Federal International Relations Committee - I'm going to need another set of coloured pens, aren't I?

It's taken me much longer than usual to report back on what happened at FIRC's first meeting, and I am grateful to Caron and the team at Liberal Democrat Voice for fitting my piece in at rather short notice. It's just that I had almost forgotten just how much work there is to do with a new Committee, especially at a time of organisational change.

You can, of course, just wing it but, if I'm honest, laying down some ground rules early tends to avoid quite a lot of pain later. Thus, it is clear that whilst Robert, our Chair, will play good cop, I am to be the disciplinarian, creating structure, designing process, monitoring compliance, enforcing the Federal Constitution. It isn't necessarily glamorous, but then, dealing with things that go wrong subsequently is even less fun. And, if I say so myself, I'm good at it.

Paul Reynolds had written a very interesting paper on the Committee's policy role, and it was unfortunate that we didn't find time to discuss it properly - remind me to schedule it into a far more disciplined agenda for our next meeting - as we need to establish the relationship between ourselves and Federal Policy Committee. We apparently advise them, although as they have a place on our Committee, and we don't have one on their's, you do wonder how that works in practice.

We focussed on campaigning for the most part in our strategy session, and whilst I acknowledge that campaigning is essential, you do need to have something to campaign on, and unless we are a Party of ideas, we risk falling back into the routine of campaigning against things rather than for them. That got us into government, but it became increasingly clear that, once we had done so, and the Tories had stolen so many of our clothes, we didn't offer much reason to vote positively for us other than hard-working local MPs and an unproven ability to restrain the Tories from being more right-wing.

We also need to integrate our work with ALDE and Liberal International into that of the wider Party. It does, in the nicest way, feel like a bit of a hobby sometimes, a group of well-meaning souls debating big issues without always having much of a mandate to do so. Our delegations, after all, are made up for the most part of people who volunteer themselves and are selected by a process so opaque that even I don't really comprehend it. That can't be good, can it?

In fairness, it always seems to have been done like that, but in a modern age, we need to be more transparent. We also need to ensure that those who are included in our delegations as voting members actually earn their places. It shouldn't be too much to ask that they attend delegation meetings and voting sessions, although some of our people take a curiously dim view of having such obligations. So, that's another project for later in the year...

I also want to do some policy work, or at least make a credible contribution to it. That might be a bit daunting when you're surrounded by former diplomats, journalists and MEPs (we have two on the Committee, plus our remaining extant one), not to mention four Peers and an MP, but I do bring the perspective of someone whose background is not entirely British. Besides, policy is about combining knowledge with principles, and I like to think that my liberal principles are sound enough. 

How do you solve a problem like Donald, Theresa?

It has been a bit of a train wreck so far, hasn't it? However, whilst the air of chaos that surrounds the new incumbent in the White House shows no signs of abating, he is getting a worrying amount done. And, if you're a European or even British, what he has done so far is cause for some perturbation.

On trade, whilst there are perhaps grounds for axing the Trans Pacific Partnership, in doing so the way he has, he has undermined key relationships in a volatile region, where China seeks to maximise its power, soft and hard. If the Japanese and the South Koreans, in particular, sense that America is not engaged, they will be obliged to take a more respectful stance towards China. And, from the perspective of his near neighbourhood, his ruthless jettisoning of TPP, and the attempts to bully Mexico, spell trouble for NAFTA.

It does not augur well for a UK/US trade agreement, does it?

Now I accept that Trump has expressed a desire to do a deal, and heaven only knows that the Brexiteers desperately want to believe that he means it, but the problem is that he has a history of making deals that end badly for the other party and, more worryingly, for a bunch of innocent bystanders too. If he can bully the other side, he will, especially when they're desperate. And boy, are we going to be desperate.

It is already becoming apparent that a number of key potential partners, India, China, Australia, for example, are happy to do deals, but that relative freedom of movement comes with any such arrangements. Can Theresa May get over her hang-ups over migration figures, and even if she can, what will those who voted Brexit to cut migration think about being poorer AND having a bunch of foreigners coming into the country?

So, 'white' countries it will have to be. An all encompassing deal with the 'evil' European Union seems unlikely, and Australia and New Zealand are relatively small economies far away. That only really leaves the America Firsters, led by a man with a hair trigger ego advised by a man who wants to bring everything down. That's certainly not a negotiation I would enter with confidence and, to make matters worse, we already run a trade surplus with the US. Donald won't like that.

Oh yes, we could cut a deal with the rather sclerotic Japanese economy, or try to sell agricultural goods to the Koreans, but you can see our options withering away unless we're willing to compromise. And that, it seems, the Brexiteers are uncomfortable with.

It does, potentially, get worse. If the trend towards regional blocs continues, being outside of them all may make you nimbler, but it also makes you lonely and vulnerable to protectionism. And, you may have to sacrifice parts of your social model if national wealth diminishes in real terms, or grows less strongly than it might otherwise have done. There'll be plenty of people who voted for Brexit who won't like that either.

Now, is Theresa lying awake at night worrying about this? I suspect not. The more charitable might suggest that, as she is a woman of principle, doing what she believes to be the right thing, she has no reason to worry. In any event, the Opposition are insipid, or fragmented, or too few in number to really hurt her. I have a nasty feeling that she doesn't have the imagination to work out how badly this could (and I emphasise could) end up. If she did, she certainly wouldn't be able to sleep easily at night.

