The British Political Conference Season - The Insider Media Perspective

We're in the middle of the political conference season. Ed Miliband will be delivering his keynote speech to the Labour Party Conference in Liverpool this afternoon following Nick Clegg's speech last week to the Liberal Democrat conference in Birmingham. Next week it will be David Cameron's turn in the Tory conference. Here in Wales, Plaid Cymru also had their annual autumn gathering two weeks ago.

Whilst I was in Birmingham last week, I spent a few hours at the bar in the company of one of Wales' political reporters. We had a good chat about all things political and rugby (it is World Cup season after all!) and I asked him how in his experience, did the different political party conferences compare. What he relayed to me gave a fascinating insight into a media perspective on these political gatherings.

He said that in his view the Liberal Democrat conference was a 'very nice' kind of gathering. The kind where delegates will drink a cup of tea and have a sandwich. Certainly more professional now that we're in government compared to how it was in years gone by but still with a sense of eccentricity about it. I can't really disagree with that! What interested me particularly though was his view on the conferences of the other parties as I have no insider knowledge of them.

When it came to the 'fun' stakes, he said the Labour Party conference, particularly in Wales, was the worst. It was tribal and from what he was implying, didn't have any redeeming features of which to speak. I suppose the inner-party rivalries and the factionalism that was rife during the latter part of their 13 years in power took its toll internally.  His take on the Plaid Cymru conference was interesting in that he said in recent years, particularly since they went into government in Cardiff in 2007, they had tried to become more professional themselves and had lost a lot of the 'fun' aspect that had been before. It is now apparently, a party conference that runs on media spin and policy soundbites more than ever before.

But it was his take on the Conservative conference which for me was the most interesting. The Conservative Conference he said was easily the most enjoyable. He said that it was their over the top exhuberance that made it so much more lively than any of the others. Whilst liberals might be drinking tea and eating sandwiches, Tories would be drinking champagne and dining much more lavishly. I suppose this is the Conservative way.

He said that out of all of the party conferences, the worst in his personal opinion as a neutral observer was the Labour conference. The Lib Dem and the Plaid Cymru conferences came in on about par with each other but the Conservative Party conference was far ahead of the rest.

I know of friends who visit all party conferences on behalf of their work, and it would be interesting to hear whether this is the kind of view also held by those working in the voluntary sector or in private enterprise. For whilst this is only one political reporters take on this rather unique and quirky part of British political life, it surely must resonate with others who have experienced the goings-on at all of the party conferences in recent years?

Personally, I'm just thankful that I don't have to attend them all. 5 days at the Liberal Democrat Federal Conference per year is more than enough for me. It is an exhausting few days and I don't know how those lobbyists who live on the conference circuit manage to do so!

A Gareth Epps Sized Lib Dem Conference Security Farce

I've been following with some incredulity this evening an astonishing exchange of messages on Facebook between Gareth Epps and the Chair of the Liberal Democrat Federal Conference Committee (FCC), Andrew Wiseman.

A few days ago, I received an e-mail that said:

"Dear Mark, just to confirm, we have received information from Greater Manchester Police that you have been successfully accredited for the upcoming Liberal Democrat Autumn Conference 2011. Your conference pass will be posted to you in September".

My e-mail response to the Lib Dem conference office was this:

"It's good to know. I was worried my past in the Colombian rainforests would come back to bite me. Maybe next year?"

The additional security measures at this year's conference has been met with hostility by a great number of long-standing liberals who deem the illiberal measures enacted for this September's Birmingham conference as a front against our civil liberties.

I sympathise with the sentiment and feel that having been a regular voting conference attendee, as designated by my local party for nearly a decade now, the concept of being 'checked out' by the police to ensure that I am suitable to attend is pretty demeaning.

But then I suppose I should count my blessings because at least I've been given permission to attend.

Gareth Epps
The same can not be said for many long-standing members who have had difficulties with their accreditation. Despite having paid for accommodation and planned for travel months in advance, delegates are now facing the uncertainty of whether they can attend or not.

Gareth Epps

More so, hundreds of already paid-up delegates are still awaiting news from Greater Manchester Police and are therefore in a state of limbo with only 2 weeks to go.

