The Liberal Democrat Party

I will post again soon with some radical proposals that I personally believe are long overdue and desperately necessary.

But on with what I said:

“When I requested an opportunity to make a statement to this meeting, my intention had just been to explain my reasons for leaving the Conservatives in favour of the Liberal Democrats. I will still do that, but afterwards, I would also like to address some specific accusations levelled at me.

“Over the last year or so I have been struggling with my conscience: At the next General Election could I go and ring on the doors of residents of Adur and Brighton & Hove and explain to them why they should vote Conservative?

“Since it became clear to the media that the next government would be Conservative, more and more honest policies have been released. So the Conservatives will set an arbitrary limit on the number of immigrants allowed into Britain. Regardless of the fact that immigration from outside the EU is very difficult in any case, there will now be a limit set by politicians for political rather than economic or cultural reasons. Now, presumably someone’s husband will be told he cannot come to the UK; or the next Director of a large UK company will be denied access because he is that one person over the limit.

“The Conservative Party has been at sixes and sevens over its policy on the European Union promising referenda on treaties that would be illegal under international law and then, when realising this, making no decision at all about what to do about the supposed problems with EU membership. To be clear I have, in the past, been critical of the EU because like most institutions, it is imperfect, but it is better to have a policy of positive engagement than no policy and be isolated by hostility.

“A Conservative government would remove Stamp Duty for first time buyers, but this tax slows movement in the housing market at all levels and it is extraordinarily non-progressive to tax one group just because you can. The Liberal Democrats have a coherent taxation policy that will favour those who most need lower taxes.

“For the last six months, the Conservatives have been publicly confused about their stance on the Financial Services Authority. The FSA currently plans to introduce tough qualifications to try to improve the skill-level of this country’s financial advisers. The current hoo-har over Structured Products backed by Lehmans and likely future crises are the fault of advisers who do not understand how these products work resulting in poor advice being given. A Financial Stability Committee with the FSA left alone to continue where it has expertise is the Liberal policy and the right one.

“Finally, the Conservative Party website describes its policy for National Security thus: “we must defend and make the argument for our shared liberal values” while it intends to continue the fight in Afghanistan where recent laws have stripped womens’ rights back to a Taliban-level of liberality. I quote from the charity Human Rights Watch “[The law] allows a rapist to avoid prosecution by paying ‘blood money’ to a girl who was injured when he raped her.” A new law also allows men to deny their wives food if they fail to obey sexual demands. If these are our shared liberal values…

“I could go on about national and international politics but I shouldn’t ignore the local arena. Our Council has argued for a long time that interference by Whitehall is the one major reason that we are unable to make real, significant and valuable changes to the way we run things. The Liberal Democrats have issued strong words in this respect at a national level.

“So I left the Conservative Party in my heart earlier this year. And then I found my natural home in the Liberal Democrats.

“I had hoped to work with the Conservative administration until May for the benefit of the people of Adur District and I believed, perhaps naively, that the Tory leadership was honest and, like me, here for the benefit of the residents. But it seems holding onto power is more important.

• “Rather than issue a press release that suggested that Cllr English had missed many meetings, when he had in fact missed one;
• “Rather than issue a press release that suggested I had been deselected when actually I had not sought reselection for the reasons I just gave,

“they could have spoken of their personal disappointment in the decision Cllr English and I had taken and reassured the public that they were a steady hand to run the Council.

“I made this decision on principles and I hope, despite this bad start, we can work together in a constructive and positive way in the future.”

I am extremely disappointed that the Conservative leadership have decided to take this path as I had every expectation that we would be able to work together in the future for the betterment of Adur District in a friendly way. In fact, in my letter to the Leader of the Council I made it quite clear that my reasons for leaving were not in any way a reflection on the Conservatives as individuals. The following is an extract:

I have had my differences, since 2006 when I was elected, with a few people in the party locally, but none of these differences are the cause, or even contributed to my change of heart.

I have found it an extraordinary culture shock, actually, since joining the Council as there’s a lot more ‘politics’ than I have experienced in the real world. At my usual place of work the vast majority do not gossip or insult their colleagues behind each others’ backs and if there’s a problem that needs resolving, people tend to have a chat with the appropriate person. Not so in local politics it seems!

The friendly chap who answered the phone at The Argus read me the Conservative press release and in the absence of an opportunity to respond in the paper, I have drafted the following response:

The Conservative press release suggests that I was deselected as a Conservative Councillor and rather than choosing to leave the party I was compelled by the potential of losing my seat to seek alternatives. I would like to make it quite clear that I have had no interaction whatsoever with the Conservative Party locally in relation to seeking to defend my seat as a Conservative. At around the same time as I decided to switch parties, for idealogical reasons, I also spoke to a Conservative colleague who had expressed an interest in representing the Buckingham Ward and told her that she would have my personal support (she’s a very likeable person as well as being a great Councillor and a hard-worker).