No, a combination of the Administration's apparent retreat from the strong dollar, a headstrong President and his belief that deals should favour America, leaves the British trade team with a potentially very challenging assignment. And we're fielding Liam Fox.

We're doomed, aren't we?...

The Parish Council takes a cold, hard look...

Gosh, it was cold outside. Fortunately, the Church Room, where Parish Council meets, isn't very far away, and there's always tea available. Unfortunately, when I arrived, it was painfully clear that the heating hadn't been on, and it was almost as cold inside as it was outside.

We were, only just, quorate, but both our District and County Councillors had shown up, as well as my near neighbour, Ginny. The reason for her attendance wasn't entirely clear to me, but incentivised by the notion that we might get home early if we stayed focussed, we sped through the agenda.

Keith Welham, our Green District Councillor, gave his usual informative report, circulated in advance in a manner that I approve of. If only he was a Liberal Democrat... On the other hand, whilst it was nice to see Gary Green, our Conservative County Councillor, turn up, his reports are a thing of brevity. I have a nasty feeling that he doesn't have much grasp of what goes on at the County Council, but given that he certainly isn't alone on the Conservative benches, perhaps I shouldn't be too critical. Too many of them are merely bench warmers, as Jessica Fleming's shocking lack of understanding of contracts at our previous meeting demonstrated.

The financial report, in its newly revised format, allows Councillors to easily evaluate how our spending is progressing relative to budget - you would not believe how impenetrable the previous Clerk made things (quite deliberately to my somewhat cynical mind). We are in good shape, and have learned the hard way that taking on responsibilities from higher levels of local government is a fool's errand unless there is an established, sufficient, funding stream. Our (relatively) new Clerk, Jennie, is willing to adapt to the needs of the Council, rather than the reverse, which was the case under the old regime.

It turned out that we have a tree warden (Ginny), and she gave her report. Having a tree warden in a rural parish can only be a good thing, especially as our nature reserve has a lot of trees which need attention.

The motion to install a defibrillator in the old BT telephone box (long since devoid of a telephone, but still lit at night), was passed, with my abstention. Whilst I'm not against it, I wasn't entirely convinced that we had really bottomed out the financing going forward. There is a lot of talk about Lottery funding, and possible support from our County Councillor, and I'm sure that we can work something out. Just think of it as that cautious streak that comes from years of looking at accounts...

I had asked for street lighting to be discussed, as our street lights are, frankly, pretty ancient, to the extent that finding bulbs for them is becoming difficult. We need to think about establishing a capital fund to pay for new ones - there are currently ten in the village, and we own them. It was agreed that, in drafting the 2018/19 budget, this should be a priority. It would be nice to move towards having environmentally friendly LED ones, but any upgrade would be an improvement, both aesthetically and financially.

The cold was really beginning to set in now, and it wasn't a huge surprise that we reached the end of the agenda in a lightning forty-eight minutes, allowing us all to retreat to the warmth of our own homes.

It's good to be back... 

Federal International Relations Committee meets - some personal thoughts...

I spent most of yesterday either travelling to and from, or in, the first ever meeting of the Party's Federal International Relations Committee (FIRC). At least, as now constituted - the old International Relations Committee was a rather more pallid creature - it is a new, rather more defined, structure. It is, if you like, under construction, as members attempt to define its place in the wider Party structure beyond those tasks assigned to it by the Federal Constitution.

It would not, then, be unreasonable to ask what FIRC is for, and how is it relevant. You might also expect me to report on that. But before I do, I want to reflect a little on our first day. Indulge me for a moment...

To hold a strategy meeting whilst today's events in the United States and elsewhere unfolded might feel like a peculiarly Liberal Democrat exercise in rearranging deckchairs, and you may be right. The timing was, how shall I put it, unfortunate, but you do have to start somewhere, don't you?

For FIRC to be effective, it needs to define its locus and decide upon how its various resources can be allocated to fulfil its constitutional and political objectives, working within the confines of the strategy as set by the Federal Board. That's dull, but likely to have benefits later. At least, that's what I tell myself, even if I have a sneaking feeling that I might not have much company in that view. Structure, organisational design and constitutions are, how can I put this, not why people get involved in international politics.

I wanted to be the Committee's Secretariat, partly because I'm good at that sort of thing, and partly because I do understand the role that 'ordnung und verwaltung' have in achieving good outcomes. And, actually, it annoys me to see such things come badly, as they can be sometimes in our beloved Party.

The problem is that, having got a job that nobody else wanted anyway, I have a nagging sense that being the organisational conscience of a committee is akin to being the one Roundhead in a Civil War re-enactment society. Hell, the Cavaliers lost, but their outfits were so much better. And, as it has been pointed out to me, you can be a bureaucrat anywhere, so why FIRC in particular?

I have, it seems, something of an existential dilemma. And now, I have to find a way of dealing with it...

