedy, I will have my Lib Dem membership card buried with me. And, despite what Ed Miliband may say, somehow I don’t think I will be welcome at the next Sittingbourne and Sheppey Labour get-together.

In Law, 'A' level is for All-Important

2010-08-20T08:46:00.000+01:00

The recent coverage over A-level results prompts me to tell a tale. A few years ago, I studied law part-time. I got my degree and then the Legal Practice Course. All I needed was to find a two year training contract and I would be a fully qualified solicitor. As anyone working in law knows, finding a contract is not easy – and it was made even more difficult by the first question I always got.

What were your A-level results?

I would point out that my A-levels were taken in 1987, that since then I had a degree upper second class, a Masters degree, a law degree with distinction, and 16 years full-time work experience including ten in a management position.

Yes, they would say, but what were your A-level results?

At the reply of three C’s I would get a shake of the head.

Some firms recruit on-line and this is often the first question. If you haven’t got AAB then it’s ’sorry but we wish you every success’ etc and you don’t get any more questions.

In 1987, getting CCC was not great but OK – it was good enough to get me into university. But it has always struck me as unfair that I should be judged by exams I took 23 years ago and that the wealth of experience and qualifications I had accumulated since then did not count. Of course most applicants for training contracts are aged 19-21, hence the question, but the legal profession were clearly unaware of the presence of mature students or career changers.

I was even asked for my positions of responsibility at school. Isn’t ten years as a manager running a team responsible enough?

To be fair they were not all like this and I did get a few interviews, twice I was the reserve candidate, but a very large number of law firms would look with blinkers at A-level results.

I considered going to evening classes to take more A-levels to try to get some As but was advised against it – and as the recession came along, training contracts dried up and the competition got even tougher. Hence three years after completing my law studies, I have had to abandon my legal ambitions.

So a word of warning to anyone at school out there – work hard and take your A-levels seriously – as like me you may still be judged on them when you pass the age of 40.

The party goes on

2010-08-18T13:12:00.001+01:00

Time to get busy on our local campaigns. Since the election we have gained quite a few new members but, with my membership secretary hat on, I am hoping to get some more. We have a busy year ahead of us – there will be the 2011 Swale Council elections and the Alternative Vote referendum to campaign on.

Members:
Overall we have increased our membership but sadly we lost a few. I guess this is understandable but we did say we would talk to whoever got the biggest mandate, and the public decided that would be the Conservatives. Some preferred Labour but the maths was not correct. And I think one or two of my former colleagues were very happy in opposition. One said to me he was so disgusted by our grab for power that he has joined the Greens! No worries of power there then.

I have some ideas to increase our membership and we are meeting soon to discuss these. I was grateful for the help and support I got during the election campaign and hope we can turn this into more longer term assistance. The more members we get, the more money we can get from central office for local campaigning.

The 2011 council elections:
At our strategy group meeting I had some suggestions about wards we could target and how we could fight them. Unfortunately my plans appeared to be too ambitious – but we have, subject to agreement from our executive committee, placed seven candidates and, as it stands, will be fielding about 20 in total. (There are 47 council seats – the council has had for a long time a very comfortable Conservative majority – which explains a lot about Swale’s problems). It would be great if everyone in Swale has the chance to vote for a Liberal Democrat. We must work towards that.

I am hoping we will be able to do more work on the Isle of Sheppey which, unfortunately, we had to neglect in the campaign for the reasons given in my ‘memoirs’. I think our brand of liberal democracy based on fairness and social justice could appeal there. We might be in a national coalition but the more Liberal Democrat votes, the more liberal democrat policies, the less Conservative policies – and that sounds good to me.

The referendum campaign:
I did have the idea of maybe getting some sort of local all-party group together. After all, it is not just a Liberal Democrat campaign, there is cross-party support for a change in the electoral system. Labour were the only party to include AV in their manifesto. However I am not sure if this all-party idea is a starter. The Conservatives will obviously be against change and Labour might be waiting for the new leader to tell them what their policy is. We might get agreement with UKIP and the Greens. Anyway, that’s an idea to put to one side for now.

Members again:
It all comes down to members. More members means more party money and hopefully more candidates and hopefully more success. It’s up to us to get the message out there.

Polls: how low can you go?

2010-08-10T12:39:00.002+01:00

With our declining poll ratings, we Liberal Democrats are cheering ourselves up by trying to think of when our support was at its lowest. Chris Huhne said he remembers it being less than 1% although, according to UK Polling Report, the recorded lowest is 1.5% in 1955.

The lowest in my own memory was the period after the 1987 general elections (at which the Alliance got 25.4%). The subsequent merger process and ‘discussions’ of 1987-8 saw our poll rating at 4% – a drop of over 21% in a year. In the 1989 European elections, the ‘Social and Liberal Democrats’ polled 6% - in fourth place behind the Greens.

The main trends recently, as well our reduced support, have been further increases in the Conservative rating and a slight recovery for Labour. I have seen some speculation amongst Conservative bloggers that there might be a good time for a snap election which might give the Conservatives a majority government and the chance to ‘free’ themselves from the Liberal Democrats. That time has not yet come though.

So oddly a recovery for the Labour rating is good for Lib Dems – because it would deny the Tories of the lead that they would require. As the new leader emerges and the cuts take hold, Labour’s rating will doubtless continue to improve and by next spring there should be a healthy lead.

Of course, under the current constituencies, Labour don’t need to get more votes. They can get more seats with a few percentage points less. One MORI poll had the Tories on 40% and Labour on 38% - this would give Labour 50 more seats than the Conservatives. The forthcoming bill to equalise constituencies should resolve this.

Hopefully by the next election the public will clearly acknowledge the contributions we have made even if the media do not – especially in political reform, lower taxes and the soon-to-be-introduced pupil premium. And I’m sure we would rather be in government with a low rating than have high ratings and perpetual opposition.

To finish off, the latest polls averaged over the last few days read: Conservatives 42%, Labour 36%, Liberal Democrat 14%, others 8%.

With the help of the BBC Election Calculator this works out as Conservatives 314 seats, Labour 289 seats, Liberal Democrat 20 seats, others 27 seats. So still a hung parliament.

Trident - a sign of weakness

2010-08-02T09:24:00.002+01:00

During the campaign, one gentleman on his doorstep told me he was going to vote for us but had now changed his mind and will vote Tory. The reason, he said, is that ‘they will keep our defences strong’ because of Trident. David Cameron, in his ‘offer’ speech, also referred to strong defences and Trident. The very first question at the Churches Together debate in Sheerness in May was directed at me on this topic and keeping our defences strong.

So clearly there is public concern on the issue of Trident and our defences and how the perception is that we must have Trident so we can be strong.

I am reminded of the scene in Yes Prime Minister when Sir Humphrey patiently explains to Bernard that the point of Britain’s defence policy is not to defend Britain – but instead to make the British believe Britain is defended. With Trident in our hands, we can all walk about, reassured that we are safe.

Yet it seems to me that a defence strategy which bases itself almost exclusively on nuclear weapons is not strong – in fact, it is very weak indeed – and this is something we should all be concerned about.

Trident is back in the news because of who should pay for it. George Osborne and the Treasury argue that the Ministry of Defence should foot the £20bn bill because it is a military weapon. Liam Fox and Defence, on the other hand, argue that as nuclear weapons are ‘political’, they should be paid for by the Treasury. (It was President Truman who established the principle that civilian politicians, not the military, should control the use of nuclear weapons).

The bill is twenty billion pounds and this may rise to one hundred billion and beyond in the years ahead. At a time of massive deficit, when our military are crying out for modern equipment and vehicles, when our troops are moonlighting to save up to buy battle armour, when our forces are using equipment designed for Northern Ireland in the mountains and heat of Afghanistan, does it make sense to spend this money on a system we don’t need and can’t use?

We have seen British troops fight in the Falklands, in Kuwait, the former Yugoslavia, Iraq, and presently Afghanistan. Nuclear weapons were useless for these conflicts. In fact, the Falklands War was the first time a non-nuclear power has attacked a nuclear power, knowing full well there was no risk of ‘nuking’ Buenos Aries.

Equally there have been terrorist activities such as the IRA and Al Qaeda for which modern counter-terrorism resources must be provided.

It is concerning to read that our defences will now be cut even more to pay for Trident severely further reducing our capability to fight a modern conventional war. Would we be able to liberate the Falklands if Argentina walked in tomorrow?

We must have an overhaul of our defence strategy and ask ourselves where do the threats to our security come from and how can we meet them?

To keep our defences strong we need highly trained and efficient conventional military forces, with the necessary modern equipment and facilities to do what they do so well. We need our forces to have the flexibility and mobility to fight wherever we send them – whether it is Europe, the desert or against terrorists at home.

That is what we need – strong defences to protect our country and our people. Not a weak defence based on Trident.

Sittingbourne and Sheppey - the latest news

2010-07-27T12:32:00.002+01:00

So what’s been happening in our local constituency I hear you ask? Well, not a lot. The towns have settled back into their routine of not much happening.

The Sittingbourne and Sheppey Conservatives remain a one man band. Our new MP, Gordon Henderson, has thrown himself into parliamentary life, currently campaigning for the Isle of Sheppey Academy (which I visited during the campaign). He is keeping an excellent diary on his blog giving a view into the life of a new MP. I hope he keeps it going.

The rest of the Tories remain invisible. Their web site has not been updated for over a year and their councillors keep a low profile (having seen a few of them in action this is probably wise). However, to be fair, being invisible has given them considerable local electoral success in the last two years (although of course local election results tend to be guided by national trends).

The much awaited redevelopment plan continues to be much awaited. During the campaign, one of the most commonly raised issues was how there is so little to do in Sittingbourne and Sheppey. People go to Maidstone and Canterbury to spend their money, money which could be spent and invested in the local economy. There have been much worthy efforts by individuals to bring something to the area, such as a new cinema, but unfortunately Tory-dominated Swale council has all the energy of a three-legged tortoise so overall this situation is likely to remain the case for a while yet.