Gareth Epps is one of those in the former category and anyone who knows him realises what a ludicrous situation this is. Andrew Wiseman the FCC Chair has reacted on Gareth's Facebook wall tonight in a very matter of fact way which has not helped matters. Complaints that Gareth hasn't been sending the right passport style photo through to the conference office is missing the point entirely. Gareth Epps is a long-standing and well known Liberal Democrat activist, Federal Committee member and PPC (and nearly an MP in Reading for his efforts). He's opinionated, passionate in his views and is also very importantly, a keen member of the conference Glee Club.

Gareth Epps you could almost say is your stereotypical Liberal Democrat conference delegate for crying out loud and he's being refused entry now not only apparently by the police but by our own conference committee! If this can happen to someone like Gareth Epps who has the stomach to raise his voice and fight back against the authorities and these draconian measures, what about the quieter members who may not be so confident to challenge these dubious decisions? How many delegates may end up missing the conference because of these ill-conceived measures?

It is a complete and utter bloody farce.

Andrew Wiseman and his committee need to sort this out with a cold, sharp dose of common sense. If the likes of Gareth aren't able to enter conference, there'll be a blood-bath on the conference floor in the debate on this very issue on Sunday morning and it will be the members of the FCC that will be scrapped off the walls.

What's that coming over the hill? Is it a Conference? A Lib Dem Conference?

Oh yes it is.

I can't pretend that I wasn't ever so slightly excited when I saw the big brown package waiting for me in the post on Friday morning. I've been waiting for it for a few days now and what it signifies is that we are now on the cusp of the autumn party conference season.

I explained quite comprehensively here last September, why I enjoy attending Liberal Democrat conferences so much.

It really does feel like a family environment to me. Politics is an intense environment and it is comforting at times to be in the likeminded company of those who believe in the same values as yourself. I commented here about that growing Lib Dem family of mine after I attended Andrew Reeves' memorial service in London last month.

33 Lib Dem Conferences...and counting...
By my reckoning, this will be my 34th Liberal Democrat conference in a shade under 10 years since my first conference in Manchester in the Spring of 2002.

I have attended 19 Welsh conferences in that time (including the special conference in 2007 to discuss the formation of a possible Rainbow Assembly Coalition with Plaid Cymru and the Conservatives). Indeed, since my first Welsh Liberal Democrat conference in Llandudno in the Spring of 2002, I have been an ever present apart from the autumn conference in Llandrindod Wells in 2004. In addition, I have attended 14 Federal conferences including every major autumn conference since my first in Brighton in 2003.

Birmingham 2011
So my first venture to a conference in Birmingham will by 15th at a UK-wide level. The pre-conference documentation arrives in two seperate batches - firstly the agenda and policy papers in early August and then at the end of the month, the Conference Directory and Training Guide.

The good news begins merely in the fact that the first pack arrived in the first place. The added security arrangements this year have caused great controversy amongst the rank-and-file and the new hoops that had to be lept through to register was quite off-putting. So the fact that pack 'A' has arrived means that my mamouth attempt to register on-line was not in vain!

I have also already booked into central and more than reasonably priced accommodation for the week so I'm all set for the trip.

I will have to wait for pack 'B' to arrive to plan my whole week around fringe events, training events and policy debates but the first glimpse at the agenda brings a number of very interesting topics to the fore.

The Agenda - Policy Debates & Speeches
The fact that we're now in Government means that our debates mean so much more than they did when we were in opposition. The result of the NHS debate in the Sheffield spring conference led to a change on Government tack on changes to the health service - a clear sign that having the Liberal Democrats in government is helping to moderate the worst excesses of the Conservative Party.

A significant debate on late Sunday afternoon titled 'Protecting Individuals and Communities from Drug Harms' will see the party debate a call for a government-backed inquiry into the decriminalisation of drugs as reported here on the BBC website and as Steph Ashley excellently comments on here in what is a welcome return to blogging after a 9 month hiatus.

Another debate which I expect to find overwhelming support amongst delegates will be the one on Tuesday morning titled 'Science Not Stigma: Ending the Blood Ban' which will focus the fire on the Blood Service for refusing to take blood donations from homosexual men who practise safe sex when hetrosexual men and women who have had unprotected sex can give blood after just one year. With blood stocks running low, this is a scandal.

