Yesterday, I wrote of the problems facing our women Parliamentary candidates, and the collective failures of the parts of the Party machinery that have a stake in dealing with such issues. It seemed to strike a chord with a number of people, who felt that I had put my finger on something which should concern us all.
However, in the eyes of an old colleague and friend, I didn't go far enough. And I have a confession to make - Duncan is right to say that. However, I have a defence, albeit an imperfect one. I might actually have to get involved in that process of reconciliation that is so necessary. In my role as a member of my State and Regional Candidates Committees, if a conciliator is required, I will be needed to act as an honest broker. Thus, taking a stance that places the blame on one side or the other reduces my potential effectiveness.
I have heard some pretty ghastly stories where candidates have been consistently undermined, and encountered Local Parties whose expectations of what might reasonably be expected of a candidate run towards the delusional end of any sensible scale. In turn, I have encountered candidates who have an unrealistic expectation of what the Local Party might be able to deliver, or whose perception of the winnability of their seat is flawed. Occasionally, I have lent a helping hand, where I am able to do so.
My responsibilities start with diagnosing the problem, which I think that I have done. However, that can only be an opening gambit, and actions speak louder than words. Last night, I found myself in conversation with a member of the Leader's team, and took the opportunity to raise this issue, seeking to place the item on their agenda. I got a fairly friendly hearing, and I hope that Team Nick will at least investigate further.
Over the coming few days, I will make some suggestions of my own regarding the roles that various groups might play in improving the situation. Meanwhile, Duncan will be doing some research as indicated yesterday. It won't be immediate, but we might have some effect in the medium and long term.
In the meantime, if you know a PPC who is struggling, offer them a helping hand. Do something that might ease their burden. If necessary, find someone who can step in if needed. After all, one day you might be that PPC...
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Women parliamentary candidates voting with their feet - is the Party fiddling while Rome burns?
A worrying trend in recent months is the number of good women candidates who have decided to give up the seats they fought so hard to be selected for. A variety of reasons have been given, but one of the hidden reasons is, I believe, the inability of the Party to address the problems which place pressure on candidates, regardless of gender.
A number of Local Parties assume that, having selected their candidate, that all of the things that haven't happened up to that point, will suddenly happen. The creation of delivery networks, enhanced fundraising, vast amounts of canvassing, all of these will come if only a PPC can be found.
Meanwhile, in good seats, Campaigns Department have a game plan. If the Local Party fulfil the central plan, funds will follow, creating an obligation to deliver the declared objectives. Regardless of the resources and, indeed, willing, of the Local Party, without achievement, funds may be withdrawn in favour of a more compliant alternative target seat.
In the middle of these competing pressures is... the poor PPC. And who is there to support them?
Not the English Candidates Committee, whose role formally ends at the point where a candidate is selected and only resumes after the election, when the performance review is conducted. Not the Campaign for Gender Balance, or Ethnic Minority Liberal Democrats, or even the Parliamentary Candidates Association. Whilst they can provide mentoring, and very useful it is too, they have little enough funding to carry out core activities, let alone a meaningful programme of concrete support.
The Campaigns Department will support paid staff, as they have a responsibility as managers. There aren't many of them anyway, so their time is fully employed producing the ammunition for use locally. And as for the rest of the Party... we have plans for a Leadership Academy, and this will certainly help increase the skill levels of our candidates.
But who is there to stand by our candidates, to guide them when their Local Party is refusing to do the work necessary to properly support them, to provide assistance when work, family or carer responsibilities become too much to easily bear? Who is there to provide concrete support in terms of cash, support staff, telephone canvassing, a paid leaflet delivery?
Someone needs to step up and demand the resources to provide a genuine support system for our candidates, especially those in good seats. Unless we do, we risk losing a generation of excellent candidates because they burn themselves out trying to balance the conflicting demands on their time, energy and emotional fortitude. And if those losses are disproportionately women, we risk a major setback in our quest to seek a better balanced Parliamentary group.
Irfan Ahmed, bureaucrats and censorship
I seem to have set off something of a storm in the blogosphere. Curious, really, as it increasingly seems that my words are being tortured for subtext that doesn't exist.
So let's start at the beginning...
Originally, I 'called out' Irfan for possible homophobic comments. I wasn't absolutely certain, more the possessor of a sense that his language was, at best, clumsy, and, at worst, offensive. The emerging viewpoint veered between the two, so I feel utterly justified in my initial stance.
I then wondered out loud about whether the Aggregator needed a 'community policing strategy'. At no point did I call for a named individual to be banned, although, in retrospect, one can easily see how the two pieces could be conflated.
So, let's summarise. I have not called for anyone to be banned from Lib Dem Blogs. I have not called for anyone to be expelled from the Party. As witchhunts go, it lacks most of the key elements required (the witch, the firewood and the scary guy with the bulging eyes and the religious text spring to mind most immediately).
Irfan has responded initially by denying his intent to cause offence and, eventually, by apologising in the comments of the offending blog entry. I am content that he has clarified the position to my satisfaction (the rest of you must draw your own conclusion), and I will, when I get a chance to do so, reverse the mute on his blog.
From a personal perspective, were I to be in his position, I might choose to post a discrete blog entry clarifying my position, but that is a style point, not a demand.
I have, in the past, noted the caution with which one should write for a public, unfiltered audience. Irfan has provided an object lesson in the risks of the medium... And, perhaps, so have I...
A blast from the past in Barnstaple
Saturday evening found us in North Devon, where Nick Harvey had invited Ros to meet some of the members in the Liberal Club in the heart of Barnstaple.
Despite the fairly unwelcoming weather, a small but friendly group turned out to talk about the Party and what it is doing. The Club has, on display, a collection of scrapbooks containing press cuttings going back to the time of Jeremy Thorpe, and it was fascinating to follow the stories as the constituency changed hands from Liberal to Conservative and back, with Nick's narrow victory when he regained the seat.
Pictures of a somewhat younger Nick were dotted around the room, as well as posters from celebrations of years gone by. It was fascinating to see such signs of Liberal tradition, something that I seldom encounter in London.
Despite the fairly unwelcoming weather, a small but friendly group turned out to talk about the Party and what it is doing. The Club has, on display, a collection of scrapbooks containing press cuttings going back to the time of Jeremy Thorpe, and it was fascinating to follow the stories as the constituency changed hands from Liberal to Conservative and back, with Nick's narrow victory when he regained the seat.
Pictures of a somewhat younger Nick were dotted around the room, as well as posters from celebrations of years gone by. It was fascinating to see such signs of Liberal tradition, something that I seldom encounter in London.
Monday, October 06, 2008
Somebody else's Annual General Meeting - what do sheep have to do with it?
Saturday entailed a latish start, as we weren't due in the award winning Tedburn St Mary (Best Village of 2001!) until after lunch but, as we had some time to spare and a little shopping to do, we made our way to Okehampton for a gentle stroll to ease the kinks out of my back (it's a little better thank you, although I still ought to have it looked at, methinks...) and grab some coffee.
Okehampton is a pleasant little town on the northern edge of Dartmoor, and has managed to keep its main shopping in the centre, making for a bustling scene on a Saturday. However, sadly, we had to move on to make sure we arrived in good time for the Central Devon AGM, where Ros was the guest speaker.
Business was conducted fairly briskly all things considered, despite a slightly idiosyncratic performance by the Chair and Ros was on her feet somewhat earlier than I might have otherwise feared. She gave a frank and honest appraisal of Party strategy, noting that this had an impact on our targeting strategy in places like Devon, where our primary opposition is the Conservatives.
Ros complimented Sally Morgan, the Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Central Devon, noting that the Party needed more like her if it was to achieve its goal of selecting and electing more women to Westminster, and I share her enthusiasm. Sally juggles her family and political responsibilities in a manner which demonstrates that she could handle the competing priorities of an MP's role quite easily.
There is an assumption in some quarters that raising a family is a barrier to being a successful candidate. It is - for anyone who is a parent. However, it should not be insuperable, and we have a duty as liberals to ensure that we provide support sufficient to enable anyone to play any role they are qualified to fulfil. It shouldn't be down to the partner, if one exists, to shoulder the burden of support, although there are many who do so uncomplainingly.
Meanwhile, outside, a field full of sheep chewed thoughtfully on the damp grass as a thin drizzle fell throughout. I find sheep intriguing. They aren't very interesting in terms of activity, but I am increasingly suspicious that they have greater understanding of what we're up to than they let on. I wonder what they make of it all?...
Okehampton is a pleasant little town on the northern edge of Dartmoor, and has managed to keep its main shopping in the centre, making for a bustling scene on a Saturday. However, sadly, we had to move on to make sure we arrived in good time for the Central Devon AGM, where Ros was the guest speaker.
Business was conducted fairly briskly all things considered, despite a slightly idiosyncratic performance by the Chair and Ros was on her feet somewhat earlier than I might have otherwise feared. She gave a frank and honest appraisal of Party strategy, noting that this had an impact on our targeting strategy in places like Devon, where our primary opposition is the Conservatives.
Ros complimented Sally Morgan, the Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Central Devon, noting that the Party needed more like her if it was to achieve its goal of selecting and electing more women to Westminster, and I share her enthusiasm. Sally juggles her family and political responsibilities in a manner which demonstrates that she could handle the competing priorities of an MP's role quite easily.
There is an assumption in some quarters that raising a family is a barrier to being a successful candidate. It is - for anyone who is a parent. However, it should not be insuperable, and we have a duty as liberals to ensure that we provide support sufficient to enable anyone to play any role they are qualified to fulfil. It shouldn't be down to the partner, if one exists, to shoulder the burden of support, although there are many who do so uncomplainingly.
Meanwhile, outside, a field full of sheep chewed thoughtfully on the damp grass as a thin drizzle fell throughout. I find sheep intriguing. They aren't very interesting in terms of activity, but I am increasingly suspicious that they have greater understanding of what we're up to than they let on. I wonder what they make of it all?...
In the immortal words of the Pub Landlord, "Irfan Ahmed, you're barred!"
So I provoked a discussion on whether there is a place for community based discipline within the Liberal Democrat blogging community, and it turns out that you're a rather tolerant bunch (I knew that I liked you all for a reason...).
It is clear that there is no desire for a policy of exclusion of individual bloggers from our community at this time, for reasons wholly liberal and laissez-faire. Naturally, I respect that view and intend to take the oft recommended position that the mute facility means that I can exclude those that offend my sensitivities.
So that's my stance from here on in. I will, as a matter of courtesy, indicate if I choose to mute someone, explaining why so that the offending party can either seek to persuade me that I'm wrong, or at least be aware that someone out there disapproves.
I think that Irfan's approach to the controversy that surrounds his post is naïve and wrong. If he doesn't understand that he has caused offence, and sees no reason why propagation of some of the anonymous filth that spews from the comment pages of Guido Fawkes' blog is unacceptable, then I don't have to put up with it.
Irfan Ahmed, for the time being at least, you are the weakest link. Goodbye!
Completing the circle in Totnes
Some years ago, when the prospects of serious political success in Brent were, to be blunt, rather less than they later became, I was appointed as Returning Officer for the Parliamentary candidate selections in Brent.
At that time, there were three individual, free-standing Local Parties, none of whom had a large membership. Indeed, Brent East had just forty-seven members, and only seven of those voted in the uncontested selection.