Reflections on a 'Special Relationship'

So, Theresa has visited the Donald, and reaffirmed the Special Relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom. She'll doubtless be pleased that she has been seen with the new President before any other major leader, and timing does matter. He's said the right things from her perspective too, as The Times puts it on its front page this morning;

Trump blesses Britain

It does come at a cost though. She has been blessed by a man whose popularity in this country is rather less than that of Jeremy Corbyn, and whose views on a range of key policy areas are a long way from the apparent mainstream of British politics (now I come to think about it, a bit like Jeremy Corbyn). Indeed, in some circles, his views are seen as mad and dangerous. Being pictured holding hands with such a man might not look quite so good when your political opponents have had a chance to play with the images. Mind you, it does beg the question, "Why were you holding hands anyway?".

Theresa will argue that she is influencing Donald in a more measured direction, but I fear that she has allowed her ego and her tin ear to camouflage the reality, that Donald will do whatever Donald wants unless his core advisors can persuade him otherwise. And given that many of them have little experience of government, and appear to have been chosen for their business reputations rather than any understanding of public service, I wouldn't count on that happening much.

My fear is that there will be a price to pay for Donald's blessing. If you're a free trade Conservative, being allied to an America Firster, whose first major trade pronouncements have all been protectionist, you might wonder how this can be reconciled with the idea of signing a great trade deal between our two countries. Deals that can be terminated with thirty days notice might be fine in the hands of people with a measured approach to trade disputes, but might not be so stable in the hands of a man willing to build a big wall and then attempt to charge it to the people most damaged by it.

If you believe that we need to have a mutually beneficial relationship with the European Union post-Brexit, finding yourself allied to a man who is actively calling for its destruction might not enhance the prospects of an amicable divorce. After all, for the Europeans, this is existential in its threat, and Theresa may yet find herself having to choose between an unreliable partner (Donald) and an angry one (the European Union). Trying to agree a beneficial divorce settlement with an angry ex is not a bowl of cherries. And, of course, once Article 50 is triggered, the balance of power in negotiations lies squarely with the European Union.

And, if you believe in 'taking back control', the sight of a British Prime Minister rushing to support a man with such unfortunate views might be an unhappy reminder that we are not the major player we were given to believe we might still be.

In truth, for the time being, Theresa can probably get away with it. A huge opinion poll lead, an inept, disorganised rabble as the Official Opposition, and a compliant media means that it will be some time before the impact of Brexit starts to impact on Conservative support. We haven't even left yet, so the prophets of doom for the British economy haven't really been tested, whilst the markets are still responding erratically to perceived clues in statements made by people who may not have one.

Time will tell, as they say. But I fear that Theresa will find herself forced to choose a side eventually, Europe or an isolationist America. Because the only things you find in the middle of the road are white lines and dead armadillos...

Nick Tyrone - taking hyperbole to an epoch-defining low...

It is not often that I am moved to criticise a fellow Liberal Democrat blogger. Generally speaking, if I join in, you've probably stretched the envelope of acceptable behaviour or attacked someone I love. However, on this occasion, I'm making an exception.

In his 'interesting' posting on the ALDE Group's entanglement with the Five Star Movement, he describes the decision of the Parliamentary Group to reject the proposed entry of the Beppe Grillo led group as 'an epoch defining act of stupidity'. One might argue as to whether it was the right call or not, and there are arguments either way, but come now, Nick, epoch defining to reject a party that has no clear philosophical basis except whatever Beppe thinks when he gets up in the morning? Methinks one protests too much.

And whilst Nick claims to spent time around ALDE and other European liberal parties, and I have no reason to doubt that, he may not be talking to the people I talk to as a member of the ALDE Party Council. I am more than aware of the accusations of fake news generation that whirl around M5S, and of their views regarding the Euro and the future of NATO. Indeed, the proposed deal included a provision that their MEPs would be members of the ALDE Group but not bound by its whip, something which smacks of a 'marriage of convenience'.

Perhaps there was a prospect of a coming together of M5S and European liberal forces leading to an evolution of the former into a genuinely liberal party, and perhaps such an evolution will take place eventually. Personally, I've seen too many personality driven parties disintegrate once the key personality quits or implodes to be that confident, but one learns not to presume anything - something doubly true when considering Italian politics.

But there is no point admitting one dubiously liberal grouping only to lose a number of established ones in protest. ALDE is already a coming together of social liberal and economic liberal parties whose shared objectives outweigh the disagreements. Adding M5S to the mix would be one step too far for a number of them.

So, encourage M5S down a path towards a genuinely liberal grouping in Italy with an informal agreement to work together on issues where the agenda is a shared one by all means and, if they demonstrate that there is a potential place for them amongst the Liberal family, then fine, let's talk about some more formal relationship. But until then, the idea that you invite people to be the flag bearers for liberalism who oppose some of its core tenets for political advantage isn't an epoch defining act of stupidity, it's a demonstration that a political party has to maintain some core principles, lest it forget why it exists in the first place.

And finally, Nick suggests that, in his time spent around ALDE and other European liberal parties, the one thing he noticed again and again is a lack of understanding about how politics basically works. I disagree, obviously, because I'm one of those stupid European liberals he so disparagingly refers to. I might find myself wondering just how successful Nick's brand of politics is, given that there are seven ALDE Prime Ministers, and five Liberal Commissioners, and that the number of Nick Tyrones in government is how many exactly?

But he's entitled to his opinion and I'm entitled to mine. And I think that Nick needs, on some future occasion, to come to an ALDE Party Congress and meet some of the people I meet and talk to them. But as he loathes them - his words, not mine - I'm not sure that a meeting of minds is very likely. Perhaps becoming a member of the Five Star Movement and trying to influence them towards liberalism from the inside might be more palatable to him than spending time with his fellow liberals?

