Moonlight over International Relations Committee - the Chris Black tribute report...

Longer term Liberal Democrat bloggers will remember the evocatively named 'Moonlight over Essex', the blog of Cllr Chris Black, from Rayleigh, a not particularly notable area of Liberal Democrat support. And, having passed through Rayleigh earlier today, I was reminded of his blog (Chris, if you're reading this, hope that all is well with you and your colleagues!). Hence, the title...

This evening's meeting of International Relations Committee was an unusual one, possibly because we spent quite a lot of time on discussions of an organisational and functional nature. As part of the Party's Governance Review, Sal Brinton, in her capacity as Party President, has been meeting with various groups to discuss possible input and likely implications. And tonight, it was our turn.

I have to admit that I hadn't read the current document (habitual Party bureaucrat in 'not paying attention to constitutional stuff' outrage...), but quickly speed read through it to find the key principles. It seems that IRC will become a sub-committee of the proposed new Federal Board (not much different to its current position as a sub-committee of Federal Executive) but there was talk of business plans and more directly elected representation (only five of us are directly elected by Federal Conference delegates at present - myself included). A business plan is certainly a radical concept for IRC, which can be a bit of a talking shop given the lack of connection between it and the relevant backbench committees in Parliament. I personally don't get a sense that we are taken terribly seriously by the foreign affairs enthusiasts in either the Commons or the Lords, and thus don't need to be considered.

But, it was resolved that we would submit some feedback, individual and collective, to the Compliance Review in the next month (note to self, read current document...). I also noted that we need to think much more about our role and purpose, and others raised the issue of what mechanisms might be necessary to improve access and increase diversity.

Discussion then turned to my paper on future ALDE delegation makeup. The general sense seemed to be that the paper wasn't bad, but needed more consideration. In the meantime, my proposals for the 2016 ALDE Council delegation was endorsed by a rare IRC vote, 7-1, after which we were advised as to who the delegates now are. I am not one of them, although I am first reserve and have been led to believe that I might get to be Sal Brinton's understudy in Vilnius in early June. Frankly, I'll be there anyway as consort to the Vice-President, but I enjoy Council (a bureaucrat's natural environment) and like to think that I punch above my weight there.

We then had reports from the International Office on its work with the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, and from the Liberal Democrat 'Remain' team - all very interesting but not really appropriate for publication yet, I'd suggest. Besides, if you want to know what the International Office get up to, I strongly recommend their reports in Liberal Democrat Voice.

Verbal reports from various groups followed before, almost miraculously, we were done just before eight o'clock - IRC Chair, Robert Woodthorpe Browne, runs a tight ship when it comes to getting through the business. That left me with enough time to catch a civilised(ish) train back to mid-Suffolk and write this meeting report. Quick enough for you, Dr Pack?...

Leaving the lizards behind... or coming home to them?

I have been, as those of you who are Facebook friends may be aware, on holiday in Cuba, a trip which has, from a personal perspective, not gone as smoothly as might have been hoped. Personal misadventure leading to a badly gashed elbow and a jarred shoulder, followed by three days interrupted by (presumed) food poisoning, rather cut into the trip. Nonetheless, the weather was good, the wildlife friendly and the resort... well, not as good as perhaps it should have been, would be fair. Ros is at least well-rested for the campaigning ahead, which is probably the most important thing.

Our resort had a fine collection of curly-tailed lizards, who haunted the rocks and crevices of the landscaping in our resort, and were seemingly quite content to be photographed. The pelicans that cruised the shoreline, looking for fish, glided by in a manner that implied that they were doing this for our benefit between essential refuelling, and the other birds were colourful and inquisitive. One species in particular seems to have learned that sugar packets may be valuable, pulling them out of their little holders and scattering them around. Don't ask me whether they know what the contents are - evolution doesn't appear to have progressed quite that far yet.

But now I'm back to a Britain about to determine its future in the world. Naturally, I'll be voting 'remain', and will be campaigning accordingly.

It is noticeable so far that the people who have been telling us for a couple of decades that we would be better off outside the European Union have been so busy moaning that they've never quite got round to working out what the implications of Brexit are. 

Today, for example, Bernard Jenkin claims that the critical Article 50 provisions need not apply. They are, of course, provisions of a treaty that we signed, and are binding unless both sides agree to an amendment. Of course, we need not adhere to them, the sort of negotiating strategy that the diplomatic equivalent of cads and bounders would implement. Naturally, by behaving in an untrustworthy manner at that stage, we could expect such behaviour to be overlooked when it came to negotiating all of the treaties on trade and citizen access that Bernard assumes would follow...

And, of course, Boris. Two weeks ago, he seemed to say that engagement was better than estrangement. Now, he's changed his mind so as to maximise his leadership potential in the event of a 'leave' vote. I have to wonder why I should trust the judgement of someone whose political positioning is, predominantly, populist in nature and who is, generally, as slippery as an eel.

It seems that I didn't leave the lizards behind me...

@NeedhamFC versus @GraysAthleticFC - as relegation rears its ugly head, can the Marketmen turn things around?

Welcome to a cold Bloomfields, on a windy evening with a pitch that doesn't look to have improved much since I was here for the VCD Athletic game a few weeks back. Since that rather sorry home defeat, not much has gone right for the Marketmen, although Saturday's nil-nil draw at basement dwellers Lewes at least halted the run of grim outcomes.