Brent South was likewise an unopposed 'contest', and the candidate was a young man called Julian Brazil. It was his first attempt at selection, and he was duly adopted by a vote of two to nil. He was an enthusiastic candidate in a contest against Paul Boateng but duly went down to defeat in what was hardly an unexpected result. However, he performed well, and earned a positive report.
To cut a long story short, Julian is now our PPC in Totnes, a seat where we harbour hopes of success, and it was a pleasure to spend an evening with him, his new wife and three dozen or so local members and, of course, my lovely wife. We were attending a dinner at a restaurant called 'Alf Resco' and a really rather pleasant time was had by all, made even better by the fact that a goodly sum of money was made to support the campaign.
It has been one of the curious features of our travels that I keep running into people that I've worked with. I wonder what happened to the young woman who chaired Brent & Harrow Young Liberals in 1986/87?..
At that time, there were three individual, free-standing Local Parties, none of whom had a large membership. Indeed, Brent East had just forty-seven members, and only seven of those voted in the uncontested selection.
Brent South was likewise an unopposed 'contest', and the candidate was a young man called Julian Brazil. It was his first attempt at selection, and he was duly adopted by a vote of two to nil. He was an enthusiastic candidate in a contest against Paul Boateng but duly went down to defeat in what was hardly an unexpected result. However, he performed well, and earned a positive report.
To cut a long story short, Julian is now our PPC in Totnes, a seat where we harbour hopes of success, and it was a pleasure to spend an evening with him, his new wife and three dozen or so local members and, of course, my lovely wife. We were attending a dinner at a restaurant called 'Alf Resco' and a really rather pleasant time was had by all, made even better by the fact that a goodly sum of money was made to support the campaign.
It has been one of the curious features of our travels that I keep running into people that I've worked with. I wonder what happened to the young woman who chaired Brent & Harrow Young Liberals in 1986/87?..
A high-wire act by Mr Ahmed and what it might mean for us all
Yesterday, I drew attention to a posting by one of our fellow Lib Dem bloggers, indicating my concern as to the implied homophobia of his comments about the new Labour cabinet.
A number of you commented, indicating that I was not alone in my view. Indeed, some of you posted comments on Irfan's original posting, advising him that, at the very least, the language used was unwise. It was apparent that he had also drawn some highly inappropriate and unsavoury anonymous comments.
However, it is his view at the time of writing that he is perfectly within his rights to bring the matter to the attention of others. And, of course, he is right. On the other hand, he is providing a platform for homophobia of a sort most heinous, and worst of all, doing it under a Liberal Democrat banner. This is unacceptable and, it might be argued, behaviour likely to bring the Party into disrepute. Indeed, Julian Harris has uncovered another comment which might be deemed to be in conflict with the tenets of liberal democracy.
"What can be done?", I hear you ask. At this time, there is no mechanism to remove offensive material from the Aggregator unless an individual chooses to self-police. However, as a collective, we should have the right to exclaim, "Not in my name". Access to the aggregator generates a significant percentage of traffic to our blogs, and loss of that access will hurt, especially those of us who set some store in the level of our readership.
So here's a proposal. If someone is offensive, it should be the right of a self-defined community to punish that individual in an open and transparent manner. We should encourage rehabilitation and penance, as well as restorative justice. However, we should not allow a free-for-all, whereby the acts of an individual imperil our collective reputation.
So, my friends, I come to a question? Do we believe in obliging individuals to accept responsibility for their actions and in defending the rights of others to take offence? Or do we prefer to just disengage from a debate about proper behaviour?
Learning about recycling
I cannot deny that travelling the length and breadth of the country with Ros has been educational. I've already noted that I've learnt about the rural dimension of Party policy, about the problems caused by our internal processes and about how activists locally see the Party nationally.
However, sometimes I learn something of a non-bureaucrat nature. On Friday, Ros and I were taken to see some of the achievements of Teignbridge District Council, now Liberal Democrat led. Our guide was Leader of the Council, Cllr Alan Connett, and our first stop was the Recycling Centre.
Teignbridge residents now recycle 56% of their waste, and we got to meet some of the key staff, as well as Cllr Gordon Hook, the Executive Member who leads on recycling. I was particularly impressed by the work done in schools to encourage children to play a role in encouraging household recycling, with collection vehicles named by different schools, and pictures created by children placed on the side of them. One particularly nice touch is that there are big signs on the sides of every collection vehicle thanking residents for their achievements and telling them how well they are doing.
There is genuine enthusiasm for improving those figures, and all of this without moving towards mandatory recycling, something that has been introduced by other councils. Best of all, their efforts contribute towards reducing the costs of landfill to the residents.
There is an interesting twist though. Teignbridge is one of very few, if any, local authorities to bring their waste management back in-house. It was their view that the original contract was poorly delivered and, when the opportunity arose to retender, they discovered that they could undercut the best private sector bid by £750,000. They now have the flexibility to try new ideas without having to constantly renegotiate.
Sometimes, it isn't public or private, it's about what actually works...
However, sometimes I learn something of a non-bureaucrat nature. On Friday, Ros and I were taken to see some of the achievements of Teignbridge District Council, now Liberal Democrat led. Our guide was Leader of the Council, Cllr Alan Connett, and our first stop was the Recycling Centre.
Teignbridge residents now recycle 56% of their waste, and we got to meet some of the key staff, as well as Cllr Gordon Hook, the Executive Member who leads on recycling. I was particularly impressed by the work done in schools to encourage children to play a role in encouraging household recycling, with collection vehicles named by different schools, and pictures created by children placed on the side of them. One particularly nice touch is that there are big signs on the sides of every collection vehicle thanking residents for their achievements and telling them how well they are doing.
There is genuine enthusiasm for improving those figures, and all of this without moving towards mandatory recycling, something that has been introduced by other councils. Best of all, their efforts contribute towards reducing the costs of landfill to the residents.
There is an interesting twist though. Teignbridge is one of very few, if any, local authorities to bring their waste management back in-house. It was their view that the original contract was poorly delivered and, when the opportunity arose to retender, they discovered that they could undercut the best private sector bid by £750,000. They now have the flexibility to try new ideas without having to constantly renegotiate.
Sometimes, it isn't public or private, it's about what actually works...
Sunday, October 05, 2008
Another addition to my blog roll
I sense that Jennie is lonely, so it's high time I added another name to my blog roll. Step forward Jonathan Calder, whose blog 'Liberal England' has been a source of amusement and food for thought for a long time.
Of course, Jonathan's role as secretary to Lord Bonkers (my favourite slogan, "Don't be plonkers, vote for Bonkers!" will live long in my memory) is what he is perhaps best known for amongst Liberal (Democrat) activists. However, amidst the references to the presumably now world famous 'Shropshire Star', and the pithy one-liners, there lies an astute commentator on current events. The recognition of his work by fellow bloggers, regardless of party, is a reflection of the thoughtfulness and quality of his postings, indeed of his writings generally.
For unlike most of us, Jonathan has rather greater reach, through his contributions to Liberal Democrat News and the New Statesman. He is an ambassador for Liberal Democrat blogging and worthy of our celebration.
Of course, Jonathan's role as secretary to Lord Bonkers (my favourite slogan, "Don't be plonkers, vote for Bonkers!" will live long in my memory) is what he is perhaps best known for amongst Liberal (Democrat) activists. However, amidst the references to the presumably now world famous 'Shropshire Star', and the pithy one-liners, there lies an astute commentator on current events. The recognition of his work by fellow bloggers, regardless of party, is a reflection of the thoughtfulness and quality of his postings, indeed of his writings generally.
For unlike most of us, Jonathan has rather greater reach, through his contributions to Liberal Democrat News and the New Statesman. He is an ambassador for Liberal Democrat blogging and worthy of our celebration.
No platform for racism, sexism or homophobia?
I am a child of the mid-sixties, studied at a pretty left-wing university in the mid-eighties and have seen a shift in British politics whereby more women and ethnic minorities play a role in the governance of this country, and whereby the sexual orientation of an individual does not define his or her place in society in the way that it once did. That is not to say that society is entirely blind to the gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation of the individuals within it, nor that those previously under-represented groups remain anything other than under-represented.
However, I was brought up aware of the idea that, whilst the concept of free speech is entirely desirable, it is not obligatory to provide a platform for racism, sexism or homophobia. Irfan Ahmed's blog entry earlier this afternoon treads perilously close to homophobia, perhaps even steps over the line. Publishing such comments on a Liberal Democrat blog aggregator risks discrediting all of us, and posting such comments under an avatar which is the Party's official logo is, in my mind, unacceptable, and I have muted his blog accordingly. If clarification is forthcoming, and is satisfactory, I reserve the right to reverse my stance.
I might have taken the step of complaining about the matter to Ryan. However, I think it unreasonable to place him in the position of having to make decisions of censorship, and therefore place my view before my fellow blogging colleagues for their consideration accordingly.
I do not believe that any blogger, regardless of his or her views, should have the ability to propagate their views curtailed. However, it is not their right to have such views further propagated by groups or individuals who do not support and, indeed, condemn them.
However, I was brought up aware of the idea that, whilst the concept of free speech is entirely desirable, it is not obligatory to provide a platform for racism, sexism or homophobia. Irfan Ahmed's blog entry earlier this afternoon treads perilously close to homophobia, perhaps even steps over the line. Publishing such comments on a Liberal Democrat blog aggregator risks discrediting all of us, and posting such comments under an avatar which is the Party's official logo is, in my mind, unacceptable, and I have muted his blog accordingly. If clarification is forthcoming, and is satisfactory, I reserve the right to reverse my stance.
I might have taken the step of complaining about the matter to Ryan. However, I think it unreasonable to place him in the position of having to make decisions of censorship, and therefore place my view before my fellow blogging colleagues for their consideration accordingly.
I do not believe that any blogger, regardless of his or her views, should have the ability to propagate their views curtailed. However, it is not their right to have such views further propagated by groups or individuals who do not support and, indeed, condemn them.
Friday, October 03, 2008
David Blunkett - proving that it takes an autocrat to know one
And so goodbye Sir Ian, and thanks for everything. The politicisation of the Metropolitan Police, spin, an inability to accept responsibility, yes, I will probably sleep more soundly in my bed knowing that he's gone.
It is nice to see David Blunkett's commentary though. "This is rule by autocracy and a dangerous precedent, politicising the police force in Britain." Such a pity he didn't understand that when he was Home Secretary...
It is nice to see David Blunkett's commentary though. "This is rule by autocracy and a dangerous precedent, politicising the police force in Britain." Such a pity he didn't understand that when he was Home Secretary...
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
London Region Conference: it just gets better and better
I've had some really excellent news, in that Graham Watson (the Leader of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats in Europe, ALDE) has agreed to speak at our Conference on Saturday, November 15th.Graham will add lustre to our discussions, given his reputation as one of the European Parliament's leading figures, and I am hoping that, despite his early slot, we'll get a good crowd in for his speech. He will also be taking questions, and given the importance of performing well in next year's European elections, I'm optimisitic that he will give our activists some food for thought.