I will be the first to admit that I have not put the hours into being a Councillor that some of my retired colleagues have been able to, but I believe I have represented my constituents’ interests well where I could, and I have provided valuable input to meetings that I have attended.

One of the comments in the press release attempts to associate the amount of allowance that I have claimed to the number of meetings I have attended. This is extraordinarily spurious and should never be the way these numbers are used. It is simplistic in the extreme to suggest that the amount of allowance a Councillor ‘deserves’ should be related to how many meetings they have attended. I did miss a few meetings this year but I have responded promptly and in a helpful manner to my constituents’ requests for information, assistance and advice.

The constituents of Buckingham are fortunate to have Councillor Kennard represent them and she does work very hard for them — I hadn’t previously chosen to shout about the number of people I have helped — I think it is more appropriate to respond to the question and move on!

Since the representatives on each committee were decided earlier this year, I have only been a member of the Constitution and Audit Committee aside from Full Council meetings. This has reduced, significantly the opportunities that I have to be present at Council. This allocation of committees is carried out by the very ‘inner circle’ that was criticised in the press release announcing Carl English’s decision to represent the more reasoned, Liberal Democrat party.

Earlier in my term, however, and before the Cabinet system was adopted, I was welcomed onto the Policy & Strategy Committee for the very reason that I was able to apply intelligence and calm consideration to complex issues at Council. I was vice chair on the Housing and Central Services committee I believe for those same reasons.

So I find it shocking that the Conservatives would now suggest that they would not have chosen to retain these, sadly rare, qualities in one of their own. I believe, if the party wants to be judged on the record of its Councillors (again, according to the Press Release), it should look carefully at some of the people that have passed their supposedly stringent criteria. There are a few highly competent Councillors in the Conservative ranks at Adur and I could name them if I didn’t think that that would be rude. This reliance on a few, though, is not good for the health of Adur Council and reflects strongly on their new criteria given some of the people that I understand have been reselected.

I have requested an opportunity to speak at the next Full Council meeting on 8 December and I would encourage members of the public who are interested, to come along. The meeting starts at 7pm at the Civic Centre on Ham Road (Google Map) and if you enter the main entrance, a friendly person will let you know where the public seating area is.

The Liberal Democrat Party logo

Equally interestingly, I often had trouble relating to so-called Conservatives who it seemed were entrenched in their opinion and were irreconcilably wrong. I have slowly come to realise, of course, that there’s often no right or wrong answer (clichés like that sound so much less trite if you believe the underlying sentiment).

If I’m totally honest, I sometimes wondered whether those Conservatives who did not agree with me were just a little stupid (in some cases I was right about that, but that’s not the point of this note).

But reasonably recently I realised that there was an alternative explanation. The world was not full of Conservatives who did not agree with me and liberals who did because I was an unusually liberal Conservative, rather it was because I am at heart more liberal than most Conservatives.

I posted letters yesterday by first class to the appropriate people to explain why I am leaving the Conservative Party and so will no longer be a Conservative Councillor. From this moment I shall refer to myself as Independent until the party I am joining have officially accepted my application for membership.

But the line that triggered it is typically considered politician-poison. And why? Because we have a system which relies upon people who are not intelligent enough to listen to an argument before deciding whether the argument is cogent or not. That system, in case it’s not clear, is democracy using First Past The Post and political parties. Ya boo sucks and I’ll do what I like while wearing this red/blue/yellow rosette and see if you can do anything about it.

The sentence that caused the ‘It’s liberating’ comment?

“I don’t know anything.”

I could claim to know that I believe it is wrong to treat particular sections of society differently to others on the basis of some arbitrary feature or idiosyncrasy. But would I follow my argument to any logical conclusions or would I reach, at some philosophical point, a point where I would have to add a proviso?

If I was interviewed about my political beliefs I could not defend any pre-written ideology to the end. I could not claim to be more able to follow philosophical, moral, cultural or political arguments past the first few bends in the road than the next person. And, actually, very few people have ever been able to. It is why, actually, Greek philosophers and philosophers from a long time ago are still read, enjoyed and debated — there are no right answers.

Politicians in interviews inevitably end up not answering questions. It’s not because they’re stupid, more stupid than the interviewer or, even, because they’re wrong. It’s because it’s bloody hard to make a point that cannot be argued against. And the media that tries to trip politicians up isn’t helping push on the argument.

When a politician says “I believe gay marriage is fair” he’s saying that he does not believe in discriminating arbitrarily against homosexuals. He is not saying that he understands the cultural imperative of marriage (because I’m not sure I do), he’s not saying that it is wrong for a couple (heterosexual or homosexual) to cohabit, he’s not saying that he thinks that the bible is wrong or right, he’s not saying that everyone should like his opinion and he’s not saying “this is what my party thinks”…

He’s saying that he believes gay couples can be as in love as straight couples and they should be allowed to publicly express this in the same manner.

Okay, I know I went off on a tangent about homosexuality but I know it’s a particular divide between the so-called right and the so-called left.

