On Liberty, Online

Lib Dems win Stannington by-election

2008-12-12T00:16:00.002Z

A brief bit of news here, but one I am delighted to report:

Parish of Bradfield - Stannington Ward:

CONDLIFFE, Katie (Liberal Democrat) - 762 votes
DIXON, Matthew (Conservative) - 200 votes

Yes, you read that right - that's a whopping 79.2% of the vote.

When I won my seat I only got 49.9%. Given that Councillor Condliffe is my other half, I doubt I'm going to hear the end of this any time soon. ;-)

Labour hypocrisy over "civil liberties" issue

2008-07-31T23:47:00.003+01:00

Your starter for 10: what do you think Labour's Emily Thornberry is getting upset about here?

Labour MP for Islington South and Finsbury Emily Thornberry described the council's move as "absolutely outrageous and completely unjustified".

She added: "They said they didn't need permission. It's extremely arrogant.

"I'm concerned about the intrusion into people's private lives. It's a civil liberties issue."

Sounds pretty serious. What on earth could Islington Council have been doing? Selling people's rent statements perhaps? Putting CCTV in people's back gardens? Naming and shaming those who don't vote, even?

No - this "civil liberties issue" is a completely anonymous analysis of the mixed rubbish disposed of by 1,000 local residents to see what they were actually throwing away, and which actually helped improve recycling facilities within the borough.

This is just another example of how Labour in opposition are capable of manufacturing faux outrage about just about anything. This is rich indeed coming from a party that collects innocent people's DNA, bans protesting outside Parliament, tracks our cars' every movement and wants to put every man, woman and child in this country on an immense, intrusive national database.

I wholeheartedly support my colleagues in Islington - they must be gritting their teeth in sheer frustration at having to waste their time dealing with this ridiculous non-story.

Labour - you just can't trust them.

If he were British he'd be a Liberal Democrat

2008-06-17T22:46:00.000+01:00

Duly Elated

2008-05-03T00:07:00.002+01:00

Just in case anyone is wondering why I haven't been around that much lately - this is why: today I was elected as a Councillor for Hillsborough Ward in Sheffield!

The result in full:

Joe Taylor (Liberal Democrat) - 2739
Robert MacDonald (Labour) - 1620
Eric Collins (BNP) - 491
Chris MacMahon (Green) - 346
Neil Everest (Conservative) - 292

We now have two out of the three seats in Hillsborough Ward and more than doubled our majority from last time. We also gained five other seats plus control of the Council and wiped out the Tories in the process - so I couldn't be more pleased!

The experience itself was rather hectic. The count was easy enough - it was obvious after the first two boxes that we had won substantial majority. News started filtering through from our other target wards that things were going well. Then came the exciting bit!

The candidates were all called up onto the podium - which is quite an intoxicating experience as you are looking down on a sea of people many of whom are cheering for you!

The votes for each candidate were read out and I was declared elected - I was then whisked off to the side to be sworn in by the Council's chief executive (which involves reading some lines from a book and then signing it).

I then had my photo taken for the Council website in front of the infamous tie-dye blue background - I think they take them just after you've won to make sure you'll actually be smiling!

Following that I was collared by photographers from the Star and Yorkshire Post who wanted me to repeat my victory pose - presumably so they could get a better photo of it for the next editions. I've told my mum to go out and buy the papers tomorrow... ;-)

Then I was taken to see some student journalists who pointed a TV camera at me and did a short interview - hopefully not for consumption by too large an audience!

Then it was off up to the Town Hall for a big photo shoot with Nick Clegg on the front steps - with lots of curious shoppers milling about wondering what on earth we were doing!

In short, I am now absolutely knackered - but I couldn't be more pleased. Congratulations to our team, and remember - the real hard work starts now!

Sigh!

2008-04-28T08:21:00.002+01:00

Have just been listening to Nick Robinson on Radio 4's Today Programme giving an analysis of what the leaders of the various parties need to do to avoid embarrassment in next week's elections.

Apparently it's all about how we do in the London Mayoral election.

Nice to know that the BBC thinks the Council seat I'm running for in Sheffield is irrelevant!

Another blinder from the London-obsessed Beeb - cheers!

Paddick amuses all with typo

2008-03-06T14:10:00.002Z

Well, it amused me, anyway.

I refer of course to the bit in bold:

It is cheaper per mile to fly to New York than it is to travel by tube, according to new research conducted by the Liberal Democrats.

The latest figures show that the cost of travel on London’s tube, already one of the most expensive forms of public transport in the world, can be up to £40 per mile.

Commenting on the figures, Liberal Democrat Mayoral candidate Brian Paddick said:

"It’s over 120 times more expensive per mile travelled to take the tube from Embankment to Charing Cross than it is to take a train from London to Birmingham. It’s even cheaper per mile to fly to New York.

"What king of Mayor charges Londoners the earth and provides them with a cattle class service?

"London needs a Mayor who can deliver the real changes London wants, and that includes a decent, affordable transport system."

Is it just me, or does that ring rather true about Ken?

Note for the slow of wit: Do not try to take the Tube to New York. You'll get lost at Ealing Broadway, and no-one wants that.

Get your Wikileaks here

2008-02-25T15:37:00.002Z

For those who like their freedom of speech served uncensored, Wikileaks is alive and well and living in Stockholm despite being stripped of its URL by freedom-hating lawyers.

So I'm doing my bit to stymie the corporate censors by posting a nice link for Google to find. Here it is again: Wikileaks. It's currently in second place, so clearly this works...

I highly recommend that you infuriate the litigants by reading something on there you otherwise wouldn't have read...

Hat tip: Guido

The Man from Hope, Part II

2007-12-24T02:20:00.001Z

I'm getting more than a little concerned with the rise to prominence of Baptist preacher turned gay-bashin' gun totin' US Presidential candidate, Mike Huckabee. According to a recent poll he has taken the national lead among Republicans for the first time, which occasions me to ask this question: haven't any of our American cousins noticed that he is in fact Bob Roberts?

The other interesting fact about Huckabee, other than his chilling similarity to said fictional guitar-playing evil politician, is that he shares a birthplace and a profession with none other than Bill Clinton. Both were born in Hope, Arkansas and served as Governor of that state.

Clinton's TV ads portraying him as "the man from Hope" famously propelled him into the national limelight. This blogger will be hoping that history doesn't repeat itself.

The Big Smoke

2007-12-17T23:01:00.000Z

I will be travelling down to London to join Team Clegg tomorrow so I will be unable to react to the news when our new leader is unveiled. Well, obviously I will react - but being sadly disconnected it will not be on this blog. You'll all have to wait a few hours at least!

I'm feeling nervous, but quietly confident. Just a few short hours to go!

Congratulations in advance to whoever is declared the winner tomorrow, and more importantly - GOOD LUCK! May the spirit of liberty guide him well, may he find his cup runneth over with Riso ink, and may he smite our enemies in closely-fought by-elections for years to come.

Google maps fun with Church Parishes - wheeeee!

2007-12-15T23:49:00.000Z

I don't know why, but I found this utterly fascinating: A Church Near You is a website where you can not only find out where the Anglican churches are near you, but browse their Parish boundaries in a Google Maps window.

I'm unlikely to use it for the purpose for which it was intended, but it was quite addictive finding out which parts of Sheffield are in the catchments for what churches!

You can also look up contact numbers for each church, times of communion, even details of coffee mornings that are happening! It's a superb website that would be worthy even of the mighty MySociety.

Now all we need is a website that lets you keep track of your local vicar and e-mail them questions. But what to call it? Well, TheyPrayForYou springs to mind...

The romance of the leadership election result?

2007-12-14T14:45:00.000Z

Liberal Democrat Voice have started a leadership prediction competition today. I think that people's guesses are quite revealing. Most people seem to have Clegg winning by 5% or Huhne winning by 0.1%, but hardly anyone has Clegg winning by a fraction of a percentage point.

My guess is that people are making their predictions based on which of the two "stories" they subscribe to. I suppose Nick Clegg scraping home wouldn't be a very romantic outcome for anyone!

My own personal guess? Clegg 54.9%, Huhne 45.1%. I have faith!

Yet more lost data - this time in Sheffield

2007-12-12T21:52:00.000Z

BBC news has the story:

Hundreds of forms containing personal and confidential information about members of the public were lost by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).
Staff were told that 800 budgeting loan applications have been lost in transit between Sheffield and Newcastle.

It gets worse:

Interest-free budgeting loans are available to people who claim benefits such as income support so they can spread the cost of one-off expenses, such as household appliances.

So now the details of 800 people, most of whom will be vulnerable people on income support, have been lost by Labour?

Are they determined to keep repeatedly shooting themselves in the head?

Cable zings Brown again

2007-12-12T13:51:00.000Z

Let this be a lesson: never try a vacuum-packed put-down on someone who is ready for it.

In his last hurrah at PMQs today, Vince Cable cheekily decided to ask Brown which of the disasters that had befallen him in the last few months would haunt him the most as he took his Christmas break. Gordon thanked him for his service and then decided it was time to get back to his well-worn tradition of pithily forgetting the name of our party:

"Given the history of the Liberal party it might not be long before he is back in that place."

Unfortunate for Broon - because his old Glasgow pal Vince was, as so often in the last few months, one step ahead of him:

"Given his own position, the prime minister might not be wise to speculate on leadership elections."

Vince's appearances at PMQs have been a veritable masterclass. The next leader, whoever it might be, would do well to take note.

Thank you Vince - the Lib Dem blogosphere salutes you!

Blue Horseshoe loves Nick Clegg

2007-12-02T00:55:00.000Z

Those of us politico-anoraks who have been trying to call the Lib Dem leadership election by the political equivalent of sticking a wet finger in the air can put away the divining rod, scrub out the scrying bowl and stick Mystic Meg on the number 83 bus home. For finally we have rejoined the world of science, with these cold hard numbers courtesy of Sky News and YouGov.

The result of the poll of 678 Lib Dem members was as follows:

Despite a 10PM news embargo, the numbers had leaked throughout the day thanks to a combination of a butterfingers moment from Iain Dale (he's right, the buttons are right next to each other) and the never-blinking electronic eye of Google Blogs Search.

All this of course sparked the inevitable reaction from ~~wannabe City spivs and sharks~~ Betfair punters, who had by midnight pushed Huhne out to 4/1 and tightened a Clegg win to 1/5.

Poor Iain will be anxiously waiting for the knock on his door tomorrow: "'Ello Mr. Dale - we're from the Gambling Commission..."

On blue-shirted lackwits

2007-11-22T11:45:00.000Z

Alix Mortimer has written an insightful (and hilarious) article about how people see our tax policy - I suggest you all read it:

IHT is of course a tax specifically invented to annoy the People’s Republic of Mortimer, whether the Head of State is being forced hatefully to draw up calculations for people to avoid it or voluntarily reading silly articles about what an unearthly evil it is. It’s a tax on accumulated wealth which affects anything up to forty-eight people, of whom forty live inside the M25 and one is the Duke of Westminster*, so for twat-in-a-blue-shirt to be allowed to perpetuate the myth that it’s some sort of lodestone for the economic liberty of The People is risibly London-focused, and such an unselfconsciously Thatcherite piece of upper-middle-class bleating as to be little short of sick. (Incidentally, why would you give a toss about IHT as a supposedly selfish apolitical young person unless you are actually planning to murder your parents? Damned suspicious, in my opinion.)

Full article here.

Nick Clegg wins third debate

2007-11-20T23:29:00.001Z

Well I would say that wouldn't I! ;-)

Seriously though, delighted with my guy's performance tonight. A great answer on immigration, owned his podium, and refused to be bullied by Paxman. He seems to have found his form just at the right time - plenty of cheers and nodding heads here at Clegg Towers!