A new feature for Liberal Bureaucracy
I've noticed that a number of my fellow bloggers have blog lists, whereby you can see what some of their favourite/most interesting colleagues are saying.Never let it be said that I am behind the times, so I am introducing my own blog list, one at a time. I'm starting today with Jennie Rigg, whose astonishingly cool blog on LiveJournal is one that I tend to keep an eye on. I voted for her in the recent Iain Dale lovefest, and my only regret is that I didn't give her a higher ranking. Consistently interesting, with a lively commentariat, this is a blogger who merit more attention in the coming year. If anyone from the Blog of the Year judging panel is watching, consider that as a nomination for 2009...
Is that nice Mr Hague about to betray his eurosceptic friends?
I was taught that, if you don't like the question that you're being asked, answering another one with sufficient conviction will do.
Whilst I'm not convinced that it is ethically sound as a theory, I listened to a fine example of the art this morning on 'Today', courtesy of Edward Stourton and William Hague. It is presumed by many that the Irish will vote again on the Lisbon Treaty and that, if they do, they will ratify it.
"So, what will the Conservatives do if this happens?", William Hague was asked. "Will you tear up the treaty? Will you put it to a referendum of the British people?", he was asked.
His response, to say what would happen if the Irish had not ratified, left the question hanging, unanswered. "So, Mr Hague, the answer is that you don't know?", was the final enquiry, at which point time ran out.
I thought that the Conservative position was for a referendum come what may. William Hague apparently disagrees. What does he really believe in, if not a referendum, or was his position just for media consumption? You really begin to wonder if the Conservatives believe in anything...
Whilst I'm not convinced that it is ethically sound as a theory, I listened to a fine example of the art this morning on 'Today', courtesy of Edward Stourton and William Hague. It is presumed by many that the Irish will vote again on the Lisbon Treaty and that, if they do, they will ratify it.
"So, what will the Conservatives do if this happens?", William Hague was asked. "Will you tear up the treaty? Will you put it to a referendum of the British people?", he was asked.
His response, to say what would happen if the Irish had not ratified, left the question hanging, unanswered. "So, Mr Hague, the answer is that you don't know?", was the final enquiry, at which point time ran out.
I thought that the Conservative position was for a referendum come what may. William Hague apparently disagrees. What does he really believe in, if not a referendum, or was his position just for media consumption? You really begin to wonder if the Conservatives believe in anything...
George Osborne: catchy slogans, 100% hot air
For God's sake, can't someone persuade David Cameron to ditch the intern and get someone who understands economics as his Shadow Chancellor? Fair enough, he does clearly recognise good spin when he sees it, but surely even Dave can spot the hypocrisy of his party's position on tax and spending?
A freeze on council tax? Sounds great, until you realise what is actually on offer. Councils will be allowed to increase spending by 2.5% and will have the entire increase funded by central government. Now, let's see if I've got this right. I will not pay more council tax but will pay more tax to cover the increased central government contribution. Not smoke and mirrors at all then...
Oh yes, and it's entirely inconsistent with Conservative talk of localism. No right for a local council to spend more if they need to, so clearly a means to introduce still more stringent capping. Whereas for efficient councils, it provides an incentive to spend more money, not less, as the funds are coming from central government.
It isn't a stealth tax either, is it, as it replaces a charge that I can see, receive an explanation of, and can punish the council for, with a subvention from a large faceless budget administered by civil servants who have no accountability to a formula which is even less transparent than the answer to the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Of course, there will be cuts to make up for it all, I'm sure. The emphasis on 'hard working families' makes it abundantly clear that, if you're single, or childless, or poor, there is little on offer. The poor won't benefit, as their council tax is paid for by the state. The elderly will continue to suffer from the death by a thousand cuts that is the likely fate of social care. Those amongst us who are single will lose out through the introduction of bribes to become, or stay, married.
I loathe this government, and most of its recent works. However, I don't see why I should go quietly in a transition from a bunch of big government, authoritarian control freaks to a bunch of socially reactionary, hypocritical control freaks. My only hope is that the Conservatives get exposed for what they really are...
A freeze on council tax? Sounds great, until you realise what is actually on offer. Councils will be allowed to increase spending by 2.5% and will have the entire increase funded by central government. Now, let's see if I've got this right. I will not pay more council tax but will pay more tax to cover the increased central government contribution. Not smoke and mirrors at all then...
Oh yes, and it's entirely inconsistent with Conservative talk of localism. No right for a local council to spend more if they need to, so clearly a means to introduce still more stringent capping. Whereas for efficient councils, it provides an incentive to spend more money, not less, as the funds are coming from central government.
It isn't a stealth tax either, is it, as it replaces a charge that I can see, receive an explanation of, and can punish the council for, with a subvention from a large faceless budget administered by civil servants who have no accountability to a formula which is even less transparent than the answer to the Schleswig-Holstein question.
Of course, there will be cuts to make up for it all, I'm sure. The emphasis on 'hard working families' makes it abundantly clear that, if you're single, or childless, or poor, there is little on offer. The poor won't benefit, as their council tax is paid for by the state. The elderly will continue to suffer from the death by a thousand cuts that is the likely fate of social care. Those amongst us who are single will lose out through the introduction of bribes to become, or stay, married.
I loathe this government, and most of its recent works. However, I don't see why I should go quietly in a transition from a bunch of big government, authoritarian control freaks to a bunch of socially reactionary, hypocritical control freaks. My only hope is that the Conservatives get exposed for what they really are...
English Candidates Committee: my manifesto for 2008
Mark Valladares – it’s about more than just ideas, it’s about making them live!
Last year, I claimed that I would be a radical voice for change on English Candidates Committee, and you gave me the chance to prove that it was more than just a slogan.
Since then, I’ve been working to put my ideas into play, not just on the committee itself, but on the newly created Selection Rules Review Group.
Since then, I’ve been working to put my ideas into play, not just on the committee itself, but on the newly created Selection Rules Review Group.
and my cat, Cincinnati, thinks so too… Local Parties, especially our smaller ones, struggle with the bureaucracy of our candidate selection system. It is expensive and time consuming, so I have proposed that we abolish selection committees for non-target, non-Moving Forward seats. Less need for selection committee training, less work for returning officers, and why place more barriers in the way of applicants who are already approved?
I’ve worked hard to persuade my fellow colleagues, and sense that I’m making some headway. I’ve also supported other proposals such as revised, cheaper arrangements for advertising vacancies for PPC’s.
There is still more that I would like to do. Greater freedom of campaigning in selections is still to be won, but I truly believe that we should encourage greater creativity from our candidates. Technology may be seen as a threat by some, but it also presents opportunities for the brave.
I promise to oppose attempts to introduce positive discrimination in candidate selection. Liberals oppose such things on principle and I am no exception.
Finally, if re-elected, I will continue to propose and debate issues related to the work of the committee on my blog, as a means of reporting back on what I’m doing. I believe that it is vital that I keep you informed of my activities so that you can vote on an informed basis. It’s what democracy should be all about.
Monday, September 29, 2008
It's been a difficult year for cats
My recent Facebook update, indicating that I am somewhat more intelligent than my cat, has drawn a number of comments, and I am reminded just how many Liberal Democrats are 'cat people'.
It's been a difficult year for the feline element of the family, with Victoria dying from cancer, Franklin from old age aggravated by a meeting of my Local Party Executive, and then Eleanor from renal failure. They had all had a pretty good innings, so to speak, all of them making it to the cat equivalent of their eighties, but it has been something of a blow nonetheless.
I'm left with Cincinnati, a big orange and white bruiser of a cat (at least, he looks like one yet is a gentle soul at heart) and Katherine, who has suddenly given up her Greta Garbo approach to the world to become affectionate and demanding. Cincinnati is struggling a bit with the sudden lack of company, and has become more clingy in recent months.
Ros has been thrust into a world of cat fur, litter trays and 'cat food breath' and I have to say that she has borne this new world with surprising equanimity. However, the impact of two cats plus a cleaner is far less than that of five cats, and I have noticed that the house is easier to manage than it was.
Given the age of Cincinnati (15) and Katherine (16), they aren't going to be around forever, and I've already decided that our lifestyle is ill-suited to pets, so they won't be replaced, but I admit to a sense of foreboding about their age. Cincinnati, particularly, has been a major feature in my life, with his loud, reassuring purr and his sense of ownership over me.
Nobody ever said that pet ownership would be so emotionally testing...
It's been a difficult year for the feline element of the family, with Victoria dying from cancer, Franklin from old age aggravated by a meeting of my Local Party Executive, and then Eleanor from renal failure. They had all had a pretty good innings, so to speak, all of them making it to the cat equivalent of their eighties, but it has been something of a blow nonetheless.
I'm left with Cincinnati, a big orange and white bruiser of a cat (at least, he looks like one yet is a gentle soul at heart) and Katherine, who has suddenly given up her Greta Garbo approach to the world to become affectionate and demanding. Cincinnati is struggling a bit with the sudden lack of company, and has become more clingy in recent months.
Ros has been thrust into a world of cat fur, litter trays and 'cat food breath' and I have to say that she has borne this new world with surprising equanimity. However, the impact of two cats plus a cleaner is far less than that of five cats, and I have noticed that the house is easier to manage than it was.
Given the age of Cincinnati (15) and Katherine (16), they aren't going to be around forever, and I've already decided that our lifestyle is ill-suited to pets, so they won't be replaced, but I admit to a sense of foreboding about their age. Cincinnati, particularly, has been a major feature in my life, with his loud, reassuring purr and his sense of ownership over me.
Nobody ever said that pet ownership would be so emotionally testing...
Sunday, September 28, 2008
A day at the zoo
It's been a long campaign, and one of the problems is that you can't always find 'us time', as I like to think of it. You want to make sure that everything that can be done, has been.
However, we managed to find a little time to spend doing something that I enjoy particularly, i.e. a trip to a zoo, in this case, Marwell Zoo in Hampshire. Now I fully accept that zoos are not perfect, and there are always questions about the size of enclosures, diet, activity and, to be frank, whether or not it isn't simply better to leave them in the wild.
My view has always been that less is better, and zoos should be encouraged to maintain less animals in bigger enclosures. However, the reality is that such conditions are uneconomic, and that many zoos would go to the wall in the face of spiralling costs. Zoos perform a vital role in protecting endangered species, maintaining a viable gene pool and providing an opportunity for young people to see animals for themselves. The hope is that, having seen them in captivity, they might be moved to ensure that, one day, they might have an opportunity to see them in their natural state.
It was the perfect day for visiting a zoo, warm sunshine but not too warm, a gentle stroll between exhibits, and a nice variety of animals to look at, including a few that you don't usually see.
And now, back to the campaign...
However, we managed to find a little time to spend doing something that I enjoy particularly, i.e. a trip to a zoo, in this case, Marwell Zoo in Hampshire. Now I fully accept that zoos are not perfect, and there are always questions about the size of enclosures, diet, activity and, to be frank, whether or not it isn't simply better to leave them in the wild.
My view has always been that less is better, and zoos should be encouraged to maintain less animals in bigger enclosures. However, the reality is that such conditions are uneconomic, and that many zoos would go to the wall in the face of spiralling costs. Zoos perform a vital role in protecting endangered species, maintaining a viable gene pool and providing an opportunity for young people to see animals for themselves. The hope is that, having seen them in captivity, they might be moved to ensure that, one day, they might have an opportunity to see them in their natural state.
It was the perfect day for visiting a zoo, warm sunshine but not too warm, a gentle stroll between exhibits, and a nice variety of animals to look at, including a few that you don't usually see.
And now, back to the campaign...