Skip advert

Offensive material: The site linked to below is definitely for mature people only.

So back to my original point:

Can we please stop employing interviewers who are after soundbites. Can we please stop quoting soundbites in the ‘news’. And can we please use the BBC (a public service broadcaster afterall) to remind people that at all elections except those to the EU ‘parliament’ we are voting for individuals not parties.

I am a Conservative Councillor but that doesn’t mean I agree with any more than a certain proportion of what David Cameron, John Redwood, Ken Clarke and William Hague believe. It doesn’t mean I agree with any more than a certain proportion of what Adur District Council’s leaders believe and it doesn’t mean that I can be pigeon-holed. In fact I am sure there are Liberal Democrat, UKIP and Green politicians who I share more beliefs with than I do with some Conservatives.

I stood for the Conservatives at the last election to my Ward in Adur and I am still pleased I did that. I shall make an announcement at some stage about my plans for next May (2010) when my seat will next be contested. But if I do contest that seat base your decision on me, not on my party affiliation and not on what the Council as a whole does or does not do (which is a whole other post).

He described a post-war Britain in which people had learnt the value of working together. His idea was that working together meant State ownership and, far from debating the whether the mines needed to be closed, he attacked the individualist world that was created by the destruction of the destructive unions.

I thought that intellectual socialism was dead in the UK. I thought that the young who would have joined the CND and marched in protest at anti-Union laws in the 1970s and 80s, had now moved on to supporting (un)Fair Trade and complaining about Global Warming (while simultaneously defending people who don’t believe in science when it suits them). But it appears there are a still few stalwarts the BBC can dig out to attack the consensus and provide ‘balance’.

Far from causing an age of selfishness, a period of genuine capitalism would have increased charitable giving and would have enabled all in society to benefit from the fruits of economic growth. Those fruits, which come from being competitive, do not just benefit the so-called fat cats, they also provide employment to the masses through direct employment by the successful companies but also through employment providing services to those employees. By working against each other in a competitive spirit (which isn’t nasty and aggressive) everyone benefits. I imagine a deeply depressing world inside Ken Loach’s head and I feel pity in a way which I am sure would cause him to become angry at me for patronising him.

But Newsnight tried to suggest that the ideological age was behind us; tried to imply that consensus politics had arrived and the debate was over a smaller middle-ground. I think that is dangerously naive. Aside from the obvious dangers of extreme left-wing players in the form of the BNP, Respect and Islamic Fascism, we also have the idealogical split between those who believe in freedom and those who do not.

The truth is there are three major parties two of which claim to believe in personal freedom to some extent (Conservatives, Liberal Democrats), and one which does not (Labour) and there are three minor parties that believe in freedom (Libertarians, UK Independence Party, Cannabis Alliance) and countless that do not.

Skip ad

But at any election, if a member of the public believes in the repeal of RIPA (nationally) or in the abolition of Civil Parking Enforcement (locally) or in a withdrawal of Council services that would be better served by charities (nationally or locally) who should someone vote for? Cameron’s new Bill of Rights is more promising than the offers from other parties hence my affiliation, but there’s really no chance of the Road Traffic Act being amended.

Socialism has been mortally wounded but environmentalists, Fair Trade advocates (you know it’s being promoted in schools?) and europhiles still pose a significant danger.

Classical liberals are now fighting on two fronts and it is by no means certain that we will win eventually. It is important that debates continues, that good science (biology, chemistry, geology, palaeontology, physics) is allowed freedom from attack by the religious, and that good people do not hide behind the most frightening phrase of our time: “If you have nothing to hide…”

Why do I single out Daniel Hannan?

“… at every opportunity the people vote no. If you think I’m wrong, prove me wrong, put the Lisbon Treaty to a referendum; Pactio Olisipiensis Censenda Est.” Daniel Hannan (in almost every video!)

See these videos:

It may seem really, really lazy to link to another blog and direct readers to read the post, but this time it’s worth it.

The post in question describes, possibly without realising it, how we can reach Nineteen Eighty Four. It describes the changes the government has successfully made to the way people think (read Crichton’s State of Fear for a better understanding of that) and how these changes could be used in the future to control us.

So take a look at the best post Devil’s Kitchen has come up with in a long while. Happily, it’s also expletive-free!

My Political Views
I am a centrist social libertarian
Right: 0.44, Libertarian: 5.6

Political Spectrum Quiz

I think this test is actually a little more accurate than the one I completed in June 2006. James Hellyer, where are you?

This from the Guardian:

Last night Tory opposition was also growing with Tim Loughton, the Tory frontbench spokesman on children and MP for Worthing East and Shoreham, cancelling a visit to Birmingham so he could oppose the proposal and Lord Baker, the Tory former cabinet minister, deciding to vote against the measure in the Lords.

At least some politicians appear to care about right and wrong — it’s a shame so many of them are in opposition.

Let’s hope David Cameron can be convinced not to abstain, but instead to show that he believes in democracy and whip up a vote against Gordon Brown’s abuse of power.