I'm also looking forward to the 'Community Politics' debate later that same day which will reaffirm the party's commitment to a form of bottom-up politics that has stood it in good stead for some 40 years. This is more important now than ever before since we've become entwined with difficult decision making in Westminster. The Ceredigion Liberal Democrat local party were one of the many who jointly put it forward alongside Party President Tim Farron. I will also take great interest in the debates on 'phone hacking and the Arab Awakening.

Finally, to go back to my earlier barb about the additional security measures introduced by the police for this now Government influencing conference, I will take great interest in the Sunday morning debate on these changes and the attempt by the grass-roots to rest its conference back from the contol of the apparatchiks. I rather wish them well in their attempt and will have my voting card on the day to make my individual mark in this and all of the other debates which I have mentioned above and more.

In addition, there will be the keynote speech by Nick Clegg to close conference but also a Q&A session with him in which party members can ask what they like without any pre-warning. There'll be speeches by Vince Cable and Chris Huhne which I will also want to hear as well as one by Steve Webb MP the Minister for Pensions (a particularly important issue for me representing as I am an area with a high proporition of elderly residents). I'll be looking forward also to Kirsty Williams' speech as our Welsh leader on the final day following what will also be a very interesting Q&A session on international affairs with amongst others, Paddy Ashdown.

So there's much going on but the above is a mere drop in the ocean of what will be occurring during the course of those 5 days in Birmingham.

I can't wait for pack 'B' to arrive in the coming weeks for me to complete my plans. But come what may, I have a particular plan for the Saturday afternoon - I'm off to Villa Park to watch my boys take on Newcastle! Well, kill two birds with one stone and all that!

Should the UK re-instate the death penalty?

Put simply, no. Put more forthrightly, absolutely not.

If you agree with me, please sign Martin Shapland's e-petition at the HM Government e-petitions website. It can be found here at http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/1090.

It has currently been signed by over 12,500 people as opposed to the contrary e-petition which has been started by Paul Staines (the infamous right-wing on-line commentator Guido Fawkes) which has currently attracted just over 6,800 signatures.

This is an issue of principle. I believe passionately in my view on this matter and it's important that in this on-line battle that those of us who do not agree with the death penalty make our voice loud and clear.

You may agree with me and you may not. That's fine because that's democracy. But if you agree with my sentiments, please sign the petition.

Murdoch's Watergate? Cameron's Watergate? A Historian's Perspective

Having been away in London, I've not had time to comment on the incredible #hackgate developments.

It has been an astonishing pace of events that has shook the British media, its police and its politicians to their foundations. Much has been said and is being said about what has happened and the situation is so fluid that we can not tell where this is going to end. So the best that I can do at this juncture is to take a step back and to make some observations on what has already happened from my perspective as a historian.

Hackgate
Modern society overuses the 'gate' suffix at an alarmingly regular rate nowadays and in all reality, none of the modern uses can really match the severity of the original Watgergate moment in history. A pretty comprehensive list can be found here and forasmuch as 'Sharongate' in Eastenders may have had the nation transfixed back in the early 1990s or Nipplegate in which Justin Timberlake revealed Janet Jackson's nipple during the halftime show of Super Bowl XXXVIII may have caught the world in awe, do they really deserve comparison with a scandal that ousted an American President? Of course not. But over recent days and weeks, as more information has been released and more people have been implicated in this mire, I get a sense in my historic bones, that something really ia afoot here and what we are watching are the ingrediants for what will be a seismic shift in our cultural politic from what has been over the past four or so decades.

(a) Murdoch's Demise?
The whole point of Watergate was that at its core, there was a rotten political centre which as it transpired, went right up to the very top of America's political chain of command to the Commander-in-Chief in the White House.

James and Rupert Murdoch facing a House of Commons
Select Committee Grilling

Here, the rotten core has been in the ethics and standards of the tabloid journalists primarily in the News of the World but wider than that, throughout the News International empire and indeed, further afield across the spectrum.

It so happens however, that the hideous and disbelieving antics of a number of reporters during the past decade at the very least, were found at News International on the Murdoch's watch. What has transpired since has been a momentus and seemingly never-ending barrage of developments that have further showed this part of the Murdoch Empire to be wrapped up in dirty and dodgy dealings. As a result, the famous and historic News of the World name was allowed to be killed off in an attempt to placate the rising tide of anger and revulsion at what was being disclosed.