Friday, September 19, 2008
Setting sail for Wiltshire
In keeping with today's celebration, I'm writing this post from the number 8 bus, but not the usual one. This one's from Andover to Amesbury, and here I am, parrot on my shoulder, and a chest full of pieces of eight... sorry, I'm 4 Ros leaflets. Tonight, the I'm 4 Ros roadshow hits Wiltshire, an area with little in the way of a seafaring tradition - unless you know better, gentle reader.
For a change, I'm meeting Ros at our hotel, which requires an hour long bus ride. This is an unexpected pleasure, as I've always enjoyed country bus rides since my years at the University of East Anglia in the mid-eighties. Eastern Counties buses were always a pleasure, and a front row seat upstairs always allowed an opportunity to soak in the gentle countryside of Norfolk and Suffolk. The odd stop at a country inn for lunch never did any harm either...
In recent years, without the time to ride the country buses at home, I'd taken to riding the buses elsewhere, in Mauritius or Fiji, for example. It's an unpressured way of both seeing a country and getting a feel for its people.
You also get to see places that the tourists don't go, and I remember a journey a few years ago when my bus suddenly veered off of the road down a track through a sugarcane field for no adequately explained reason. Eventually, we arrived in a small village of about 100 people, before lurching off in some other random direction. I did get to where I was going in the end...
Ah well, better dash! Aha, me hearties, avast behind!
For a change, I'm meeting Ros at our hotel, which requires an hour long bus ride. This is an unexpected pleasure, as I've always enjoyed country bus rides since my years at the University of East Anglia in the mid-eighties. Eastern Counties buses were always a pleasure, and a front row seat upstairs always allowed an opportunity to soak in the gentle countryside of Norfolk and Suffolk. The odd stop at a country inn for lunch never did any harm either...
In recent years, without the time to ride the country buses at home, I'd taken to riding the buses elsewhere, in Mauritius or Fiji, for example. It's an unpressured way of both seeing a country and getting a feel for its people.
You also get to see places that the tourists don't go, and I remember a journey a few years ago when my bus suddenly veered off of the road down a track through a sugarcane field for no adequately explained reason. Eventually, we arrived in a small village of about 100 people, before lurching off in some other random direction. I did get to where I was going in the end...
Ah well, better dash! Aha, me hearties, avast behind!
A pirate's life for me!
Isn't it marvellous? Yes, once again it's International Talk Like A Pirate Day, and to mark the occasion, I'm going to... Stonehenge.
So, I'll be the pirate with the white robes, the silver sickle and the blood sacrifice of a hedge fund manager then... So splice the merchant banker and sing with me
"Fifteen men stuck to their vests, yo ho ho and a bottle of gum..."
So, I'll be the pirate with the white robes, the silver sickle and the blood sacrifice of a hedge fund manager then... So splice the merchant banker and sing with me
"Fifteen men stuck to their vests, yo ho ho and a bottle of gum..."
Death to the speculators - time to ask for our money back
It is not unreasonable to pay performance bonuses but why should it be that, whilst there is a reward for success, there appears to be little punishment for failure?
There are those who say that losing your job is enough of a punishment but, until recently, even that was unlikely. The new rich have drawn vast amounts out of the system yet suffered very little during less successful times.
So, perhaps we should ask them for our money back. We, the taxpayer, have picked up the tab for their foolishness, and don't we deserve compensation?
There are those who say that losing your job is enough of a punishment but, until recently, even that was unlikely. The new rich have drawn vast amounts out of the system yet suffered very little during less successful times.
So, perhaps we should ask them for our money back. We, the taxpayer, have picked up the tab for their foolishness, and don't we deserve compensation?
Come dancing with Vince
Last night saw the Annual Dinner of Borough of Brent Liberal Democrats, with star guest, Vince Cable.
How times change. Two years ago, Vince stood in at the last moment and was considered worthy if not the biggest draw in the world. Now, he is a hero, bestriding the world of liberal democracy like a colossus. Unsurprisingly, there was a good turnout for what has become a pretty good draw on the speaker circuit. Brent's Annual Dinners normally include entertainment, homemade food and decent supplies of wine, and tonight was no exception, as Vince very graciously pointed out. This time, we had a steel band and salsa dancers, and I noticed that Vince was paying close attention to the dancers. I wonder if he does the salsa?
Vince spoke of the crisis in the financial markets, and the action that will be necessary to stabilise matters. As usual, he made a compelling case for stronger regulation and action to deal with personal debt.
Brent Liberal Democrats have seen the best of times in recent years, and a great deal of that stems from the event whose fifth anniversary we were celebrating, the by-election win in Brent East. At that time, we had nine councillors, the most we had ever had. Three years later, we had twenty-seven, and were leading a joint administration with the Conservatives.
The work ethic that applies here is quite something, and Paul Lorber leads from the front, never asking anyone to do anything that he isn't willing to do himself. Sarah Teather may not be everyone's cup of tea (the lack of respect from her opponents is quite horrendous), but she has inspired a cadre of activists to seize power and use it.
And so we look to the future with confidence, and rightly so...
How times change. Two years ago, Vince stood in at the last moment and was considered worthy if not the biggest draw in the world. Now, he is a hero, bestriding the world of liberal democracy like a colossus. Unsurprisingly, there was a good turnout for what has become a pretty good draw on the speaker circuit. Brent's Annual Dinners normally include entertainment, homemade food and decent supplies of wine, and tonight was no exception, as Vince very graciously pointed out. This time, we had a steel band and salsa dancers, and I noticed that Vince was paying close attention to the dancers. I wonder if he does the salsa?
Vince spoke of the crisis in the financial markets, and the action that will be necessary to stabilise matters. As usual, he made a compelling case for stronger regulation and action to deal with personal debt.
Brent Liberal Democrats have seen the best of times in recent years, and a great deal of that stems from the event whose fifth anniversary we were celebrating, the by-election win in Brent East. At that time, we had nine councillors, the most we had ever had. Three years later, we had twenty-seven, and were leading a joint administration with the Conservatives.
The work ethic that applies here is quite something, and Paul Lorber leads from the front, never asking anyone to do anything that he isn't willing to do himself. Sarah Teather may not be everyone's cup of tea (the lack of respect from her opponents is quite horrendous), but she has inspired a cadre of activists to seize power and use it.
And so we look to the future with confidence, and rightly so...
Thursday, September 18, 2008
It appears that history is cyclical after all...
I still tend to the view that markets are good, even in the midst of a potential financial crash, the likes of which has not been seen since the 1930's.
However, we have clearly begun to see the unravelling of a financial edifice which, it is now apparent, was reliant on people who were too clever by half. The financial markets have never been a zero sum game of relative values but are a theatre of sentiment and herd mentality.
Whilst the markets were dominated by people of a conservative ilk, people who understood how a balance sheet worked and looked for the fundamentals, things worked reasonably well. Alright, gains were generally unspectacular, but there was an understanding that brokers were playing with somebody's money, even if it wasn't theirs. Indeed, they had a pretty good idea whose money it actually was.
Nowadays, with vastly increased numbers of participants, and huge waves of money coming into play, the whole thing has become depersonalised, and the sense that 'this is somebody's money' has been lost. Financial instruments have become more and more complex, to the point where senior managers are reliant on terribly clever young men to deal with ever more leveraged transactions. Indeed, the game has become one of shifting risk in less and less transparent ways in the hope that someone whose greed exceeds their judgement will snap up the 'opportunity'.
The catch, and there is always a catch, isn't there, is that in a financial market riddled with interconnections, the fall of one institution leads to tremors across the piece. Banks and brokerages that are fine as long as things stay positive suddenly look vulnerable, and other fearfully clever people behave like a lion with a wounded antelope.
Ironically, it's the rather dull players, the mutuals, those who seek security over adventure, who are best placed to survive. Whilst their shareholders moan about a lack of ambition, they now have an asset with value, unlike, for example, shareholders in Lehman Brothers.
After the crash of 1929, rules and markets were tightened up. We see history repeating itself, as short-selling is prohibited, with doubtless more regulation to follow. It would appear that freedom to gamble means the freedom to lose, after all...
However, we have clearly begun to see the unravelling of a financial edifice which, it is now apparent, was reliant on people who were too clever by half. The financial markets have never been a zero sum game of relative values but are a theatre of sentiment and herd mentality.
Whilst the markets were dominated by people of a conservative ilk, people who understood how a balance sheet worked and looked for the fundamentals, things worked reasonably well. Alright, gains were generally unspectacular, but there was an understanding that brokers were playing with somebody's money, even if it wasn't theirs. Indeed, they had a pretty good idea whose money it actually was.
Nowadays, with vastly increased numbers of participants, and huge waves of money coming into play, the whole thing has become depersonalised, and the sense that 'this is somebody's money' has been lost. Financial instruments have become more and more complex, to the point where senior managers are reliant on terribly clever young men to deal with ever more leveraged transactions. Indeed, the game has become one of shifting risk in less and less transparent ways in the hope that someone whose greed exceeds their judgement will snap up the 'opportunity'.
The catch, and there is always a catch, isn't there, is that in a financial market riddled with interconnections, the fall of one institution leads to tremors across the piece. Banks and brokerages that are fine as long as things stay positive suddenly look vulnerable, and other fearfully clever people behave like a lion with a wounded antelope.
Ironically, it's the rather dull players, the mutuals, those who seek security over adventure, who are best placed to survive. Whilst their shareholders moan about a lack of ambition, they now have an asset with value, unlike, for example, shareholders in Lehman Brothers.
After the crash of 1929, rules and markets were tightened up. We see history repeating itself, as short-selling is prohibited, with doubtless more regulation to follow. It would appear that freedom to gamble means the freedom to lose, after all...
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Seeing ourselves as others see us?
We all have, I suppose, a sense of who we are. Over years of growing up, through exposure to outside influences, we develop a sense of what we are capable of, a sense of how we are perceived by those about us. It may not be wholly shared, but it is ours. To then be confronted with an image that is unfamiliar can be disconcerting, especially if that image is unfavourable.
And so it is with political parties, especially at conference time. Inside, spirits are high, enthusiasm for the electoral battles to come is abundant, and thoughts turn to potential victory. Meantime, out in the 'real world', the media are painting a different picture, one that suits their agenda, the simplistic left versus right, A versus B. They wish to talk of winners and losers, whereas we think of winning, and what we might do if we were fortunate enough to achieve victory. We think of principles and grand ideas, of philosophy and theory, whilst journalists are looking to blame someone for whatever is exciting them this week.
"If only we could reach out to the public to tell them of our plans to do X or Y", all would be well. It is my view that there is a danger that it will become more and more difficult to do so as the media fragment. Our views will increasingly be refracted through a prism of bias, often by no means malicious, in favour of the perceived voice of the mob, personified by opinion makers whose volume and tenor obscure their utter lack of mandate.
As one fears for any individual who is defined by what others say as opposed to what they themselves do, one fears for a democracy whose flaws are magnified yet whose virtues are overlooked.
And so it is with political parties, especially at conference time. Inside, spirits are high, enthusiasm for the electoral battles to come is abundant, and thoughts turn to potential victory. Meantime, out in the 'real world', the media are painting a different picture, one that suits their agenda, the simplistic left versus right, A versus B. They wish to talk of winners and losers, whereas we think of winning, and what we might do if we were fortunate enough to achieve victory. We think of principles and grand ideas, of philosophy and theory, whilst journalists are looking to blame someone for whatever is exciting them this week.