Sittingbourne and Sheppey Labour party had a quiet patch after ‘a hard general election result to take’ but are slowly coming back to life with new members and the leadership debate. According to their blog, they are giving the Council leaders a hard time and campaigning against the VAT increase. Both worthy exercises.

By next May’s elections, Labour should be revitalised under a new leader (please, not Ed Balls!) while the government will be struggling under the cuts agenda. It remains to be seen if Labour will take this opportunity to revive their Swale fortunes.

As for us in the Lib Dems, we are preparing our campaign for next May (we have to start early as there’s not many of us). The first priority will be defending our seats and then hoping to pick up some more. Also we will have the referendum campaign for fairer votes to fight. I am in the process of contacting our membership and supporters and intend to keep them in touch.

UKIP intend to fight 20 seats in the council elections. As I have mentioned before, I have a soft spot for UKIP. For obvious reasons, we can’t have an agreement but I hope they do well.

Then there is the nuclear possibility – that the media get their wish and the coalition breaks down. This would force us into a snap election. Let’s not go there.

And that’s the local news. And now the sport. In the Ryman South, Sittingbourne Town will kick off on 21 August at home to Dulwich Hamlet.

Radio .. killed the radio star

2010-07-18T12:08:00.003+01:00

An advantage of having a blog is having the chance to grumble and, to prove I don’t always talk about politics, the subject of my grumble today is radio stations.

Now I like listening to music while I’m driving or typing or whatever, but I always play my own CDs rather than put the radio on. The reason – radio stations NEVER PLAY ANY MUSIC! I can understand that smaller stations need the income from advertising but it is all the other bits that I object to.

For example: let’s take an example of a 30 minute car journey where I got the below.

- The second half of a Kylie song as I switched on

- The DJ giving me a long list of people I am ‘about to hear’

- An advert on car insurance

- The DJ: ‘what are you doing right now?’ (driving a car actually)
- ‘Do you want to tell us what you are doing?’ (no, not really)
- ‘If so, ring us on .. or email us on .. or text us on .. or tweet us on our Twitter page which is .. or leave a message on our wall on Facebook’ (I’ve forgotten the question now) or send a pigeon to .. (OK, I made that bit up)

- An advert on windows

- A trailer for the news (!) ‘ coming up you can hear about .. and .. and ..’ (well, I don’t need to hear about them, you’ve just told me)

- The weather, ‘today it is sunny’ (I know, I have windows)
- ‘It is raining in Scotland’ (I don’t care, I’m in Kent)
- ‘Do you want to know tomorrow’s weather?’ (All right then)
- ‘Well. I’ll tell you in 15 minutes’ (Oh the suspense)

- An advert for the next show after this one

- Travel news: ‘on the M2 it is fine, on the M20 it is fine, on the A249 it is fine ‘ etc etc ‘moving into Essex, on this road it is fine, no problems on that road’ etc etc (wouldn’t it be quicker just to say which roads do have problems?)
- ‘The trains also have no problems and neither do the ferries. No point me being here really’. (You took the words right out of my thoughts).

- An advert on holidays

- ‘Who do we have on line 1?’
- ‘It’s Stella. I’m so excited’
- ‘And where are you calling from, Stella?’
- (pause) ‘from my living room’
- ‘Er, right, and what are you doing right now?’
- (pause) ‘talking on the phone’
(I’ll spare you the rest of this conversation)

Eventually I did get to hear a song before arriving at which point they started to go round again - so a Scissors Sisters tune and half a Kylie in return for 30 minutes seems a poor return. Plan B, flicking through channels, just gives you all the above in a different order. I am sure this just adds to road rage as you are eventually BEGGING them to put a record on.

If someone would like to introduce a radio channel that just plays music (I’ll allow the occasional SHORT commercial) please let me know.

Keep the flag flying high

2010-07-12T12:58:00.003+01:00

Those of us who are supportive of the coalition still recognise the need for our own identity and there are some in the Liberal Democrats who are concerned that this is being lost – and for good reason.

In Swale we are planning to take on the almighty iron grip of the Conservative party but of course some voters may think we are now on their side. Labour’s strategy has been to concentrate their fire on the Lib Dems, presumably hoping to bring down the coalition, although another general election may not be favourable to the Labour party.

Liberal Democrat members are as unhappy as anyone with the VAT rise – but we could either (i) ensure that measures are there to protect those on lower incomes or (ii) break up the coalition and force a general election. I think the public would expect the first option and find the second option, of cutting and running at the first disagreement, irresponsible.

We need to make two lists.

1. Which of the coalition’s policies is uniquely Liberal Democrat?
2. Which Liberal Democrat policies are not in the coalition agreement which we want to see?

To list 1 we can point out:

-The raise of the threshold to take nearly a million people out of tax
-The rise of the capital gains tax rate to reduce tax avoidance and ensure the burden shifts more to those who can afford it
-A series of measures to protect our civil liberties and freedoms
-The referendum on a fairer votes system
-Reform of the House of Lords

Can you imagine a Conservative government doing any of this? Of course not. These are all ours. They wouldn’t be there without us.

And, to coin a phrase, what do we want?

-The replacement of council tax with a local income tax
-The abolition of university tuition fees
-No like-for-like replacement of Trident to save £100bn
-Proportional representation in parliamentary and council elections
-Ensure the programme of cuts does not harm the most vulnerable in society

Above all we must continue to campaign for good liberal democratic values of decentralisation and bringing powers back to local levels.

From one election to the next

2010-07-06T13:34:00.002+01:00

Last night I was at the Houses of Parliament for the Liberal Democrats Parliamentary Candidates Association reception – a post-election party. This was a nice event, a chance to put the suit on, visit the House and this time I could take Mary along. It was good weather to stand on the terrace balcony overlooking the Thames (fenced off from the Lords section – and they had chairs!), chat generally and drink a lot of good wine under the eye of a disapproving wife.

Words of thanks for the campaign were made by Nick Clegg and various others and there was an excellent pep talk by our new deputy leader, Simon Hughes. This might be selfish of me but I hope he stays outside the government, is a cheerleader for our independence and pushes for those of our policies which were not in the coalition agreement (e.g. abolition of tuition fees).

Mention of tuition fees and students brings me on to my own university town. I spent four happy years as a student in Aberystwyth, Ceredigion in mid-Wales – so when I saw the party advertise for candidates for next year’s Welsh Assembly elections I jumped at the chance. I have applied for the Assembly seat of Ceredigion (currently held by Plaid Cymru) as it would be a pleasure to represent and campaign for the area.

As an approved candidate for England, I had to be approved for Wales and so was interviewed by our policy officers about Welsh affairs and our policies etc. Happily I passed selection and so can now attempt to be a Lib Dem candidate for any seat in England and Wales.

Ceredigion currently has a Lib Dem MP and we have a lot of support there. A lot of ifs though. If I am shortlisted and if I am invited to a hustings and if I am the selected candidate and if we win the seat next May then I would be an Assembly Member – but a long way to go to get there. Being a winnable seat, there will be tough competition for the candidature. But I am hoping that, if I am unsuccessful in becoming the candidate, at least the experience will stand me well when seeking a parliamentary seat to fight for the next election.

Much work to do in Sittingbourne of course. Last week we had a strategy group meeting to discuss our initial plans for the ‘all-out’ council elections next May. We won’t be fighting every seat and ward but we need a good show to put more Liberal Democrats into Swale's council chamber – so we have identified some target areas which we can focus on. And there will be a referendum to win as well.

As membership officer I am aiming to build up our members and supporters. We gained quite a few during the campaign and I am hoping to keep the momentum up.

So things are still busy! The election is over. But there are more to come!

England - so it all went wrong again

2010-06-29T08:56:00.002+01:00

Another campaign has come and gone. We looked forward to it, we sung the usual range of songs, we waved our flags, we booked our seats in the pub, and we watched as another England performance ended in despair.

The usual recriminations are coming out – ‘the players are not good enough, the manager has failed, the tactics are wrong, our season has too many games and the youth coaching is inadequate’. I copied that quote from when we failed to qualify for the 1994 world cup. I expect we’ll be saying the same in 2034.

Blaming the manager is an easy thing to do but let’s look at this. Fabio Capello is the most successful club manager England have ever employed. Steve McLaren has done well in Holland. Sven was also successful as a club manager. Maybe the players are simply unmanageable.

Wayne Rooney, Steve Gerrard and Frank Lampard are outstanding players – wearing their club shirt. They are too good to be left out but for England they are not good enough to be left in.

Gerrard and Lampard can’t play together, we are told. OK, don’t pick them then. Wayne Rooney had a great Euro 2004 and two miserable world cups since.

In Emile Heskey we have a striker who specialises in not scoring goals – an interesting novelty which must have passed the experimental stage by now. Peter Crouch has scored over 20 goals for England but hardly played because his goals were ‘only against smaller teams’ – perhaps like, er, Algeria and Slovenia then.

In my view, the problem with England is the same as it is with France. Young players getting enormous salaries, a luxurious lifestyle, cars, mansions, girls etc and see an international career as a means, not to represent their country, but to boost their marketing rights.

We are told the players are ‘tired’. Yet with Brazil and Argentina, not only do many of their players play in Europe, they also have several flights each year to South America for qualifying games. Sounds quite tiring to me.

Are South American players fitter than their English counterparts? Of course not. The difference is that there is simply no pride, passion or commitment. Look at teams like Ghana and South Korea. They know they are not good enough to win the cup but they will have a go.

The players see themselves as more important than the manager – hence it is insignificant who is the boss, the players will just kick a ball about till they can go home, add to their portfolio, and point the finger at the manager for trying to make them work too hard.

The question is – do you pick the best players? Or do you pick the players that want to play?

