Queensbury Rules for a modern Leadership contest

Great, another leadership contest... just what the Liberal Democrats were crying out for. Or not, perhaps. Frankly, whilst Tim didn't handle the whole 'gay sex' thing terribly well, and a far better response was available than the one he gave, whilst he had the support of my friends in the LGBT community, I was willing to turn Nelson's eye towards the matter. It is his actions rather than his personal beliefs that actually impact on people's lives, and it seems that his record on Parliamentary votes was well nigh impeccable.

But it wasn't to be, and the grey men came for him. It's not clear who they were yet, and even less clear who exactly they spoke for, and I can't say that I'm awfully impressed. Jonathan Calder has already put it rather well when he suggests that whilst you can claim to be a democratic Party all you like, if a decision of the membership can be overturned by an anonymous cabal, you don't really have proper democratic control.

And, like Bill Le Breton, I'd like names too, if only so that I know who to hold to account. However, unless we're going to quiz every potential suspect, and we can validate what responses are given, the identity of the 'delegation' can only be conjecture, and a witch hunt would be deeply unedifying. That, of course, hasn't stopped elements of the Party in the past...

As to the succession, I know as much and as little as anyone. There are only eleven potential candidates, which does rather narrow the field, and some of those will rule themselves out as the days pass by.

I'm not minded to indicate support for any candidate at this stage. Until nominations close, the nature of the field is unknown, and whilst if given a range of choices, I might prefer one candidate over another, until offered an actual choice, I'm not disposed to providing even a glimpse of my thought process yet.

However, I would like to offer some advice to anyone out there thinking of running (in no particular order);

1. Don't go negative. If you do, I'll assume that you don't have as much to positively offer as your campaigning might suggest. If you win, I'll think less of you, and to be honest, you need me rather more than I need you. After all, without me, and thousands like me, you lead a shell of a political party. And as for me, I could give the time and energy that I currently expend on the Party to something else, or in a different way. Oh and if you lose, you will probably have damaged the winner. I recall both Huhne vs Clegg and Lamb vs Farron achieving that only too vividly.
2. Offer a vision. Vision is important. Yes, I want a shining city on a hill, yes I want chocolates and a long-stemmed rose. Or a pony. But definitely a vision for the Party. Have one, and articulate it.
3. Talk to people beyond the bubble before you get elected. Find out why the volunteer Party volunteers, and tell me why it should volunteer for you. Demonstrate that you understand how the Party really works - some of the previous job holders really haven't got that, and it's made the relationship between leader and led rather prickly. I also expect you to work with the Party President and respect their office...

There's probably more that I should include, and I'll probably revisit this before too long, but one should always get some thoughts out there whilst they might be noticed and make a difference...