At least the visitors, Grays Athletic (unbeaten in 2016, apparently) may have brought along some support - we'll see if the attendance is better than the 135 who turned out to brave the risk of hypothermia for the VCD Athletic game...

A lively start saw both sides test the opposition goalkeeper, but the crosswind was already causing play  to concentrate on the far side of the pitch. The Marketmen seemed to looking to play long balls over the top, whilst Grays were testing the pitch by playing more along the ground. Probably a mistake, given the conditions, but we'll see...

35 minutes - a pretty even contest thus far, with both teams having had their chances. Still nil-nil though...

Half-time - both sides have hit the woodwork, but Grays appear to have a slight edge as we reach the break. Can Needham Market rally in the second half and get something from the game? A win would see them reach the giddy heights of eighteenth...

60 minutes - Needham's best spell of the game led to a shot on goal spilt by the Grays keeper low down and turned in from a tight angle. But whilst the home supporters celebrated, the assistant's flag was flying. Still scoreless, but the hosts were looking the stronger...

Time is running out, and the Marketmen are hanging on... The final whistle blows, and it's another point, and a clean sheet - Needham Market 0, Grays Athletic 0...

A question to which the answer is forty-two...

Yes, it's been six weeks since I started my (kind of) health regime of ten thousand steps and 1.9 litres of water a day, and I've managed both every day thus far.

It feels, I must say, pretty good.

Today, by way of a change, Ros and I took our morning constitutional on the seafront at Felixstowe, which isn't so far from the Creetings, but is somewhat different, especially on a sunny, but windy day. Put it this way, walking northwards was wind-assisted, and the return journey somewhat tougher.

Felixstowe is, unlike some seaside resorts locally, in relatively good shape, in part due to the presence of one of Europe's biggest container ports on its doorstep. And even now, despite the pressure of local government finances, the gardens and landscaping have been maintained, the promenade is in good condition, and there are places to stop for a cappuccino, should one be so inclined.

There is even sand, which sounds unremarkable until you discover that, until recently, the beach was a pebble one.

After our walk, we made our way into town for a light lunch, and remarked on the fact that the range of shops was pretty broad, with a mixture of chains and more local outlets. The bank that Ros worked in when she left school is still there (and still a bank), and there isn't that sense of decline that towns such as Walton on the Naze have experienced.

All in all, it was nice to get out, and we may well take the opportunity to stroll around other places over the coming weeks. At least, we will when we next have a free weekend at home...

Is using your preferred definition of liberalism a means to suppress reasoned dissent?

It's funny really. Once upon a time, I was a Young Liberal on the minority non-radical wing of the Party. Yes, radicals were all well and good, but somebody had to keep the organisational show on the road. Sensible, less emotional people like myself, for example. And yes, I tended to be sceptical about some of the more 'out there' proposals (a surprising number of which went on to become mainstream truths), but disagreement, or even outright dissent, was seemingly tolerated to a greater extent.

As I've grown older, I've developed a greater appreciation for honest dissent, courteously and intelligently expressed. The majority, after all, isn't always right, and the status quo is never disturbed unless someone challenges it. I've always seen liberalism as a philosophy which encouraged dissent and challenge of the orthodoxy. Indeed, some of my colleagues that I've most admired are not those who I consistently agree with.

I also have, over the past five or six years, developed an appreciation of the breadth and depth of liberalism through my involvement with ALDE (our European umbrella party). Social liberals, economic liberals, all coming together under one banner, but able to debate courteously and reach an agreed policy stance through compromise.

And so, I am somewhat disheartened to see fellow Liberal Democrats (and no, not ALL Liberal Democrats...) use their definition of liberalism, usually one which reinforces their view of the world, to attempt to shut down debate. Lines like, "policy X, passed by Conference, is illiberal", or, "Thank goodness we have a President of the Party who does write this. It shows that she understands the fundamentals of Liberalism.". By implying that anyone who disagrees with the argument isn't a liberal, you seek to suppress dissent from your preferred stance.

In truth, I've probably played the 'liberalism' card myself in the past. It is terribly easy to use, even more so when you are so certain of the rightness of your position, and yet more so when the person arguing with you is 'annoyingly persistent'.

But, perhaps, we would do better by respecting the right to dissent amongst ourselves, displaying a bit more courtesy towards those we disagree with. We are, I've always thought, a family. A family that squabbles amongst itself, yes, but one that pulls together when threatened.

And so, the establishment bureaucrat has morphed into a respecter of difference. Perhaps I have mellowed over the years, or perhaps Ros has been a positive influence (very likely, I'd guess...), but either way, I've developed a sneaking regard for those who are outside the perceived mainstream. I can only hope that I'm not in a minority on this occasion...

Ros in the Lords: Food Waste

Regular readers will know that, for some time, Ros has been working to raise awareness of food waste, following the publication of a seminal report by the Select Committee that she chairs.

This week, she returned to the subject by means of a Short Debate, seeking to keep up the pressure on the Government...

Baroness Scott of Needham Market (LD): My Lords, it is almost two years since the EU Energy and Environment Sub-Committee for energy and the environment, which I chair, published its report into food waste. At the time, it was enormously gratifying for the committee to produce a report that generated so much interest. The press office tells me it had more coverage than any other Lords Select Committee report.