"If only we could reach out to the public to tell them of our plans to do X or Y", all would be well. It is my view that there is a danger that it will become more and more difficult to do so as the media fragment. Our views will increasingly be refracted through a prism of bias, often by no means malicious, in favour of the perceived voice of the mob, personified by opinion makers whose volume and tenor obscure their utter lack of mandate.
As one fears for any individual who is defined by what others say as opposed to what they themselves do, one fears for a democracy whose flaws are magnified yet whose virtues are overlooked.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Tax policy: it'll never get better if you pick at it
I have very mixed feelings about yesterday's setpiece debate on 'Make It Happen'.
The movers of the amendment had every right to seek to steer (note, not commit) the Party towards the fight against poverty and inequality. Indeed, there are few in the Party who would disagree. Those defending the language of the original document, likewise, had every right to seek to highlight the possibility (note, not certainty) of tax cuts. And, likewise, there are few who would disagree with that either.
I am generally of the view that there are areas of life where government has a core role in terms of service provision. However, there are some fields of human endeavour where unwieldy and cumbersome government dinosaurs shouls steer clear. Thus, once you have raised enough money to cover the costs of your obligations and promises, it makes sense to stop raising funds. Empowering people does mean providing them with the means to make a decision from a range of options, and part of that requires money.
I'm not clear that the debate as to the role of government has been settled yet within the Liberal Democrats and, ironically, I suspect that the debate yesterday was in part a surrogate for that debate. On one side, those whose faith rests in the ability of good government to improve lives and communities. On the other, those who believe in empowering individuals.
There is an underlying caveat to both stances, however. It assumes that, on one hand, that government is efficient, a self-evident fallacy based on the performance of local and central government, and on the other, that individuals have real freedom to make their choices, something which poverty and lack of information make a mere illusion for too many of our disadvantaged fellow citizens.
I freely admit that I voted with the leadership in the end. I'm not convinced that either side has particularly lost or won. A marker has been laid down, a reminder left, and we move on towards a General Election with a sensible degree of honest flexibility.
The movers of the amendment had every right to seek to steer (note, not commit) the Party towards the fight against poverty and inequality. Indeed, there are few in the Party who would disagree. Those defending the language of the original document, likewise, had every right to seek to highlight the possibility (note, not certainty) of tax cuts. And, likewise, there are few who would disagree with that either.
I am generally of the view that there are areas of life where government has a core role in terms of service provision. However, there are some fields of human endeavour where unwieldy and cumbersome government dinosaurs shouls steer clear. Thus, once you have raised enough money to cover the costs of your obligations and promises, it makes sense to stop raising funds. Empowering people does mean providing them with the means to make a decision from a range of options, and part of that requires money.
I'm not clear that the debate as to the role of government has been settled yet within the Liberal Democrats and, ironically, I suspect that the debate yesterday was in part a surrogate for that debate. On one side, those whose faith rests in the ability of good government to improve lives and communities. On the other, those who believe in empowering individuals.
There is an underlying caveat to both stances, however. It assumes that, on one hand, that government is efficient, a self-evident fallacy based on the performance of local and central government, and on the other, that individuals have real freedom to make their choices, something which poverty and lack of information make a mere illusion for too many of our disadvantaged fellow citizens.
I freely admit that I voted with the leadership in the end. I'm not convinced that either side has particularly lost or won. A marker has been laid down, a reminder left, and we move on towards a General Election with a sensible degree of honest flexibility.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Paul Burstow in Fantasyland
Alright, now I'm really angry. Paul Burstow has the audacity, the nerve, to claim that there has been meaningful, constructive consultation with the English Candidates Committee.
I am perfectly happy to go on record and state, categorically that this is untrue. Until yesterday morning, there had been no consultation. We don't agree with some of the key recommendations, and I don't think that we are likely to... ever. When someone can stand up and oppose something on behalf of ECC, in the certain knowledge that, actually, they do represent all of us, who should you believe?
Perhaps if Paul would like to take up his permanent invitation to meet us, he might be (better) informed. Until then, I will doubt his credibility on this issue...
I am perfectly happy to go on record and state, categorically that this is untrue. Until yesterday morning, there had been no consultation. We don't agree with some of the key recommendations, and I don't think that we are likely to... ever. When someone can stand up and oppose something on behalf of ECC, in the certain knowledge that, actually, they do represent all of us, who should you believe?
Perhaps if Paul would like to take up his permanent invitation to meet us, he might be (better) informed. Until then, I will doubt his credibility on this issue...
"It's not that we don't trust you... but we don't..."
So, here I am, in the hall for the consultative session on the Party Reform Commission.
We've just debated the governance proposals, and a series of speakers have stepped up to the microphone, generally welcomed the Report, and then condemned the proposed Chief Officers Group (COG), for a range of reasons related to diversity, scrutiny and, in the case of John Smithson, a former Regional Chair, basic distrust of the leadership.
Distrust of the leadership? Sadly, yes, there is, and there always will be. It isn't necessarily the Leader himself, more the people around him. We can't see them, they seek to control access, and we don't have any meaningful scrutiny over them or their roles. In such an atmosphere, distrust grows, especially in an organisation with a noble tradition of bloody-minded radicalism.
I would urge the Commission and the Leadership to pay heed to our concerns. It will be a clear indicator of the direction of travel of the Party if they are ignored. Indeed, if a vote were to be called for (and it won't be in this instance), the governance element might well have been rejected or referred back. That does not augur well for lasting, effective reform.
We've just debated the governance proposals, and a series of speakers have stepped up to the microphone, generally welcomed the Report, and then condemned the proposed Chief Officers Group (COG), for a range of reasons related to diversity, scrutiny and, in the case of John Smithson, a former Regional Chair, basic distrust of the leadership.
Distrust of the leadership? Sadly, yes, there is, and there always will be. It isn't necessarily the Leader himself, more the people around him. We can't see them, they seek to control access, and we don't have any meaningful scrutiny over them or their roles. In such an atmosphere, distrust grows, especially in an organisation with a noble tradition of bloody-minded radicalism.
I would urge the Commission and the Leadership to pay heed to our concerns. It will be a clear indicator of the direction of travel of the Party if they are ignored. Indeed, if a vote were to be called for (and it won't be in this instance), the governance element might well have been rejected or referred back. That does not augur well for lasting, effective reform.
A radical proposal for candidate selection
I've been talking to Tamsin Hewitt, the English Candidates Officer of the Party. We were discussing some of the fallout from yesterday's meeting, where I raised the issue of abolishing selection committees.
There is no support for their complete abolition - that was merely a dream of mine - but I think that I've finally won the argument for a simplified process for non-target, non-Moving Forward seats, whereby we skip the selection committee phase, and go straight from advert to campaign phase. I can see that this would take weeks off of the schedule and remove the necessity of dragging unwilling volunteers to diversity awareness training, as well as reducing the number of pre-meetings for the volunteer Returning Officer to attend. We may also have found a way of reducing the costs to Local Parties of selecting their PPCs. I'll leave that for another day...
Tamsin and I do agree on one thing though. We think that televised cage matches would be a solution for the campaign phase...
There is no support for their complete abolition - that was merely a dream of mine - but I think that I've finally won the argument for a simplified process for non-target, non-Moving Forward seats, whereby we skip the selection committee phase, and go straight from advert to campaign phase. I can see that this would take weeks off of the schedule and remove the necessity of dragging unwilling volunteers to diversity awareness training, as well as reducing the number of pre-meetings for the volunteer Returning Officer to attend. We may also have found a way of reducing the costs to Local Parties of selecting their PPCs. I'll leave that for another day...
Tamsin and I do agree on one thing though. We think that televised cage matches would be a solution for the campaign phase...
Sunday, September 14, 2008
My afternoon with Lembit...
By now, everyone knows that I'm 4 Ros, so I was a mite surprised to receive an invitation from Millennium Elephant (you were robbed, my friend... again...) to meet Lembit as part of the series of blogger interviews.
I was even more surprised to be accepted... clearly, pachyderms have no sense of conflict of interest...
As others have already mentioned, I did ask some fairly searching questions. Not out of malice, but because they were the questions I would have asked anyway - I honestly believe that the stated view of Liberal Democrat Voice readers as to Lembit's effectiveness as our Housing spokesman is a legitimate subject to enquire into.
I thought that, in terms of his brief, he came across as initially shallow but, when pressed further by Mary, he was able to demonstrate that he has a grasp of his brief. His housing portfolio is a key one in terms of helping us to convince potential supporters, and I wish him well in his efforts to make our case.
I also raised the issue of the headline on the front of GQ Magazine where he was interviewed by Piers Morgan, on the basis that it was part of finding out why, or more saliently, how he ticks. My more dispassionate colleagues, Mary and Millennium, have already covered his response, and I feel that it would be fairer to a neutral reader to guide him/her towards their thoughts.
There are two policies that Lembit would go to the wall for. One is the right of medical professionals to prescribe hard drugs to addicts. You could argue about the politics of it, and I have more than enough colleagues who would do so, but it is a principled stance. The other is hunting with hounds...
Lembit has changed his mind. A leading advocate of a compromise between pro- and anti- lobbies, he has now come down in favour of hunting with dogs. He quoted evidence from multiple sources in support of the contention that hunting a fox with hounds, who then tear the fox to death, is less cruel than shooting. I beg to differ. However, I come from an urban constituency and he doesn't.
I'm told that this was the most 'edgy' of the blogger interviews so far. Perhaps I'm missing the point a bit, but shouldn't we be, albeit thoughtfully and constructively, challenging our senior figures? Praise where praise is due, yes. But kindly questioning designed to make everyone look good, regardless of merit? I think not...
I was even more surprised to be accepted... clearly, pachyderms have no sense of conflict of interest...
As others have already mentioned, I did ask some fairly searching questions. Not out of malice, but because they were the questions I would have asked anyway - I honestly believe that the stated view of Liberal Democrat Voice readers as to Lembit's effectiveness as our Housing spokesman is a legitimate subject to enquire into.
I thought that, in terms of his brief, he came across as initially shallow but, when pressed further by Mary, he was able to demonstrate that he has a grasp of his brief. His housing portfolio is a key one in terms of helping us to convince potential supporters, and I wish him well in his efforts to make our case.
I also raised the issue of the headline on the front of GQ Magazine where he was interviewed by Piers Morgan, on the basis that it was part of finding out why, or more saliently, how he ticks. My more dispassionate colleagues, Mary and Millennium, have already covered his response, and I feel that it would be fairer to a neutral reader to guide him/her towards their thoughts.
There are two policies that Lembit would go to the wall for. One is the right of medical professionals to prescribe hard drugs to addicts. You could argue about the politics of it, and I have more than enough colleagues who would do so, but it is a principled stance. The other is hunting with hounds...
Lembit has changed his mind. A leading advocate of a compromise between pro- and anti- lobbies, he has now come down in favour of hunting with dogs. He quoted evidence from multiple sources in support of the contention that hunting a fox with hounds, who then tear the fox to death, is less cruel than shooting. I beg to differ. However, I come from an urban constituency and he doesn't.
I'm told that this was the most 'edgy' of the blogger interviews so far. Perhaps I'm missing the point a bit, but shouldn't we be, albeit thoughtfully and constructively, challenging our senior figures? Praise where praise is due, yes. But kindly questioning designed to make everyone look good, regardless of merit? I think not...