Chris Huhne was steady and forthright - I'm pleased that we've moved on from the 'Calamity' dossier and that he's issued a full apology. I thought that his responses to the "one word answer" questions were testing the patience of his audience though!

Overall, a good night for the Liberal Democrats and a good night for Clegg. Cheers!

This is the sort of thing we should have had from the beginning!

2007-11-20T02:04:00.000Z

James Graham has written a superb account of the bloggers' panel with Nick Clegg which has just reminded me of all the reasons I'm voting for him. It should be required reading for all floating voters!

Now why can't we see that on the telly? Well, Clegg and Huhne are on Newsnight with Jeremy Paxman tomorrow night (eek) so maybe we still might...

Take these anonymous blogs down NOW

2007-11-19T11:02:00.000Z

*sigh*

I'm not going to give them the oxygen of publicity by linking to them, but whoever has been posting anonymous attack blogs on Huhne under the pseudonym "Chris Almighty" - stop it, and stop it NOW.

Liberal Democrats Do Not Do That Sort Of Thing.

That is all.

The road not taken

2007-11-19T10:51:00.000Z

I often find myself wondering in politics what my life would be like if I'd been brought up in a strongly Labour or Tory household. I've been a Liberal Democrat ever since I was able to vote. I was admittedly delighted when Labour annihilated the Tories in 1997 - however my views of Labour (and socialism) have taken a long road away from both since then.

But I have to accept that my upbringing and social class make me a prime candidate to become a Liberal Democrat. The house I grew up in happens to be in the Mosaic demographic that scored highest for the Liberal Democrats in 2005 - that's top out of 60. My mum delivers leaflets for the party, my dad admits to having been a fan of the SDP in the 1980s - although I am by far the most politically active in my family.

But under different circumstances could I have joined the Tories? Labour? The Greens? UKIP? Respect? The Legalise Cannabis Alliance?

I've recently been reading an excellent book by American political psychologist Drew Westen called The Politicial Brain. The premise of the book is that the idea that people make political decisions on the basis of a sober analysis of maximum personal utility is dead wrong - that people actually carry around with them a much simpler emotional model of political reality, and base the vast majority of their decisions on that.

I'm very aware, then, that a lot of arguments that people give for a particular side of an argument are post-rationalisation, based on adopting the best argument from their own side, or maximising the importance of some facts and minimising others, or simply refusing to accept the motives of those who would argue the contrary.

That feeling has been particularly acute during this leadership contest. I'm a Sheffield Liberal Democrat. I was brought up in Sheffield. I worked on Nick Clegg's election campaign in 2005. I know and like Nick Clegg; I've never met Chris Huhne. I feel passionately that Nick Clegg is the right man for the job of leading this party - but would I feel different if I did my politics in Eastleigh? And just how much of my view is made up of my natural bias?

Doubts are a difficult thing to admit to in politics, but they are intrinsic to its fabric. I like to think of myself as a rational person. I like to think (and Westen's book agrees) that it make sense for us to look first for emotional literacy in a potential leader, something that Nick has in bucketloads. I like to think that it makes sense to put values before policy, something that Nick has tried to do in this leadership campaign. But how much of my opinions here are post-rationalisation? Perhaps I will have to wait until the next leadership contest to find out - here's hoping that that's a long time off yet!

I'm also feeling very odd about having some people I genuinely like and respect as political opponents, albeit temporarily. Jock Coats and Paul Walter are plumping for Huhne; I suspect James Graham and Alex Wilcock are heading that way. The temptation to feel less of them is at times disturbingly compelling; I sincerely hope that I resist it and come out of this election with my capacity to respect personal choice intact!

So, here's to the future. Let's hope that on December 17th, whoever wins, we are a party again. I want us to get back to railing against the real enemy: the massed forces of NewToryLabour. Let's hope that before long we are sat in a by-election war room somewhere in some NuLab or Tory heartland, stuffing envelopes, eating pizza, telling bad jokes, and generally being the grease that oils the wheel of the great campaign that will finally bring the cosy consensus to it's knees.

Who's got the 'mo'?

2007-11-18T15:28:00.000Z

I see that The Observer today is running a story saying that Chris Huhne is 'closing' in the Lib Dem leadership race. This is based on the fact that "several of the party's MPs privately believe" that the two are running neck-and-neck.

Big Mo. Or, you know, not.

Well let me tell you, if everything I believed came true then for a start there'd be no such thing as I'm A Celebrity - Get Me Out Of Here.

What I do know is that 37 MPs are supporting Nick Clegg versus 11 for Huhne. Over 1500 supporters have declared for the Clegg campaign, versus just over 1000 for Huhne. That includes around 300 Lib Dem Councillors for Clegg but closer to 200 for Huhne. And the Clegg Facebook groups are running at about twice the number of total members compared to the Huhne ones.

And this was all before Radio 4's The World at One conducted a survey of 100 local Lib Dem party chairs today. The scores on the doors: Clegg 43, Huhne 30.

The Observer article today will have cheered the Huhne campaign following sister paper The Guardian's endorsement of Clegg yesterday, but it appears to be based on little more than blind faith. Huhne does have more MSPs supporting him - maybe that's what they meant?

If you ask me though, Huhne's team know they are behind and are trying absolutely everything they can to pull a rabbit out of their hat - hence the disastrous 'Calamity Clegg' briefing.

Huhne's negative chickens come home to roost

2007-11-18T12:31:00.000Z

Oh dear - I've just watched the second leadership debate on The Politics Show where Chris Huhne was utterly blindsided by a very nasty briefing document written by his campaign office entitled 'Calamity Clegg'.

What followed was a new low in leadership campaign politics as Huhne first denied knowing anything about the memo - and then proceeded to parrot all the attacks on Clegg contained within it! Several times he even used the word "flip-flop" - are we borrowing from George W Bush's campaign playbook now?

It was a most unedifying spectacle as Huhne recited the attacks by rote - including yet again his discredited line on school vouchers - as both the interviewer and Clegg were unable to stop him talking despite dozens of attempted interventions.

Clegg's response when he finally got to open his mouth was "this saddens me". He went on to chastise Huhne for attempting to manufacture synthetic differences between the two of them, including school vouchers, health insurance and Trident.

I have studiously avoided attacking either of the candidates thus far in this leadership election - but this makes me absolutely furious. I feel duty bound to warn the Huhne team that if they keep on dragging this campaign into an unsightly punch-up I will rapidly lose my sense of humour.

It's in their best interest too - I don't think any floating voters watching that just now will have been at all impressed by Huhne's display. If he wants Nick Clegg to come across as the more human, reasonable, and empathetic of the two he's going the right way about it!

Update: The World At One debate on Radio 4 wasn't much better: Huhne claimed that he'd apologised for the title of the briefing (if he has I didn't hear it), but still couldn't help himself from going on the offensive. I think the debate was epitomised by an exchange right at the end. While Clegg refused to be drawn into painting his comments on the Tories' advances on the environmental agenda as a criticism of Huhne, Huhne intervened with a poll saying we were still the most trusted party on the envionment and "we couldn't say that about Home Affairs, could we Nick?"

Oh dear.

Phew

2007-11-16T00:55:00.001Z

I've deliberately written this without looking at any of the other blog comments, so apologies if I end up repeating anything!

I've just finished watching the Question Time leadership debate. I have mixed feelings about it - Nick got off to a very shaky start under some heavily personal questioning, while Chris was confidently plugging away and seemed to be enjoy it more.

Then it all changed after the half-hour mark - Nick gave a superbly passionate answer talking about his anger at the 14 year difference in life expectancy between the richest and poorest wards in Sheffield. From then on, he seemed to "switch on" - talking with passion and conviction, giving human examples, and generally had people in the audience nodding along.

I ended up coming away with the impression that Nick shaded it - as I'm told did the journalists on Question Time Extra, although I haven't yet managed to watch it myself! That said, Chris Huhne is doing very well and certainly improved on his performance a year and a half ago. He is certainly exceeding many people's expectations at the moment.

I'm not really sure though whether this debate will have influenced people one way or another - partly because it was very even and there were bits for supporters of both candidates to pick out. We shall see though.

One thing that's made this leadership election so nerve-wracking so far is that members are hard to pin down in any national polling. Not only does no-one know how close it is, no-one even knows who's in the lead!

I suppose we will find out in a month's time...

Davey and Kramer on the railways

2007-11-15T08:54:00.001Z

Thanks to Stephen Tall of Lib Dem Voice for pointing out this excellent piece from Channel 4’s Political Slot last night. For those of us that don't often turn on a TV, it's nice to be able to watch retrospectively what our MPs have been saying to the electorate!

In this piece, Ed Davey and Susan Kramer discuss the an issue close to my heart - the railways.

Railways for me are an opportunity to bring this country closer together. Advances in railway technology have come thick and fast - just look at Shanghai's Transrapid Maglev system. By contrast, our railways are stuck in the past, having had almost no investment for a century.

Imagine for a minute the economic benefits if you could get from London to Birmingham in half an hour, or Edinburgh to Glasgow in 15 minutes, as suggested in the UK Ultraspeed proposal.

Davey and Kramer are not going that far yet - but they are at least proposing a way to get more investment into the railways, which is a welcome start.

Here is the video:

Basher on 4

2007-11-15T08:23:00.000Z

I don't often feel like praising David Davis, but credit where credit's due - he's just given an excellent interview on the Today Programme on why he is opposing Labour's plan to double detention without trial to 56 days. So forceful was he that he barely allowed the interviewer - John Humphrys of all people - to get a word in edgeways!

It helps, of course, when you have the facts on your side. He's quite right that the Government already have powers to declare a state of emergency if they want to question people for longer than 28 days - and if they want to do that, it better bloody well be an emergency! And as to the Government's motives? Simple Sailor West's remarkable turnaround from

"I still need to be fully convinced that we absolutely need more than 28 days and I also need to be convinced what is the best way of doing that."

"I am quite clear that the greater complexities of terrorist plots will mean that we will need the power to detain certain individuals for more than 28 days."

after doing no more than a brief chinwag with Gordon offers a clue. Davis again is on the money - West is an undoubted expert in this field, so what evidence could Brown possibly have provided that he didn't know already? Instead this illustrates precisely what we all suspected - that the motives for this proposed extension are entirely political.

As I say, I don't often praise Davis but whatever you think of his politics, his calibre as a debater is undoubted - and on this and the ID cards issue I often find myself glad that he's on our side.

Getting inspired

2007-11-15T01:24:00.000Z

Phew. As you can probably tell, it's been a long day today. The Clegg campaign in Sheffield has gone from having too little to do... to drowning under a mountain of paper. It's all feeling very by-electiony.

That said, I still can't say I'm feeling very inspired by this leadership campaign. Maybe that's the nature of leadership campaigns. Maybe it's because I made up my mind early. Or maybe it's because I've been watching The West Wing again from the start - real politics just isn't as poetic, goshdarnit!

It's at least preferable to the long periods of stultifying boredom punctuated by brief bursts of humiliating scandal that was the last leadership election. And I'm told by my elders and betters that absolutely no-one got excited about the 1999 campaign.

Maybe the Question Time debate tomorrow will inspire me. The stakes are high at least - if it's close, I have a feeling it could be the deciding factor in this election. I'm pretty nervous to be honest - I feel like anything can happen, and I just hope Nick turns up and charms everyone like we know he's capable of!

Anyway, off to bed...

Leo McKinstry is a coward

2007-11-12T23:49:00.000Z

Leo McKinstry is a coward. I say this because he seems unable to stomach the comment I posted on this story of his - it was conveniently lost in comment limbo.

I wrote:

Oh no! One of those gay egghead atheist immigrant-loving abortionist Communists!

It's surely only a matter of time before he's caught eating good Christian babies - I say we dispense with due process and string him up in Central Lobby without delay.