But of course, one of the hallmarks of this crisis has been the way in which Rupert and son James Murdoch have been unable to keep up with events and are playing a constant scrambling game of catch-up. For a family that has for so long lived in the public eye and has made its millions by being at the forefront of media campaigns, it is an incredible volte-face that see's them now struggling to deal with the searing light of the world's media attention. They have so badly misunderstood the public mood, their reaction to events has far from calmed the growing current that has turned against them but has in fact exacerbated and made worse that tide.

In only a matter of weeks, everything has changed. Who could seriously have thought just a month ago before the recent Milly Dowler revelations were made public, that a Parliamentary motion calling on Murdoch to drop his bid for the 100% sharehold in BSkyB would be supported unanimously by all parties and that as a result of this rare show of solidarity, Murdoch would indeed drop the bid?

Who could have believed the scenes of watching both Rupert and son James on Tuesday in front of a House of Commons select committee? It was indeed a historic and disbelieving event to witness. Suddenly, here was the media tycoon whose empire has held British politicians from both the Labour and Conservative benches over the past 3 decades in the palm of his hand, being brought back to heel as he faced questions about his company, its ethics and about his role in the events that have seen its share price collapse by some 17%. Murdoch Snr it suddenly became apparent to us, was now this frail old octogenarian who is getting no younger and who is clearly past his prime and not in control of his vast media empire as many may have felt was the case.

It is apparent, that many of his fellow executives at News Corporation are seeking to stregthen their grip on the corporate managment of the company from what seems to have been the lazy gaze of its Chief Executive and his heir apparent. The sudden and dramatic share price collapse of the company will certainly have concentrated minds to this effect. Also rumoured amongst this growing discontent at the Board level is that the company may want to look more seriously at its future in the British press. It is a widely felt view that the ownership of the Times and Sun titles in the UK owes more to Murdoch Snr's pet enthusiasm which emanates from his father's journalistic background and his own earlier years in breaking through in the 1960s than to a financial imperative. For the News International stable of newspapers from a British context at least is only a small part of News Corporation's bigger picture. It may be unlikely but it is not inconceivable that post-Murdoch, these papers might be sold off and what of that? A British tabloid and quality press without the Murdoch fingerprint written all over it after over 40 years at its heart?

Murdoch showed contrition on his appearance in Westminster in Tuesday but then so he might. In a matter of weeks he has seen everything that he has created and everything that he has stood for questioned. Hackgate has made him as vulnerable a target as he has ever been and whilst he may cling on to power or may be moved upstairs to become Chairman of the company, it would seem that these events will hasten the transition from power of this once mighty media mogul. It is now also highly questionable that son James will automatically take over the mantle from his father and if it proves in time that he doesn't, then it will indeed be another humiliating blow to the prestige and power of the Murdoch brand.

Most importantly of all from this perspective is how this on-going episode will alter the relationship between the media and the politicians that run our country. Suddenly, no-one wants to be seen near the toxic Murdoch brand because that's exactly what it has become - toxic. Having a proper and respectful distance and seperation of the media and political worlds in the UK is now likely in the foreseeable future and this in itself, whatever happens to Murdoch and his family, can only be a good thing.

Maybe Vince Cable was right all-along!

(b) David Cameron's Demise?
What then of the political ramifications of these developments?

Disgraced British Prime
Minister David Cameron?

In 1974, it became apparent that the rotten core that had seen US government put under the spotlight was actually orchestrated from the very top. President Nixon was forced to beceome the first and only American President to date in history, to resign his office because of the nature of the deceit and the part that he played in it.

Only last week, it didn't seem as if David Cameron would be badly touched by these events but such has been the speed of the revelations that the bookmakers have slashed the odds of his being the next resignation fron the Cabinet.

The dodgy connection of course is Andy Coulson and whilst the Prime Minister has done his best to robustly defend his position as he did in the House of Commons yesterday, it seems as if the more that is said, the more that is left un-said. It is probably most likely that David Cameron himself is an innocent by-stander in all of this and that his only mistake was one of judgement in which he believed all that Coulson said to him. Coulson may of course be exonerated by the Judicial inquiry and so in connection, will Cameron. But if not, Cameron's judgement will be seriously questioned but of course it does not stop there.