One moment, there were stars, the next... ALDE decide to walk on the mild side...

Well, that was quick, wasn't it? No sooner had Italy's Five Star Movement decided to proceed with applying to join the ALDE group in the European Parliament than the latter chosen not to accept them.

In retrospect, it feels like the right move. Whilst the proposed deal seemed to address a number of issues of mutual agreement, the unreliability of M5S and their, at best, unorthodox view of how media ethics should be applied, represented some serious red flags.

It was an interesting proposal though, with the two sides intended to commit to the promotion of policies such as the simplification of the Brussels bureaucracy, resolving the immigration emergency via a system of permanent relocation, the promotion of the green economy and the development of the digital economy together with more job opportunities. There wasn't too much there to concern the liberal family.

However, the lack of adherence to a Group whip was somewhat troubling, implying that ALDE were a flag of convenience serving to give M5S a route to greater influence within the European Parliament.

It would have potentially tied M5S to a position of being in favour of the European Union, some progress from their stance hitherto, and there is an argument which suggests that bringing the populists into the mainstream acts to defang them of their less appealing views. Some might argue though that, if you lie down with dogs, you risk getting fleas.

A brief discussion amongst members of the Federal International Relations Committee exposed some significant reservations, and the news that the deal had collapsed met with some approval when news broke just as the meeting was coming to an end this afternoon. It will indeed be interesting to see what the ALDE Party make of events, when they meet in Ljubljana in early June.

Unlikely but strangely likely? The Five Star Movement abandon UKIP for liberalism?

Today's news that Beppe Grillo, the leader of Italy's Five Star Movement (M5S), has called an online vote on his recommendation that they leave the Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy (EFDD) Group and switch to the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats in Europe (ALDE) is something of a bolt out of a clear blue sky. There had, after all, been no suggestion that such a move was being contemplated, and to move from being aligned with UKIP to being aligned with the Liberal Democrats is a bit of a plot twist.

The strange thing is, when they entered into a grouping with UKIP in the first place, it seemed like an odd choice. After all, the five stars represent public water, sustainable transport, sustainable development, access to the Internet and environmentalism - not exactly things that you would associate with Nigel Farage and Paul Nuttall. As an avowedly populist party though, they didn't appear to sit entirely comfortably anywhere, and given that the European Parliament tends to favour a coming together of national delegations into groups, and UKIP were sorely in need of allies, perhaps a loose arrangement with UKIP suited both parties nicely. And loose apears to be the right word, given the claims that the M5S only voted with UKIP about 20% of the time.

There is nothing amongst their five core priorities that jars with the ALDE platform, and their enthusiasm for direct democracy and e-democracy hardly rules out closer working.

So, if members of the Movement, voting online, accept the recommendation, one presumes that talks will commence regarding the transfer from EFDD to ALDE, albeit that it seems unlikely that some discussions haven't already taken place. It may be a bit ragged - there are already suggestions that some of their seventeen MEPs are less than entirely keen - but it would reduce UKIP's influence in the Parliament and make ALDE the third largest group in the Parliament once again.

What this doesn't necessarily mean is that the M5S will be joining the ALDE Party - the ALDE Parliamentary Group is somewhat larger than the ALDE Party, consisting as it does of members of the ALDE Party, the European Democratic Party plus the odd independent.

There is undoubtedly a space for a liberal party in Italian politics. Whether or not the Five Star Movement is that party is still to become clear, but they do at least offer a potential starting point...

A little light reading for the International Relations Committee...

I am not really a policy wonk. Yes, I take an interest in it, but I am increasingly of the view that, in an ever more fast-moving world, a coherent philosophy is possibly more useful than an ultra-detailed manifesto.

And so, this weekend, I and my fellow Federal International Relations Committee members are preparing for a meeting on Monday to consider the draft Liberal Manifesto, due to be adopted in the Liberal International Congress in Andorra in May. The manifesto has been circulated, a document designed to define how liberalism will face the world in the coming years. That looks like a big ask to me.

So, what do I think, prior to reading the document? Well, here are some of the things that I'll be looking for...

Government as enabler - as a liberal, I feel that government is there to enable people to improve themselves and to live the life of their choice, balancing the freedom of individuals against the needs of the communities they inhabit. In other words, not a free-for-all, but a means of protecting the citizen from those who would deny opportunities and freedoms.

That's a bit technical, but then liberalism is about competing complexities and finding ways to referee them.

Collaboration across state borders - it may be that we're seeing the death throes of the sovereign nation state. In truth, nations aren't sovereign in the old sense, able to define their own destiny in the way that they once could. There are too many inter-dependencies, too many ways in which the acts of one nation impinge or impact on the affairs of another. Finding ways to bring countries together to solve solutions, ways that allow for transparency, accountability and citizen involvement, should be at the forefront of a new liberal agenda.

Free and fair trade - I believe in a global economy, and as someone with links to the developing world, I want to see the benefits of a market economy spread to the world's poorest. That may mean an acknowledgement that, in relative terms, we in the West are going to be poorer or, more accurately, less rich. We may be better off than we were, but the likelihood is that poorer countries could grow faster than we do.