Thankyou Mr. McKinstry for bringing American talk radio mores over here and teaching us the lessons we so richly deserve...

Incendiary? You bet. But that clearly wasn't the reason the comment wasn't published, as Mr. McKinstry seemed perfectly happy to display the following comments which I'm sure would cause any newspaper's legal department to perspire:

It is no surprise to me that he is called Dr. Death - I think it is a requirement that you have to be a bit of a 'fruitcake' to be a Lib Dem as most of them are.

and

This guy has always given me the creeps since I saw him on TV advocating telling primary school children about certain sexual exploits.

It seems our Leo can dish out the bile, but he doesn't seem to be able to take it. And since he seems intent on lowering the level of debate in this country to the vile posturing seen across the Atlantic, it seems only fit for me to call him yeller.

Mr. McKinstry, care to respond to comments that you are peddling fear and hate because you're afraid of a real debate?

*protrudes tongue*

Equality of opportunity, fairness of outcome

2007-11-10T10:35:00.000Z

This is a response I posted to James Graham's post On Equality. I'm replicating it here, partly because it ended up as something of an essay, but also because the thoughts came out a lot more developed than I thought they would.

James wrote:

Ultimately, a commitment to true equality means moving outside the narrow confines of concepts like “meritocracy”, “equality of opportunity” and “equality of outcome” and instead appreciating the bigger picture. Ideally, equality of opportunity ought to produce equality of outcome. In the real world we are never going to achieve that ideal but the creative tension between the two can lead to progress. By contrast, an opportunity-centric approach in the way that Andy Mayer espouses is like a factory owner having a machine in which he believes he can get the best products by putting the finest raw materials in one end, but who refuses point blank to look at what comes out at the other end.

I think as liberals we ought to be OK with the idea that person A makes more money than person B because they work harder or have better ideas. In that sense, absolute equality of outcome would be an affront to natural justice. Perhaps fairness of outcome would be a better term.

But James is right, it would be equally daft to ignore outcomes altogether when designing a fair society. For a start, there are some pretty obvious injustices - the way that women and ethnic minorities are under-represented in Parliament or on the boards of FTSE 100 companies, for example.

As a rule though I tend to believe that providing equality of opportunity is the best way to influence outcomes. I think that intervening directly in outcomes should be a tool of last resort - because to do so blunts incentives and as such limits people from reaching their full potential… not to mention enslaving people by conformity!

The biggest problem we have in British politics is that no party has attempted more than a nod at solving the biggest problem facing equality of opportunity in this country. James mentioned it himself - wealth distribution.

Socioeconomic status at birth is still by far the biggest predictor of outcomes in education, in employment, and in politics. And from a point of view of providing equality of any kind, it simply stinks.

The economist Tim Harford in his book The Undercover Economist suggests a way that you could acheive radical wealth redistribution without affecting incentives - just give everyone a lump sum at birth to compensate for the opportunities (or lack of) that you expect them to have.

That’s the sort of radical policy shift I would like us to be looking at.

It's a one horse race - only Nick Clegg can win in this Himalayan monastery

2007-10-31T21:14:00.000Z

Before anybody asks - no, this isn't a staged stunt and the Clegg campaign team are as surprised about this as anyone. ;-)

(See also: Director's Cut with added monks.)

The threat to two party democracy is averted (for now)

2007-10-30T20:15:00.000Z

BBC: Parties' funding talks suspended

I'm aware that we have a spokesman quoted in this story (which is better than we usually do) but the Liberal Democrats should be all over this story like a rash, for as long as it takes for people to take notice.

There has been a lot of chatter in the media recently wondering what actual differences remain between the three parties; what policies of each other's they wouldn't adopt if they thought it would make them more popular.

A commitment to real reform what sets the Liberal Democrats apart from Labour and the Conservatives, and nowhere is that more stark than reforming our democracy.

Labour are terrified of losing their union funding. The Tories are terrified of losing their funding from big business.

One criticism of our stance stands out though.

We were right to criticise the Tories for walking away from these talks, but they have at least shown willing to cap both union and corporate donations.

Where is our criticism for Labour for refusing to compromise on the union donations?

We should slap them hard and we should do it now - for the truth is Broon's Labour is only interested in "reform" when it suits them.

There's a word for that: hypocrite.

Decision time - who to back?

2007-10-30T19:02:00.000Z

So, the time has come to me to make my mind up and tell the planet who I think should lead the Liberal Democrats. In fact, I made my mind up as soon as I knew who was standing, and anyone who knows me at all, has read my comments on other blogs, knows where I live, or is friends with me on Facebook will know exactly who I'm backing. But let me spin it out for a bit. If you're anything like me you'll need a bit of suspense in your life.

I think we all agree that Liberal Democrats are generally consistent regarding our core values. In fact, we and the Liberal Party and SDP before us been a great deal more consistent than both Labour and the Tories, although they will (and do) protest otherwise. It shouldn't be a surprise therefore that our two likely candidates have so much common ground between them. This will not be a sober battle of ideas or a titanic struggle for the soul of the party - ultimately, I suspect most members will be perfectly happy whichever of the two candidates ultimately wins.

However, that's not to say that there aren't ideas in play here, and important ones. As President of ALTER, Chris Huhne is one of the standard-bearers for land value tax, a policy of which I'm a big fan. I don't go nearly as far as those who say it's the only tax we need, and I'm skeptical of a lot of the currency reform ideas that also tend to be espoused by members of ALTER, but this factor ought to be a draw. Huhne's clever packaging of these principles into the "Green Tax Switch" has also impressed me, as has his ambition - both for himself and for the party.

But despite all that, I have to confess the truth - I am an unabashed Clegg fan. I have to declare some interests here: Nick is my local MP, his constituency office is about 100 yards from my front door, and his was the first campaign I ever worked on. But on top of those admittedly rather facile factors, there are plenty of serious reasons why I think he should lead our party.

In Nick I see an outspoken leader who can not only reach out to ordinary people and grasp their worries about modern life, but also communicate to them what we all firmly believe - that liberalism has the answers.

Nick is a citizen of Britain first and Westminster second. He is a politician who genuinely wants get power to give it away, and above all he is an inspirational leader while remaining a genuine human being.

His appeal to the electorate should be obvious. One of his backers (I heard it was Jeremy Browne) memorably referred to him as the "Carlsberg candidate" - able to reach parts of the country that others can't reach.

Keeping with that theme, I'd also rate him as the candidate most likely to sew up the John Smith's vote - he is firmly in the "no nonsense politics" camp. A team of researchers at Manchester University gave Clegg the dubious-sounding honour of being one of the "least evasive" politicians they had studied - what they meant was that he ducked only 1 in 10 direct questions aimed at him.

Still, it is nice to have the benefit of knowing one of our leadership contenders personally, and I'm pleased to be able to report that Nick is a pleasure to know and a genuine people person. He is decidedly chatty and surprisingly funny. A friend remembers the Clegg and Allan double act regaling the crowd with a series of Bremner, Bird and Fortune sketches at a local folk festival. Richard has stuck with him to the extent that he is part of his campiaign team as we speak.

Nick is also surprisingly humble and has a talent for self-deprecating humour. I recall a story he told us during his 2005 election campaign where it slowly dawned on him that people on the campaign trail were in fact smiling and waving at outgoing Hallam MP Richard Allan and not at the grinning candidate standing beside him - the anecdote was later recycled and used in his maiden speech.

He has even offered to deliver some of my leaflets in the Council elections next year. If he becomes leader I think I will waive that obligation as I accept he will have more important things to do...

Three days on The Moon

2007-10-25T12:37:00.000+01:00

If anyone's just got an e-mail from Flock Together advertising a 3-day drinking session in Sheffield - don't worry, it WAS just a typo.

Maybe after the leadership election... ;-)

Anyway, Liberal Drinks is visiting The Moon in Sheffield on Tuesday 6th November at 8pm - all are welcome.

Good work Lembit

2007-10-10T07:58:00.000+01:00

Lembit Öpik was just on the Today programme, talking about the news that MPs can now jump the queue for all sorts of House of Commons facilities, including lifts, telephones, shops and restaurants.

He was punchy, confident and - dare I say it - rather charming. He made some good jokes: particularly "the 'do you know who I am' brigade" and "having to wait two years for a General Election when we can't wait 2 minutes for dinner."

Lembit is seen as something of a comedy character sometimes, but this was a top-class performance - well done.

I'm delighted that Lembit has grasped the bull by the horns and immediately put the Liberal Democrats on the right side of this issue. This story is bound to reinforce the public's perception of MPs as arrogant, self-important, and contemptuous of the ordinary people who after all pay for Parliament to exist - it's important that they don't include Liberal Democrat MPs in that perception!

Lembit has introduced an EDM on this matter (hat-tip Iain Dale) - I suggest you all urge your MPs to sign it.

UPDATE: On the BBC News website now.

Housekeeping

2007-10-01T20:19:00.000+01:00

Just in case I've been keeping anyone in suspense for two and a half months - no, we didn't win the Ealing Southall by-election...

Oh, and now that the busy period for my day job is over, hopefully this blog will return to a more regular posting schedule - I'm aiming for something less than 105 days this time!

And after all (say it softly) we might have the thrills and spills of a General Election to look forward too before too long...

How to get a head - Yorkshire carving mystery solved?

2007-10-01T20:09:00.000+01:00

Those who have been following the news recently may have noticed a story that appeared on BBC News about a clutch of mysterious carved heads that have been left on doorsteps in Yorkshire villages.

The Beeb picks up the story:

Despite CCTV film showing a man leaving three heads outside a post office, their origin remains unknown.

So far, 12 have appeared in Goathland and Kilburn, North Yorkshire; four in Arthington, West Yorkshire and three in Braithwell in South Yorkshire.

Each of the heads, which are up to a foot tall, looks different but all feature the same carving - which appears to spell out the word "paradox" - and a note bearing the riddle: "Twinkle twinkle like a star does love blaze less from afar?"

Fortunately for those with short attention spans, those are the only clues that are required. A quick google for "paradox carving" reveals - wait for it - paradox-carving.co.uk, the website of Yorkshire-based sculptor Billy Johnson, whose speciality happens to be stone heads.

And as is customary these days, said googling also reveals a bevy of bloggers deriding the BBC's sleuthing abilities. Good for them.

Mystery solved, I feel.

Loony candidate backs Lib Dems to win in Ealing Southall?

2007-07-17T14:34:00.000+01:00

Well, it's in the bag folks - with this endorsement we surely can't be stopped!

I happened to spot this comment by veteran Official Monster Raving Loony candidate John Cartwright on the UK Polling Report blog:

"I have a theory that the people in the eastern half of the constituency may be being taken for granted by the main parties, that they are being relied on to vote anyway without needing to be persuaded, and that they will apply the usual mechanics to the psychology of by-elections. The comfortable middle classes of Ealing Common, invisible behind their net curtains yet steadfast in their polling booths, may have already decided to vote tactically for the Lib Dem candidate, and to squeeze the Conservative Party out completely, in order to give Labour a kicking. Mr and Mrs Not-Particularly-Interested-In-Politics-But-Aware-That-The-
Lib-Dem-Was-Second-Last-Time may not even be aware of the big personality cult / bandwagon which has been developing for Tony Lit three miles away.

If this hunch is correct, and if it is combined with a differential turnout between the two halves of the constituency (perhaps 40% in Ealing and 30% in Southall?), then do not be surprised by a substantial Lib Dem victory on Thursday. If the result is something like:

Lib Dem 13,000
Labour 11,000
Conservative 6,000
Others: Whatever

then remember it was what I wrote here."

Whatever you might think of the Loonies, John Cartwright is certainly a colourful character without whom politics would be much the poorer. Some readers may know him from his regular comments on both UK Polling Report and Political Betting (as JohnLoony).

