ALDE Election Congress: reflections after the event

So, the Verhofstadt/Rehn joint ticket is unleashed upon an unsuspecting world, with a healthy 80% mandate, and most people seem to be happy that their goals have been achieved. All is, therefore, as well as it might be. The deal cut, whereby one or other candidate will visit a particular location based on the needs of the local member party, is clearly designed to allow the most attractive aspects of the ALDE platform to be showcased in a manner appropriate to the political culture and circumstances that prevail. That too appears to be a thoroughly good thing.

So, what have we learned from this?

Firstly, if you give people an opportunity to do something that suits them, they will take it, even if it might not, in the long run, be terribly wise. Second, process is a good thing, and acts as a means against summary (in)justice. Thirdly, politicians need bureaucrats, firstly to design process, and secondly to manage it.

And what, I hear you ask, does that mean?

Well, it means that we need to be far more transparent about how we decide upon our delegates to ALDE, both to Council and to Congress, especially as we may see a significant reduction in our entitlement in future years. In the past, there hasn't been a lot of competition, especially for Congress - we have a lot of places, travel and accommodation are unsubsidised, and the delegation has presumably grown in size as our electoral performance has steadily improved. If that changes, you need process, and one that is apparent to all.

It is something that has troubled me for a while now, and the events of the past fortnight have reminded me that the longer it is left, the more pressing it will become, and the solutions potentially less satisfying.

Ah well, I needed a project anyway...