As with Watergate, it all comes down to who knows, what do they know and when did they know it.

Cameron's repeated protestations in the House of Commons yesterday, using the same carefully-phrased legal wording, seemed to cry of Shakespeare's Macbeth: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks".



Disgraced American President Richard Nixon

What did he know of Coulson's relations with the blackened journalists? What indeed did Coulson know himself and did the Prime Minister know the same? What indeed did the PM say to the Murdoch's and Rebekah Brooks during his many meetings with them regarding the possible BSkyB takeover?

Suddenly, every word uttered by the Prime Minister takes on a much greater significance. There are many imponderables and if Cameron honestly is free from all legitimate accusations, then he will be fine. But, if like Nixon, there is a discussion along the way or a knowledge of events that can implicate him in the wider furore, then it could well be as seriously damaging and far-reaching as that American political crisis of 4 decades ago.

All it needs is for one whistleblower or for one errant remark to me made that blows yet more out of this hideous can of worms.

In the meantime, the 24 media coverege that seems to be dedicated to the sensational new twists and turns that unleash yet more interest in this story, can far too easily forget the other great stories of this time. The fragility of the Euro-zone and its impact on us and the starvation of millions in Somalia are just two stories that spring to mind that are being clouded from view by hackgate.

But for all the words and all of the analysis, as is ever the case with such things, it is only time that will tell whether hackgate does indeed have the long-term repercussions on our society as the original 'gate' did on its American counterpart, back in the 1970s.

The Ed Miliband Media Car Crash

I was speechless when I saw this BBC interview with Ed Miliband yesterday. It was one of the most gut-wrenchingly awful media performances I've seen from the Labour Party leader.

Whatever your view on the strikes yesterday, Miliband's muddle was excruciatingly painful to watch. His parrot-like repetition of the same tried and tested lines spoke of a man clearly ill at ease with his script, knowing as he did that he was walking a near impossible tightrope of trying to appease his own party whilst not being painted into a corner by 'middle Britain'. He sounded wooden and stilted and thoroughly un-natural.

The final question was truly awful. Given an opportunity to provide some humanity as a father of children, he just trotted out the same line that he'd worn out over the previous 2 minutes.



Who is Ed's media consultant? Because if someone honestly told him that this was the way to interview then they need really should consider a new career in watching paint dry.

For my sanity Ed and for the sake of your leadership of the Labour Party, sort it out before your Party sort you out instead.

Circus Wild Animal Ban Must Become a Reality

I was very pleased to see a rare showing of unanimity this past week in Parliament in support for Conservative MP Mark Pritchard's non-binding motion to ban the use of wild animals in the circus here in the UK.

The fact that he stood up so resolutely against his own leader and party Whips under intense pressure to withdraw his motion is to his personal credit and it is lamentable of the Conservative Party and David Cameron that they attempted to silence Mr Pritchard in the manner of which he described at the start of his debate.

My Thailand Experience
I can't recall having ever visited a Circus but my thoughts on this matter come from an episode of my life when I was on holiday in Thailand back in 2008.


Are Elephants supposed to be great artists?

I was in Chiang Mai in the north of the country when we took up the option of visiting an elephant trekking centre and I was very excited at the prospect. The trekking itself through a forest was a real 'once-in-a-lifetime' experience and I felt comfortable with it. For in history, these animals have been well versed in carrying human kind and indeed were powerful weapons of force and strength in battles past under Alexander the Great and Hannibal.

What I found greatly disconcerting however was the use of elephants before hand, to perform 'acts'. I couldn't help but notice that their feet were chained into position so their movement was limited and what followed for me, was a crass attempt to attract visitors and their tourist baht (the local Thai currency).

The two photos you'll find in this blog post are those taken by me whilst we were there. I must admit that I was not enamoured by the sights of elephants drawing pictures with their trunks or playing a form of basketball.

Are Elephants supposed to be great sports stars?

Because I may be wrong here but somehow I don't think elephants were put on this Earth to play basketball or to paint (please note the sarcastic tone).