The fact that around one-third of all food produced in the world is wasted is truly shocking. The waste of land, labour, water, carbon and all the other resources is truly staggering. When people around the world are going hungry, when the global population is set to increase and when many thousands of people here in the UK do not have enough to eat, this becomes a moral issue, too. It does not matter what sort of political philosophy you have—there is a case to be made for dealing with this as a matter of urgency.

So two years on seems like a good time to see what has happened since. In this time, food waste has rocketed up the agenda and efforts are being made at all levels. I am very grateful to all noble Lords who are speaking in the debate today and very much look forward to hearing from them.

The United Nations sustainable development goals, which were published in September, contain a commitment to halve food waste at the consumer and retailer level and to reduce food losses along the supply chain. The UN goals make a distinction between the two, as we did in our report, but I would like to give an example of where this is no longer quite so clear-cut. The campaigning organisation Feedback has spent several years looking at the supply chains of our major supermarkets. Focusing on Kenya, Peru and Guatemala, it has uncovered evidence of late cancellation of orders and overzealous size and shape specifications resulting in up to half the crop being wasted and massive hardship for farmers.

These were exactly the sort of practices which in UK agriculture had led to the establishment of the Groceries Code Adjudicator in 2013, and it is increasingly clear that farmers in the developing world need protection, too. Is the Minister aware of this issue and would he agree with me that bad behaviour should be stamped out, regardless of whether the farmer is in Norfolk or Nicaragua.

Our report made recommendations aimed at all levels of government. We asked the European Commission to look at areas where it has responsibility—date labelling, the regulations around the feeding of waste to animals, packaging regulations, fish discards, and the use of CAP funds for food waste reduction projects—and we asked it to spearhead work on common definitions, measurements and benchmarks.

Around the same time as we were producing our report, the EU Select Committee reported on the role of national parliaments in EU decision-making. It concluded that national parliaments should have a power to request action as well as to object. Under the leadership of the noble Lord, Lord Boswell, a so-called “green card” procedure was developed with the support of all EU parliaments. I am really pleased that the first-ever green card to be issued in the EU was based on our work on food waste. It was signed by 18 parliamentary chambers.

In December, the Commission published its Circular Economy Package, which includes a section on food waste. That reflects many of the recommendations that were made in our report and in the green card proposal. Will the Minister say whether the Government are minded to support the proposals on the table?

The thread which ran through our 2014 report was the role of the supply chain in generating food waste, and why it is essential to look not just at each stage but at the links between them. The UK is fortunate to have a highly effective think tank—that is what I will call it—WRAP. It is now a charity independent of government and it provides a unique combination of academically rigorous analysis, supply-chain knowledge and campaigning skills. It really excels at developing partnerships and has been at the forefront of doing so with regard to food waste. Its work with the hospitality and food service sector achieved a 3.6% reduction in food waste by its second year. In a sector where an estimated one meal in six is thrown away, it is really important to address this. The food service giant Sodexo has developed some very good initiatives and what strikes me from what it told me is how important it is to get the staff engaged, because, when they are engaged, things begin to happen and it is more effective than just setting targets.

A couple of weeks ago the Times ran an article outlining how top chefs are now moving away from à la carte menus in favour of more limited menu choices. That is exactly to reduce food waste. One Michelin-starred restaurant said it thought it could halve the amount of food it wastes. So regardless of the size of your business there is a clear economic case for dealing with this. This is an area where a lot more could be done, particularly by the large outfits. Will the Government meet WRAP and perhaps me and other Members to discuss what more could be done about this? Clearly, the public sector is an enormous user of these catering services.

Another good example of this partnership is the Courtauld commitment. The voluntary agreement started in 2005 is in its fourth stage and aims to reduce packaging waste as well as food waste. While recognising the limits of the new charitable status of WRAP, I hope that the Government will commit to continue to support its work. I was certainly very taken by a briefing from the campaign group Stop the Rot which talked about how important this is and I know that it, and I suspect some noble Lords here today, would like to see Courtauld do more and be more ambitious.

Retailers are still very reluctant to publish food waste data, so, in this regard, hats off to Tesco, which has been more open about its levels of waste; others should follow suit. Retailers are crucial in reducing supply-chain waste. They impact not only on the growers, as we have heard, but also on the processors of food, and are key influencers of consumer behaviour. Tesco and Asda have done some very interesting work to assess levels of waste of their most popular products and have looked right through the supply chain to see what can be done. It is not rocket science—for example, using bananas that cannot be sold off the shelf as a base for frozen smoothies or using things for soups and sauces makes absolute sense, as does sending bakery waste to animal feed or converting used vegetable oil to biodiesel. The Food and Drink Federation told me that KP is now using potato starch generated from its processes to make products such as wallpaper paste. This is real value added from waste.

Our report highlighted a food waste hierarchy in which food produced for humans should, wherever possible, be eaten by humans—then turned into animal feed, then used to generate energy, then composted and so on to achieve zero to landfill. I think this is one of the most important aspects of this whole debate. Without getting into discussion about the need for food redistribution, of course it makes sense to use this food wisely. FareShare has reported a 30% increase in the food redistributed in the last two years. Indeed, its partnership with Tesco provides 1,700 community groups with meals. The Co-op increased its depot-level redistribution from 85 tonnes to 300 tonnes in the last year.