I’d like to have a go with the latter. The next game is a friendly against Hungary on 11 August. Let’s give an entire new squad a chance and pick young players to make their debut or who only have a few caps at the most. They know that a good performance could cement their place in the squad and will hopefully have the pride and incentive to put in 100%. We may not win but that is the point of friendlies.

Of course we all have short memories anyway. By the end of September Rooney, John Terry et al will all be heroes again, we will wave the flag when Euro 2012 comes round and then all have the same arguments afterwards. But if we genuinely want to reach the latter stages of any summer tournament we have to accept that, no matter how good a player is, you can't force him to play if he doesn't want to - we have to make brave decisions and stick to them.

Kent Freedom Pass for the Over 60s

2010-06-25T10:37:00.002+01:00

Support for the Kent Freedom Pass for the over 60s

Keith Nevols, the recent parliamentary candidate for Sittingbourne and Sheppey, has expressed support for Harry Farrow's campaign for a Kent Freedom Pass for the over 60s.

'Harry approached me with details of his campaign', he said, 'and I was very impressed by the support he has accumulated. Harry wants to see a Freedom Pass on the railways for the over 60s, similar to the London model, which would provide free off-peak train travel for visits to family, hospital or work. He has worked tirelessly for over a year, has got support from most of Kent's councils and will be presenting a petition to Downing Street with thousands of names.'

'We should encourage ways of getting people out of their cars and onto the railways as part of working towards a green economy. So I am happy to add my own support to his campaign and hope the coalition government and the railway companies will enable the scheme to be put in place.'

My General Election - Epilogue - Where Now?

2010-06-22T10:42:00.001+01:00

Throughout the election campaign I always had it in mind that we could be doing it all again very soon. The polls pointed to a hung parliament with the Conservatives taking the most seats and I thought, if that were the result, that David Cameron would form a minority government, write a Queens’ speech and then call another election for October.

It was my intention to run again in this second election – if selected by my local party. In a way I was looking forward to another campaign, mostly because we wouldn’t be burdened by the council elections taking place at the same time – and hence we would be free to campaign around other areas of the constituency that we didn’t get to – especially on the Isle of Sheppey.

I had all sorts of thoughts for things we could do differently – more canvassing, more telephone canvassing, an earlier Freepost leaflet (if possible), more on-line work, different high street stalls. The main drawback would be that, after fighting a general election, we don’t have any cash – a problem that the other two major parties would not have, of course.

To our surprise, though, we have a Con-Lib Dem coalition government which must have a good chance of surviving for a full five year term. So there are two questions. Where now for the Sittingbourne and Sheppey Liberal Democrats? And where now for Keith Nevols?

The answer to the first is that we have two aims – one to build the local party up, the other to work towards the 2011 Council elections.

I am getting back to people who contacted me during the campaign with the intention of enrolling more members and supporters. We lost two members who disagreed with the coalition but on the other hand have recruited many more and, as I type, continuing to do so. I am now the membership secretary so I can concentrate on this and involving our members and supporters – as well as organising drives to add to our numbers.

The 2011 Swale council elections are ‘all-outs.’ Instead of elected in ‘thirds’ as in previous years, every one of the Council’s 47 seats is up for election – and then there will be no more for four years.

Now of course we won’t be able to contest all 47 – we could only do 13 this year – so it will be a case of working out a strategy, selecting target wards, and finding good candidates. That is our immediate aim. Hopefully if the first objective of building up the party continues to be met, then so can the second objective of putting more Liberal Democrats into Swale’s council chamber.

Where now for me? It is clear that Sittingbourne and Sheppey are unlikely to have a Liberal Democrat MP for a while. The seat will be Conservative for some time. And there has been no Liberal MP in Kent since 1929. Even a strong campaign like Peter Carroll’s, of Gurkha fame, in Maidstone and the Weald still fell some way short.

So for parliamentary ambitions I will have to look elsewhere. And it will be a couple of years or so before local parties start looking for candidates so it will be a case of keeping an ear to the ground.

It is an end to the general election story of 2010 and back to the local story for the months ahead. In Sittingbourne and Sheppey, the fight for liberal democratic values goes on.

My General Election - Part Four - Election Day

2010-06-16T08:11:00.001+01:00

As the final days of the campaign drifted on, there was further canvassing, leafleting, school visits, racing round to rally troops, up early to catch commuters and so on.

At this stage we noticed a disturbing trend – people who had considered voting for us were now drifting back to the two main parties. David Cameron had impressed in the last leaders’ debate and the continual media attacks on us were hitting home.

The big day arrived – and I got up at 4am for a 25 hour day. The defence of Murston remained our primary target. Roman was our secondary target, where we figured Labour might be weak (we were partly wrong here, Labour’s vote did fall but the Conservatives scooped the seat). We had leafleted and canvassed both areas and by 5am I was in Murston delivering the ‘Good Mornings’.

Anyone who has worked in an election campaign would know how busy the actual day is. Lots of good mornings leaflets, checking tellers are in place, collecting numbers, and knocking up supporters. I also had to remember to vote myself of course and give my neighbour a lift, and I was surprised to see a queue at the station. I had heard that Gordon, the Conservative candidate, was visiting all the polling stations. I would have loved to do the same but alas was too busy.

By 9.30pm I had knocked on my final door. If they were not going to vote now, they never will! It was time to go home for a shower and a change of suit. The election campaign was finally over.

Now sporting my great new large yellow rosette (specially purchased for the count) I drove to the Swallows Leisure Centre.

Parliamentary counts are exactly like you see on the telly. Rows of people, furiously counting papers, while everyone else wears a rosette and aimlessly wanders about. There are the media there however so I spoke to the local press, and BBC Kent asked me to go on a few times. In return, they kept me in touch with our target seats – that we had got Eastbourne but not Maidstone.

I stood next to one table while a box was being emptied and sorted and, as the papers were sifted through, could see that the Conservatives had about half while Labour had slightly more than we did. I estimated 50-25-20 which, on the basis of just a few dozen votes, was not a bad guess.

Mad Mike, the Loony candidate, kindly offered me a banana which, as there was no food about, was appreciated. With David Miliband in mind, I was wary of photographers but looked around to find everyone else was also munching on a banana so it would be all right.

As the night went on (and on) a table was set up in the centre of the hall and bundles of papers put in. When they had to get a second box for the Conservative vote we knew that it was quite clear. However there was further delay because the numbers would not match – they were 30 votes out. As it was obvious that the Conservatives had won by a mile, the popular view was to give the 30 votes to Gordon so we could all go home. But the law is the law.

As 4am came and went, I suggested calling for a recount – although no-one seemed to find that very funny.

Finally we were all called together, agreed the result, and then mounted the stage. Having seen this moment hundreds of times on election nights over the years it did feel strange to stand up there myself.

I later discovered the BBC covered the result by just a blue box appearing on-screen ‘Sittingbourne – Con Hold’ (Sorry, Sheppey). The long haul was over.

Coming soon: the epilogue – where do we go from here?

Labour's leadership conundrum

2010-06-14T12:11:00.002+01:00

A break from my memoirs to discuss the Labour leadership contest. Now this is important to all of us for two reasons.

Firstly, it is possible that the winner will be our next Prime Minister so we must take it seriously. Secondly, it is important for any government to have an effective opposition to scrutinise it and keep it on its toes.

Labour party members must ask two questions – who will provide this effective opposition to the government and who is the most likely to win for Labour at the next general election?

Who do we have in the running? The first surprise is who is not running. I thought Alan Johnson had the gravitas and ability to help Labour recover from their defeat and provide tough opposition to David Cameron. And Harriet Harman struck me as someone quite ambitious. I don’t think she would have won, but it was a surprise not to see her have a go. Neither of them are likely to get another chance so presumably now have no ambitions to be Prime Minister.

The favourite is obviously David Miliband who seems to have been the leader in waiting almost as long as Gordon Brown was. He is the choice of Peter Mandelson and Alastair Campbell, who, between them, have run the party for the last 25 years, and will both be powerful allies for him.

Some members may feel they need to move away from New Labour – hence his expression of Next Labour – whatever that means.

Ed Balls is quickly moving away from the Brown government – distancing himself on Iraq and immigration. It was a bit harsh though for the PM to compare him to Alf Garnett – as we discovered during the campaign that immigration was an issue causing a lot of concern. He would be an interesting choice, close to the Brown view, but like David M, he would suffer from being a central part of the last government when the election comes round.

Ed Miliband, although in the cabinet, was not a senior member so may not have this problem. I gather his bandwagon is gaining speed and the effect on his brother must be considered. Have you ever had a work colleague at a lower level suddenly promoted above you? That is how David will feel if the person who has always been his younger brother then becomes his boss.

Watching the hustings it was slightly uncomfortable seeing Ed have a go at his brother – rather like watching a married couple arguing.

Apologies to Andy Burnham but I don’t know enough about you to comment. He seems to be well liked by some Labour MPs.

Let’s face it, we all love Diane Abbott. I am pleased she was able to get in the contest as she is a real wild card and will bring something different to the table. I don’t think Diane has a chance of winning but may well have an effect on the result. She is the oldest candidate, has been an MP the longest, is very well known, is not associated with the last government, and will have a lot of grass roots support. Her inclusion will provoke a real debate about the future direction of the party which will make it interesting for us observers.

So who will win? The winner’s name will be Miliband, or Ed, or both! I would put my money on David Miliband but I don’t think he is someone we should be afraid of.

A problem for Labour is that the party has recently been so dominated by the Blair-Brown partnership that the candidates are struggling to come out of the shadows. Have you ever heard a ‘bring-the-house-down’ speech by David Miliband or won over by the character of Ed Balls? This may not be a problem – how many of us had heard of David Cameron in 2005? – and he (or she) would have five years to get themselves known.

But the first duty of the new leader will be to make a name for himself – and fast!