It all felt un-natural and I can remember feeling a great sense of unease at what I was watching and felt guilty for my wilfull visual participation in the event.

A "barbaric" practise that has "no place in civilised society in the 21st Century".

Those were the words of Liberal Democrat MP for Colchester Bob Russell during the debate last week. I have to agree with his sentiment.

The RSPCA estimate that only a handful of circuses in England still keep wild animals which includes any non-domestic species, such as tigers, zebras and camels but that there are currently some 46 of these naturally wild animals currently being used in circus performance in the UK.

This is not their natural habitat. This is not what they were born to do.

I will leave the final word to Mr Pritchard who said in the debate that he orchestrated, that these performances are cruel and outdated and compared them to outlawed practices such as dog-fighting and badger-baiting.

It is simply for these reasons that I hope that the Government legislates fully on the clear will of Parliament on this issue and ensures that this form of 'entertainment' is disgarded to the history books which is the only place where it belongs.

Nick Clegg: Missing in Action?

So, after the abysmal local election results last Thursday, Nick Clegg today used the first anniversary of the forming of the coalition government in Westminster to announce that there would be a more "muscular liberalism" on show to demonstrate "the real Lib Dem input" at the heart of the of the Coalition Government in London.

Most supporters and members will no doubt welcome this more forthright announcement and expression of intent, but it does beg the question...where has Nick been for the past 365 days?

My Wonderfully Naïve E-mail to Ted Heath in 2001

For any political historian (of which I enthusiastically count myself as one), BBC Four's documentary this week on the titanic duel at the centre of British politics between 1965-1975 was a 'must watch' event.

I found it absolutely fascinating.

Hearing the accounts of the main players close to both Heath and Wilson at this time, mixed in with the excellent array of political archive footage and the music of the period, brought alive this pivotal period in our history which at its end, began to see the break-down of the consesual style of politics that had marked British political life post-1945.

It can be viewed for the next few days on BBC iPlayer, right here.

Heath, Wilson and I
My University dissertations centred around this period of political history so my views come from much detailed research into a period in which I did not live at first-hand.

My BA dissertation centred around the 1963 Conservative Party leadership crisis and I proudly gathered a First for my efforts (and a 2:1 degree in all). Ted Heath played a minor role in this work whilst Harold Wilson meanwhile, played a central role in my MA dissertation effort which concentrated on the Labour Party's attitude towards Europe between 1964-1983. Admittedly, my effort here was much for the worse of having began gainful employment and I was fortunate to have scraped a 40% pass which also went for my Masters as a whole.

Through these studies, I formed a rather low opinion of Harold Wilson who I've never held in high esteem. For me, his brand of 'personality over politics' marked him out as an early day version of Tony Blair. Much of the credit for the good that came from his time at No.10 (particularly between 1964-1970) I feel belongs to his his Home Secretary and latterly Chancellor of the Exchequer, Roy Jenkins.

Ted Heath meanwhile is a bewilderingly complex character to try and decipher. He certainly lacked Wilson's charisma and common touch and yet he did seem to have a deeper grasp of what he was all about. His singular greatest achievement and one for which I am thankful, was his success in getting Britain into the European Community in the early 1970s.

My E-mail to Ted Heath
It was my admiration for his ability in this arena, if none else, that enticed this young and politically keen though rather green and naïve young 18 year old to send a personal e-mail to him back in 2001.

I was a first year student in Aberystwyth University and I recall sitting in the Pantycelyn Halls of Residence computer room, prior to the 2001 General Election, sending a handful of electronic messages out to politicians both local and national, asking questions to them on various issues. I was only beginning to become politically active (indeed, I only joined the Liberal Democrats the autumn previous and my total effort in the 2001 campaign was to deliver one leaflet for the party around Pantycelyn!) and I was keen to communicate my various political interests to these different politicians.

Specifically, I recall sending an e-mail out to Alec Dauncey who is an Aberystwyth Town Councillor who at that time was standing as the Welsh Liberal Democrat Parliamentary candidate for Preseli Pembrokeshire where my parents moved back to from south Pembrokeshire in 1999. He had the good grace to reply to my e-mail and we have struck up a good friendship ever since.

