Feeling the love for Navnit and Ann Dholakia...

Instead of being at the BOTYs, I was accompanying Ros to a surprise event, a dinner to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the election of a Liberal to Brighton Council. That young Liberal candidate was Navnit, now Baron, Dholakia.

Navnit is a very special figure to me, as his experiences are similar to those of my father, and when our paths first crossed fifteen years ago, we hit it off immediately. We would, thereafter run into each other occasionally, but ten years later, he was to play an unexpected role in events that changed my life forever.

I had not been seeing Ros for very long, when she went on a delegation to Taiwan with, amongst others, Navnit. He very kindly gave me a very good character reference, and the rest is history. To this day, Navnit jokes that ours was an arranged marriage, and that he was the one that arranged it.

And last night, the room was full of people whose lives have touched, and been touched by, Navnit and his wife Ann. From his early days in Brighton, through his work on penal reform, policing and equalities to his fifteen years in the House of Lords, there were people who had been there, had experienced that.

There were speeches from Tim Razzell, Chris Rennard and Raj Loomba, highlighting his contributions in a range of fields, but it was Navnit's response, talking of his early experiences after coming to this country from Tanzania, of casual racism, of being part of a mixed-race couple, which exposed a passion and a vehemence that I had not seen in him before. It did, however, encapsulate exactly why I admire him so much.

I should also mention Ann. Ann has been by Navnit's side throughout, and always has a kind word or gesture. She fulfils a role that I recognise in a way that many might not, that of support, helpmeet, and the person who, in quiet moments, is there with advice or information, who understands what you are going through. It was nice that she was recognised.

Afloat on a sea of affection, the evening almost ended too soon. But some of us are getting old, and you have to pace yourself.

I should not close without mentioning Chris Maines and Paul Elgood, whose kindness in arranging the event cannot be overstated. The brochure for the event, with pictures and stories from a range of people, brought back some great memories, so many thanks to them.

Looking back in confusion and regret

In hindsight, and with the benefit of reflection, I feel somewhat cheated. It appears that my faith in the honour and decency of some of our party's most senior figures might have been ill-judged and, by exhibiting an unhelpful degree of naivety, I may well have prejudiced the very cause I had hoped to promote.

You will recall that I had been surprised by the two amendments that were chosen for debate. One, on monitoring, came as a surprise only because I was not informed that it had been taken for debate. As James Graham rightly reminds me, I had been warned about it in advance and, putting aside my personal misgivings about monitoring for sexuality and religion, I certainly accepted the basic principle of collecting data so that progress might be quantified.

The second, proposed by Simon Hughes, our illustrious Party President, was obviously tabled with the knowledge and support of our Chief Executive, who demonstrated once again, if proof were needed, his mastery of internal politics. I was warned, albeit probably too late to do anything about it. And even, had I been able to credibly attack it, I didn't have enough 'backstory' to successfully do so, especially after arriving in the hall to find that Navnit Dholakia's speech already included a statement of acceptance. For the record, I only discovered this by reading his speech over his shoulder (and he didn't know that I was there at the time). The response to his intervention from my readership and the wider blogosphere is, thus far, a long way short of impressed.

And so they were both passed. Unfortunately, I am now left in the uncomfortable position of hoping for the best, and fearing the sort of invidious sabotage that the Federal Executive tends towards when Conference wants something that it doesn't.

It pains me to have to make a statement like this publicly, and I will happily recant if the review produces something effective and timely (bear in mind that winnable seats are selecting already, and wasn't the whole purpose of the exercise to get black and ethnic minority MP's elected?). But either the auguries aren't promising or my more pragmatic friends are overly cynical. Experience tends towards the former.

Gentlemen, prove me wrong...