My General Election - Part Three - Cleggmania

2010-06-04T12:38:00.006+01:00

Throughout February and March the pre-campaign campaign continued. I was out most evenings doorstep canvassing around Murston, telephone canvassing at the weekends, attended a couple of functions in London, a meeting at Fulston Manor school, some debates with the other candidates, much deliveries of leaflets, more media interviews, and various email correspondence. I also wrote a series of local policy documents.

On 6 April the election was called - we were under way. I booked my leave from work, we accelerated the pace, we completed our planned timetable up to the election date, and things were going along nicely.

All changed on Thursday 15 April.

I had told the local press that I thought Nick Clegg would do well in the first leader’s debate, that I thought he would put our case across well, and that it was a good opportunity for the party. Watching the debate I was pleased he did exactly that, and was surprised at David Cameron’s poor performance. But none of us saw the aftershock coming when Cleggmania erupted.

Our poll ratings climbed to our highest since the early days of the Alliance, Nick Clegg was being compared to Churchill, the media were horrified and desperate to find some smears, and the public interest dramatically increased.

How did this affect us? This affected us by the fact that the expectations on us had now gained enormously. I received dozens of emails from constituents criticising us. Why haven’t we seen you? Why haven’t you called? Why haven’t we received any leaflets? Why haven’t you got big posters up like the Tories? Why are you invisible? Why are you missing this opportunity? Etc etc.

My main thought was – where were all these people three months ago? We would certainly have appreciated the help.

The obvious answers to the questions were that we did not have the resources. When there are only three or four us out canvassing each night, we can only reach a small part of the constituency. And with leaflets, not only do you need the money to print them, you also need the people to deliver them.

With posters neither us nor Labour could compete with the huge Lord Ashcroft sponsored posters that we saw. And the Conservatives had, wisely, arranged for farmers to display their election boards along the main roads.

Many of these queries came from the Isle of Sheppey. I would have liked to have done more there but we had to give it a low priority – mainly because we could not compete with the island candidates of the other parties and also we were concentrating on the defence of our council seat. (We could not even find candidates for some of the council seats on the island).

I explained all this and attached some briefing notes in my responses. I am not sure everyone bought this. The impression given was that we were simply not doing enough to make the most of Cleggmania – despite the fact that I have never worked harder.

The delay of the Freepost leaflet annoyed me. Every candidate is allowed one leaflet delivered free by post (although you have to pay the printing costs). Labour’s leaflet went out in the first few days with the Conservatives closely behind. I would have liked ours to go out early as well to at least say hello, here I am, and yes we’ve started. Unfortunately, to save costs, the printing had to be co-ordinated with other local parties and so we had to wait for all of them to be ready. Hence most people never got anything from us until the third week of the campaign.

So we had to up the tempo further as Cleggmania hit. Fortunately we did get some helpers and volunteers and were able to get some leaflets printed and delivered on the Isle of Sheppey and other parts of the constituency, but we all now had to work even harder at breakneck pace. We even found some people pleased to find us knocking on their door.

And when we added up all the stats and feedback we realised that the Labour collapse had continued and our boost had put us in second place – which would have been an astonishing result. But alas it was not to be.

Final episode soon – when I’ll tell you about the hectic last week.

My General Election - Part Two - The Strategy

2010-05-26T16:37:00.002+01:00

The Council’s Local Engagement Forums are usually dull affairs and the one held in January 2010 was no exception. However in the presence of councillors and local media it gave me the opportunity to ask a question and introduce myself as the 'Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate'. I was of course deleted from the minutes but the damage had been done. At last the news was out and some media interviews resulted.

My first decision was one of my best. It was to ask Elvie Lowe to be my campaign manager. Elvie is a local legend, a councillor for 22 years, former county councillor and parliamentary candidate, and for the last few years, the leader of the Liberal Democrat council group. An experienced campaigner, Elvie organised everything very well with energy and efficiency. Although, of course, the campaign choices (and mistakes) were my responsibility.

In 2005, the Labour MP Derek Wyatt held the seat of Sittingbourne and Sheppey from the Conservative Gordon Henderson by 79 votes. We were a long way behind in third place. As Derek was not re-running, Labour had chosen local council leader Angela Harrison.

Several things were clear. Firstly, given the majority and the national trend, the Conservatives would win the seat. This was confirmed in our early canvassing where Tory votes were holding solid while Labour’s were drifting – although we didn’t yet know who to.

Secondly, there was a danger of us getting squeezed should a lot of people vote negatively. We did find some people who were our supporters but were voting Labour because they were more concerned with keeping Gordon out. (Even a member did this!!)

Thirdly, as we were not a target seat, or remotely winnable, there would be no money nor ‘faces’ coming from central office. We were on our own.

Fourthly, we had discovered from experience that people on the Isle of Sheppey will generally vote for people from the Isle of Sheppey. Both the other two candidates were very Sheppey-based so we would be at a disadvantage there.

Finally we guessed, correctly, that the general election would be the same day as the local council elections where we would be defending one of our few seats. This would have to be factored into our strategy.

Given all this, it would be quite easy to not bother with a campaign and travel to Eastbourne or Maidstone to help out with the local target campaigns there. But I didn’t want to abandon Sittingbourne and Sheppey so easily without a fight, especially my first shot at parliament. Labour dismissed this as ‘a vanity campaign’ – well, maybe but what is wrong with ambition? (You will see that Labour spent a lot of time criticising us – more on that in future episodes!).

One of our Council seats were up for re-election in May 2010. As we only had four, we were rather keen to hold on to it. Unfortunately our defending Councillor was unable to run again due to work pressures and we also had a shortage of candidates. Our best available candidate was, to be honest, me! But should I run for parliament and for council at the same time? (The Labour candidate had the same issue – but she was defending her own council seat).

After, shall we say, an open debate and a frank exchange of views, it was decided that I would do so. Thus our council campaign would be centred on Murston ward, an area to the east of Sittingbourne, and also on Roman, a Labour held ward which was next door to Murston.

We held two team strategy meetings in late January which did not go well and so I decided to reduce the strategy discussions to a meeting of two – me and Elvie. This made decision making much easier.

So with canvass leaflets ready, clipboards prepared and everyone primed for action, we were hitting the streets of Murston and knocked on the first doors.

My General Election - Part One

2010-05-19T13:10:00.002+01:00

In October 2009 I got the welcome and surprising news that, following a tough evaluation day, my application to join the approved list of parliamentary candidates was successful. I could now apply to represent the Liberal Democrats in any UK parliamentary seat.

There was only one seat I wanted to have a shot at – my local seat of Sittingbourne and Sheppey – and I knew our local party were looking for a candidate. I immediately completed the application form, put together my manifesto, and submitted it to the executive committee. (I also got details of the almost-next-door Chatham and Aylesford seat in case I was not successful).

I was the only applicant! The local Labour party criticised me for this point but I am not sure what I could have done about that. The party had advertised in Liberal Democrat circles and press etc but only I had come forward. There was another possible candidate from the local party but he had by now defected to Labour.

Of course it was not a foregone conclusion. The approval of the committee and the local party members was still required. If not successful, central office would have sent a candidate and I would have applied elsewhere. After an interview with questions coming from all places, the committee approved me to go to hustings. The first hurdle was crossed.

By now both Labour and UKIP had selected their candidates, the Conservative candidate had long been in place, David Cameron posters were appearing all over London, and there were rumours of a March 2010 election. So I was keen to get on with things.

The Hustings were confirmed for 12 January 2010. A room was booked, invitations sent out to the 95 local party members, my speech was drafted and re-drafted (my wife was the audience), I put on my smartest suit, prepared for the questions I might get, marched to the hustings with confidence to face all-comers – and seven people turned up!!

This tiny turnout was a bitter disappointment. Admittedly it was in the middle of all the snow we had in January and the roads and pavements were in a bad condition, but two of the seven were over 80 years old – if they could make it why could so few else? The Labour party criticised me for this as well and here they may have had a point.

But anyway we went through the whole process which went well and I got a unanimous 9-0 approval (two were postal votes). The paperwork was all signed and witnessed etc and I gave my first interview as a parliamentary candidate to a group of students from London.

I was eager to get going and get myself known to the people of Sittingbourne and Sheppey.

First idea: let’s print and deliver a leaflet to everyone in the constituency to introduce myself. Sorry, no money to do that.

Second: write to all the non-active local party members to introduce myself, set out my plans and ideas, and ask for their help in the campaign. Only two replies.

Third: send press releases to both local newspapers announcing my candidacy. They both ignored it.

I knew this campaign would be a hard task but already I could see it was going to be much harder than I had imagined.

Now get to work!

2010-05-13T08:43:00.002+01:00

Things look promising. I’ve studied the coalition document and have been pleasantly surprised by the amount of Liberal Democrat policies that are in there. There has been a good attempt to capture areas of common ground – which is presumably why the negotiations took so long.

David Cameron has surprised us all. He could easily have refused to talk to anyone, bulldozed ahead with a minority government, and waited for a favourable moment to call another election. Instead he has shown great flexibility and compromise and putting national interests ahead of his party to secure a government for the country, and deserves praise for doing so.

This is so unlike the Conservative party that we have known all these years. Can you imagine Margaret Thatcher allowing Liberal Democrats in her cabinet? Norman Tebbit’s anger means we must be right.

Some grumbles: in the document there is reference to education funding, but not specifically tuition fees. There is no mention of whether the all-party talks on elderly care funding will be resumed. And the referendum remains on alternative vote rather than a PR system. But we’re getting there.

Five Cabinet ministers and 20 ministers in all is a good achievement and more than expected, although I am not sure what Nick Clegg would be doing. I am pleased that Vince Cable has a good job as, at the age of 67, I had feared his talents would be lost to the nation. Instead he must now be a contender for Chancellor of the Exchequer in two or three years once George is moved sideways.

So now we wait for the Queen’s speech and the budget. No more can people pompously say ‘Lib Dems can promise what they like because they will never be in a position to govern.’ It will be strange to defend the government after opposing it for 25 years but we must deliver – we must ensure that good liberal democrat policies are put in place and that the coalition government is a success.