Those are just three of the things that, I think, matter. And yes, issues like migration will be a factor - it couldn't be otherwise - but I think that they represent three pillars that you could build a manifesto around.

We'll see what my colleagues think in less than forty-eight hours...

Hot tubs by the lake, fireworks on the green...

New Year's Day, and with our afternoon and evening already committed, we needed something to occupy our morning. And so it was that we made our way back to Interlaken Ost station to board the Lucerne-Interlaken Express - our destination, Brienz.

Brienz sits as the eastern end of the Brienzersee, one of the two lakes that lie either side of Interlaken, and the Zentralbahn runs along the northern edge of the lake, providing some scenic views across the water to the mountains beyond.  It isn't a big place, but the setting is attractive and it offered an opportunity to walk along the lakeshore.

And there, we discovered something unexpected - a clutch of hot tubs and saunas, set up for public use, as part of a winter event, "Hot Pot Brienz". Now I'm not sure if I'd have the courage to use an outdoor hot tub when it's below freezing, but clearly the locals are up for it.

The rest of the lake promenade is rather pretty, but we had more pampering planned, so it was back to Interlaken for us. The afternoon was spent with more spa activity, courtesy of Ariane, before a buffet dinner and the evening's big excitement, a serious firework display.

Interlaken isn't as big a town as I had expected, so the crowd gathered for the display did lead me to suspect that we might be in for a treat. We weren't let down, as the sky was filled with explosions of colour for nearly half an hour as an enthusiastic crowd sipped gluhwein and the town was as lively as I had rather expected it to be on New Year's Eve.

We wandered back to our hotel, swept along by a well-organised crowd, to get some sleep for our last day...

It's only a revolution if the people support it, otherwise it's just a reactionary coup...

One of the most worrying trends in recent politics is the rise of the demagogue in Western politics. It led to Brexit, and saw Donald Trump win the Presidency. Here in Britain though, it appears to be being usurped by a small bunch of highly influential ideologues.

First, it was experts. They're all biased, because they didn't agree that Brexit was the greatest thing since sliced bread. How very dare they suggest that things are complex, and that it might not be so easy, or beneficial to cut ourselves adrift from the largest single trading bloc in the world? The answer, discredit them, as the likes of Michael Gove chose to do.

By the way, what has happened to Michael since he lost his leadership bid? Has stabbing his former friends in the back caused him to lose the plot, for his use of Twitter is not that of someone behaving entirely rationally? But I digress...

By discrediting experts, the field is left open for any opinionated person with access to a media platform to make any claim they like, knowing that it will have to be given credence by repetition through an unquestioning media (yes, I'm looking at the BBC!).

And that credibility leads to influence.

But our system of government has checks and balances, through an independent judiciary and a neutral Civil Service. Well, they've got to go, haven't they? First, attack the right of the judiciary to determine what the law is (Iain Duncan-Smith, for ignominious example), leaving it to our merry band of opinionated ideologues again to define what they can get away with under the cover of leadership privilege.

And they then need a Civil Service which is unwaveringly committed to the Project. There's no need for balanced advice, or for experience, if the cause is so right, so glorious. Thus, pick new people, people who will do what they are told unquestioningly.

In such ways is our Government undermined. The cost is to our rights and freedoms, the protections from an over-mighty state in the hands of extremists. For I'm afraid that that's what the likes of Michael Gove and Iain Duncan-Smith presage, and it isn't a country for liberals or the powerless. Because, at the end of the day, it's all about taking back control, taking back control from the people and putting it in the hands of the ideologues.

That never ends well...

The perils of spa treatments, as explained by a bureaucrat...

Nakedness, the province of the buff and lithe, and those who intend to defy convention. Not necessarily for me then, you might think and, for the most part, you'd be right. After all, I like the human species, and too much exposure to this rather out of shape (albeit less so currently) bureaucrat is unlikely to add much to the sum of human art.

However, I do like my spas, and have over the years taken advantage of them for emergency, and not so emergency, pampering opportunities. The catch is that they're all different. Today, I turn my mind to the bit that causes more hassle than any other, i.e. what is it that you wear in the spa?

I've just come back from German-speaking Switzerland, having taken a bit of a rest cure. For a slightly repressed Brit, the presence of a 'naked zone' in the spa was something of a surprise. But that came as nothing when I suddenly realised that you're not only expected to be naked, but that there was no separate facility by gender. Yes, you're expected to be naked with other people, potentially of a different gender. Strangers, no less!

Over the years, I've found that the Germanic and Scandinavian countries tend to the view that wearing swimwear in the sauna, for example, is unhygienic. You are, after all, supposed to sweat, not something that goes well with clothing of any sort. For your massage treatment, nakedness is de rigeur - your masseur/masseuse is trained in draping, whereby most of you is covered by a towel whilst they work on the bit that is exposed. And they've probably seen most things over the years...

Once you've got used to it, you can relax and go with the flow, although I acknowledge that it isn't for everyone. But the experience is meant to be enjoyable, right?

In Britain, the idea that you might be naked in anything other than a changing room environment is looked upon with something akin to horror - it's that repressed thing again. What it does mean is that you need to pack swimwear for the UK, and for other Anglo-Saxon countries. And as for other countries, well, it depends on the influences locally. I've been offered tiny paper underwear in New Zealand and Poland (not designed for the more portly figure, let me tell you).