His campaign blog from Ealing is also worth a read - presumably written between stints of tramping up and down the Uxbridge Road with hat and placard (and yes, we did beep at him...)

I think it's appropriate to leave you with some sage words from his leaflet for this election:

“The Official Monster Raving Loony Party wants to build a diverse, pluralist, and tolerant democratic society in which there is mutual respect for a wide variety of different cultures, lifestyles and viewpoints. Anybody who dares to suggest otherwise should be ruthlessly exterminated.”

(Oh, and in keeping with the spirit of this election I have shamelessly nicked John's photo from his website. I'm sure that will be OK. That is, unless he wants to add some spice to his campaign by threatening to sue...)

Go to Ealing and Sedgefield. My face says so.

2007-07-16T02:32:00.000+01:00

Have just noticed that my face has appeared on one of the party's new buttons to promote Thursday's by-elections in Ealing Southall and Sedgefield.

So that's why a cackling Mark Pack ushered me into a mysterious yellow room yesterday, whereupon I was planted in front a of a mysterious machine operated by a creature known only as Will Howells - that was the Lib Dem Button Machine!

Obviously I can't reveal anything about the device itself - it is of course a closely guarded trade secret. The last thing we want is Tony Lit telling everyone on the Interweb that he's "been to the by-elections". (Or perhaps "made a donation" would be more appropriate...)

Anyway, do as the scary man in the picture says - go and deliver or canvass in Ealing or Sedgefield, even if it's just for an hour. Only three campaigning days left!

Off you go then.

A Marriage of Convenience

2007-07-11T09:06:00.000+01:00

Why £1,000 a year to get married? Is it "for the sake of the children"?

I ask this question - especially to any Conservatives in the audience - because I have just read in Levitt & Dubner's excellent book Freakonomics that, once you control for other factors, your family structure has almost no effect on educational and social outcomes.

That's right - according to their research, once you control for other factors it really doesn't matter whether you have a mum and a dad, one mum, one dad, or two mums or two dads. What does matter is the socioeconomic background of your parents.

David Cameron is falling into a classic lazy intellectual trap when he says:

"We have the highest rate of family breakdown in Europe. And we have the worst social problems in Europe. Don't tell me these things aren't connected."

Cameron has come down with a bad case of post hoc ergo propter hoc. Of course those things are connected. They are strongly correlated, and that is borne out both by the data and anecdotal experience. But that doesn't mean they are cause and effect.

In fact, Levitt & Dubner's research suggests that a poor socioeconomic background makes you both more likely to come from a broken home and more likely to fail at school. Encouraging people to marry when they otherwise wouldn't have is rather like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.

It is poverty and ignorance themselves that cause the social strife we are seeing around us. The only way out of it is increasing social mobility - and the key to unlocking social mobility is education itself.

But we knew that, didn't we?

Update: Teh Grauniad makes much the same point this morning.
(Hat tip: Paul Walter.)

Dale's defective defection detection

2007-07-10T17:33:00.001+01:00

...and in the other political mystery story of the day, Iain Dale posted this ~~(unsourced)~~ claim that another Labour Councillor in Southall had joined the Tories.

Unfortunately, the Councillor herself then hotly denied it (via Tom Watson's blog).

Not so much as scoop as a rather inaccurate gouge, it would seem...

Update: The plot thickens now to the consistency of chip shop gravy - it would seem she both defected, and then didn't - a sort of Schrödinger's defection, if you will. It seems our line about the Labour and Tory camps descending into farce was even more far-sighted than might have been anticipated.

Labour are taking the biggest blows at the moment; how much longer can they cope with this relentless bad press? And how will Councillor Noori cope with having alienated both Labour and the Tories? If Dale's comments are accurate, surely she can't keep the Labour whip after this comedy of errors?

Interesting times indeed. You almost have to feel sorry for Tom Watson - with friends like these, who needs enemies? Fortunately, we appear to be immune from this madness - for our group in Ealing Southall to split would require some gymnastics from Jon Ball of which I'm not sure he's capable...

MiShapps

2007-07-10T16:30:00.000+01:00

I don't think I really need to write anything much on this one - rather I'll stick to tracking the response... but I think I deserve a good laugh at a man who claimed that we pay people fifty quid to put a poster up (and then failed to supply any evidence whatsoever).

Mark Pack earns his spotters' badge (and a hearty slap on the back) by catching Grant Shapps red-handed in a clumsy astro-turfing attempt on YouTube.
Tim Ireland then takes time out from laughing himself silly and e-mails Shapps - who then comes back with the piss-weak excuse that he had set his password as "1234".
Guido and Unity laugh themselves silly, too...
... as do Jonathan Calder, Paul Walter and Chris K.
Iain Dale decides to be the only person on the Internet to leap to Shapps' defence and provides a bit more hard-to-swallow detail... apparently Shapps waited two days before trying to change his password!

Clearly we're to believe that the Tories' so-called e-campaigning expert doesn't know the first thing about internet security.

And this is the man they called their "answer to Chris Rennard"!

UPDATE: As Unity points out in Dale's comments:

"Should point that in order to get into Shapps' YouTube account, our 'mystery commentor' would need to know the exact e-mail address used to register the account (which YouTube doesn't disclose) as well as 'guess' the password."

This tale just gets taller and taller! Someone should tell Shapps it's time to come clean now before the papers get hold of it...

LabourHome's sheer delight at Southall selection

2007-07-06T11:28:00.000+01:00

Feel the love, people.

Sedgefield Facebook group set up

2007-06-30T14:55:00.001+01:00

Please click on the big logo to sign up for news and updates!

Oh. My. God... what is Dave doing to that woman?

2007-06-30T09:11:00.000+01:00

Yes, yes, I know he's shaking the baby's hand (psst - Dave - you're traditionally supposed to kiss them).

But what does this look like? The still doesn't even do it justice - go here and start watching at about 2:15...

Doesn't anyone check this stuff before it goes out?

Get yerselves to Ealing Southall and Sedgefield!

2007-06-29T22:22:00.000+01:00

This entry is 100% shameless plug, so I'm going to let people who are better with words than I say it for me.

First, Mark Gettleson:

"Last summer, hundreds upon hundreds of Lib Dems flocked to Bromley for one of the biggest by-election campaigns in history. Many of them were young people just like us - university students, school-age people, young professionals and volunteers. Almost a million pieces of election literature were delivered. And we came within a whisker of overturning the 17th safest Tory seat in the country.

"If you have never experienced the buzz and thrill of a Lib Dem by-election campaign on full steam, this summer is the time to start - and this time it's urgent.

"On July 19th, less than THREE WEEKS from now, there will be a by-election in Ealing Southall. The Lib Dems are in second place to Labour and this is not only an election we can win, but one which we are vigorously trying to win."

You can find out more and get regular updates by joining the campaign group on Facebook (and if you haven't joined Facebook yet, you really should - it's an excellent way to get the latest news on the campaigns that you're interested in).

And second, Chris Rennard:

So, don't forget:

Join the campaign group on Facebook
Visit the local party websites at www.sedgefieldlibdems.org.uk and www.ealinglibdems.org.uk
Come to and help out with the by-elections (or do some canvassing
Please consider making a donation to the campaigns here.

Remember - you write off the Lib Dems at your peril, and this is yet another opportunity for us to confound our critics. Go! Campaign!

US Democrats: All protectionists now

2007-06-29T08:02:00.000+01:00

Daily Kos has this potted summary (1, 2, 3) of the latest Democratic Presidential candidates' debate:

Q: Outsourcing a problem?

GRAVEL: No. Bad trade deals, employer-based health insurance is the problem.

DODD: Yes. We need to try to keep jobs here.

CLINTON: Yes. Make it less advantageous to outsource -- fight for better trade deals. Develop new industries.

BIDEN: Need to take burden of employers. Make ourselves more competitive through infrastructure development.

EDWARDS: I've seen the horrors of outsourcing. Repeats tax, trade arguments seen earlier.

OBAMA: Much the same as Edwards et al.

KUCINICH: Need to cancel NAFTA, WTO.

You have to worry when Joe Biden makes the most sense out of all of them. Bring back Jed Bartlet, that's what I say.

If they keep this up I might end up supporting Rudy Guiliani (not that it makes the slightest bit of difference...)

"A Government of all the talents"

2007-06-28T10:34:00.000+01:00

David Miliband is the new Foreign Secretary.

I'll be out in the back garden digging a bunker...

Update: Hammond deletes FOI comments, waits for world to go away

2007-06-02T17:20:00.000+01:00

Anthony Fairclough (who penned the original letter to Stephen Hammond MP whose reply drew my ire) has alerted me to the fact that the post has vanished from Hammond's website, along with Hammond's own reply.

Fortunately, the original is archived here.

While it's nice to know you're being listened to - it would be nicer if Mr. Hammond or his web team could have

a) published my letter, or
b) replied to it, or
c) contacted me with an explanation for the post in question...

Frankly, this just looks like he's covering his tracks.

Thankyou also to whoever posted this link to this article on cloudsoup - it's a very concise and easy-to-follow explanation of why anyone who voted for the closure motion (as Hammond did) may as well have been voting for the Bill itself.

Once again:

You can sign the Lib Dem petition here
You can write to a random Lord here
You can join the campaign's Facebook group here

An Unwelcome Tribute (or: How Stupid is Margaret Hodge?)

2007-05-26T10:49:00.000+01:00

Most politicians would be delighted to see a comment piece in the morning paper telling them that they had the right policy ideas.

This morning, Margaret Hodge must have choked on her cornflakes, because the person telling her "I agree with her" and she was saying "what we were saying five years ago" was none other than the leader of the BNP.

Let this be a lesson - pandering to extremists, however well-intentioned, will always play into their hands. Mrs Hodge's suggestion that "British people" should be given priority over "migrants" for Council housing was always straying on the wrong side of acceptability.

Just compare that with the measured argument of so-called "Red Ken" (who is starting to sounds more like a liberal with each passing year).

Hodge, of course, has form on this. In the wake of the BNP's gains in East London in 2006 (which saw them become the second largest party in her own constituency) she was roundly criticised for talking them up before the election. During the campaign, she had said that 80% of white families were "tempted" by the BNP, a quote they exploited ruthlessly - indeed, the BNP's Richard Barnbrook made a point of thanking her for her "beautiful gift".

She could be forgiven for feeling slightly foolish for being outwitted twice by a party famous for bad publicity and public naïvety.

As the saying goes, fool me once...

FOI debacle: holding Stephen Hammond MP to account

2007-05-25T15:09:00.000+01:00

Readers of Lib Dem Voice and Lib Dem Blogs will doubtless already be aware of the scandalous Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill - otherwise known as the David MacLean Secrecy Bill to Stop Publication of MPs Expenses!

If any readers are unsure of the background, have a read through Lib Dem Voice since April 20 (or check out the campaign's Facebook group).

I have written an open letter to Conservative MP Stephen Hammond following these absurd comments on his website:

"Interestingly, given the noise they are making about the Bill, it is noteworthy that not a single Liberal Democrat opposed the Bill at Second Reading. In fact, they actually supported it at Committee Stage! In reality, even at Third Reading only nine of their 63 MPs voted against it, despite many more being in the House to vote on the Closure motions! Isn’t it interesting that for all their sanctimonious words, their actions fail them? I am sure, like me, you are not surprised - as this is exactly what is to be expected of Liberal Democrats."

These are little more than weasel words designed to damp down the outrage surrounding the Tory position on this Bill - and at the same time impugn the reputation of the Lib Dems, who have been gaining a lot of credit for theirs.

My response (posted on his website) is as follows:

Dear Mr. Hammond,

I am utterly outraged by your attempt below to misrepresent the position of the Liberal Democrats on the issue of the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill.

Liberal Democrats have consistently opposed this Bill, both in Parliament and in their national campaigns - to the extent of setting up a national online petition.