It must be with the Tories or without

2010-05-11T08:32:00.003+01:00

The general election result seems a long time ago now and we are still waiting for the result. No doubt everyone has made studious notes of the last few days for their forthcoming memoirs but in the meantime we are still in the dark.

My own view is rather straight forward.

1. Nick Clegg was right to start negotiations with the Conservative party. With 36%, they got more votes and more seats than Labour and together we can form a stable government if we concentrate on common ground.

2. Voting reform MUST be one of the results of any negotiations. The party have fought for that for years – we simply cannot keep up a discredited unrepresentative unfair system.

3. Alternative vote is NOT proportional representation. We will only have one chance to change the system – let’s get it right first time.

4. We must NOT enter a deal with Labour. The election was clearly a rejection of Labour’s record and policies and to put together a Lab-Lib Dem government would be ridiculous, especially with Gordon Brown STILL running things.

5. If we cannot make a deal with the Conservatives then at least we can say we have tried. David Cameron can then run a minority government and our MPs can vote with him on an issue by issue basis, such as abolishing ID cards, education investment and the low carbon economy.

6. We will thus be sticking to our principles and if we are facing the electorate again in a few months, we can say that we tried to provide stable government but it was not possible.

Gordon Brown’s departure is welcome – and I am sure we all wish him well – but he should have gone on Friday morning not in a few months time.

Election results - the day after

2010-05-07T15:53:00.002+01:00

Election day, 6 May, was, as expected, the most busiest day of all, from getting up at 4am to delivering the election day leaflets, through to the last knock-ups at 9pm, and on to waiting for the result at 5am – a 25 hour day, then four hours sleep, before up again for the council results. I might sleep for two days before going back to work on Monday.

But there’s no denying it – the Liberal Democrat results nationally and locally were very disappointing. It seems many people lost their nerve and went back to the devils they knew. We discovered this quite a lot in the last few days of canvassing.

To my own results:

Sittingbourne and Sheppey:
Gordon Henderson (Conservative) – 24,313 (50.0% - up 8.3%)
Angela Harrison (Labour) – 11,390 (24.6% - down 17.1%)
Keith Nevols (Liberal Democrats) – 7,943 (16.4% - up 3.6%)
Ian Davison (UKIP) – 2,610 (5.4% - up 3.1%)
Lawrence Tames (BNP) – 1,305 (2.7%)
Mad Mike Young (Loony) – 319 (0.7% - down 0.5%)
David Cassidy (Independent) – 158 (0.3%)

I enjoyed the campaign very much. It has been very tiring but also invigorating and already I am thinking about what I can do differently next time. But I have to admit that given all the work I and we put into the campaign over four months, an increase of only 3.6% is a bit disappointing – although larger than the national average Lib Dem increase.

Obviously national factors played the major part. We expected the Tories to win the seat but we certainly didn’t expect such a surge to result in a majority of 12,383. Although I have commented on the collapse of the Labour vote, I didn’t expect such a large collapse and nor that most of it would swing to the Tories.

Some bright spots – as I said, I enjoyed the campaign. I was pleased that UKIP kept their deposit, as Ian and the UKIP guys are likeable chaps, and my earlier fears of a sizeable BNP vote were not realised. Maybe they will go and look elsewhere.

The biggest disappointment was to come the following day.

Swale Borough Council
Murston ward
Ed Gent (Conservative) 845
Keith Nevols (Liberal Democrat) 695
Shelley Cheesman (Labour) 618

There were 16 of Swale’s wards up for election (13 with us in Sittingbourne and Sheppey and the other three in Faversham). Because of our limited resources we decided to throw everything at our defence of Murston. The whole ward was canvassed, leafleted three times, and chased up on election day. We could not have worked harder.

Yet the higher turnout, due to the general election and the Tory increase, saw us lose this seat and reduce our number of councillors to three. The only consolation is that the whole council is up for election next year – so if I had won, I may have been a councillor for only a year.

For now a break – it will seem strange not to go knocking on doors for a while – but very soon we, and I, will think about our future strategy and where we go from here.

Use your vote - and vote for genuine change

2010-05-05T21:09:00.002+01:00

Another very busy time in the final two days – I have visited Rodmersham Primary School and Westlands School to answer questions and provide material for their mock elections, spent many hours delivering leaflets, handed out leaflets at Sittingbourne and Newington stations, much more canvassing and more leafleting, co-organise the final arrangements for the campaign headquarters and the team – and devoured an eve of poll fish and chips.

Early to bed tonight and up early tomorrow to get going. It will be a long day – lots to do.

The BBC and Meridian will both be attending the count and our result is expected at about 1.30am so make sure you keep an eye out for me and you can admire my big new rosette.

But to everyone who reads this – get out and vote! Vote, vote, vote! Let’s get a good turnout and ensure that as many people as possible have their say!

And if you want to see:

Fairness in the tax burden with more money in your pocket;
Fairness in our schools with smaller class sizes and no tuition fees;
Fairness in jobs by developing the long-term sustainable industries and employment we need in energy efficiency and public transport;
And fairness in our politics, so that parliament and its MPs can be completely transparent and accountable to you, the voter.

If you want to sweep away the old red-blue pass-the-parcel parties that have let us all down again and again.

If you want GENUINE change.

Then there is only one choice – and that is to vote for the Liberal Democrats.

Going For Gold - a clarification

2010-05-04T20:41:00.002+01:00

Word has reached me that some of our supporters and helpers have received contacts allegedly from the Labour party as to my supposedly limited ambitions. If true, you have to hand it to Labour, they are a crafty bunch, and I guess all is fair in love and elections. But maybe I did not make myself clear, so please let me clarify.

I want to win this election and become the MP for Sittingbourne and Sheppey. I do not want to be second, third, fourth or seventh, I want to be first. I have worked very hard these last four months with the intention of going for gold.

I have spoken to thousands of people, knocked on thousands of doors, delivered thousands of leaflets, held high street stalls, taken part in debates, replied to hundreds of emails, visited schools and societies, travelled all over the constituency, and accepted as many invites to meet people as I could. I’ve also got a job when I have time to go to work. I have not talked to as many people as I would like – but I have not done too bad!

But I wouldn’t have done all this if I had no intention of winning.

It is true that in an earlier blog and a newspaper interview I referred to us being second – this is because some Conservative supporters and many Labour supporters were coming our way, both because they did not like the actions of their own party and because they were attracted by what we had to offer. The first leader’s debate accelerated this process. And I did say that second would be a good result considering our tiny resources compared to the masses available to the old big two.

However I also said we would not rest there. We would be working until 10pm on 6 May to get as much support and as many votes as possible. As I said, someone has to challenge Gordon Henderson and the Conservatives.

If the polls are correct, Labour’s support compared to 2005 has declined by about a third, the Conservatives is about the same, and ours has increased by about a third! This plus boundary changes means that Labour simply will not defend a majority of only 79. It is obvious that only the Liberal Democrats can stop a Conservative victory in this constituency.

If the good people in Sittingbourne and Sheppey agree that the government has let us all down and want genuine change, but not the devastating changes that the Conservative party will bring to the constituency, then they should vote Liberal Democrat.

And I want to win!!

Some thoughts

2010-05-02T12:32:00.002+01:00

It’s been pointed out to me that I have only talked about this constituency. I suppose it is natural for a candidate to concentrate on what’s going on in his own patch but here are some thoughts.

If the polls are correct, then Labour’s time in government is coming to an end and David Cameron will become Prime Minister of a majority or minority administration.

Gordon Brown will be leaving Number 10 almost exactly three years after he got the job. You may recall he got praise at first for how he handled the floods and terrorist attacks leading to early election speculation – but since then it has been one long disaster zone as the government tried to wrestle with the recession, the expenses and other scandals, and consistent leadership coup attempts. Bailing out the banks could be argued as a good move but then not using this newly acquired muscle to force changes was a mistake.

Where will Labour go now? There’s no shortage of leadership candidates but who will manage to catch the public imagination in 2014 or 2015? Alan Johnson and David Miliband appear to be the favourites with Ed Balls, Harriet Harman and Ed Miliband also talked about. But in which direction will they take the party? Old Labour has gone. New Labour has now run its time. What’s next? Second hand Labour?

No such problems with the Conservatives, they have always been consistent. They are sponsored by the rich, backed by the rich, and will always look after the rich. The working classes will be kept in their place. Margaret Thatcher and John Major both came from humble backgrounds – by the time they had finished even more people were coming from humble backgrounds.

In 1979, the last time the Conservatives came to power in a recession, the first budget cut taxes for the very top earners, increased VAT for the rest of us, and slashed public spending. As a result, unemployment rocketed and for most of the 1980s was at a far higher level than is now. Industries nationwide were wiped out, a generation of young people were wasted, and massive social problems hit the country.

It really concerns me that the Conservative party plan to do all that again – and the social unrest we all saw will be repeated. One difference this time is the rise of the BNP. People will feel that politicians have let them down again and may well turn to extremist options.

The only hope is if the Liberal Democrats can make enough progress to deny the Conservatives a majority or at least a working majority and to somehow get in the reforms we really need. However I think the Conservatives will rule with a minority if they have to, and make deals with others on a case-by-case basis. There will be over 30 MPs from other parties, the Speaker and Deputies don’t vote and Sinn Fein won’t turn up so they could muddle through.

One of the biggest disappointments in this campaign has been the Daily Telegraph. Last year they did very well in exposing the expenses scandal, produced an excellent book on the topic, and did their reputation a power of good. You would hope they would go to the next step to promote methods to ensure this sort of thing won’t happen again.

But instead the Telegraph have declined rapidly to pathetic attempts to smear Nick Clegg, scare everyone about hung parliaments, and are now aiming to deny us the necessary parliamentary reforms. Nothing will change. A shame.