Marks & Spencer is using an app called Neighbourly that links stores with local charities and in the pilot a single store in Bristol in just six months redistributed 4 tonnes of perfectly good food that otherwise would have gone to anaerobic digestion. FareShare estimates that around 300,000 tonnes of supply-chain food waste could go to feed people instead of feeding animals or going to digesters or landfill. Will the Minister commit to exploring ways of ensuring that the incentives to behave in this way are lined up? We are still a long way behind the US, Belgium, France, Italy and Spain and they all have some sort of fiscal incentive.

While it is true that much household waste occurs at household level, it is a complex issue to tackle. As we uncovered in our evidence, the causes are often rooted in modern life—irregular eating patterns, the weekly shop, a wider variety of food and so on, and much less basic knowledge about food. WRAP has developed the Love Food Hate Waste label and has even exported it to Canada. The retailers have stepped up to the plate on this, but there is still very much to do to demystify date labelling, despite the Food and Drink Federation’s Fresher for Longer initiative.

We have made a lot of progress in the past two years but we are really still only in the foothills of what we need to do to make permanent inroads into the scandalous waste of food. What gives me cause for optimism is that I think that we have developed a sort of ecology. We have the academic rigour and analysis from WRAP; a huge variety of civil society groups, from the Trussell Trust to Stop the Rot; innovative use of technology; a willingness on the part of industry to really see the business case; and the campaigning zeal of people such as Tristram Stuart from Feedback, and celebrities such as Jamie Oliver, who are so effective at mobilising public action. We have done a lot, but there is much more to do.

Suffolk Liberal Democrats announce their candidate for Police and Crime Commissioner

Helen Korfanty, a local Solicitor, campaigner and advocate, has been selected as the Liberal Democrat candidate for the post as Suffolk Police and Crime Commissioner. The elections take place on 5 May.

Helen has lived in Suffolk for 33 years, was born in Yorkshire and qualified as a solicitor in 1982. She has worked for firms Ipswich, Sudbury, and Stowmarket and currently works for firms in Thetford and Newmarket. Her main areas of specialism are Criminal Law and Family Law and she is a trained Family Law Mediator.

A first tier advocate, she serves as a Duty Solicitor at the Police Investigation Centres and Magistrates’ Courts. She was also among the local solicitors who have acted as agent prosecutors for the CPS.

In the past, Helen has Chaired South Suffolk Victim Support Scheme and volunteered at the Citizens Advice Bureaux both as an adviser and subsequently on the Management Committee for Sudbury CAB. 

Jon James, Chair of Suffolk Lib Dems said;

Helen Korfanty is one of the best qualified individuals to put themselves forward to contest this election. She is a well respected advocate across the criminal justice system in Suffolk and brings with her lots of experience in both criminal law and family law and will bring a whole new approach to managing police resources especially in areas of domestic abuse and mental health where the Lib Dems are leading the way. Helen will provide strong, independent minded leadership and support to the Suffolk Constabulary at a time when government cuts are seeing local neighbourhood policing significantly reduced.

"Building a Better Walrus" - a progress report

So, I've been walking around a bit, and making sure that I'm properly hydrated (who knew that I was supposed to drink nearly two litres of water a day?). A month has gone by, well, a month and four days, to be strictly accurate, but has it made a difference?

The answer is, slightly surprisingly, yes. Including the four days in December, which I tend to see as a warm-up, I've made my ten thousand steps and 1.9 litres of water every day, managing more than three hundred and seventy thousand steps (just over 12,000 a day!) in January alone, and have lost nearly seven pounds (three kilos for those of you operating in metric).

This is rather satisfying, I have to admit. And yes, it probably isn't repeatable - it is likely to get harder as I lose weight to achieve the same results - but it might be sustainable, which is rather more important.

Of course, none of this would be possibly without Ros's support, or the probably unintended inspiration that came from Alistair Carmichael, and I am keen to keep going with this as long as my willpower lasts. But the Fitbit app on my iPhone is acting as a bit of a nag/motivator (delete as appropriate), so we'll see how it goes...

All quiet on Creeting St Peter Footpath No. 1...

It's been a mostly dank, drizzly sort of day in Mid Suffolk but, as the saying goes, not rain, nor snow, nor gloom of night shall deter the bureaucrat from his ten thousand steps, and so I set off into the irritatingly persistent drizzle to buy a loaf of bread and the Sunday paper. The advantage is that I can cut across country using one of the parish's many footpaths.

There is, however, a slight glitch, in that the routes of a number of those paths were disrupted by the small matter of a four lane trunk road that was carved through the middle of the parish in the 1970s, by-passing Needham Market and Stowmarket. The A45, now the A14, divided the village from its church, and obliged the County Council to create diversionary routes to allow villagers to get both to church and into Stowmarket. There weren't many people here anyway, and they could fairly safely be ignored.

Admittedly, given that virtually everyone around here drives these days, it matters little now and the footpaths are generally quiet. Thanks to our conscientious local farmers though, most of them are pretty well maintained.

Originally, footpath 1 ran from the centre of the village, near the Parish noticeboard, in a westerly direction, and it still does, but as it expires on the wrong side of the A14, those heading for Stowmarket are diverted south across the road bridge and then parallel to the A14 before rejoining the original route.