You may notice that no members of the House whatsoever opposed the Second Reading of the Bill. There was no debate, and no division. At that point it was a little-known Private Members Bill among many others.

It was Liberal Democrat Members who first brought this scandalous Bill to public attention, including Norman Baker MP, Simon Hughes MP and Nick Harvey MP (whom you incorrectly accuse of supporting the Bill at Committee stage).

Mr. Harvey himself has said on the topic of this Bill: -

'I gave interviews on radio/TV, before most folks here even woke up to the issue, opposing the bill and making clear my objections. Anyone who says otherwise is misleading people.

'I do think Maclean identified a couple of valid concerns – MP correspondence when not covered by Data Protection, and potentially excessive intrusions regarding expenses.

'But his bill takes a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and we can’t have an FOI Act which excludes the national legislature.

'When I spoke at the committee, Mark D’Arcy of BBC radio – who sat in - immediately booked an interview with me, because I was the only one present “who spoke against it” (his words).'

Since this Bill was brought to their attention, Liberal Democrats have made concerted efforts to block it, especially Mr. Hughes and Mr. Baker who successfully talked out a previous attempt to progress it to a Third Reading in April.

No Liberal Democrat Member has, to my knowledge, supported this Bill at any stage of the legislative process. Any failure to intervene at an earlier stage is lamentable, but that owes more to the absurd system of debating Private Members Bills on a Friday when Members should rightly be engaged in Constituency work.

By contrast, the Labour and Conservative members who allowed this Bill to proceed to the Lords have suffered a clear failure of conscience.

May I remind you: This Bill was authored by David MacLean, a Conservative MP. It was voted for by a number of Conservative front benchers. And it would not have proceeded to the Lords without being sponsored by Lord Trefgarne - a Conservative Peer.

Your attempts to pour scorn on the Liberal Democrats will not salve the conscience of the Conservative Party, nor will it allow you the right to use sanctimonious words of your own!

Yours sincerely,

Joe Taylor

If you, too, think that this Bill is a national outrage, you can do two things:

Sign the Lib Dem petition at http://campaigns.libdems.org.uk/foi
Write to a random Lord at http://www.writetothem.com/lords

Liveblogging that Dispatches bin programme

2007-05-24T21:08:00.000+01:00

Because we all know that bins are IN (if you're in local government)

21.03 - Lots of pictures of rats so far. Nice and sensationalist then.

21.06 - Oxford eh? Will be looking out for shots of our councillors running from TV crews...

21.10 - It's Jean Fooks! Not running from Channel 4, giving a nice interview pointing out how much the policy has increased recycling..

21.11 - Here comes the SCIENCE BIT!

21.12 - Does anyone know the name for an instrument that measures smells? No matter - I'll be calling it the Smellometer...

21.13 - I had to get Sheffield City Council's rat catcher in once. Nice chap - showed me where the runs were - and gave me his mobile number to call if I started to "smell any dead ones"...

21.18 - At least they have glass recycling bins in Oxford - in Sheffield they have to get stacked up in the back of the Smart Car and taken to Waitrose car park near the office (oh, how posh)

21.20 - Ad break. Does anyone else get up extra early on a Sunday morning so that no shoppers will see how many bottles of wine you've had that week?

21.22 - I have a feeling that the bin bacteria test is going to throw up some horrifying results even after one week. Has anyone seen "How Clean Is Your House"?

21.24 - I can't say I can see the concept of the Bin Police taking off around here.

21.25 - That said, our bin men do have "no-no" slips for anyone who's left their bin lid slightly open.

21.28 - Slap an ASBO on them Jim! To be honest, I find the enforcement side of this business pretty distateful. I much prefer a system driven by financial incentives - let's see how the Belgians do it...

21.30 - See, "pay as you throw" works for me. I'm not falling for any of that Daily Mail "spy in the bin" nonsense...

21.33 - Why identify Jean Fooks in Oxford as a Lib Dem but not John Garner in Tamworth as a Conservative?

21.36 - In a recycled paper mill now. I hope they mention whether they recycle plastic window envelopes - I've yet to get a straight answer on this!

21.42 - There seem to be a lot of adverts for kitchen and garden stuff in these breaks. Obviously not all politicians watching this then.

21.44 - Students, as a rule, don't know how to use a bin. I know this from when I used to be one...

21.46 - Looking at the bit on excess packaging reminds me of the "good pile - bad pile" segment from "You Are What You Eat" (continuing our theme of referring to shows where busybody Scottish women reform the lifestyles of bad people)

21.48 - Cutting down on packaging if you're a supermarket shopper is a difficult one. Only this week my Katie was telling me about her trials and tribulations when trying to buy loose mushrooms. Apparently the checkout assistant didn't take kindly to assorted fungi dancing joyfully down the conveyor belt.

21.50 - This debate seems to be veering between "it's a market problem with a market solution" to "just ban everything" - I tend to err on the side of the former...

21.53 - ...although I do like the idea of the biodegradable carrier bags!

21.55 - They seem to be standing in front of these two piles of rubbish and struggling to draw any sensible conclusions whatsoever.

21.57 - Apparently two-week-old rubbish emits solvents. Perhaps this explains the phenomenon of the Barnsley bin sniffers?

21.59 - I have a feeling that the thought of breathing in 60,000 fungal spores every time you open your bin will lead to people wearing surgical masks to do so...

22.00 - And it's over.

Not sure what we learned from that really - but I'm as certain as ever that any attempts to change the ways bins are collected will result in wide-scale moaning. Any local authorities that want to change things will have to be prepared for that.

I know the narrative was pushing the Belgian system, but having witnessed Continental recycling standards I'm not surprised. We could learn a lot from them.

Who said the Manchester dance scene was dead?

2007-05-24T20:51:00.001+01:00

Hat-tip: Shambla via B3ta.

Those crazy Filipinos!

2007-05-21T01:06:00.000+01:00

This story - about an election in the Philippines decided by the toss of a coin - is currently featured on the front page of BBC news.

One has to wonder why - it's not like we do things too differently here! Seasoned campaigners will know well that in this country tied elections have long been decided by tossing coins, drawing lots and all manner of other random events.

In fact, only last year control of St. Albans District Council was decided by a "pick the longest pencil" contest!

Still, don't they do things funny over there?

The squeeze is on

2007-05-05T21:25:00.000+01:00

A cursory look at this week's local election results nationally have led me to believe the following:

We have, by and large, done well in councils where we are the official opposition - especially in Labour-controlled councils
We have, by and large, done poorly in situations where we are in third place or worse, or there is little Labour presence

As I am keen to stress, this is based more on gut feeling than a formal analysis. It would make a very interesting project for someone with more time than I to see if this hypothesis stands up to scrutiny.

Nevertheless, I feel I am starting to get a picture emerging - that of tactical voting against the incumbent Government based on a "kick 'em out" mentality. In places like Sheffield, "vote Lib Dem to beat Labour" has been a very potent message - even in Conservative-held Council seats. Presumably in other authorities, the Tories have benefitted from the self-same phenomenon.

In 1997, we benefitted enormously from this sort of voting - and there is surely an opportunity of equal magnitude available this time. We must take care though to defend what we have in terms of Parliamentary seats against a sadly inevitable Tory revival.

There are two important - and seemingly contradictory - lessons to learn from this:

Squeeze the Tory vote everywhere they are in third place on the Council - even in individual Council seats that are Lib Dem vs. Tory.
Beware the squeeze elsewhere - and where possible refute it by demonstrating that we can win!

My other - again, untested - hypothesis is that we have done significantly better in the 20% of Parliamentary seats that are important for the next general election than the remaining 80% of the country. But that remains to be seen.

Whether I'm right or wrong though, let's not forget the most important habit of all - winning! Why are you sitting here reading this rubbish? Get out there and recruit members, motivate your candidates, plan literature schedules, and sow next year's crop of Lib Dem stakeboards. We have elections to win!

It's 39, stupid!

2007-05-05T09:21:00.000+01:00

Some of you may have guessed from the lack of recent blogging that I have been pounding the pavements in the run up to this week's elections.

It couldn't have been more worth it.

You may know that last May, Sheffield once again bucked the trend of national Labour decline by holding all of their 44 seats. We, however, had lost our Central ward seat to the Greens and had been reduced to 35 Councillors - our lowest total since 1996. (We were to be reduced temporarily to 34 a few months prior to the election by the sad death of Cllr. Andrew White.)

I had also gone through the emotional wringer of sitting through a double recount, near-punch up and eventual 49-vote defeat for our hardworking and superb candidate Denise Reaney in Gleadless Valley.

Sitting in our party-cum-wake over a mournful pint, I decided that whatever happened, I wasn't going to feel like this next year.

Luckily, I quickly made friends with our defeated candidate for Hillsborough, Steve Ayris - a man I've since found to be not only politically astute but affable, thoughtful and extremely hardworking.

Now I'm a relatively recent recruit to the activist fold - having literally walked in to Nick Clegg's campaign office off the street in 2005 - so I was particularly surprised when I ended up as Steve's campaign manager and agent!

I will write about the campaign in more detail later, but suffice it to say that after a year's hard work and late nights - both from us and a small army of Councillors, old friends, new friends, family, co-workers, sympathetic locals and fiancees (thankyou Katie), we did it!

We were certainly helped by a catastrophic Labour blunder - a decision to close a popular and successful local school - but make no mistake, overturning a 215-vote defeat to a 491-vote victory in one election is no mean feat.

I also have to give a lot of credit to a Hillsborough population who refused to lie down and take it. In the end, they turned up to the polling station in droves to give Labour a good kicking, giving us the fourth-highest turnout in the city in the process.

Labour's faces at the count were ashen - not so much the defeated candidate (who was gracious in defeat, and had seen it coming a mile off), but the remaining two Councillors who may have seen the writing on the wall!

The eventual fall of two other Labour seats - and their subsequent loss of the Council - was the icing in the cake for me.

This year, my pint after the count tasted a lot sweeter. It may have something to do with being able to toast:

Councillor Steve Ayris
Councillor Denise Reaney
Councillor Penny Baker
Councillor Mike Davis
Councillor Colin France

Cheers!

Facebook is just a tool... and so is Guido

2007-04-27T08:37:00.000+01:00

Have just popped over to Guido's for his weekly bash-a-Lib-Dem thread. I would have thought that he could have come up with something better than "Ming has a Facebook profile"* to attack the man, though.

I don't get it. He has an e-mail address too, perhaps we could have a go at him for that?

No, I know exactly what this is all about. Ming's opponents have absolutely no ammunition when it comes to matters of substance, and so resort to the political equivalent of chanting "Old man, old man..."

Isn't that ultimately why it piqued your interest, Guido?

I like Ming. I like where he's taking the party - I like some of the free market reforms he's brought in. I like many of the young politicians he's promoted to his Shadow Cabinet. In that regard he's every inch a modern politician - and you'd think that young Mr. Fawkes, as a proud free-market libertarian, would be praising that.

But no - and yet he seems to have no problem cosying up to the new Tories who seem to value Polly Toynbee over Smith and Hayek. How's that for sticking to your principles?

I know Ming has an image problem in some quarters - but he will never ever have a substance problem. Sorry Guido.

* It's taken Guido a while to notice this - he joined in January.

Back on track?

2007-04-03T20:36:00.000+01:00

Today's news of £2.4 billion to be spent on railway expansion in the UK is welcome - indeed, it's long, long overdue.

The investment isn't as London-centric as I'd feared - however the biggest single spend is still the Olympic transport project at £400 million.

However, news from France puts this all into perspective.

The rail speed record in UK: 208 mph
The new rail speed record in France: 356 mph

This is how far we are behind our Continental neighbours - time to start catching up, and soon.

Oh, and which train holds the UK speed record? The Eurostar, of course!