And so I've learned to ask the simple question when enquiring about a spa, "textile or non-textile?". It does tend to save a lot of embarrassment in the long run, and you can pack accordingly...

The dinner jacket gets another airing...

I am not the suit wearing type - traditionally, I do not look good in suits due to the minor detail that I'm carrying far too much weight to look anything other than vaguely uncomfortable. However, as the weight has come off, I've revisited that a bit.

Who is this glamorous stranger?

Simultaneously, I've found myself doing a few more formal black tie events - Needham Market's Barrandov Opera, for example. And when the opportunity came to attend a gala dinner at our hotel on New Year's Eve, I grabbed the chance to give the old dinner jacket an airing.

There was one catch - my weight loss means that my dinner jacket, and the matching trousers, were a bit on the big side. Rummaging through my wardrobe, in the area invisibly marked "if you think that you'll find anything here that fits...", I discovered my old, but still perfectly wearable dinner jacket, from my slimmer days, and that it fit rather well. Replacement trousers weren't a problem either.

And so, after our adventures in Grindlewald, we returned to the hotel in good time to change for dinner. First up was a champagne reception as, despite my diet, it seemed a shame to eschew a glass or two, especially as we did, if I say so myself, brush up quite well...

And as for this even more
glamorous stranger...

An excellent meal followed, courtesy of the hotel's rather good chef, with a decent bottle of Sauvignon Vaudois (I always like to try local wines, and you aren't likely to go far wrong in a good hotel...). The company of my lovely wife, who is looking more lovely by the day, I must say, was the final adornment to a fine evening.

We're not necessarily huge New Year's Eve people, and having discovered that, in Interlaken at least, not much happens on the night itself, I left Ros for a little while and went for a post-dinner stroll in a cold, and almost deserted town. It seems that the locals save themselves for New Year's Day itself and, at 10.30 on New Year's Eve, there was no sign of life.

So, one asks, what happened the next day?...

Is this the next social care scandal?

The report in yesterday's Daily Telegraph, suggesting that expats living in Spain are being recruited for short-term live-in care work without much training or, it is alleged, active supervision, raises a number of warning flags.

One of the many agencies supplying care staff is apparently recruiting heavily amongst the retirement communities, offering quite lucrative (£800 per week) packages designed to "fit neatly with the expat lifestyle" and to attract those whose income has been affected by the fall in the value of sterling. They admit that many of those on their books don't want to look after the vulnerable, but were driven by the cash.

That doesn't sound promising, does it? But these are ex-nurses and the like, right?

Wrong. Many of them have no relevant experience or professional training, undergoing a short "induction course" and are then sent into people's homes without even a physical health and safety inspection of the property. Worse still, in the case of one of the significant agencies, these transient carers are treated as self-employed and thus not subject to regulation by the Care Quality Commission.

Are you really comfortable about leaving your granny in the hands of such people? Yes, they might be perfectly decent people, but their motivation isn't promising and their skill levels aren't likely to be sufficient to deal with the range of problems that might potentially arise.

They'll have support though, won't they? If you consider having someone theoretically at the end of a telephone line as support, then yes. Frankly, I don't, and you can be pretty confident that, if something does go wrong, it'll be the NHS that is the first port of call.

And, returning to the fact that these people will be self-employed, who is accountable if something goes wrong? Is there insurance and who supplies it, or is responsible for doing so? An agency might be insured for acts carried out by their staff, but these aren't staff, they're contractors - unless, of course, such status is merely a pretense to avoid having to administer PAYE and to pay employer's National Insurance Contributions.

No, this will probably end badly, at which point "something must be done". If I was the Care Quality Commission, that point would be sooner rather than later...

High on a hill stood a (not actually) lonely bureaucrat...

Trains. I'm rather fond of them, fond enough to spend much of the day on them if given the opportunity. Ros is not so keen, unless there is a purpose. And so, day 3 started with a train ride to Lauterbrunnen, the other branch of the Berner Oberland Bahn. The train was packed with tourists evidently bound for the Jungfraujoch, as well as skiers heading up for some time on the slopes.

There hasn't been any snow so far this winter, but it had been cold enough for the authorities to start up the snow cannons, and you could see white ribbons, filled with small dots, running up the hillsides.

Lauterbrunnen itself was a bit grey, partly because the village sits in a bit of a gorge, with high cliffs blocking out the sky, but as our connecting train reached Wengen, the skies cleared and we were joined by dozens of skiers, all in search of a sense of motion. It turns out that a ski pass entitles you to use the railway to get back to the top of the ski run, so people circulate up and down.

Naturally, for this is a country which is nothing if not organised, the trains have racks to hold skis in so that you don't batter some hapless tourist with them, and they interconnect with the ski runs so that you don't have to walk too far.

At Kleine Schiedegg, the sun was shining out of a gorgeously picture-perfect sky, and hundreds of skiers of all ages were milling around until their turn to push off onto the run came. And again, because they are Swiss, they don't have to be managed, they ski with respect towards those around them.

We headed off towards Grindlewald again, past more skiers, heading downhill fast, with lunch in mind. Rosti is not entirely a core part of our diet these days, but you do need to cut yourself some slack on holiday, and it was very good. A brief walk through the town, and it was time to head back to base. We had a gala dinner to attend...

A bureaucrat takes a rest cure...