Understanding diversity: why English Candidates Committee is different
Meanwhile, in another meeting room somewhere in the Marriott Hotel, the non-award winning half of this dynamic duo was to be found at English Candidates Committee discussing the impact of the Bones Commission on our work.
It's curious, because there are those who see us as part of the problem. And there is something of a dilemma here. We have spent many years, individually and collectively, striving to establish a level playing field. We really believe in creating a process that is 'colour-blind' in every sense of the word, and it matters deeply to us.
Bones talks about two-tier selection, and about cash bonuses for Local Parties who select BME candidates for good seats. We don't like it, we're simply not comfortable with it. In many ways, our fixation on process rather than outcome makes us ill-equipped to address the call for affirmative action. We mean well, we really do. We genuinely want everyone to come forward and get on.
So, the challenge for us is to find ways in which we can advance the diversity agenda and retain our principles. Suggestions, anyone?
It's curious, because there are those who see us as part of the problem. And there is something of a dilemma here. We have spent many years, individually and collectively, striving to establish a level playing field. We really believe in creating a process that is 'colour-blind' in every sense of the word, and it matters deeply to us.
Bones talks about two-tier selection, and about cash bonuses for Local Parties who select BME candidates for good seats. We don't like it, we're simply not comfortable with it. In many ways, our fixation on process rather than outcome makes us ill-equipped to address the call for affirmative action. We mean well, we really do. We genuinely want everyone to come forward and get on.
So, the challenge for us is to find ways in which we can advance the diversity agenda and retain our principles. Suggestions, anyone?
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Waiting for Lembit...
I'm here, so are Mary, Helen, Alex and Millennium. Lembit isn't.
There's a bloke outside doing street theatre with a Segway. I wonder if the two facts are related?
There's a bloke outside doing street theatre with a Segway. I wonder if the two facts are related?
Lessons for Local Party Secretaries: no. 9 - crushing nations beneath your jewelled sandals
You do realise that this is the job of the Chair, don't you? Of course, it isn't unheard of for a Secretary to take the 'top job', although why you'd want to, I don't know. After all, you don't want someone coming along, inspired by the spirit of Machiavelli, making you dependent upon them, do you?...Friday, September 12, 2008
Energy relief - Gordon says no to a windfall tax but I'm not impressed
Having condemned a windfall tax earlier in the week, I am delighted that Gordon Brown has seen fit to agree with me. Indeed, he has persuaded the energy companies to come up with £910 million to pay for free loft and cavity insulation for all low-income and pensioner families, with half-price deals for six million others. So, why aren't I impressed?
Firstly, it's a question of naivety. Gordon insists that he doesn't expect the cost to be passed on to the consumer. The chief executive of the Association of Electricity Producers says, "Whenever people impose costs on an industry, the bill to some extent always ends up with the customer.". One of these gentlemen is likely to be right, and sadly, I have a nasty feeling which one of them it's going to be. What were the negotiations like, I wonder...
Gordon Brown. "I would really like you to meet me part way here."
Energy Companies "Why should we, what are you going to do if we don't?"
Gordon Brown "I'll be very unhappy and the Conservatives will win the next election."
Energy Companies "And?"
Gordon had his trump card, the threat of a windfall tax. The chances are that it would have been popular (forget the economics for a moment) and he would have been looking for a lot more than £910 million. So the energy companies will take most of the credit at relatively little cost.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives have responded through Alan Duncan. "(it is) not clear how this announcement will help the millions of people who will struggle to heat their homes this winter". Genius. But what about a solution? Oh no, that would risk having a policy, and we can't have that, can we?
Firstly, it's a question of naivety. Gordon insists that he doesn't expect the cost to be passed on to the consumer. The chief executive of the Association of Electricity Producers says, "Whenever people impose costs on an industry, the bill to some extent always ends up with the customer.". One of these gentlemen is likely to be right, and sadly, I have a nasty feeling which one of them it's going to be. What were the negotiations like, I wonder...
Gordon Brown. "I would really like you to meet me part way here."
Energy Companies "Why should we, what are you going to do if we don't?"
Gordon Brown "I'll be very unhappy and the Conservatives will win the next election."
Energy Companies "And?"
Gordon had his trump card, the threat of a windfall tax. The chances are that it would have been popular (forget the economics for a moment) and he would have been looking for a lot more than £910 million. So the energy companies will take most of the credit at relatively little cost.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives have responded through Alan Duncan. "(it is) not clear how this announcement will help the millions of people who will struggle to heat their homes this winter". Genius. But what about a solution? Oh no, that would risk having a policy, and we can't have that, can we?
Lessons for Local Party Secretaries: no. 8 - the black arts
Of course, Secretaries aren’t always the kindly person sitting in a corner with a set of coloured pens, faithfully recording every utterance and smiling in an encouraging manner at the Chair. There is, of course, the risk that your Local Party couldn’t administrate itself out of a brown paper bag with the aid of satellite navigation. You will, as Secretary, encounter colleagues who can irritate to Olympic standards. A few years ago, one of my colleagues would assiduously circulate his report in advance, and then, in the meeting, equally assiduously read the entire report out. After a couple of meetings, I interrupted him, seeking clarification that he was adding new material not already reported. My colleague never did it again and, given that he’s gone on to become Chair of the English Party, he clearly wasn’t too badly traumatised… Sarcasm, irony and the occasional flash of barbed wit will make people stop and think, and allow you to influence their behaviour - in a good way, of course.
Understanding the constitution gives a Secretary a real advantage, and I strongly commend reading it. Quote from it frequently in your early meetings as Secretary and people will assume that you know it off by heart - even if you don’t. Let them believe that, and when you really need to get something done, you can use that perceived knowledge to get something you really want, or stop someone from doing something you don’t like. Trust me, they won’t have read the constitution, so even if you’re making it up, they won’t know.
Of course, as I mentioned earlier, you control information, and your minutes, as the only contemporaneous record, frame the perception of events. By emphasising one view over others, you can convince waverers of the rightness of the position reached, or otherwise, if you didn’t get your way. You can, by selectively quoting individuals, impact on their credibility by only quoting them when they’re on the losing side (if you don’t like them) or only when they are on the side of truth, beauty and good administration (that’s your side, by the way).
I will finish with a quotation from Niccolo Machiavelli who wrote, “The prince must think about how to keep his minister good, honouring him, enriching him, making him feel a sense of obligation, sharing honours and responsibilities with him…”. For prince, read Chair, for minister, read Secretary…
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Save the date: Saturday, November 15th
I'm delighted to announce that the Regional Conference and Annual General Meeting of London Liberal Democrats will take place on Saturday, November 15th, at Haverstock School, Chalk Farm.
It should be a pretty good event, especially with Chris Huhne as our guest speaker. There will be a European flavour to the event, especially as we're just nine months away from the next round of European Parliamentary elections.
There'll be a chance to question the Regional Executive, and this might be your best chance to ask questions about our recent campaign for the London Assembly. There'll also be a session where you'll have an opportunity to question a panel of elected representatives. We'll bring them all together at one time so that you can get an 'integrated' response. We might even get a little debate going amongst them...
In the breakout room, there will be consultation sessions on proposals for a new candidate selection system and the review of the GLA selection process.
Training will be provided by the Association of Liberal Democrat Councillors, who have already announced an exciting programme of activities, intended to help you (yes, you sir, you at the back eating that knit-your-own muesli bar!) fight and win elections - 2010 isn't that far away, you know.
We're hoping to get a guest speaker (or two), once Conference Committee has 'met' - I'm keen on establishing a virtual committee so as to avoid meetings - and there'll be more news on that as we get nearer to the event.
A mailing has already gone out to all duly nominated Regional Conference representatives, but if you aren't one, get in touch with your Local Party Secretary and find out if there's a vacancy for a substitute. Or just come along as a non-voting representative, you'll be more than welcome!
It should be a pretty good event, especially with Chris Huhne as our guest speaker. There will be a European flavour to the event, especially as we're just nine months away from the next round of European Parliamentary elections.
There'll be a chance to question the Regional Executive, and this might be your best chance to ask questions about our recent campaign for the London Assembly. There'll also be a session where you'll have an opportunity to question a panel of elected representatives. We'll bring them all together at one time so that you can get an 'integrated' response. We might even get a little debate going amongst them...
In the breakout room, there will be consultation sessions on proposals for a new candidate selection system and the review of the GLA selection process.
Training will be provided by the Association of Liberal Democrat Councillors, who have already announced an exciting programme of activities, intended to help you (yes, you sir, you at the back eating that knit-your-own muesli bar!) fight and win elections - 2010 isn't that far away, you know.
We're hoping to get a guest speaker (or two), once Conference Committee has 'met' - I'm keen on establishing a virtual committee so as to avoid meetings - and there'll be more news on that as we get nearer to the event.
A mailing has already gone out to all duly nominated Regional Conference representatives, but if you aren't one, get in touch with your Local Party Secretary and find out if there's a vacancy for a substitute. Or just come along as a non-voting representative, you'll be more than welcome!
Getting just a little excited about Saturday
Just two days to go until Conference starts, and the excitement is building up to fever pitch.
Millennium has advised me that I shall go to the ball or, in this instance, get to take part in the blogger interview with Lembit Opik. I've promised to bring my bestest notebook (the one with the pressed flower on the cover) and a full set of coloured pens. I've got a bunch of questions to ask him and look forward to reporting back on what he has to say.
I'll be going straight from that to the launch of our diversity engagement programme, before attending the rally, a book launch, two Regional Receptions (London and East of England - we're a bi-regional family) and then the Liberal Democrat Blog of the Year Awards, where Ros has been nominated for three awards.
I just hope that I can keep up the pace...
Millennium has advised me that I shall go to the ball or, in this instance, get to take part in the blogger interview with Lembit Opik. I've promised to bring my bestest notebook (the one with the pressed flower on the cover) and a full set of coloured pens. I've got a bunch of questions to ask him and look forward to reporting back on what he has to say.
I'll be going straight from that to the launch of our diversity engagement programme, before attending the rally, a book launch, two Regional Receptions (London and East of England - we're a bi-regional family) and then the Liberal Democrat Blog of the Year Awards, where Ros has been nominated for three awards.
I just hope that I can keep up the pace...
Lessons for Local Party Secretaries: no. 7 - the Annual General Meeting
Once a year, the Secretary becomes core to the very being of the Local Party. Ironically, the only reason anyone will notice this is if you screw up. So, given that yesterday was the last date by which you could call an Annual General Meeting on 1 October, the first date on which one could be held, it is high time that we looked at planning your Annual General Meeting.In England, the State Party provide a very useful CD which contains all of the information you need to fulfil your obligations (I'm not sure if the Scottish and Welsh Parties do likewise), including all of your report forms, model nomination forms and job descriptions. I got mine this morning, and very good it is too.
However, you need to set things up. Firstly, you need to agree a date, which must fall between 1 October and 30 November. Make sure that your key personnel (MP, PPC and Chair) can make it, and that a venue is available. Have you left yourself enough time to issue a calling notice (a minimum of twenty-one days)?