That’s my thoughts so far. After the election, once we see the results, I will tell you what I think about the Liberal Democrat campaign, those of the smaller parties, and about how we developed our own strategy here in Sittingbourne and Sheppey.

The Final Debates

2010-04-29T11:47:00.002+01:00

The series of Sittingbourne and Sheppey debates came to an end this week.

Firstly, on Monday, Gordon, Angela and I went to the Isle of Sheppey Academy to meet 16-18 year olds where we were questioned about local issues and politics in general.

Then in the afternoon Gordon and I met again at Highsted school in Sittingbourne for a discussion about school transport. Contrary to my last entry, Labour did indeed send a representative in the form of the legendary Roger Truelove, a well-known and very experienced local councillor, and we were joined by a representative from Kent County Council and the police.

I found this second debate quite tough – the subject matter was rather narrow and were with matters primarily relating to Kent County Council. Hence Gordon and Roger are much more experienced than I on local county issues and were able to give better answers. I got in our party policy on public transport and policing however.

The final debate was the Churches Together event at The Church in Hope Street, Sheerness. This was advertised and open to the public. Issues raised included Trident, the rights of Christians, hung parliaments, human rights, drinking hours and our local ambitions as an MP. To my surprise, immigration, the most common issue raised on the doorsteps, did not come up. Sitting next to the chairman, I could see a question coming about energy to which I would have had a great answer but, alas, we didn’t get to it.

This was a good debate. Heated discussions went to and fro, the audience got their say and generally we all answered the questions. It was also well conducted and chaired.

Gordon was less dominating than previously and came across well. I even found myself agreeing with some of his answers – which is a worrying precedent. Angela had her best debate of the series also with some good answers. As neither Europe, immigration nor the economy came up then Ian of UKIP didn’t really have much to bite on, but fended off the BNP. David Cassidy, an Independent of whom I know nothing, showed an independent spirit.

I managed to answer the questions without too many problems but, as I am not used to addressing 200 people, had to resort to the microphone to be heard.

The BNP candidate and three colleagues were present but of course were not invited onto the panel. We were anticipating some sort of onslaught but instead they carried out a rather weak attack on Ian regarding an email he is alleged to have sent.

That’s all the debates. Six in all, five of them alongside Gordon, four with Angela and three with Ian, so we have got to know each other fairly well. They have all been fun but also hard work. And we will next meet on Thursday at the count!

Sittingbourne & Sheppey - has Labour given up?

2010-04-25T17:29:00.002+01:00

I took this last week off work and a very busy week it has been too. More media interviews, lots more delivering of leaflets, and lots more canvassing, around Sittingbourne and on the Isle of Sheppey – as well as catching up (slightly) on the emails. I am also delighted to have found many new members and supporters. We are all being exceptionally busy spreading the message as far as we can – and generally are getting a good response.

Labour’s campaign is rather puzzling. We were to have a church debate in Milton Regis, but the Labour candidate, Angela Harrison, refused and so it had to be cancelled. This disappointed a lot of people, many of them Labour supporters, who wanted to meet us, ask us questions and see us discuss the issues. This may have cost Labour 100 votes or so, which, when you are defending a majority of 79, makes a difference.

Tomorrow we are getting together for a discussion chiefly regarding public transport (although I am sure other issues will crop up). Gordon from the Conservatives, Ian from UKIP and my good self will be there – not only no Angela, but no-one at all from Labour! The invitation was declined.

I hope Angela will be at the church debate in Sheerness on Wednesday – as this is home territory for her.

In Faversham the safe-seat Tories have the luxury of refusing to meet people (as in the environment debate). I'm not so sure about Labour here. I would have thought they would be keen for every vote.

The local Labour party has released a statement insisting it is still a two horse race. As the saying goes, they still don’t get it! Who do they think those poll numbers which are not red or blue are for? And how do Labour think they can win if they are turning down chances to meet people who want to meet them?

Unlike Labour, we in the Liberal Democrats haven’t given up. After all, someone has to challenge Gordon Henderson and the Conservatives.

We are fighting for every vote in this seat and will continue to do so to the end!

Sittingbourne & Sheppey - second place?

2010-04-19T21:26:00.004+01:00

We’re in second place!! This could be our best result since this constituency was formed in 1997 - as the recent total of our data shows we have overtaken Labour into second place. How did we reach this possibility?

For three months we have been door canvassing and phone canvassing and hardly found any support for Labour. People who had voted Labour before informed us that they felt betrayed by Gordon Brown’s government and that the party had left its roots. Most of these were going to give us a chance as we were listening more to the concerns of ordinary people. Vince Cable, especially, was much admired. Other Labour supporters said they would not vote at all, with a few opting instead for UKIP or BNP.

Now we have started working in some more traditional Labour areas we have found a similar pattern. It is surprising to find that, apart from Sheppey, Labour’s support seems to have melted. And even in the Isle of Sheppey many Labour supporters have told us how they feel so let down by the government.

This trickle of support increased after Vince Cable’s debate performance – and is now a flood following Nick Clegg’s showing. I am struggling to keep up with the emails (apologies to those who I have not yet replied to – I’m getting there!)

There is a cloud however. Many people said they would vote Labour anyway because they believed, in error, that was the only way to stop the Conservative candidate, Gordon Henderson, from becoming our MP. So we still have Gordon as the odds-on favourite. And we think that both UKIP and BNP are also heading for a reasonable result.

Of course we have still done nowhere near as much work as I would like. And there are still a lot of don’t knows. But we can be optimistic at the moment.

Considering our tiny resources compared to the infinitesimally greater amounts available to the big two, if we finish second it would be a huge achievement.

However we must not be complacent. Two weeks are a very long time in politics and there’s a lot of hard work ahead.

Neither of the tired old two parties will like the possibility of a Liberal Democrat making progress so will come at us locally as they are nationally. We must stay alert, stay focussed and keep getting that message across. And maybe on 6 May we will surprise a lot of people in Sittingbourne and Sheppey.

Sheerness and Sittingbourne - on the high streets

2010-04-18T10:53:00.002+01:00

We have just completed two very successful high street sessions. Last week we were in Sheerness by the clock and this weekend we set up camp in Sittingbourne. On both occasions we were fortunate with the weather and were armed with policy statements, balloons and literature.

Throughout these sessions I met many people, discussing with them the wide variety of issues they are concerned about, which were mostly local, but also touched on national issues, such as tax and immigration.

Sheerness and the Isle of Sheppey has suffered badly as a result of Gordon Brown's recession so there was a lot of concern about jobs and businesses and how to revitalise the high street and the island overall. The area we were situated in was next to three empty shops as an example. People wanted to know our plans as a party and what would I, if I was the MP, do about it.

There were a lot of people who were understandably anti-politician but I was pleased to see some support for us and that Labour’s support is not as strong as we might have expected. There was a general feeling of being let down.

Then in Sittingbourne there was much positive feedback about Nick Clegg after his debate performance and people telling me that they have never voted Liberal Democrat before but were now very tempted. Again, the local economy was a subject of concern as well as schools and the commuter trains.

In both towns, the behaviour of MPs and our politicians was also discussed. And there was a lot of concern about the Conservatives getting back into power - especially in Sheerness where cuts in investment and even higher unemployment were the last thing they wanted.

Sadly every silver lining has a cloud. Half an hour after we set up camp in Sheerness, along came the Tories and set up a stall right next to us! Then half an hour after we were in Sittingbourne, what do you know, here they come again. Not further down the high street, you note, but again adjacent to our stall! Before they turned up, I had a queue of people wanting to talk to me and keen to discuss things but as soon as the blue balloons arrived, that was it, the streets got much emptier.

I have to confess blame here because I publicised the fact we would be in those places – but you live and learn.

Anyway, that was just a minor grumble. I found both sessions to be very rewarding and enjoyable. It’s always a joy to get out on the streets and talk to real people.

Friends of the Earth - debate report

2010-04-14T08:36:00.003+01:00

This time I visited the constituency next door in Faversham to take part in a debate on the environment hosted by Friends of the Earth. Faversham is a beautiful old English town with lots of history and has a small town centre with many small shops. It's a nice place to wander about on an afternoon.

I was quite pleased with how the debate went – this was probably my best performance so far – and of course we Liberal Democrats are quite strong on the environment.

We were each given five questions to prepare answers for and then the questions came thick can fast. We discussed what challenges face mankind, climate change, alternative fuels, public transport, renewable energies, local businesses including small shops, sustainability, what councils can do now, and education.

Liberal Democrats control more major cities than any other party and numerous towns as well so there are plenty of examples of initiatives from these councils to help the environment which I could quote. I was able to answer all the questions that came my way, get a few nods from the crowd, and slip in a few party policies.

I had three sparring partners on the panel. Firstly there was a spokesman from the Greens, a nice chap who made some good points. On environmental issues, we often agree with the Greens but we differ on the economic side of things.

Then there was a spokesman from UKIP who dominated the debate. Everyone soon lost patience with his argument that everything was the EU’s fault and that, in the face of crumbling small businesses and failing local transport, the government and councils are helpless,which seemed a cop-out to me. But it was good of him to come along and liven up the evening.

Finally, there was Ashok Rehal, the Faversham candidate from Labour. Another nice chap who performed well in a quiet sort of way.

What’s that I hear you say? No Tories? Well, the Faversham MP Hugh Robertson was invited but declined. That’s fair enough but he didn’t even send a representative like UKIP and the Greens did.

The Conservative blog’s own poll of their own candidates, when asked to list issues in order of importance, put the environment 19th out of 19. So when many members of the likely next government refuse to admit there even is an issue, then we are in trouble indeed. Understandable in difficult times but even the Lab-Con governments won't make a recession last for ever and we are talking about the long term future.

Despite that, I was pleased with how the debate went and am getting to improve these skills. Unfortunately two debates which I agreed to join (hosted by the business park and a church) have had to be cancelled so maybe others don’t find them so enjoyable.