Sin of omission

2007-03-17T09:24:00.000Z

I thought I knew all of the misdemeanours a man can be guilty of in a relationship.

Apparently there's one I wasn't aware of: neglecting to tell your other half at a Lib Dem function that the person she is talking to is Vice-President of the European Parliament.

So now apparently Diana Wallis MEP will always remember Katie as that person who watches The Apprentice and drinks 15 cups of coffee a day...

Meet the new boss - same as the old boss

2007-03-14T09:39:00.000Z

This indicision's killing me

Danny Finkelstein has a post in Comment Central exploring the significance of Cameron's hair changing from a parting on the right to a parting on the left.

Da Fink even drops in an understandable reference to The Who.

But wait! Read on! Townshend's lyrics are spookily accurate:

And the morals that they worship will be gone

It's true! Just ask ConHome!

The change, it had to come
We knew it all along

My god, the entire Cameron strategy is in here!

We were liberated from the fold, thats all
And the world looks just the same

Sing it, Cameroonies!

Theres nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Are now parting on the right

Bring it home!

Meet the new boss - same as the old boss

Ooo - spooky!

Sorry Dave - we won't get fooled again.

Photo credit: Nils Jorgensen / Rex Features

I've officially given up on the BBC

2007-03-04T16:19:00.000Z

What a load of rubbish their coverage of Conference has been. Having to endure The World at One's take on the weekend (which included a lengthy interview with the Tory candidate in Sutton & Cheam saying how she was going to beat the Lib Dems at the next election) was painful enough. Now I see that they've put up this piece claiming that Ming's speech means he is "setting out the conditions for a coalition with Labour".

The optimist in me likes to think this was just a piece of lazy reporting - the cynic in me thinks it was a case of wilful misunderstanding. But having been in the room for the entire speech I can honestly say that the thought of coalitions did not cross my mind. In context, the "five tests" section came across as a way to draw key distinctions between us and Labour that Brown is very unlikely to change - and in such a way to echo Brown's "five key tests" on joining the Euro.

My guess as to what has happened is that the reporter who wrote that article didn't even watch the speech - most likely they have simply reproduced this press release and got the message totally, totally wrong.

And Ming did mention proportional representation - it got the loudest and most sustained round of applause in the entire speech. So there.

Edit: If anyone knows who the anonymous "senior party official" mentioned in the BBC article is, do tell. Is it someone who actually speaks for the Leadership or just a random officer with a grudge? Either way, they have questions to answer.

Goddamn journos

2007-03-03T00:11:00.001Z

Having watched his conference speech live, I thought Ming had a good day today.

That's why I couldn't be more annoyed to get home and find that the top politics story on the BBC News website is the following:

"A Newsnight poll suggests voters want Charles Kennedy rather than Sir Menzies Campbell as Lib Dem leader."

To which I say to BBC editors:

a) The results of the poll were exactly the same last time someone ran it, and you ran exactly the story then.
b) Of course they bloody will if you keep running stories like this!

That the BBC is falling in line with the dead tree press's anti-Ming agenda is really starting to get on my wick! Funny how no-one at the BBC runs stories about Cameron when his approval rating dips into negative figures (as it does more often than not).

Bloody press!

First impressions

2007-02-16T07:14:00.000Z

I'm not really awake right now, but I just thought I'd pop on to give my immediate reaction to the new climate change deal:

YES!

*tap-dances in dressing gown*

Real politicians infiltrate fictional world

2007-02-15T22:56:00.000Z

If anyone is in any doubt about the fact that the Internet is really in charge of our lives, check out this post on Wonkette.

Yes, that's right - a campaign volunteer from the entirely real John Edwards '08 Presidential campaign has set up an entirely fictional campaign headquarters in the online game Second Life, bringing an entirely new meaning to the phrase e-campaigning.

I must say, it's certainly a novel way to reach the much vaunted "gated generation" - those awkward young souls who frustrate us by not having letterboxes, telephones or even front doors.

Could this be how elections will be fought in 20 years time? Will we be organising doorknocking parties on Ultima Online, promising residents to sort out that pesky ogre problem? The possibilities are endless, surely!

So - any volunteers to set up our virtual Cowley Street, then?

Will we end up paying for tuition fees?

2007-02-14T17:01:00.000Z

Who will win the argument over tuition fees? Today's big increase in University applicants is certainly good news for their advocates. But should the Lib Dems ditch their commitment to scrap fees in England?

This piece, as so often happens, started off as a reply on another blog. Stephen Tall's is the blog in question which today carries a thought-provoking piece on tuition fees:

"The Labour Government was hypocritical to introduce tuition fees, having explicitly ruled them out in its 1997 manifesto; and even more hypocritical to introduce top-up fees having explicitly ruled them out in its 2001 manifesto. As a result, parents were given less time than they should have been to prepare for their introduction, and many have found it harder to fund their kids through education as a direct result.

"But it is the right policy - indeed, the only policy - which will give our universities any chance of standing on their own two feet. The Lib Dems need to start facing up to that reality."

My big problem with tuition fees is that they discourage the idea of academic pursuit for its own ends. People now seem to see their degrees as purely a means to attain a higher salary. It makes me worry about where the next generation of top scientists, historians, linguists etc. are going to come from...

Maybe that concern is ill-founded. It will be difficult to tell until we've had, say, 10 years of top-up fees. But it still makes me feel... uneasy.

It may seem uncharacteristic for a free-marketeer like myself to be so cautious. Theoretically the marketisation of education should be a good thing. But there's some question as to whether growth and the all-elusive progress necessarily follow from one another where academia is concerned.

My major worry is whether an academic community that is predisposed to worry about the monetary value of things will be as inclined to fund truly independent, undirected research.

So where does that leave us? Well, I know "wait and see" is a crap answer, but that's the best I have at the moment. My expectation is that English tuition fees legislation will eventually be reformed to filter out some of the unintended consequences I've touched on here, but keeping the fees themselves. But it will certainly be interesting to see how the fate of English higher education compares to that in Scotland over the next decade.

Lib Dem recovery continues

2007-02-01T10:06:00.000Z

By common consent, Communicate Research's polls are a volatile and unreliable thing indeed. But since ConservativeHome can run news stories on them, and put them in their Poll of Polls, it allows me to mention that we were up EIGHT PERCENT in this one.

CON 34% (-2)
LAB 29% (-8)
LDEM 21% (+8)

It's awfully funny how ConHome only seem to update the Poll of Polls when it's good news for them, isn't it? Exactly the same thing happened earlier this month - the PoP didn't get updated with the results of this ICM poll (Tories down 3) until the later YouGov one showing them up two...

Kind of puts Tory moaning about the "Lib Dem bar chart department" into perspective, doesn't it?

Update: We're up 1 in Populus and 1 in Mori. Not us much as I expected, but a gain's a gain. And ConHome has finally updated their poll! Hurrah!

Up 3 in YouGov: Lib Dem supporters not dead, just hibernating

2007-01-29T17:14:00.000Z

If you don't "do" polls, look away now!

January's YouGov poll is out with a substantial bounce for the Lib Dems:
Con 38% (+1)
Lab 31% (-1)
LD 18% (+3)
Others 13% (-2)
Lib Dems will have come to fear YouGov in recent months, as they give us by far the lowest score of all the major polling organisations. This is welcome news though and confirms the trend in the excellent January ICM poll showing us up five points on 23%.

If these trends are anything to go by, January's MORI poll ought to be a good one when it comes out. I'm guessing somewhere in the area of 20-21%, but watch this space.

Ming's recent statement that we are polling "in the region of 18-20%" is starting to look a little modest!

The cause of this bounce is of course open to debate - Anthony Wells of UK Polling Report has a theory that a significant chunk of Lib Dems were absent from the sample during the Christmas weeks. Ming's team will no doubt argue that the polls are thanks to a very good news week for the party, after the crime launch and our statement on Iraq. It's probably a bit of both.

So we survived 2006, folks. It seems that, nationally, we're at least back where we were in May 2005. Now we need to make sure we have a good 2007 - and I personally will be hoping to take another bite out of Labour's local government base in May.

Hopefully the We Can Cut Crime campaign will start to conquer some fresh political ground when we take it to the streets in February. It's the first time in a long, long while that we've had a coherent, positive message on crime. I'm looking forward to it.

Ming at PMQs - full text

2007-01-25T00:29:00.000Z

It's been a while, hasn't it? A blog is a terrible thing to waste.

Ming was excellent at PMQs today - but don't take my word for it, click here and go to 10 minutes 13 seconds in, or read on below:

Campbell

May I associate myself with the expressions of sympathy and condolence which the Prime Minister has expressed in relation to the young soldier who has been killed. May we also on this occasion remember those who have been wounded, some grievously, and whose lives have been deeply affected by that as a result of their service in Iraq.

General Dannatt has said that our presence in Iraq exacerbates the security situation. Later today in the debate on Iraq we will be setting out our proposals to bring the troops home by October. Should not the Prime Minister be setting out his proposals in that debate as well?

Blair

As I have already indicated I of course - when the operation currently going on in Basra allows us then to reconsider the configuration and deployment of our forces is finished then of I course will come to the House and report on future strategy for British forces. I have to say to him though first of all he does not represent General Dannatt accurately - that is not his view; secondly let me just tell him this: for us to set an arbitrary timetable - and that is what it is, it's arbitrary, it's not attached to the conditions in Iraq, it's simply saying that we will pull British troops out in October come what may - that would send the most disastrous signal to the people that we are fighting in Iraq. It is a policy that whatever its superficial attractions may be is actually deeply irresponsible, which is probably why it's the Liberal Democrat policy.

Campbell

Well if he feels that strongly he should come and debate these issues with us! What can possibly be more important than that the Prime Minister should be here to debate the issue of Iraq at a time when British forces are at risk every day in respect to their lives? isn't that the kind of leadership we're entitled to?

(massive cheer)

Blair

We're actually debating the issue with him now and I entirely agree that British forces are doing a fantastic job in Iraq in circumstances of difficulty and danger. But let us remind ourselves why they are there - they are there under a United Nations resolution with the full support of the Government of Iraq - he shakes his head - let me remind him in 2003 after the conflict and after the invasion of Iraq there was then a United Nations resolution that specifically endorsed the multinational force. We are there with the agreement of the Government of Iraq. When I spoke to the Vice-President of Iraq, himself a Sunni, just a few days ago he made it clear how disastrous it would be to set an arbitrary timetable for withdrawal, and the very way that we can make sure that the sacrifice troops has not been in vain is to see the mission through and complete it successfully.

The soldier that was killed was Pvt. Michael Tench of A Company, 2nd Battallion, Light Infantry. Condolences to his family and friends.

Ming at PMQs - full text

2007-01-25T00:14:00.000Z

It's been a while, hasn't it? A blog is a terrible thing to waste.

Ming was excellent at PMQs today - but don't take my word for it, click here and go to 10 minutes 13 seconds in, or read on below:

Campbell

May I associate myself with the expressions of sympathy and condolence which the Prime Minister has expressed in relation to the young soldier who has been killed. May we also on this occasion remember those who have been wounded, some grievously, and whose lives have been deeply affected by that as a result of their service in Iraq.

General Dannatt has said that our presence in Iraq exacerbates the security situation. Later today in the debate on Iraq we will be setting out our proposals to bring the troops home by October. Should not the Prime Minister be setting out his proposals in that debate as well?

Blair

As I have already indicated I of course - when the operation currently going on in Basra allows us then to reconsider the configuration and deployment of our forces is finished then of I course will come to the House and report on future strategy for British forces. I have to say to him though first of all he does not represent General Dannatt accurately - that is not his view; secondly let me just tell him this: for us to set an arbitrary timetable - and that is what it is, it's arbitrary, it's not attached to the conditions in Iraq, it's simply saying that we will pull British troops out in October come what may - that would send the most disastrous signal to the people that we are fighting in Iraq. It is a policy that whatever its superficial attractions may be is actually deeply irresponsible, which is probably why it's the Liberal Democrat policy.