I also decided to e-mail Ted Heath. For it was now 2001 and he was retiring from Parliament having been an MP for a remarkable 51 years since the General Election of 1950. I haven't got the text of that e-mail that I sent a decade ago but if I recall correctly, it was in the spirit of grateful thanks for the work that he did with Europe. I also recall rather cheekily asking him, (particularly as the Conservatives were struggling against a popular Tony Blair and New Labour project at the time) why he remained a Conservative and wasn't now alligned with the more moderate and internationalist Liberal Democrats. I must've been in a slightly provocative mood at the time but suffice to say, I never received a reply - which was a great shame!

A Reflection
My sentiments on both Wilson and Heath were summed up neatly at the end of the BBC Four documentary by Lord Donoughue who was Harold Wilson's senior policy advisor between 1974-1976 and remained in that role under Jim Callaghan until his defeat to Margaret Thatcher in 1979.

He therefore had a greater insight into the mind of Harold Wilson than many and yet his startling comment, for one with Labour links, of Wilson was this...

"He wasn't a revolutionary and he wasn't very radical. Ted Heath was much more radical than Harold Willson".

I rest my case.

British Guns on Dublin's Streets

It's not 1911 and not 1921, but 2011 and today, members of the British security services will walk the streets of Dublin, fully armed.

It's an incredible occurrence that until only recently, would've been thought as wholly inconceivable.

Yet today, as a new mark of a new political stability between the United Kingdom and it's nearest neighbour, Queen Elizabeth II will start a truly historic visit to the Republic of Ireland - a full 100 years since her grandfather King George V visited a then constituent part of the British Empire back in 1911.

But following that visit a century ago, there followed bloody confrontations between Irish republicans, the Irish and the British Army as the Irish battled for their independence. The latter decades of the 20th century were dominated by 'The Troubles' in Northern Ireland between Republicans and Unionists during which almost 4,000 died from both sides of the sectarian divide.

It has been a torrid, blood-stained relationship.

During her visit, she will lay a wreath at the Irish Garden of Remembrance in memory of those Irishmen and women who died in the battles against the British and will also visit that bastion of Irish nationalism, Croke Park, the scene of the original Bloody Sunday massacre in 1920 when the the infamous Black and Tans of the British Army, entered the stadium and turned their guns on the crowd and killed 14 spectators and players.

This is not therefore just a typical ceremonial visit but one that will take in emotive places in the Irish psyche. The itinery is bold and brave. It has come at the request of the Irish President Mary McAleese but then, if the Queen was to accept a cordial invitation, the first in a century, then it may as well be made in fulsome reconciliation to cover the old enmities that have scarred the relationship between these two nations.

The Irish financial bailout of recent months has demonstrated the interdependence of European nations in these difficult economic times and the Irish/British trade links are of course strong.

But we're not talking about economics here. We're talking history. We're talking symbolism. We're talking death, grief, anger and pain.

Queen Elizabeth II has in her 59 years on the throne, conducted countless official visits to foreign countries but none of them will quite hold the meaning than the one which is starting today. She has probably walked on the soil of more nation states than any other human being in the world in her 85 years. Yet, remarkably, she has never set foot on the sovereign soil of the one nation that shares a land border with her own. She'll put that right today and in doing so, will formalise in its entirety, the normal diplomatic relations of these two nations.

There are of course security concerns as not all in the Irish Republic will be pleased with this visit and hence there will British security forces on hand, along with the Irish security forces, to ensure that all goes according to plan.

To be precise, the Irish Government is allowing up to 120 armed British police officers to patrol the streets of Irish cities to protect Queen Elizabeth II on her State visit. A force of the Metropolitan Police's royalty protection force carrying Glock pistols and Heckler & Koch submachine guns will join gardaí in ensuring her safety. They will be allowed to patrol the streets fully armed wherever Queen Elizabeth goes on her four-day visit, which has sparked the biggest security operation in the history of the State.

This is the way of things and should be taken with a pinch of salt. But just remember, as the footage is screened back to us here in Britain, that this is a remarkable sight. British guns on the streets of Dublin? Extraordinary, but a sure sign that Ireland and the United Kingdom have walked out of the darkness of the 20th century and into a more hopeful and prosperous century where they will learn to co-exist alongside each other in harmony.