They're off!

2010-04-06T12:31:00.002+01:00

Here at Millbank Tower in Westminster (where I work) there has been much excitement amongst the Tories downstairs in their headquarters at the sound of the starting pistol. Extra security (and extra heavies) are present and in the lift we overhear people talk about what they will say to ‘Dave’ when he visits today. The Tory press conferences are going to be taking place six floors underneath me.

But at last we’ve got lift off – and I’ve been checking the BBC and SKY election pages to check they have spelt my name right. We’re away – exciting stuff.

The polls, as always, make interesting reading. The Guardian have the Tories in a four point lead which, oddly, would leave Labour with most seats – yet another fault with our election system. But generally the Conservatives seem in a comfortable lead.

We’ve been campaigning in Sittingbourne and Sheppey for over two months but now we have the date and can accelerate accordingly. Let the games begin!

The triumph of the 'won't vote' party

2010-03-31T13:13:00.004+01:00

In our canvassing we have noticed a disturbing new trend. There are more and more people who have made a positive decision not to vote in the general election.

Cynicism and apathy are understandable given the whole series of MP scandals recently. And being insulted and pre-judged by people you have never met comes with the territory when you are running for elected office. But if I was a wealthy crook or a corrupt charlatan, as I have been called, I wouldn’t be spending hours of my own time out in cold evenings, knocking on doors or delivering leaflets.

The implication seems to be that by the very fact that you are running for parliament or for council, therefore you must be corrupt. End of.

I would ask these people two questions. Firstly, if people don’t vote, how will things change? You could elect people who have promised to open up politics and then ensure you hold them to account afterwards.

Or question two. If you don’t like a system where we elect our MPs and councillors, what alternative would you like? A dictatorship? Military government? One-party rule?

If turnout is below 50% for this election, maybe we should have some sort of national consultation on how to choose our politicians – or even a referendum on whether we should elect them (and what would the turnout be for that?)

But, seriously, we should certainly address this issue and ask how can we get a higher turnout in elections.

RSPCA - Debate Report

2010-03-27T01:18:00.002Z

Our second debate this week on the topic of animal welfare and organised by Mike from the RSPCA. This was a subject I knew very little about and much homework was necessary – hence the main benefit of the debate is that I know a lot more about animal welfare than I did previously. And, as I said in the discussion, I receive more emails from people on this topic than on any other subject.

There were about 25 people in the audience in the Avenue Theatre, Sittingbourne but all participated well and the flow was better and longer than last week’s debate. Wisely, Gordon told his agent to stay at home.

The questions covered a whole range of topics. We talked about fish, greyhounds, horse racing, performing animals, birds, dangerous dogs, food labelling, live exports, hunting, Europe, wind farms(!) and Boris’s Thames airport among others. To my surprise, animal testing didn’t come up – so I slipped it in myself as I had a point to make there.

I felt I started badly but did better as we went on. I was rather quiet as this is not a strong topic of mine but got through unscathed. My main triumph was scoring a point when I pointed out to Gordon that David Cameron plans to hold a free vote on repealing the Hunting Act and not amending it as Gordon maintained.

Despite this, Gordon dominated the evening and I thought did well again despite the fact that I disagreed with most of what he said. He came across confident and used his knowledge of the agricultural field.

Angela performed much better than last week making good points in a quiet way. The Labour government has a reasonable record on this topic via the Hunting Act and the Animal Welfare Act so she was on safer ground.

UKIP had planted a couple of questions on fish and wind farms. Oddly Ian’s prepared answers didn’t come across well. On other questions he spoke more naturally and from the heart and thus was much more impressive. There’s a lesson for us all there.

I didn’t plant a question. This was demonstrated when a fellow Lib Dem asked a question on bird protection from development in Sheppey which I didn’t have a clue how to answer.

Overall, another enjoyable evening but much more hard work than last week. I guess these skills develop with practice.

Next debate is on 13 April on the environment but this time in Faversham next door so I will be up against some different faces.

Federation of Small Businesses - debate report

2010-03-20T11:12:00.003Z

Friday saw the first of our candidates’ debates, hosted by the Federation of Small Businesses. It was also the first time I had met my main fellow candidates for the constituency.

I was slightly apprehensive about this debate, as I would have preferred a format where they asked each of us questions individually, but in the end I quite enjoyed it and was sorry to see it brought to a close when there was still so much to say.

I had prepared by examining our policies (and those of the others) on all matters relating to small business – and reading the FSB manifesto and budget statement – but other topics came into the discussion as well. Inevitably the meeting descended into an argument over Europe but we also discussed town centre car parks, public transport, red tape, the skills of young people and planning. The national insurance rise, business rates and encouraging local enterprise did not come up.

Ian Davidson (UKIP) was clearly passionate about his cause and I discovered afterwards, that he had won a couple of votes for this. He also stood up well to Gordon before the debate as Gordon was unhappy about a UKIP leaflet.

Gordon Henderson (Conservative) was in forthright and bullish form. Initially he did well but his agent annoyed a lot of the audience by taking over the meeting to give Angela a hard time. (I didn’t want to use a plant – in case the plant asked questions I couldn’t answer!)

Sitting next to Gordon, I had a bit of difficulty getting a word in at first, but eventually got in my stride and scored a few points on public transport and on how we could make Europe work for us. I don’t think I did too badly for my first effort although maybe I was concentrating too much on getting our own view across rather than attacking those of my opponents.

Angela Harrison (Labour) was surprisingly poor. In her opening statement she essentially said she had no interest in small businesses – then instead of defending the government’s record or pointing out Labour’s ideas, she blamed civil servants for everything. I later heard that unfortunately Angela was unwell so maybe she will be back to form at the next debate.

I chatted to the audience afterwards and got mixed views on the debate – some felt there was not enough about small business discussed, others said it was good to see and hear the views of all the candidates.

Anyway, on the next debate. This is hosted by the RSPCA on the topic of animal welfare and takes place next Friday 26th.

In the diary again

2010-03-13T22:55:00.002Z

Let’s take another look in the diary. Unusually this week is dominated by my employment.

Saturday 13 March – meet colleague from Hampshire for useful exchange of ideas – afternoon of leafleting

Sunday 14 March – catch up on emails, telephone canvassing, prepare for Friday’s debate

Monday 15 March – more evening canvassing

Tuesday 16 March – all day workshop with colleagues at work

Wednesday 17 and Thursday 18 March – off to a two day work conference in Stansted to enjoy myself

Friday 19 March – interviewed by Meridian TV (to be confirmed) – in the evening a debate with other candidates hosted by the Federation of Small Businesses

Saturday 20 March – back to canvassing and leafleting – meet campaign manager for progress and update

Sunday 21 March – more of the same plus prepare for Friday’s debate. Catch up on emails and various post.

Monday 22 March – back to work after four days out of the office – try to explain why everything is not my fault

Wednesday 24 March – Budget statement, prepare response

Friday 26 March – question time style debate with other candidates hosted by RSPCA

Also:
Debate with other candidates on the environment (13 April)
Debate with other candidates (we ought to be getting to know each other by then) on local education and transport (26 April)
Debate hosted by Churches Together (possibly 28 April)
Local elections (6 May)
Oh, and mustn't forget the general election (probably 6 May)

I also met a young lady wandering around my house who tells me she’s my wife – so I might have to be there a bit more often.

Now on the doorsteps

2010-03-06T11:51:00.002Z

With two months to go (we think) we are now canvassing on the doorsteps. This is always quite an enjoyable task as you get to meet and talk to real people. It will be easier once the clocks change and the evenings get lighter (and warmer!).

Of course with canvassing you get a lot of 'don't know/not voting/f*** off' etc but despite this I have been pleased with the early results. Lots of Conservatives of course but we seem to be in second place - not many admitting to vote Labour - and hardly any for the others. I've met two Greens, two UKIPs and my first BNP voter ('all the foreigners should leave the country').

However we haven't touched the Isle of Sheppey yet where there is a lot of Labour support and is where UKIP have been concentrating - so it is still very much early days.

Meanwhile there are the other tasks - I am organising a fund-raising quiz night for tonight and have many leaflets to go out - as well as invitations to various debates and preparation of papers and leaflets for future events.

Alas, I am slightly wounded at present with a shoulder injury which is restricting the use of my left arm (ever tried typing with one hand?) as a result of some heavy lifting in an office move at work - but I will put on my brave, British, 'the cruel sea' expression and battle through regardless!

Back to school

2010-02-26T16:43:00.001Z

Today I visited Fulston Manor School in Sittingbourne to meet a group of GCSE Citizenship students. I was quite nervous about this, as young people are much more politically aware than when I was at school, and expected (correctly) some tough questioning. However it was a real pleasure to discuss politics with these students, to hear their questions, to ask some myself, and to listen to their views and concerns.

The main issues raised were mostly local – how there is nothing to do in Sittingbourne, freedom passes on the buses, how teenagers are viewed with mistrust and suspicion, and how they feel their voices and opinions are ignored or not heard by the Council. They, rightly, feel it takes years for anything to change (such as the ’20-year’ transport plan and the long awaited town centre regeneration plan).

The best quote: all those present said they would vote if they could. When asked why they thought half of adults don’t vote, one bright young man said: ‘Adults don’t vote because they don’t do anything, they never go out, they just like to sit on the sofa and moan!’

Overall, the session was a real joy. I would encourage all parliamentary candidates to visit schools and talk to young people. I found it a real eye-opener and it has given me much food for thought.

Right question - wrong answer

2010-02-22T12:32:00.004Z

I received an email asking me what did I think of Gordon Brown’s alternative vote suggestion? Well, it’s a shame that it has taken 13 years and almost certain defeat for Labour to suddenly realise that there is something wrong with the electoral system but this is not the answer.