Campbell

Well if he feels that strongly he should come and debate these issues with us! What can possibly be more important than that the Prime Minister should be here to debate the issue of Iraq at a time when British forces are at risk every day in respect to their lives? isn't that the kind of leadership we're entitled to?

(massive cheer)

Blair

We're actually debating the issue with him now and I entirely agree that British forces are doing a fantastic job in Iraq in circumstances of difficulty and danger. But let us remind ourselves why they are there - they are there under a United Nations resolution with the full support of the Government of Iraq - he shakes his head - let me remind him in 2003 after the conflict and after the invasion of Iraq there was then a United Nations resolution that specifically endorsed the multinational force. We are there with the agreement of the Government of Iraq. When I spoke to the Vice-President of Iraq, himself a Sunni, just a few days ago he made it clear how disastrous it would be to set an arbitrary timetable for withdrawal, and the very way that we can make sure that the sacrifice troops has not been in vain is to see the mission through and complete it successfully.

The soldier that was killed was Pvt. Michael Tench of A Company, 2nd Battallion, Light Infantry. Condolences to his family and friends.

That cheeky Mr. Fawkes

2006-12-21T22:47:00.000Z

Guido has decided to have a bit of a pop at Lembit here and here.

My response:

From the BBC:

"Welsh Liberal Democrat officials have said they are satisfied MP Lembit Opik did nothing wrong in discussing his new girlfriend's visa problem."

Are you happy now Guido? Or should we have him investigated by the Standards Board for good measure? Failing that, I hear Ken Starr's not doing too much these days...

I know that scandal and sexual innuendo are what ultimately pay for this blog (if it had tits you could charge 35p and call it The Sun) but if you're trying to fit the bloke for a black hat you couldn't be more wrong.

As Paul Walter put it so well:

"It seems that the only thing Lembit is guilty of is...er...being Lembit."

Greens must apologise

2006-11-29T16:34:00.000Z

Liberal Democrat-controlled Uttlesford District Council has just turned down a planning application from BAA to expand Stansted Airport, with local councillors saying that they were "concerned about the impact expansion would have on the local environment".

That must come as news to Green Party principal speaker Caroline Lucas MEP, who said

"Lib Dems use green rhetoric to get into office, only to support road-building schemes, incinerators, airport expansion and even backing GM crops when in power."
(emphasis mine)

upon the launch of our green manifesto last year.

Will Dr. Lucas now apologise for this distortion of our position?

Blair gets his just desserts

2006-11-20T22:34:00.000Z

This new e-government lark is working out well for Tony:

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to stand on his head and juggle ice-cream.

The reason?

If he's not going to resign, the least he can do is provide us with some entertainment.

Go on, sign it, you know it makes sense. Well, more sense than that whole Iraq thing, anyway.

(Incidentally, the originator of the petition was one Tim Ireland of bloggerheads, who did our excellent NewToryLabour animations and seems to have his fingerprints on everything nowadays...)

Technorati tags: Blair, dairy products

Non-violence: is Gaza getting it?

2006-11-20T21:46:00.000Z

I wouldn't start comparing them to Quit India just yet, but seeing Gazans respond to a threat of air-strikes not with more suicide bombings, but with that staple of non-violent protest - the human shield - fills me with a certain hope.

I'm certain that neo-con bloggers will already be rushing to condemn Hamas and those that protect them from "justice". But that would be to miss the point.

Nevertheless, perhaps a Gandhi quote would be appropriate at this time:

"For this cause I too am prepared to die, but for no cause, my friend, will I be prepared to kill."

While I'm quoting the Mahatma, here's one that Liberal Democrat activists should easily identify with:

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

Cameron, Brown and Iraq

2006-11-16T23:23:00.000Z

Serious post this time - click "play" above to watch a truly excellent Party Political Broadcast from the Lib Dems.

Great voiceover from Nick Clegg, great production values - the more of these we do the better.

Time for a video on the Great Repeal Act / Freedom Bill?

Cameron gets YouTubed... again

2006-11-16T22:39:00.000Z

Much as I hate driving up the traffic to WebCameron, this was just too juicy to leave alone.

It seems ~~David Cameron~~ Mr. Funny Face ran a competition last week on his blog. Punters could win an appearance on the Tory Party Policial Broadcast by answering this question:

Just complete the sentence: For our NHS, I’d like…

All very innocent, you'd think. That was until Channel 4's This is a Knife got hold of it... and this is what they did.

And yes, that video really is on the Tory website... Ain't technology wonderful?

Rob Fenwick is a genius

2006-11-16T19:39:00.000Z

I'm weak.

(From the marvellous Lib Dem Voice).

Be afraid - be very afraid

2006-11-12T09:13:00.000Z

Good advice - if anyone wants me, I'll be hiding behind the sofa...

Friday spot-the-context competition

2006-11-10T10:47:00.000Z

"The researchers also concluded that Conservative leader David Cameron, unlike Tony Blair or Gordon Brown, has features prone to make people laugh."

Oh, all right - BBC link.

From now until Further Notice, Cameron will be referred to on this blog as "Mr. Funny Face."

I left it in a taxi, honest

2006-11-09T16:53:00.000Z

"Is that Mr. Robinson? I have a highly confidential memo I think you need to see."
"You know, you sound an awful lot like Ming Campbell."
*click*

BBC Article:
~~FOR GOD'S SAKE, PPCs, DO SOME WORK BEFORE CHRISTMAS~~
Lib Dems 'prepare for snap poll'

Guido likes Clegg - pass it on

2006-11-09T15:52:00.000Z

Guido - and a surprising number of his readers - and Iain Dale have both come out (kinda, sorta) in favour of the Great Repeal Act publicised by Nick Clegg today (plug, plug). The GRA was of course launched at the Lib Dem Autumn Conference (thus proving that nobody pays any attention to our conference but us).

As everyone knows, Guido is a trend-setting new-media visionary when he agrees with us and a troublemaking gossip-monger whom nobody reads anyway when he doesn't. I mention Iain of course in a vain attempt to progress higher than #91 in his Top 100 Lib Dem Blogs list - an accolade that should be all the proof you need that there are only 100 Lib Dem blogs.

Guido's comments were naturally thrown open to suggestions of troublesome laws to repeal - one wag calling himself Anthony Blair suggested

"The Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925 please"

Democrats to win Senate?

2006-11-08T14:03:00.000Z

More from the US mid-terms.

It seems like the Republicans are trailing - perhaps fatally - in the remaining two Senate races:

Montana:
Tester [D] 49% (194,914)
Burns [R] 48% (193,179)
99% reporting

Virginia:
Webb [D] 50% (1,170,564)
Allen [R] 49% (1,162,717)
99% reporting

In Virginia, just a handful of precincts remain, largely in traditionally Democrat areas. Montana has just one county to report in - the aptly-named Meagher - which is so small it had fewer votes cast in 2004 than Tester's 1,735-vote lead.

Recounts notwithstanding, I make that 51-49 to the Democrats - a gain of six seats.

Just to put that in context for a second: 33 Senate seats were up for grabs this time round, and the Republicans were defending just 15. Only managing to hold on to nine of those is something of a rout.

A good night for New Hampshire Democrats

2006-11-08T04:26:00.000Z

As the Democrats have gained control of the House of Representatives, we learn that in New Hampshire the Dems have not only re-elected state governor John Lynch by a landslide, but somehow managed to pick up both New Hampshire House seats.

The New Hampshire 1st was such a surprise, in fact, that it wasn't even on CNN's Key Seats list!

Looking at the results in 2004, we can see why:

NH-01: GOP 63% Dem 37%
NH-02: GOP 59% Dem 38% Lib 3%

West Wing fans will, of course, rejoice at the news.

It's going to be a rough night for the Republicans...

UPDATE: NH Democrats have also won both houses of the state legislature. I wouldn't like to be a New Hampshire Republican at this point in time, they're becoming something of an endangered species...

Gordon where’s yer scruples?

2006-10-23T14:49:00.000+01:00

(Or: Reading comments on Guido pays off at last!)

This excellent ditty was posted by one of Guido's "co-conspirators" Nick Drew as a suggestion to sing at the CCHQ Away Day - I am moved to suggest that the Scottish Lib Dems could adopt it as an unofficial anthem... ;-)

All together now:

To the tune of 'Donald, Where's Yer Troosers ?'

I’m from Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath
I look kinda deep but there’s nothing underneath
And they all shout out on Hampstead Heath
Hey Gordon where’s yer scruples?

Chorus
Let the wind blow high, let the wind blow low
I’ll bend with the wind where’er it blows,
And all the Lobby say - hello
Gordon, where’s yer scruples?

I’ve been Chancellor noo for many a year
But I’ve always slagged off Tony Blair
I brief against him withoot fear
And ye cannae do that with scruples!

(Chorus)

When I screwed up on the Benefits front
I didnae wish to look a ****
So I pushed Primarolo oot in front
For I havnae any scruples!

(Chorus)

Prime Minister I yurrn to be
Nuclear power? the top-up fee?
War in Iraq? they’re fine with me
I’ll support them without scruples!

(Chorus)

When I’m in Number 10 at last
Will I do what’s right for the wurrking class?
They can stick a Trident up their arse
If they think that I’ve got scruples!

(Chorus)

(Sadly it was posted sans writing credit - If Nick wants me to add one, or link to a blog, I will gladly do so, just post it in the comments.)

278.3% nerdier than Iain Dale

2006-10-23T11:20:00.000+01:00

See?

(As if working out that percentage didn't prove it straight out!)

In my defence, being a masters graduate in mathematics pushes the score up a dozen points all on its own... whether you consider that a defence is up to you...

A Searching Question

2006-10-21T09:32:00.000+01:00

Now, I'm not one of those people who's going to jump off the moral high board when someone mentions the word sex. However, I still feel that RadioTimes.com should re-think the Sponsored Links section of their search facility when an innocent search (honest, guv) can come back with

Local Women Wanting Sex
Naked Females Free Review
Watch Porn Movies Online

and, er

Great Christmas Savings

So what did I search for to get such tempting offers of female flesh and poultry? None other than Radio 4's Woman's Hour...

I'm off to alert the webmasters before too many people are amused offended....

The Blair Stitch Project

2006-10-14T01:03:00.000+01:00

Broadcasting Liberally

2006-10-13T00:39:00.000+01:00

There's a good article on the Lib Dem policy towards the BBC over at Stephen Tall's gaff. You should go and read it.

And not just because I want you to read my comments. Oh no.

Back from holiday

2006-10-07T22:07:00.000+01:00

I really, really have missed the Internet:

Image credit: The Great Architect via B3ta.

Thank you Brighton!

2006-09-19T14:21:00.000+01:00

Superb result on the new tax plans today - we've single-handedly outflanked Labour on social justice, outflanked the Tories on tax cuts, and out-greened the Greens. I couldn't be more proud.

I think that this result speaks volumes about how well this party's democratic policy-making process works.

The media have been going on and on about how David Cameron needs to be seen to take on his party and win - to have a "Clause IV moment" - but the simple fact is that he doesn't need to do that at all to make policy. We do - and it's a good thing.

Both the Labour and Conservative leaderships are quite capable of ruling their parties from on high with centrally-issued diktats, and find it quite within their power to treat with disdain their membership and conferences alike. We Liberal Democrats, however, are quite concerned that when we adopt new policy we take the party with us.

The media seem astonished that the party is in such rude health following the last year's upheaval. That's because the process works. Debate invigorates this party - and the democratic nature of this party means that we can outlast any so-called "scandal" you care to throw at us. Stop acting so surprised.

Paxman's got nothing on me

2006-09-19T10:48:00.000+01:00

Have just woken up from the oddest dream.