Once you've put the traffic noise into the back of your mind, it's a pleasant enough walk, slightly downhill at first before crossing a minor stream and rising back up to the access road for Brazier's Hall and the Creeting Lakes sports fishery. From there, you follow Mill Lane into Cedars Park, cut through using one of that estate's many footpaths/cycle lanes, and there's Tesco, with all of life's modern conveniences.

And, once you've got your head around the concept that it's nowhere near as far as you had thought, you can focus on the scenery...

If Liberal Democracy has the answers, perhaps we should be asking questions...

I was discussing something on the internet today, and someone noted how useless a particular organisation was by way of an argument against a thought of mine. And indeed, said organisation may well be useless - I've never encountered it and am unlikely to do so. But then I thought, "hang on a minute, we're supposed to be a political party. If an organisation is useless, why aren't we wondering what we could do to make it better?".

I have always struggled with the concept that success in politics comes from opposing things. Yes, opposing stupidity, or callousness, or ineffectuality is a thoroughly worthwhile thing, but it's only half of the task of a politician or of a political party. The other half is to offer the people something better.

Now, that doesn't mean creating new laws, or new structures, or new anything, unless of course, it does. What it might mean is running things better, or differently, or providing greater access. Such things are not necessarily easy, but they're right and, if you've given it enough thought, and sought to achieve buy-in, you might actually make people's lives just a little better in the process.

So, in response to my colleague's unhappiness regarding the utter uselessness of said organisation, I replied;

"Not a failure of concept, a failure of mission goals and delivery, I'd suggest. Who sets their criteria, who designs their guidance, who sets their goals? And, if we want to be in government, that will be us."

It seems, these days, that politics is about scaring the public into supporting you by raising fears of what the other lot have done or will do, even when what they are doing is entirely coherent with their beliefs. If Liberal Democracy is so worthwhile, we should have the courage of our convictions and start offering people something positive.

Perhaps we could start by applying some of our oceans of policy?...

Another sunny day in East Cambridgeshire...

Three weeks ago, Ros and I were in Bottisham, where a by-election caused by the resignation of the recently elected Tory councillor was the impetus behind a well-organised campaign to win back a seat we had lost last year.

At the other end of East Cambridgeshire though, a County by-election had been called due to the unexpected death of the Tory councillor, coincidentally in a division part-held at District level by Lorna Dupré, the Regional Party's administrator and now leader of the Opposition on East Cambridgeshire District Council. Naturally, having been invited to come and help, it would have been wrong not to turn out on what looked like being a rather grey, wet day.

Fortunately, the sun broke through, and it had become a much nicer day by the time we reached our meeting point, in the village of Sutton, where Lorna lives. The task for the day was to do some canvassing in Little Downham, which makes up about a quarter of the County Division. Me, I had some walking to do, occasionally interrupted by other tasks, which seemed sensible, given my ongoing steps target.

There is nothing finer than walking around villages on a sunny day, and I was getting quite into things, discovering the local bus route - three times a day, Monday to Saturday, connecting Little Downham with Ely - and spotting the railway line between Ely and Peterborough at the eastern end of the village.

However, such fun can't go on forever and, mid-reverie, my phone rang, with instructions to return to the car. Gathering with the team, a photograph was taken, envelopes returned, and we headed back to Suffolk.

Lorna has a genuine chance to win on 18 February. We lost by about 250 in 2013, and with Lorna's strong support in half the ward, and no Labour or Green contender, it may not need much of a swing for her to overtake her Conservative rival. It would be nice to think that, should she do so, we will have made another small contribution to the Liberal Democrat recovery in a county where we have done well in the recent past.

And the fourteen thousand steps I managed today won't have done the 'Building a Better Walrus' project any harm either...

Viva La Revolución! A day of Cuban bookends...

It's been a rather pleasant day, all in all.

I don't, as a rule, have an awful lot of business in London these days, but the need to sort out our visitor cards for our upcoming holiday in Cuba required my personal attention, so I was up bright and relatively early to catch a train from Needham Market on an idyllic winter's morn for the journey to the big city.

Abellio Greater Anglia having graciously supplied not one but two trains on time, I made it to High Holborn, where I was made to feel very welcome by the staff at the Cuban Embassy, and it wasn't long before I was heading off for my next engagement, lunch with an old friend, Daniel Brown, near his office at Canary Wharf.

Daniel and I go way back, nearly thirty years indeed, to our days in the Brent and Harrow Young Liberals, and we were Treasurer and Secretary respectively of the Young Liberal Democrats of England, immediately after the merger of the Liberals and the Social Democrats. But you know how life is, families and work and everything else gets in the way, and suddenly you haven't seen each other for, really, is it that long? So, lunch was a wonderful opportunity to catch up.

But Daniel was working, and time was limited (not unreasonably), and so we promised to do this again, and I headed back into Zone 1 to see my younger (taller and rather better looking) brother over a beer. Kirk very graciously produced children (the lovely Natasha, the equally lovely Imogen, and the surprisingly bouncy Lucas), presumably so that I didn't have to (this is a joke, by the way...). Later, our father joined us for a catch up, which was nice.