Because the Liberal Democrats are, unfortunately, unlikely to form an administration and the Conservative party have opposed all constitutional reforms for nearly 200 years (see my blog entry of 30 June 2009) then the Labour party are one of our few hopes for reform in this direction.

My objection is that Alternative Vote does not remove safe seats. Half of parliamentary seats have had the same party represent them for over 40 years. Many of the MPs caught in the expenses scandal were in these safe seats with over 50% of the votes and thus it would have made little difference.

My parents live in the new constituency of Meon Valley in true blue East Hampshire. Question Time viewers will have seen angry Teeside steelworkers who will return Labour MPs regardless. Under AV, these seats will still be the same colour. Meanwhile I live in a marginal – so my vote is more important because I don’t know which party will win the seat.

All votes should be equal. Voters should be able to choose between candidates of the same party – hence choosing the individual rather than the party – so the best and fairest way is using multi-member constituencies via Single Transferable Voting. Then there would be no such thing as safe seats – every individual MP would have to work much harder to get your vote.

So it’s no to Alternative Vote. We will only get one chance to change the electoral system so let’s get it right.

In the Diary

2010-02-15T22:58:00.002Z

So how does the diary look today?

Friday 19 February
Meet Rachel, a road safety campaigner, to discuss a council report

Saturday 20 February
Deliver leaflets – not sure where yet

Sunday 21 February
Have photographs taken for literature around constituency and alongside councillors and council candidates

Monday 22 February
Attend parliamentary candidate’s all-party environmental briefing at the House of Commons

Tuesday 23 February
Meeting with campaign manager to update latest literature

Wednesday 24 February
Continue to draft local policy documents and catch up on party correspondence

Thursday 25 February
Attend strategy group meeting of local party executive

Friday 26 February
Meet group of GCSE Citizenship students at local school

Weekend 27-28 February
Probably more leafleting – hopefully some canvassing – weather permitting

Tuesday 2 March
Attend Sittingbourne Local Engagement Forum

Saturday 6 March
Co-host fund-raising wine and wisdom night

To be arranged:
Meeting with local group to discuss pension campaign
Attend candidates’ debate arranged by Swale Friends of the Earth
Contact county council on behalf of resident regarding road signage issue
Catch up on emails from various lobbying organisations

Oh, and I have a job as an office manager, which I will try to squeeze in.

Championing the ordinary people of Sittingbourne and Sheppey

2010-02-11T08:23:00.002Z

Last week I made my debut on the web site of Derek Wyatt MP.

‘Keith Nevols is the Lib Dem candidate for the next election; as yet he has no web site or iPhone application. He lives locally and this is his first attempt to win a seat; he has never been a local councillor either’.

Brief and to the point. And indeed all true. Our MP is very proud of his iPhone application (it often appears in the local press) so his looking down on those who don’t have one is not surprising.

Yes, I have not been much involved in politics previously. My Conservative and Labour opponents are both very experienced local politicians. But when half of all MPs are moving on, many under a cloud, do we want to replace them with MORE politicians?

I am just an ordinary guy in the street. I live in a semi-detached in Milton Regis, I work in an office, I shop at Asda, I drink beer and I watch football. Yet I have received a large amount of correspondence from people (yes, Derek, Gordon, Angela. Ordinary people like me) who have lost faith with local and national politicians and want someone instead to look after their own interests.

I help if I can but I will be able to help even better if I am an MP. I hope the people of Sittingbourne and Sheppey will give me that chance.

Progress report: Sittingbourne and Sheppey

2010-02-07T15:04:00.003Z

The campaign continues - my interviews were published in the local press and I am busy wrestling with new software to help produce some literature. I was also able to recruit an old university friend to the candidate ranks, have received more offers of help - most gratefully received - and have been invited to an environmental debate and to visit and address a school group. So lots to do.

The local news is that the BNP have, at last, put cards on the table, and will contest four seats in Kent - Dover, Folkestone, Ashford .. and Sittingbourne and Sheppey. This is a bit of an unknown factor but may hit UKIP's 'anti-politician, anti-Europe' vote. Still, I've never met a BNP person before so that should be interesting. With six of us now, the debates will get crowded.

For the Conservatives, Gordon Henderson himself continues to be very busy - but the rest of the Tories have vanished! There were rumours that they are not too eager to help him get into parliament, or perhaps they assume they will win the seat anyway so there's no point in bothering.

Labour, on the other hand, have been very active. I think their confidence has been boosted by the slight revival of the national party fortunes and by the presence of other candidates who may dilute the Tory vote. The problem for Labour is, someone might meet Angela Harrison, be very impressed, decide to vote for her - then they switch on the news, see Gordon Brown and co and that's the end of that!

Three months to go (or is it?)

Spreading the word

2010-01-31T16:37:00.003Z

A busy week for the campaign. This week - interviews with the local media and one article appeared in the Sittingbourne Messenger (see link at end). I have also been to a PACT meeting in Murston, where I met quite a few people, sent some targeted emails, and delivered some more leaflets.

On Friday we had a strategy meeting where we made some progress as to who is doing what. Today, Sunday, we have been around various locations in the constituency taking photos for upcoming literature.

I also attended a church dinner yesterday. This was not a political event although many there knew I was running and wished me luck - which was nice. And we got some promises of articles for the church newsletter - which Mary has taken over.

This week we will be preparing some leaflets and policy sheets, interviewing (hopefully) some new members and getting things ready for some canvassing and hitting the high streets. We are a bit behind our rivals, who have been leafleting and canvassing already, but we aim to catch up fast.

The random initial findings reveal that a lot of people feel let down by Labour. This is not really a surprise but the extent of it was. Our canvassing and polling will give us a better idea.

This constituency is very interesting. Not only because Labour are defending such a tiny majority (79) but all five candidates are locals - which must be unusual. The Conservative candidate remains the strong favourite but UKIP seem very confident and we are still waiting to hear what BNP and the Greens plan to do - so there are plenty of unknown factors yet to come into play. It's all good fun!

The link:
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/sittingbourne_messenger/news/2010/january/28/lib_dem_candidate.aspx

An un-person at the forum

2010-01-28T08:55:00.002Z

The minutes of the local engagement forum which I attended last week made interesting reading. Every questionner was named – except me. Despite (or because of) announcing myself as ‘Keith Nevols’ I instead was recorded as ‘a local resident’. The question was there but the questionner became an un-person. At least my name was indicated in the list of those present.

It appears that the Conservative leaders of the panel, who must have checked the minutes before publication, decided to ‘censor’ me regarding raising issues that we intend to campaign on.

It’s not worth making a fuss over minutes which hardly anyone will read anyway – but it is a clear indication of how even an allegedly impartial ‘consult the public’ gathering is subject to direct political interference from arrogant Conservatives. Despite what David Cameron might say, the nasty party are still with us.

Are you sitting comfortably?

2010-01-27T08:32:00.002Z

I have just finished a brilliant book entitled ‘No Expenses Spared’ by Robert Winnants and Gordon Rayner. The authors are Daily Telegraph journalists and tell the story of the expense scandal as it developed last year – the leaking of the data, the SAS middleman, how the paper handled the investigation, and the development and consequences as the story took a life of its own.

It was an interesting insight into how a newspaper deals with such a large scoop, and also the bravery of certain individuals who risked their reputation and, in some cases, their liberty to take on the political establishment.

Above all, it shows how our parliamentary system is in need of reform. It is no co-incidence that some of the worst expense sinners sit in comfortable safe seats – where anyone with a blue/red rosette would win – so they get a seat for life, milk the system, avoid the spotlight, be an MP as long as they wish, and then comfortably retire with a pension and a peerage.

Half of the seats in parliament have had the same party represent them for over 40 years! So the parties concentrate on the 200 seats or so which will decide the election. It is scandalous that the votes of the people in those seats are more important than others. This is the only European country which puts up with this situation.

Last year the two large parties conveniently talked about reform – and then quietly forgot it. They will defend the current system to their last breath. It is up to the rest of us to make sure they don’t.

Transport - 20 years and counting

2010-01-20T12:41:00.002Z

Yesterday there was a meeting of the Sittingbourne Local Engagement Forum. I have previously written about this forum in October. It is a good idea allowing ordinary people to connect with their councillors to hear some of what they are up to.

The main item was a presentation and discussion of an integrated transport plan for Kent and we had representatives from the trains, buses and Kent CC present. Quite an eye opener and a lot of thought had gone into it.

After the presentations I stood up, proudly introduced myself as the Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate, and asked two questions.

Firstly, this was a 20 year plan! Are there any interim targets so we know what improvements we can expect in three to five years? I didn’t get an answer except for a rather unnecessary comment about how politicians only think in the short term. True but irrelevant. There are many older people in our area and it would be difficult for me to say to my 85 year old D-Day veteran friend, ‘Don’t worry, Arthur. In twenty years it will be easier to get on a bus to Maidstone.’

My second question referred to one of the many miseries of commuters – fares! The price of an annual ticket from Sittingbourne to London with underground using the new high speed train is nearly £4,000. What can be done to reduce or freeze prices? The answer blamed the private company and the government. While this may be true, I didn’t find it very constructive.

Sittingbourne’s new high speed train is the pride and joy of the local railway – but it goes to St Pancras and not Victoria so therefore the time of the journey remains the same!! You travel faster but a longer distance! Yes Minister is alive and well.

Maybe I am too cynical here as the whole exercise was very interesting and it was good of the various representatives to come along. I will send separate emails in an attempt to get some answers to my questions.

Let the games begin

2010-01-20T12:40:00.000Z

The Hustings went well last week, the speech was better than expected, the voting carried out, and the paperwork all complete – so I am now the officially approved parliamentary candidate for the Sittingbourne and Sheppey Liberal Democrats. My first interview was with some students from London who asked some surprisingly tough questions. But now the work begins.

This weekend we had our first strategy meeting to discuss tactics before and during the election campaign – and I have a long to-do list as a result. Mobilising the local party and getting our message out there is the top priority.