For some reason I was on Newsnight opposite Margaret Beckett. I suppose it must have been on the eve of a general election, because the talk was of possible post-election horse trading. Quoth the MP for Derby South:

"Everyone knows that the Lib Dems will go into coalition with the Tories if there's a hung parliament - just look at the likes of Birmingham and Burnley."

To which I saucily replied,

"So what do your constituents think of the Labour-Tory coalition on Derby Council?"

So what can it all mean? Why am I dreaming about Margaret Beckett? And why can I only produce those sort of zingers in my sleep? Find out on the next exciting installment of Joe's tenuous grip on reality...

Milburn a Blairite? More like a Campbellite

2006-09-15T14:07:00.000+01:00

Nick Assinder at the Beeb is claiming that Alan Milburn's speech makes him the "ultra-Blairite" candidate for the Labour leadership, but then goes on to say that Milburn wants

"[L]ocal income taxes, more individual choice in public services, [...] a directly-elected House of Lords and proportional representation for Westminster elections."

and that the main thrust of his speech was

"a call for redistribution of power away from the centre - Whitehall and government - to individuals and communities who might even take over budgets for running some of their own local services."

Now I don't know if it's just me, but I'm sure that that's a fairly complete list of the issues that the New Labour project has ducked - driven largely by an agenda of self-preservation. Indeed, there is only one party that has consistently supported all of these policies, and it isn't the Labour Party.

Has Alan Milburn defected to the Lib Dems and just not told anyone?

Boris is in hot water

2006-09-08T22:14:00.000+01:00

Many, many apologies to Papua New Guinea (and Monkey Island)

Excuse me, BBC?

2006-08-22T12:04:00.000+01:00

This is one of the front page headlines on BBC News > Politics at the moment:

Tories surge ahead, poll suggests

However, reading the article tells you the following:

The results suggest a 1% rise for the Tories since last month, and a 5% increase for the Lib Dems, but Labour are down 5%.

So who is doing the surging? Where are the headlines saying "Campbell revives Lib Dem election hopes?"

This should give the folks at Biased BBC something to think about...

Update: They have changed it to Tories' lead grows, poll suggests. I still preferred my suggestion though. ;-)

U.S. cruise missile designs leaked

2006-07-26T16:13:00.000+01:00

Courtesy of Recess Monkey via B3ta.

Dear BBC: This is why the MiliCard is pointless (by me)

2006-07-22T14:37:00.000+01:00

Submitted as a response to today's Any Questions:

I am somewhat disappointed that none of your panellists mentioned that the major problem with Personal Carbon Allowances is that they are already largely redundant.

As an EU member, we are already a member of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, which charges businesses for the carbon they emit. As most ordinary citizens' carbon emissions are emitted on their behalf by businesses, surely it makes sense to charge the businesses rather than the individuals and have the carbon cost encluded in the price? This is by far the most cost-efficient way of acheiving this - we don't make private citizens pay their own VAT bills, for example.

If we classify end-user sales of fuel - such as petrol - as carbon emissions, then short of charging people for breathing in and out, practically all of an individual's carbon emissions will be accounted for.

To answer another of your panellists' points - it doesn't matter whether those who meet the carbon reduction are considered rich or poor - what does matter however is that we use revenue from the scheme to alleviate poverty by reducing taxes and raising personal allowances for our poorest citizens.

Support eDemocracy: tell Jack Straw he's a cretin

2006-07-21T11:19:00.000+01:00

James Graham over at Quaequam Blog! has set up this pledge at PledgeBank:

Jack Straw yesterday launched an outspoken attack on http://TheyWorkForYou.com, claiming that it is distorting they way MPs conduct their business. See: http://www.epolitix.com/EN/News/200607/d...

This is patent nonsense. MPs are responsible for their own actions. TheyWorkForYou is a valuable contribution to our civil society, allowing us access to debates and MP's questions in a useable format that Parliament itself has been unwilling to provide itself.

What I'm asking people to do is to write to Jack Straw to (politely) tell him he's tilting at the wrong windmill here, and to insist that he takes part in the consultation exercise that theyworkforyou have already initiated on how to improve the way they measure MPs work. In particular, call for him to attend their public meeting on 7 November to discuss precisely this issue, rather than making potshots from his position of safety behind the despatch box.

You can sign said pledge here, safe in the knowledge that 100 other people will call Jack Straw a cretin if you do - including one Guido Fawkes who has blogged on Straw's idiocy here.

Bromley result

2006-06-30T02:51:00.000+01:00

The salient details from Bromley:

CON 11629
LD 10988
UKIP 2347
LAB 1925

Others 2181

Bob Neill having a pop now - first time I've ever heard sour grapes in a victory speech...

Good result for us overall.

Sky calls Blaenau by-election result

2006-06-30T00:27:00.000+01:00

...but not Bromley!

According to this report, the Independents are likely to retain Blaenau Gwent - a result that would make me reasonably happy. What would make me happier of course is if something were to happen in Bromley and Chislehurst - a contest about which Sky are currently predicting nothing.

Sky are not usually shy about calling results ahead of time based on sources at the count - so either this means that the result is too close to call at this stage or that they don't particularly like the result.

I think we can rule out a Bob Neill blowout...

Update: Labour has conceded both Blaenau elections. Apparently they have "a lot of listening to do." Just B&C to go, then...

Not The World Cup Final

2006-06-29T22:35:00.000+01:00

For those Lib Dem Bloggers who are in the Sheffield area, we are running an event on the evening of Saturday 8th July called Not The World Cup Final, where there will be an opportunity to watch the penultimate game of the World Cup (the 3rd/4th place playoff) and chat with some local Lib Dems. (For those non-Lib Dem readers of this blog, you may make your jokes about the Lib Dems' interest in third place in the comments...)

Food, drink and half-time entertainment will be laid on, as well as (of course) some light political discussion. You don't expect us to talk about football all evening, do you?

The event is at the Princess Royal on Slinn Street in Crookes, and starts at 7.30 PM. All are welcome. Details on Flock Together here.

Also, fellow Sheffield blogger Joe Otten is organising a Sheffield Liberal Drinks meeting on July 18th - details here. Again all are welcome.

A is for Abbotts

2006-06-29T11:06:00.000+01:00

For those that believe that being near to the top of the ballot improves your chances on polling day, behold: -

Candidates for Bromley and Chislehurst By-Election:

1. Ben Abbotts (Liberal Democrat)
2. Anne Belsey (Money Reform Party)
3. John Cartwright (Monster Raving Loony Party)
4. Nigel Farage (UK Independence Party)
5. Ann Garrett (Green)
6. Nick Hadziannis (Independent)
7. John Hemming-Clarke (Independent)
8. Bob Neill (Conservative)
9. Rachel Reeves (Labour)
10. Steven Uncles (English Democrats)
11. Paul Winnett (National Front)

Notice the following, if you will: -

We are at the very top of the ballot. (I wonder if this came up at Ben's selection meeting? *wink*)
The UKIP candidate is higher than the Tory candidate.
There is clear blue water (*ahem*) between us, UKIP, and the Conservatives (plenty of padding there from joke candidates like the Greens)
By the time you get to the Labour candidate, you've probably got bored and gone home

Not that I believe in this sort of voodoo, of course, but I'm taking it as a sign that we'll give the Tories a jolly good scare today...

Hemming puts his money where his mouth is

2006-06-28T14:13:00.000+01:00

Guido apparently has a friendly bet going with our own John Hemming MP on the outcome of the Bromley by-election.

Hemming apparently has a "three-figure" sum on a Ben Abbotts victory at startlingly short odds of 3/1. (That ought to drive down the odds on Betfair!)

Incidentally, Labour have drifted out to 200/1. It looks like Labour have given up and their voters are switching to us - it looks pretty clear that we're going to finish at worst a good second. I'm looking forward to the result...

Who says politics and football don't mix?

2006-06-10T10:15:00.000+01:00

Maybe Alastair Campbell should have seen this comment coming on his World Cup blog?

"Alastair, if Iran find themselves behind at half time, do you think they'll be able to launch a counter-attack in the following 45 minutes?"

BBC News reports.

Pinning my colours to the masthead

2006-06-10T09:50:00.000+01:00

I have to agree with Tony Ferguson here on the topic of World Cup flag-waving.

While the "PC brigade" are usually non-existant straw men used by people who want some convenient cover behind which to be racist or intolerant, there seems to have been a higher than normal amount of jobsworthiness concerning this World Cup and the St. George's Cross.

While there is an obvious correlation between the displaying of the English flag and a certain racist/xenophobic mindset (to generalise even more crassly: white van men) - that doesn't make the flag, or the Union Flag for that matter, a racist symbol. Indeed, I'm of the view that any suggestion that it is is to allow certain proto-racist "nationalists" to misappropriate what is, after all, a symbol that we all own.

Oh, and another thing - I found William Hague's German joke funny and I don't feel the slightest animosity to the Germans as a nation. So there, Denis MacShane.

Enjoy your World Cup everyone - I'm off to Manchester to watch it on the big screen!

On Liberty, Online

Lib Dems win Stannington by-election

Labour hypocrisy over "civil liberties" issue

If he were British he'd be a Liberal Democrat

Duly Elated

Sigh!

Paddick amuses all with typo

Get your Wikileaks here

The Man from Hope, Part II

The Big Smoke

Google maps fun with Church Parishes - wheeeee!

The romance of the leadership election result?

Yet more lost data - this time in Sheffield

Cable zings Brown again

Blue Horseshoe loves Nick Clegg

On blue-shirted lackwits

Nick Clegg wins third debate

This is the sort of thing we should have had from the beginning!

Take these anonymous blogs down NOW

The road not taken

Who's got the 'mo'?

Huhne's negative chickens come home to roost

Phew

Davey and Kramer on the railways

Basher on 4

Getting inspired

Leo McKinstry is a coward

Equality of opportunity, fairness of outcome

It's a one horse race - only Nick Clegg can win in this Himalayan monastery

The threat to two party democracy is averted (for now)

Decision time - who to back?

Three days on The Moon

Good work Lembit

Housekeeping

How to get a head - Yorkshire carving mystery solved?

Loony candidate backs Lib Dems to win in Ealing Southall?

Go to Ealing and Sedgefield. My face says so.

A Marriage of Convenience

Dale's defective defection detection

MiShapps

LabourHome's sheer delight at Southall selection

Sedgefield Facebook group set up

Oh. My. God... what *is* Dave doing to that woman?

Get yerselves to Ealing Southall and Sedgefield!

US Democrats: All protectionists now

"A Government of all the talents"

Update: Hammond deletes FOI comments, waits for world to go away

An Unwelcome Tribute (or: How Stupid is Margaret Hodge?)

FOI debacle: holding Stephen Hammond MP to account

Liveblogging that Dispatches bin programme

Who said the Manchester dance scene was dead?

Those crazy Filipinos!

The squeeze is on

It's 39, stupid!

Facebook is just a tool... and so is Guido

Back on track?

Sin of omission

Meet the new boss - same as the old boss

I've officially given up on the BBC

Goddamn journos

First impressions

Real politicians infiltrate fictional world

Will we end up paying for tuition fees?

Lib Dem recovery continues

Up 3 in YouGov: Lib Dem supporters not dead, just hibernating

Ming at PMQs - full text

Ming at PMQs - full text

That cheeky Mr. Fawkes

Greens must apologise

Blair gets his just desserts

Non-violence: is Gaza getting it?

Cameron, Brown and Iraq

Cameron gets YouTubed... again

Rob Fenwick is a genius

Be afraid - be very afraid

Friday spot-the-context competition

I left it in a taxi, honest

Guido likes Clegg - pass it on

Democrats to win Senate?

A good night for New Hampshire Democrats

Oh. My. God... what is Dave doing to that woman?