We've been in Switzerland for the past four days, taking a break to recharge the batteries after the excitement of Christmas. Based in a very nice hotel in Interlaken, the Grand Hotel Beau Rivage, we've taken the train into the mountains (Grindlewald, Kleine Schiedegg) and along the lake to Brienz, and had a bit of pampering in the spa.

Our journey here was, given the chaos we found at London City Airport, remarkably straightforward. Whilst our scheduled flight was delayed, the early morning flight was so late that we were able to be transferred onto it, putting us pretty much back on schedule. At Zurich, the train to Berne was on time, as was the tight, but manageable, connection for Interlaken Ost. That's one of the things about Switzerland - things just work.

The hotel is a very good one, and the provision of a shuttle from the station is a genuine courtesy rather than a necessity- it's about 250 metres away. Everything was ready for us, including a brief explanation of dinner arrangements and our luggage was conveyed to the room without our active involvement. That's another thing about Switzerland - hotels live up to your expectations and service is discreet.

Day 2, starting with a bit of pampering - a facial for Ros, and a massage for me. I am, as I've noted previously, a late convert to this. But Ariane, my German masseuse, gently, and occasionally not so gently, drove out some of the knots in my neck and shoulders, leaving us set up nicely for an afternoon riding the train to Grindelwald.

Grindlewald is a jumping off point for the ski-slopes, and a rather nice village. If you need ski equipment, look no further (just don't look at the prices, would be my advice). From there, there are cable cars and ski lifts, plus the Wengenalpbahn to Kleine Schiedegg, the last stop if you're heading onwards on the Jungfraubahn to Jungfraujoch, described as the "Top of Europe".

We pottered about a bit, but not too long, especially as we had to be back in Interlaken for dinner...

A bureaucrat sees in another New Year...

So, another year has begun, and there are resolutions to make, goals to set, that sort of thing. Or, in my case, not. I'm not really that good at resolutions - willpower is not one of my historic strengths, and it really shouldn't need an arbitrary date to convince me to start on a new quest.

But where does the beginning of 2017 find this particular liberal bureaucrat, apart from the Swiss Alps?

I'm forty pounds lighter than I was this time last year, which equates to about four inches around the waist and an inch at the collar. I walked 10,000 steps every day except three in 2016 - I was struck down with food poisoning in Cuba, which rather left me too weak to drag myself off of the sofa of our hotel room. But, since 17 February, every day has seen me complete my steps, come what may.

My wardrobe has become a mite more lively, and I've become a little more comfortable in myself. I've even joined a gym, which may be the spur towards further fitness improvements in 2017. I'm also somewhat happier in my work, which I'm still not really supposed to tell you about, as I gain more experience, which is in itself reassuring.

So, in summary, 2016 was pretty good, setting quite a high bar for 2017. It would be nice to continue the progress towards a rather sharper bureaucrat in the coming year, but we'll take that one step at a time, as they say.

Watch this space...

In the meantime, a very happy New Year to you all!

A Committee doesn't happen by itself, you know...

So, an election took place, and six members of the new Federal International Relations Committee were elected. So far, so good, especially as one of them was me. But what happens next?

Naturally, the Committee has to meet, and someone has to organise that. But who, and who makes sure that all of the members are invited? Indeed, who has the job of finding out who the members are? In the case of FIRC (no sniggering at the back, Jennie...), the questions are made more complex because it isn't always easy to establish who you would ask in the first place. How do you contact the State Parties, for example, and who do you need to reach?

Luckily, the outgoing Committee had taken the precaution of appointing a Secretary, and whilst I have no mandate beyond 31 December, I can at least make a start. So, I've sent out a stream of e-mails far and wide, seeking answers. This is what I've found out so far...

There are fourteen voting members of the Committee;

• Phil Bennion, Merlene Emerson, Jonathan Fryer, Paul Reynolds, Robert Woodthorpe Browne and myself, all directly elected
• a representative of the Federal Board, who meet on 14 January and will presumably decide then
• a representative of the Federal Policy Committee
• a representative of the English Party, whose Executive meet on 21 January
• Roger Williams (yes, the former MP for Brecon and Radnorshire), representing the Welsh Liberal Democrats
• a representative of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, whose Executive also meet on 21 January
• Hannah Bettsworth and Andrew Martin, the job-sharing International Officers of the Young Liberals (they only get one vote between them though)
• Catherine Bearder, our sole MEP
• Tom Brake, our Parliamentary spokesperson on Foreign Affairs

There are seven non-voting members;

• a representative of the Liberal International British Group, whose Executive meet on 9 January
• Nick Hopkinson, Chair of the Liberal Democrat European Group
• a representative of the Liberal Democrat Group on the Committee of the Regions
• a representative of the Brussels and Europe Liberal Democrats
• Ros Scott, as a member of the Bureau of the ALDE Party
• John Alderdice and Kishwer Falkner, as members of the Bureau of Liberal International

There should also be a representative of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, but as there is no Liberal Democrat there, the position lies vacant.

We also need a Chair. According to the Federal Constitution, only those members who were directly elected are eligible to run. Accordingly, as I didn't want the job, I opened nominations to the other five, only to find that we had but one nominee, Robert Woodthorpe Browne, whom I declared elected.