Next stop, Westminster, for a bite of dinner before the last engagement of the day, at the residence of the Cuban Ambassador, to celebrate Cuba's National Day, the anniversary of the birth of Cuba's revolutionary hero, José Martí, who was born on this day in 1853. We were greeted by the Ambassador, who seems very friendly, before a leader of the Cuban community here in Britain made a stirring speech to commemorate the 1959 Revolution, with much 'Viva-ing' to follow.

The band played some suitable music, and we mingled a bit at an event that one might describe as a bit 'Corbynista' but a lot of fun. I think that we're going to enjoy our trip...

I am my own real-life tamagotchi...

So, four weeks into this 'walking around vaguely purposefully' thing and, much to my surprise, I'm still managing my ten thousand steps a day. It seemed like quite a lot when I started and, unless I make the effort, it still does.

I can pick up an easy thousand or so walking from Ipswich station to my office, and another thousand back in the evening. Walking for half an hour around the town centre at lunchtime is another four thousand or so, and I can pick up two thousand or so in my office, photocopying something, making coffee, fetching a glass of water, that sort of thing. The extra two thousand requires more thought though.

So I've taken to looking for those extra steps if I can. If I'm early at Stowmarket station, I can walk up and down the platform for ten minutes or so, which helps, and I get in a few more steps by doing the same at Ipswich on the way home. And, if all else fails, a T-shaped loop around my village, walking to each of the three edges of its built-up area, is about two thousand steps (much to my immense surprise).

All of this is measured by the Fitbit app on my iPhone. It also sets me a target for drinking water, something that I'm not particularly good at as a rule. However, it does seem to act as a prompt, and water is supposedly good for me, so I'm making sure that I drink the required amount each day.

So, so far, so good.

Interestingly, one unexpected side effect is that I look for household chores to do that require me to take some steps - laundry, restocking the logs next to our wood-burning stove, loading the dishwasher. And, this weekend, going to the supermarket.

Creeting St Peter doesn't have a supermarket but, fortunately Cedars Park has a largish Tesco on its edge, even more fortunately at the Creeting end, so I walked there yesterday and today, slightly disappointed to find that it's only three thousand steps each way. The first half of the walk is through the fields, and it is a bit muddy at the moment. However, today's walk was improved somewhat by the sight of an egret at fairly close quarters.

My first challenge is looming large though...

@NeedhamFC blow as cold as the January weather...

Gloves? Check. Hat? Check. The scarf my mother knitted for me whilst I was at university? Check. I was properly kitted out for a night of passion and high drama at Needham Market's very own 'Field of Dreams', Bloomfields. It was, need I say, pretty cold.

Having walked from the station, it seemed that I might not have picked the most attractive game of the season, and as the visitors from VCD Athletic don't have many fans of their own, it was soon apparent that the good people of Needham Market had opted for a night in front of a warm television.

The Marketmen have recovered after a torrid first quarter of the season, and stood just above the drop zone at the beginning of the evening, albeit eight points clear of 21st placed Farnborough, and with VCD Athletic deep in trouble in 23rd, this looked like an opportunity to open up real daylight between themselves and the bottom four.

And, early on, it looked promising, with Needham dominating possession. The catch was that they weren't creating chances against a team whose defence looked as brittle as their away record suggested. And, as the first half wore on, the visitors began to come into the game more. At half-time, it all looked fairly even.

Both sides had clearly been given a good talking to at half-time, and the second half started rather more brightly. You just had the feeling that, with both sides low on confidence, the first goal would be decisive. Sadly, it was the visitors who scored it, although if the linesman had had the option of a video replay, he might not have been too pleased with his decision-making.

From there on in, Needham pressed rather ineffectually and were caught on the break with a somewhat fortuitous second - I can't believe that the away striker, Lheureux Menga, really meant to toe-poke a lob over the keeper, but there you go - before wrapping things up with a third which belied the rather scrappy football which had proceeded it.

So, 0-3 it ended and, whilst the result was disappointing, what is worse is that it has given hope to all the teams in the relegation battle.

A chance missed by the Marketmen, I fear...

Missing the point, and possibly missing the target, but still...

I've had a somewhat frustrating day at the office. And, given how it started, that wasn't a phrase I might have expected to type within twelve hours. But, you ask, why?

It has been a trying year in some ways, doing a job that, in truth, I might not be entirely suited to. Don't get me wrong, I can do it, and perform at an acceptable level in the process. But, perhaps, it isn't the most effective use of my skill set, and it runs somewhat contrary to my view of the world (a mostly optimistic one). That's how life is sometimes.

But, this morning started well. I was productive, focussed, almost inspired to achieve my goals. Indeed, I was making good progress until my manager wandered over and passed on some news. It was as if someone had let all of the air out of a child's balloon, for a missive had come from on high that more statistics and reporting were required. Why? Because our targets for the year are in jeopardy. The apparent solution? Take us away from our work to review why we might not meet them. And that, in a nutshell, explains why bureaucracy is a dirty word.

There has been one benefit, admittedly not one that is intended. I have developed a sneaking regard for my increasingly put-upon manager, whose desire to manage us as individuals is swamped by the increasingly volume of data that she is expected to gather, analyse and report. She appears to see her role as one of removing obstacles that stand between us and achievement, and of developing our skills so that we are more effective. It will, I fear, never catch on...