Excellent! Now you need a calling notice, which should include:
- an agenda
- a copy of the minutes of the last meeting
- reports from the Chair, Treasurer and Membership Secretary
- a report from your Conference Representatives
- a report from your Council Group(s)
- any constitutional amendments
- a copy of the accounts for the preceding year
Alright, you've issued the paperwork. What about the meeting? Your task, should you wish to accept it, is to minute the meeting. It isn't actually that difficult a job, given that there is usually little in the way of debate, but it is important to make sure that you know who gets elected and, preferably, their contact details. I won't go into any more details on minuting, as you've already read that...
And that's about it. There's just one more lesson, and it is based on a personal theory of mine...
The TaxPayers' Alliance - overegging a good argument?
I've not spent a lot of time following the activities of the TaxPayers' Alliance, an organisation which claims to be 'campaigning for lower taxes and better government' (as though these concepts are mutually inclusive...). However, my attention is drawn to their newly published report on the Barnett Formula, and the posting on it by Mike Denham in his blog 'Burning Your Money'.Now I admit that, as a civil servant who believes in value for money and better government (two concepts which are mutually inclusive), I'm not naturally irreconcilable with the stated aims of the TaxPayers' Alliance, i.e. to expose waste in our public sector. However, if their report on the Barnett Formula is anything to go by, they've decided that going for the cheap, inaccurate shot is easier than making a meaningful case.
Mike Denham starts by a headline that claims, "The Barnett Formula has cost taxpayers £200 billion". This is broken down as follows:
- Scotland - £102 billion
- Wales - £43 billion
- Northern Ireland - £57 billion
Mike then goes on to outline the history of government redistribution from England to the other states, noting that there was little in the way of formal, democratically determined policy or even scrutiny. He then points out that the Barnett Formula applies to education, health and social services, as well as law and order (although Wales is included with England for funding purposes in the latter area) whilst excluding most areas of public spending that are of a national nature, plus social security and pensions.
What I object to most of all is the sense that he acknowledges that there might be a case for higher spending in two out of three states,
"whereas Northern Ireland’s position is arguably justified on the basis of peace and reconstruction"
"they (Welsh politicians) point to the high cost of running public services in a territory that suffers problems of urban poverty combined with the challenges of rural inaccessibility"
and then simply ignores this, despite the fact that they might account for half of the £200 billion. All that is left is Scotland. If the arguments put by Welsh politicians are accepted, and Mike has, remember, not seen fit to challenge them, then surely the argument is similar for Scotland, with its significant tracts of urban poverty (and I've been to Glasgow East) and comparatively vast rural hinterland. As Scotland's population is that much larger than that of Wales, the comparative fiscal transfers per head are not vastly different.So, I would suggest that if you accept the arguments made by Welsh and Northern Irish politicians, as Mike has, his £200 billion becomes a much more anaemic figure.
It's a real pity, because we desperately need more transparency in terms of fiscal transfers betwen the states and regions. It doesn't help when you quote vast figures in your defence, wilfully misrepresent them and then resort to an attack on Scottish Nationalists.
This is claimed to be a definitive report on the Barnett Formula. I would suggest that it is a partisan attack on the general concept of government spending, on politicians, and on the idea that choice only applies if you live somewhere convenient, because you could argue that opposition to additional funding support for rural parts of our nation will make such places economically unviable.
Mike, nice try, but back to the drawing board, I'm afraid...
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
My Executive Committee think that I lack commitment – there’s only one solution…
Many of you will have noticed that I’ve been a bit busy this year, what with getting married, playing a discreet but time-consuming role in a campaign for the Party Presidency and travelling around the country with Ros.
Unsurprisingly, this has had an impact on my other responsibilities, some of which I wanted, some of which were accepted out of a sense of duty. One of the latter roles was that of Regional Conference Chair, which I was persuaded to take on and, in a moment of weakness, accepted. Now I freely admit that I haven’t been fully engaged, and likewise would confess that I probably needed a nudge to get down to work.
However, in the usual wonderful way that the Party tends to work, I was confronted at Monday’s Executive Committee meeting with the phrase, “a few of us have been worried about the lack of apparent progress and have been talking about it”. Or, in other words, “we don’t believe that Mark is doing anything about it and we’ll slag him off behind his back”. My dear colleagues, wouldn’t it have been easier to get in touch with me? After all, I was notionally directly elected to the position (alright, I was unopposed but that was hardly my fault)…
- date – Saturday, November 15th
- venue – Haverstock School, Chalk Farm – booked and paid for
- star speaker – Chris Huhne – confirmed, with a time slot, awaiting speech topic
- ALDC training – confirmed, although they haven’t told me what it is yet
- AGM – boring, but necessary, will include an opportunity to hold the Executive Officers accountable (they won’t like it, I’m not sure that I care)
- Parliamentary report – concept decided upon, invitations awaiting issue
- London Councils strand, agreed in principle, details to be determined
- Conference guide design – graphic designer engaged in exchange for an advert
- Fringe meetings – sessions by the English and Regional Candidates Committees confirmed, two bids for further sessions received and awaiting consideration by Conference Committee
- Policy debate – I’ve sought submissions, let’s see what comes in…
I don’t think that it’s going too badly, but I’m sure that my colleagues will find something to kibitz about…
The world hasn’t been sucked into a black hole, so why not have dinner with Vince Cable next week?
In 2003, Brent Liberal Democrats fought a Parliamentary by-election and, miracle of miracles, the amazing Sarah Teather was elected to be the Member of Parliament for Brent East. You may well have been there, many people were.
Five years on, Sarah is still representing the people of Brent East in her usual energetic manner, and we now lead Brent Council as part of a joint administration with the Conservatives (I know, but it was better than the alternative) with a group of twenty-six councillors (twenty-one Labour, thirteen Conservatives, two Independent Conservatives and an Independent). Brent has changed, yet our campaign team march on regardless, taking the fight to Labour in the newly created Brent Central seat.
So, it’s perhaps time to celebrate our success, and we’re holding a dinner to do just that on Thursday week (18 September) at 7 p.m. Vince Cable, the man Labour fear and Conservatives envy, is our guest speaker, there’ll be good food, a steel band and other entertainment, and all for just £28 (a bargain, believe me).
If you want to come along, and we’d really love to see you, the details can be found on Flock Together…
Five years on, Sarah is still representing the people of Brent East in her usual energetic manner, and we now lead Brent Council as part of a joint administration with the Conservatives (I know, but it was better than the alternative) with a group of twenty-six councillors (twenty-one Labour, thirteen Conservatives, two Independent Conservatives and an Independent). Brent has changed, yet our campaign team march on regardless, taking the fight to Labour in the newly created Brent Central seat.
So, it’s perhaps time to celebrate our success, and we’re holding a dinner to do just that on Thursday week (18 September) at 7 p.m. Vince Cable, the man Labour fear and Conservatives envy, is our guest speaker, there’ll be good food, a steel band and other entertainment, and all for just £28 (a bargain, believe me).
If you want to come along, and we’d really love to see you, the details can be found on Flock Together…
Will you still love me tomorrow?
Indeed, will there be a tomorrow? Scientists are about to turn on the Large Hadron Collider and, given that they aren't absolutely certain what will happen - fairly certain, but not certain - it could be that I saved myself a lot of time not organising the Regional Conference...
Lessons for Local Party Secretaries: no. 6 - technology
We’ve already discussed e-groups. However, is there any other technological support that might help you to be more efficient?Until recently, I was a technology free zone, minuting in hard copy, typing up my notes afterwards. Without a mobile phone, I was unreachable by colleagues, who had to find me at work, at home (a challenge) or at meetings.
Now, I minute by typing my notes directly into my laptop, using a minute template to minimise the additional work required. I can go home after a meeting, edit the minutes quickly, and issue them within twenty-four hours. That way, everyone knows what they’ve agreed to do, and are more likely to actually do it.
The use of a BlackBerry means that I’m accessible virtually anywhere, can respond to a crisis of a matter of urgency quickly and efficiently, and can send messages as and when I need to.
Technology, not essential, but certainly helpful…
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Regional Conferences: how might they be better?
I am, in those odd moments I have to spare, London's Regional Conference Chair. It isn't the most onerous job in the world, especially as I have Flick Rea to do all the tricky administrative jobs. My role is to make decisions for the most part and take a strategic view. I even have a committee to support me, although I'm fairly unused to dealing with such things.
The problem is that there is a danger of falling into 'talking head syndrome', whereby there are lots of sessions whereby someone talks to an audience, leaving little opportunity for interaction. It all gets a bit dull. In my first attempt, in the Spring, I went for something a bit different, with debates and a little humour. People seemed to like it, and I'd like to try something similar this time.
Amongst my ideas are a question and answer session for the Regional Executive, and a session for questioning representatives from both Houses of Parliament, the European Parliament, the London Assembly and London Councils (all at the same time), allowing multiple perspectives on the same topic.
However, I would be interested to hear what might attract you to a Regional Conference, so what do you think?
The problem is that there is a danger of falling into 'talking head syndrome', whereby there are lots of sessions whereby someone talks to an audience, leaving little opportunity for interaction. It all gets a bit dull. In my first attempt, in the Spring, I went for something a bit different, with debates and a little humour. People seemed to like it, and I'd like to try something similar this time.
Amongst my ideas are a question and answer session for the Regional Executive, and a session for questioning representatives from both Houses of Parliament, the European Parliament, the London Assembly and London Councils (all at the same time), allowing multiple perspectives on the same topic.
However, I would be interested to hear what might attract you to a Regional Conference, so what do you think?
Lessons for Local Party Secretaries: no. 5 - the meeting
You’ve got to the meeting. Time to find a seat. Some suggest that you sit next to the Chair, but not me. I tend to prefer a seat at the opposite end of the table, so that I have a view of everyone else, the Chair can see me frantically signalling that we need to move on and, if all else fails, I can leave in despair (not really…).Minuting is an art. What you’re trying to do is the bureaucratic equivalent of juggling whilst riding a unicycle through a vat of custard. Your primary responsibility is to make sure that you have an accurate record of what happened, reflecting any debate that takes place. This does not mean a verbatim record, especially as there will usually be someone who has no idea what is going on, makes no contribution worth valuing, and likes to hear their own voice. Stopping them is, fortunately, the Chair’s problem…
It is imperative that you do get an accurate record. If you think that you’ve missed something, make sure that you seek clarification. If need be, summarise the position for your own benefit. You’ll be surprised how many people will appreciate it, as the chances of you being the only person in the room who doesn’t understand what is happening is remote.
However, this is where your preparations pay off. You don’t have to minute the reports, only the matters that arise from them. If those tabling reports are any good, there won’t be many questions. Better yet, and everyone will appreciate this, the only serious discussion will be about things that actually matter. And everyone can leave early…
However, this is where your preparations pay off. You don’t have to minute the reports, only the matters that arise from them. If those tabling reports are any good, there won’t be many questions. Better yet, and everyone will appreciate this, the only serious discussion will be about things that actually matter. And everyone can leave early…
Make sure that all of the business is done by checking each item off the agenda as it is completed, particularly useful if the Chair decides to vary the agenda for some reason. At the end of the meeting, make certain to pick a date for the next meeting, preferably the next three, as well as a venue. It’s one less thing to worry about in the run-up to the next meeting…
James Graham - a bruiser and a winner
I see that the Rugby League Writers Association have decided upon their Player of the Year.