We need a regulatory framework too, as specified by Article 7 of the Federal Constitution. But, because we were a sub-committee of the Federal Executive, we apparently didn't have one, so we need one fairly quickly. The good news is that there is a member of Party staff who is responsible for this sort of thing, so I've dropped him an e-mail. We'll see what comes of it, but it needs to cover transparency, conflicts of interest, diversity, and all sorts of other good things.

Finally, we need an agenda for our first meeting or, at least, an outline one. Luckily, I'm on top of that too, so a draft is with the new Chair and our International Officer, the estimable Harriet Shone, for their comment prior to circulation to the emerging Committee.

I think that we've made a pretty good start, and once we've worked out a communications and engagement policy, I sense that we might have a pretty good story to tell. There's an awful lot that can go wrong before that though...

An oath, an oath, my kingdom for an oaf... Sajid Javid needs a lesson on values...

It's never a promising sign when a Minister comes up with a proposal to promote integration that requires some of the most integrated members of civil society to swear an oath declaring their commitment to it whilst leaving many of those who are supposedly the problem unaffected. And so, Sajid Javid's idea that civil servants should swear an oath of allegiance to 'British values', is a pointer towards an administration who are desperate for anything that might deflect even a little attention from the elephant in their particular room, Brexit.

Sajid, I joined the Civil Service precisely because I believe in the democratic process, and because I understand the vital nature of civil society. You need people who believe in tolerance, the rule of law and due process because, without them, people like you have no means of governing. A politically-neutral Civil Service is the mechanism by which the aims of any administration are delivered and, believe me, regardless of what we think of you as an individual, most of us understand that, even if we don't agree with you, you're the Government, and you get what you want, so long as it's legal and possible.

I certainly didn't join for the money - indeed, I am effectively paid for a four-day week because of the impact of years of real terms cuts in pay, brought about by people like you who don't understand what happens when you consistently undermine the pay and conditions of those who are expected to deliver your priorities under fire from both the public and, more insidiously, you, your colleagues and your friends in the national media.

No, I joined for reasons that would now seem altruistic at best, naive at worst. I thought that, by doing my job well, I could make society a little bit better, government a little less impersonal. And, I like to think, I've achieved that, despite the obstacles that have littered my path.

Like you, my father came here from the Indian subcontinent, so the concept of British values comes with some mixed connotations. One might joke that British values revolved around invading someone else's country, stealing the raw materials and imposing a Parliamentary system that seldom worked well for the locals. But, seriously, there is a debate to be had about what British values really are in a country as divided as Britain is at present.

Is tolerance a British value when we've just undergone a campaign where migrants have been vilified for political advantage? Is democracy a British value when 37% of the voting population can cause a major change to our society and then insist that the rest of us blithely accept it? Is respect for the rule of law a British value when elements of our national media seek to undermine it and distort it when it doesn't agree with them?

Now, I believe that those things are part of a decent, value-based society. And I believe that most British people believe in them, and live by them most of the time, albeit occasionally grudgingly. But then, so do most people, in most countries, so why are they described as 'British values', as though other nations are somehow less principled?

And, to be honest, oath swearing is something done to convince others and is, in itself, pretty meaningless. Swearing loyalty to a concept implies that it is constant, unchanging, whereas society is fluid, adapting and changing as circumstances develop. Besides, how do you determine whether or not someone actually means it when they swear an oath? What penalty is there for breaking it, and who decides upon it?

No, it's a stupid idea from a desperate politician, and that comes from someone who has no problem with the principles of civil society, of democracy and of tolerance. Perhaps that's why I criticize Mr Javid whilst not denying him his right as a Minister of the Crown to introduce the idea, should he really believe that it's worthwhile.

My advice to him, however, would be to dedicate the effort he's expended on this to better effect. Finding a solution to the housing crisis might be more helpful, but I'm sure that my readers can come up with other ones...

A bureaucrat on the edge - triumph and disappointment...

It's that walrus again...

Well, I managed to get myself re-elected to International Relations Committee, elected on the sixth count in third place, which was somewhat unexpected, given the quality of the opposition. Various people had been very supportive but, given the size of the electorate and my lack of 'celebrity', for want of a better word, one can never take anything for granted.

So, thank you to all those of you who supported me, regardless of where you put me on the ballot paper. I'm already hard at work preparing for the new committee, so you'll hopefully see a more visible Federal International Relations Committee over the coming weeks, months and years.

There will be a new Chair of the Committee to elect, which won't be me - I'm not running. However, one of the other five directly elected members will be taking the job on, and I have initiated a process of seeking nominations from them so that we can move forward quickly, if possible. I will  be seeking to stay on as Secretary though, and we'll see if anyone else comes forward to oppose me. 

The result of the election of the ALDE Party Council delegation was not so great. I came fifth which, given that there were five places to be elected, sounds good. However, I fell foul of Election Rule 10(b);

As required by the September 1992 conference motion elections to the ALDE Council delegation shall include a minimum of one person from each State Party and one person under the age of 26 at the time of election.

This meant that I was overtaken by Peter Price, the only Welsh candidate (there were no Scots or young people standing). There is, I would suggest, a certain irony in losing an election due to a twenty-four year old rule that very few people had realised was in existence. I'm guessing that I'll be first reserve in the event that someone drops out, but I'll need to check how that works.

So, I'm going to be busy in 2017, regardless. I'm going to have to be better with this blog though...