As our year end approaches, the concept of crisis management mutates into managing to cause a crisis, as senior managers begin to realise that, if their targets aren't met, they will be criticised. And, as they have no direct impact over key statistical measures, it becomes time to look as though they are managing the situation. As the real problems are long-term in nature, and difficult to resolve, quick wins are sought, primarily by harassing more junior managers to focus their attention on specific goals, regardless of their relative importance.

Me, I'm just a minion, increasingly expected to follow specified, rigid process maps, complete vast amounts of records to vouch that I have done so and deliver more for less, regardless of the holistic cost. I have nobody to devolve responsibility to, but I do know that I can only achieve what I can with the resources available. I am, ironically, where the sophistry ends.

And, because I am a sanguine kind of person, I shrug my shoulders, gather and present my data, and go home at night without fretting about it or taking it personally. If I was in a position of authority, however, I might be wondering what effect I was having on those of a less resilient ilk...

A bureaucrat wanders on...

So, we're now twenty-one days in to this walking thing and, so far, so good. I've managed my 10,000 steps every day, and am averaging over 11,000 (just in case, you understand).

Today, I walked to our nearest supermarket which, given that we are in the countryside, is a gentle half-hour stroll across the fields, along Mill Lane, over the A1120 into Creeting Road East, before cutting through part of the Cedars Park estate to arrive at our local branch of Tesco. In the sunshine, and with some villanelle to listen to on the headphones, it was reassuringly pleasant.

I didn't need much, the Sunday newspaper, a loaf of bread, some ham and some cheese for the week, and it wasn't long before I was heading back.

The funny thing is, this is becoming vaguely habit-forming. I've taken to arriving a little earlier for my train in the morning and using the time to walk up and down the platform. I perambulate around my village in the evening after work if I'm a little short on my steps (it's about 2,000 steps if you walk in a T-shape to each of the three edges of the village). And, of course, Ros is being very supportive.

So, the bureaucrat wanders on. I'll be tidying my wardrobes next...

Are we replacing management of people (which is difficult) by management of production units (which is easier)?

I was talking to someone I know (who will remain nameless) about the increasing bureaucratization of their job (which I won't specify) and it began to dawn on me that they experience similar problems to those that I have in my corner of the world, and it got me thinking - are we dumbing down the management of public services in particular to a point where we have lost control of the impact of the delivery of those services on those most affected by them?

When I started my career, at a point when the computerization of services was still a radical prospect, I was trained in the key aspects of my job in a classroom environment, alongside similar people, and was then encouraged to deliver those services, using my discretion to judge how best they could be delivered, with an element of sampling to check that the outcomes I was delivering were in accordance with a) the law (and we were pretty hot on that) and b) the quantity and timeliness of the delivery.

Yes, the quality of the management data wasn't very high, but what that meant was that, if you were a manager, you really needed to work closely with your staff to get the best out of them, passing on your experience, supporting them when you needed to, training them when new situations arose.

The main concern of central management was to make sure that you answered the post within a reasonable time and that all the required jobs got done. How that was managed was not so important, in that the outcome was what mattered.

Over time, that has changed, to the point where how things are done is more important than the outcome, and the importance of measurable results has become heightened. In short, a 'tick box' culture has taken over, with process mapping and standardized instructions replacing discretion and personalized risk assessing. As long as you have carried out the specified actions in the specified order at the appropriate time, the failure to achieve an outcome which might be defined as desirable is entirely excusable. The fact that, in doing so, you might have missed something otherwise obvious, or delivered a sub-optimal result, is therefore less of a personal problem than it should be - "I've done everything that I was supposed to do, so how can this be my fault?"

Individual contributors (and there's a depersonalized piece of management jargon that deserves putting down) quickly learn that a key part of their job is to document that they have carried out the specified actions in the specified manner and their process becomes almost mechanized. Fine when you're manufacturing widgets, perhaps not so good when you're a social worker, or any number of professional roles in the public sector dealing with vulnerable people.

So, why do this? Well, if you assume that the best of any cohort have highly developed informal systems to ensure that tasks get done, based on the experience gleaned over time, informal risk assessment and innate ability, you still have to deal with the rest. And the catch is that individualized management of people is difficult. They're all different, for one thing, with a spectrum of personalities, motivations, intellect and circumstances. So, it might be easier to design a process and make everyone do it the same. That way, you ensure that everyone should reach the same basic level of capability, thus protecting you from risk in the event that something goes wrong.

And, if you have a group of people who just aren't much good, this is easier than training them one on one, or disciplining them if they are genuinely irredeemable (and some people just aren't equipped to do the job they currently have). The problem is, the organisational scaffolding that supports your weakest links serves to constrain your high-flyers - they have to fill in the same forms, record the same activities, even if they do nothing to improve performance or enable greater output.

Worse still, by imposing such a straitjacket on your brightest and best, you tell them that, despite their apparent ability, you don't really trust them. You also deprofessionalize your people, because if all they're doing is following a process, they will know that virtually anyone can do that with enough practice.

The outcome? A public sector which loses the ability to apply discretion when it would achieve better outcomes than those resulting from a slavish adherence to process, a deskilling of those who deliver the services that grease the wheels of society and a steady deterioration of the human link between government and those it is supposed to serve.

You'll pardon me for saying this, but I can't help but feel that none of those outcomes are intended for delivery. But then again, I am a rather liberal bureaucrat... 