Step forward, James Graham, and congratulations, although how he finds the time to hone his prop forward skills between working for Unlock Democracy and writing his acclaimed blog, I don't know.
Step forward, James Graham, and congratulations, although how he finds the time to hone his prop forward skills between working for Unlock Democracy and writing his acclaimed blog, I don't know.
Monday, September 08, 2008
Losing the will to live: the anatomy of a Regional Executive meeting
Welcome to Cowley Street, where the London Regional Executive is in session. I'm listening to Leonard Cohen...
Need I say more?Flattered though I am...
People have been, in the words of Lord Bonkers, terribly kind about Ros's campaign, and credited me with a key role in it. In truth, however, there is more to this campaign than two people over the breakfast table. Much, much more.
For the real story about the campaign and the amazing team behind it, check out Ros's blog...
For the real story about the campaign and the amazing team behind it, check out Ros's blog...
Policy from London: a challenge from Jeremy Hargreaves
I've noticed a thread on Liberal Democrat Voice in the Members' Forum about policy making and debating at Federal Conference.
My London Region colleague, Jeremy Hargreaves, has noted that Regional Conferences are far more accessible yet don't tend to be fora for policy discussions. He is, unsurprisingly, quite right.
So here's a challenge. I'm willing to sponsor a motion at the Regional Conference if someone has anything they want debated. It doesn't have to be on an issue that relates solely to London, although if it was relevant to Londoners, that would help. Some ideas that might be a starting point include the shape of London government - we've had eight years of the GLA, what would we like to see changed? Perhaps a policy for usage of the Olympic facilities post-2012, or the question of airport development for London.
If someone wants to start the ball rolling, I'd be delighted to hear from you...
My London Region colleague, Jeremy Hargreaves, has noted that Regional Conferences are far more accessible yet don't tend to be fora for policy discussions. He is, unsurprisingly, quite right.
So here's a challenge. I'm willing to sponsor a motion at the Regional Conference if someone has anything they want debated. It doesn't have to be on an issue that relates solely to London, although if it was relevant to Londoners, that would help. Some ideas that might be a starting point include the shape of London government - we've had eight years of the GLA, what would we like to see changed? Perhaps a policy for usage of the Olympic facilities post-2012, or the question of airport development for London.
If someone wants to start the ball rolling, I'd be delighted to hear from you...
Lessons for Local Party Secretaries: no. 4 – the agenda
A week before the meeting, it will be time to issue the agenda. Naturally, it will include all of the reports from the Officers, your branches, Council Group, PPC(s) and, if you’re really lucky, your MP (let me make that clear, if you’re lucky enough to have an MP, they’re all utterly spiffing and fully engaged with their Local Party…).It will start with ‘Apologies’, move on to ‘Minutes of the last meeting’, where the previous effort is judged for accuracy, before reaching ‘Matters arising’, where members of the Executive will raise issues that were discussed then and they missed due to absence, sorry, didn't understand the first time... If the reports are up to the mark, it can be noted that the points are already covered there, and members will learn to read them before they come.
Next come the reports, and then ‘Any Other Business’. Don’t forget to include ‘Date and venue of the next meeting’, as it is much harder to agree a date after everyone has gone home.
If a written report has been provided, include it with the agenda. If not, note that on the agenda, as it will confirm that the failure is down to the person who was supposed to report. It might encourage them to supply a report, which you can then circulate using your e-group. Ah yes, an e-group. The party provides a really useful e-list function which, if you’re organised enough, you can use to ensure that you can quickly and efficiently distribute material. Best of all, you can set it so that the Executive can use it to talk to each other, rather than require you to do it all for them.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Tax cuts galore!
And so we come full circle (almost), with a call for tax cuts for the working middle classes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to tax cuts per se, and firmly believe that government should not be spending money where individual choice might be more effective.
However, promising tax cuts implies that you have a pretty good idea as to the role of government. I'm yet to be entirely convinced that we really do. The question of what government is for is one that has been left hanging amidst the debate over social versus economic liberalism, possibly because it would be potentially messy and divisive.
Such a debate is all the messier for the fact that we tend to see things in shades of grey, rather then the black and white of our primary opponents. Labour strongly believe that government can and should do things for you because it's big - the dinosaur theory of government. Our Conservative f(r)iends believe that government can't and shouldn't do things for you because it's too incompetent to be trusted - the small furry mammal theory. We tend to be more equivical about things.
Unfortunately, we tend to sound rather wishy-washy when addressing such issues instead of saying, "We don't give a f**k who delivers services, as long as they're the best we can afford and there is democratic accountability.". I deeply suspect that such a view reflects the attitude of a large swathe of voters.
There are a number of big ticket items which, in the short term, would allow a Liberal Democrat government to reduce the burden of taxation on what Americans like to call 'hard-working families'. However, the secret to gaining long term credibility is to make tax cuts that last. Voters now routinely expect tax cuts or very low increases in the year before an election, and are entirely cynical about the motivation for politicians in doing so. If we want to change the political culture, we need to overcome that cynicism.
So, the promise of tax cuts is easy and cheap to make. Without a credible means of delivery though, it risks engendering further cynicism amomgst voters. I hope that you know what you're doing, Nick...
However, promising tax cuts implies that you have a pretty good idea as to the role of government. I'm yet to be entirely convinced that we really do. The question of what government is for is one that has been left hanging amidst the debate over social versus economic liberalism, possibly because it would be potentially messy and divisive.
Such a debate is all the messier for the fact that we tend to see things in shades of grey, rather then the black and white of our primary opponents. Labour strongly believe that government can and should do things for you because it's big - the dinosaur theory of government. Our Conservative f(r)iends believe that government can't and shouldn't do things for you because it's too incompetent to be trusted - the small furry mammal theory. We tend to be more equivical about things.
Unfortunately, we tend to sound rather wishy-washy when addressing such issues instead of saying, "We don't give a f**k who delivers services, as long as they're the best we can afford and there is democratic accountability.". I deeply suspect that such a view reflects the attitude of a large swathe of voters.
There are a number of big ticket items which, in the short term, would allow a Liberal Democrat government to reduce the burden of taxation on what Americans like to call 'hard-working families'. However, the secret to gaining long term credibility is to make tax cuts that last. Voters now routinely expect tax cuts or very low increases in the year before an election, and are entirely cynical about the motivation for politicians in doing so. If we want to change the political culture, we need to overcome that cynicism.
So, the promise of tax cuts is easy and cheap to make. Without a credible means of delivery though, it risks engendering further cynicism amomgst voters. I hope that you know what you're doing, Nick...
Sarah Palin for Vice President of the United States? Why my wife is better qualified...
Sarah Palin has led a state government with a population that was, in 2000, approximately 620,000. I should be impressed, especially when you consider that I've never run anything. My wife, on the other hand, led one of the two ruling parties on Suffolk County Council, population in 2001, approximately 670,000.
Sarah Palin believes that her trip to Germany and her residential proximity to Russia and Canada give her foreign affairs experience. My wife served on the European Union's Committee of the Regions, as well as the North Sea Commission.
Sarah Palin believes that she has the right to tell you how you should live your life. My wife believes that, as long as your actions don't impact negatively on others, you should be empowered to make your own choices.
Sarah Palin vetoed a state grant to a distance learning education program for native Alaskans. My wife improved nursery school provision.
So the answer's obvious. Vote for Ros for Party President, and then persuade any American friends you might have to vote Ros Scott for Vice President of the United States!
Sarah Palin believes that her trip to Germany and her residential proximity to Russia and Canada give her foreign affairs experience. My wife served on the European Union's Committee of the Regions, as well as the North Sea Commission.
Sarah Palin believes that she has the right to tell you how you should live your life. My wife believes that, as long as your actions don't impact negatively on others, you should be empowered to make your own choices.
Sarah Palin vetoed a state grant to a distance learning education program for native Alaskans. My wife improved nursery school provision.
So the answer's obvious. Vote for Ros for Party President, and then persuade any American friends you might have to vote Ros Scott for Vice President of the United States!
Lessons for Local Party Secretaries: no. 3 – preparing for meetings
Most people who have served on an Executive Committee, at any level of the Party, will have horror stories of meetings that run on for hours, sapping the will to live and causing generic unhappiness.Admittedly, most of this is the fault of the Chair (not anyone I know though, no sirree Bob…) but you can help make it easier. What you want is written reports, circulated in sufficient time that people can read them before they turn up. That way, they are less likely to ask questions, the meeting will reach decisions quickly, and you can all go home. If people ask questions that could be answered by reading a report, you can suggest to them that they do. After a while, they will learn. If they don’t, perhaps a seat on the Executive is not for them…
It is usual to give a week’s notice of a meeting of the Executive Committee. Get into the habit of giving two weeks notice, so that those due to submit written reports can do so, leaving time to distribute them onwards. This will have two effects;
- everyone will have the same information
- you won’t have to minute a rambling stream of consciousness of whatever the individual can remember
Also, ask for any items of business to be included on the agenda under ‘Any Other Business’. That way, you encourage people to think about what they might need in advance. There is nothing more dispiriting at the need of a long meeting, just when your hopes are raised at the prospect of escape, than someone saying, “One item of any other business, Chair”. If it’s on the agenda, the Chair can move matters along more effectively.
Thank individuals who comply with your requests, as this will encourage them to continue doing so. Politely chide those who don’t, and note that you have not received their report, indicating that any time lost whilst people ask them questions is time not spent effectively, especially if they then complain about the length of the meeting (I love irony).
Saturday, September 06, 2008
Letting the train take the environmental strain
It appears that the cost of petrol is beginning to benefit the environment.
As a former South Londoner, and a non-driver, I had been fairly reliant on Go-Ahead, the holder of the rail franchises for Southern and Southeastern trains. Despite the usual moaning, I'd always found them to be pretty reliable, and it appears that I'm not the only one who's been convinced.
Yesterday, Go-Ahead announced that passengers numbers were up by approximately 6.5%, an impressive amount indeed. They aren't cheap, but given the marginal costs of driving these days, many have little alternative but to switch from car to train.
My concern is that the rail franchises will take advantage of an opportunity to raise prices and make more profit, a typically short term view, and one that risks driving people back to their cars. As the price of crude oil drops back towards the $100 per barrel mark, the likelihood that the purely economic logic of a switch to public transport ebbs away increases.
An argument is often made that cutting tax rates increases tax take. It seems likely that the same logic applies to the cost of a rail season ticket. So, how about cutting the cost of a season ticket, if only in real terms, gentlemen?
As a former South Londoner, and a non-driver, I had been fairly reliant on Go-Ahead, the holder of the rail franchises for Southern and Southeastern trains. Despite the usual moaning, I'd always found them to be pretty reliable, and it appears that I'm not the only one who's been convinced.
Yesterday, Go-Ahead announced that passengers numbers were up by approximately 6.5%, an impressive amount indeed. They aren't cheap, but given the marginal costs of driving these days, many have little alternative but to switch from car to train.
My concern is that the rail franchises will take advantage of an opportunity to raise prices and make more profit, a typically short term view, and one that risks driving people back to their cars. As the price of crude oil drops back towards the $100 per barrel mark, the likelihood that the purely economic logic of a switch to public transport ebbs away increases.
An argument is often made that cutting tax rates increases tax take. It seems likely that the same logic applies to the cost of a rail season ticket. So, how about cutting the cost of a season ticket, if only in real terms, gentlemen?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)