ALDE Party delegation - squeezing fifteen into six is just as difficult as it looks...

Following our not so glorious General Election result (think Charge of the Light Brigade but without the same level of survivors...), the Party has had to do a lot of thinking about what next and how. This, naturally, is way above my pay grade as a Local Party Treasurer. However, it has had effects that most members wouldn't see, and just as many probably won't care much about. As a member of the International Relations Committee though, I am suddenly confronted with one of them.

You see, our right to delegates on the ALDE Party Council and to its Congress are linked to the number of votes obtained at the most recent General Election, and the loss of votes has had a deleterious effect on our numbers, down from fifteen to six on Council, and from sixty-two to thirty-two at Congress. Luckily, we don't elect our Congress delegation. Unfortunately, we do directly elect our Council delegation, or at least, eight members of it. Our dilemma might be beginning to dawn on some readers...

In 2014, we elected eight members of the Council delegation through a vote of Federal Conference delegates and, most generously, enough of you voted for me to enable me to serve a third term. To complicate matters, none of them was the Chair of the International Relations Committee, who represents the Federal Executive on our delegation, and who really ought to be there.

The other seven places are nominated by the three State Parties, Federal Policy Committee and the Liberal Democrat European Group (LDEG) - somewhat helpfully, the State Parties all failed to nominate anyone.

And so, a resolution of this problem is required and, in a fit of enthusiasm, I volunteered to draw up a paper for International Relations Committee to discuss and, hopefully, adopt.

This is proving somewhat harder than I expected. Balancing gender, ethnicity (and yes, I fully intend to do that) and the State Parties is a challenge, but how do you address the historic role of Federal Policy Committee, or include the Party President, or ensure that the delegations aren't London-centric?

So, with the next meeting of the International Relations Committee approaching fast, I can see how my afternoon is going to look... 

And I would walk ten thousand steps, and I would walk ten thousand more...

Alright, so I've taken to the 'walking around with vague purpose' thing, courtesy of my Fitbit app, and yesterday encountered my first obstacle. The lifts in my office building failed on Thursday afternoon, and whilst walking downstairs is alright, if surprisingly hard on the knees, walking up to the ninth floor is a mite tough for those of us of a more walrusish figure.

I made it up there to start work, but with the lifts still out of order at lunchtime, the prospect of my regular early afternoon stroll was, how might I put it, uninviting. But needs must, and one shouldn't balk at the first fence, so I bravely plodded downstairs and walked around Ipswich at a modestly brisk pace.

Returning to the office, the lifts still weren't working, so I dragged my weary body back up nine flights of stairs, without stopping for breath and emerged triumphantly, if in need of oxygen, at the ninth floor landing, slightly pleased with myself.

But, another 'ten thousand step' day had been safely completed, and all was well...

Today offered a slightly different challenge, however, in that Ros had agreed to go to Bottisham, in East Cambridgeshire, to support our team there in their by-election campaign. As I am not allowed to actively campaign, I left Ros to do some canvassing and instead went for a nice stroll around the village. It's quite a large one, and so I was able to cover quite some distance, stopping occasionally to admire the architecture.

And so, a thirteenth consecutive day with ten thousand steps in has been negotiated. Apparently, I have now walked as far as emperor penguins do when heading for their breeding grounds...

A gentle stroll in a soggy countryside...

Not even my best friends would suggest that exercise and I have an ongoing relationship. I am mostly deskbound in the workplace, and whilst I have occasionally taken to gyms at moments of wild enthusiasm, such activity is usually short-lived, sporadic or both.

However, needs must, and as I aspire to travelling the world in my eighties, drinking the occasional gin and tonic in exotic, faraway places, it has gradually dawned on me that, in my early-fifties, it might be wise to improve the odds that I will make it that far in a state that allows me to get on the aeroplane.

The catch? I still hate gyms, filled as they mostly are by people who are younger, fitter and have a taste in music that bemuses me at best, irritates at worst. Is it really necessary to play endless club/dance music by artists that I've never heard of? Apparently, in Ipswich at least, it is.

Fortunately, I live in the countryside, surrounded by gently rolling landscape, with nothing more threatening than the odd low-flying pheasant. And, on a sunny day, there is little finer than the walk north out of the village along Creeting Lane towards Stowupland. And so, I've taken to going for walks, with the intention to accumulate at least ten thousand steps a day. During the week, I walk around the centre of Ipswich, carrying out routine tasks like banking, buying groceries or making small, but necessary, purchases.

When it's dry, this is fine. But on a day like today, with driving, cold rain, and a log fire to sit in front of, it is very tempting to put the steps off to another day. And, knowing my levels of willpower and focus, once I get into the habit of deferring the walk, it probably won't happen and bang goes another good intention.

And so, with Ros off on a family errand, I steeled myself to go out into the rain and wind. The wind was a southerly, which at least meant that the rain was at my back as I headed towards Hammond's Corner (no, I have no idea why it's called Hammond's Corner, I just know that it is...). It wasn't too bad... really. Turning for home was another matter, however. But in my sensible jacket and cloth cap, I was sufficiently protected from the elements and beat my way back to the village.

Strangely enough, it is quite satisfying to have overcome my natural inertia and achieved the day's goal (11,829 steps as I type this), and perhaps I might stick to this long enough for it to become habit forming...