An AV Referendum Battering? Good.

I don't mean for the heading of this blog post to signify my pleasure at the core result of the AV referendum last Friday. Indeed, as with any other progressive, forward-thinking individual, I hoped for a Yes vote so that we could at last move incrementally forwards towards a fairer voting system and finally get rid of the First Past the Post system that is unfit for the 21st century.

But it was clear as D-Day approached that the portents all pointed towards a poor result. But whilst the last opinion polls showed a 2:1 feeling against, no-one surely must've realised that far from over-estimating the sentiment to keep the staus quo, they actually under-estimated it with 7 out of 10 voters saying a resounding NO to electoral reform last Thursday.

Discredited Campaigns
The No campaign was nothing short of a disgrace. The lies that they peddled were shocking. Yet, the Yes campaign retaliated poorly and could not get the positive message of why a Yes vote was needed across to a sceptical public. This undermined the hard work being put in by volunteers across the country who faithfully put their all into getting a Yes vote.

What irked me most was that locally, all I got through my door was the No Freepost - no sign of an equivalent from the Yes campaign. If this was all many people read of the campaign, who should be surprised that they overwhelmingly voted No?

I for one spoke to residents on the door-step during the Assembly campaign and put across the positive reasons for why we needed a Yes vote and I made sure that all of the literature that we put out had this positive message on it too. But with what seemed like the bare bones of a Welsh campaigning infrastructure for the Yes vote, it was never going to be enough.

Who's to blame?
Clearly, and hindsight is a wonderful thing, the referendum should've been seperate from the other polls on that day. Only a handful of Council areas voted yes and many of these were in London where it happened to be the only poll of the day. Did linking it onto English Council and Welsh Assembly/Scottish Parliamentary elections work? Clearly not. It meant that those who voted were doing so through the prism of the local and national political scene and with the No camp linking it to Nick Clegg, this was always going to make it more difficult to win.

Holding the referendum on a seperate day would've made it easier to concentrate on the central questions themslves. But what is done is done.

At the end of the day, I'm glad that it was lost so convincingly. That's not to take anything away from those who worked tirelessly for a positive result, but points to the fact that AV really was the 'squalid little compromise' that Nick Clegg had called it before the General Election last year. Do I blame Nick Clegg? On putting it on the same day as the other elections, maybe - but as I said before, hindsight is a wonderful thing. On the question of it being a referendum only on AV and not on the PR alternatives, certainly not. Anyone who now blames the Liberal Democrats for only being able to achieve a referendum on AV and nothing more substantial are living in cloud cuckoo-land. The fact that Nick Clegg was able to get a referendum on changing the electoral system through the Conservative Party as a part of the coalition negotiations is a remarkable achievement in itself. There was no chance of getting the Conservative Party or indeed the House of Commons to agree on a referendum for a proportional alternative - the numbers just weren't there. Indeed, it is the half of the Labour Party that opposed the change that should hang their heads in shame. Call yourself progressives? Hypocritic dinosaurs more like.

Thanks to the Liberal Democrats, we got a chance at last to move away from FPTP but in the end, and for all of the reasons mentioned above and more, it was answered with a resounding no.

Next?
Fine. If that's what the people of Britain said then that's what they'll get. No more complaints now about wasted votes and jobs for life - it's what the country wanted.

What then for the concept of AV? Well, at a national level, it will now be confined to the dust-bin of British electoral history. Such a resounding defeat for this particular system means it can never again be put forward to the British public in another referendum - one of the reasons why if it was going to be lost, the referendum may as well have been lost big-time.

What then of the future for electoral reform? Well, there's no doubt in this mind that the battle has been lost for a generation. Here was an opportunity and it was not taken. Why would the people of Britain want another referendum vote on such an issue when the bigger issues in these economically difficult times are more basic - like putting the bread on the table?

For those of us who wish to see a change in the way in which we elect our politicians, we should now embrance the whole shoot. Proportional representation - fair votes in its proper meaning - is the only alternative left. We will not have an opportunity to enact it for decades but it's all there is left.

But here's a warning for those across the political spectrum but particularly in the Liberal Democrat party who see electoral reform as the holy grail - move on. We will not let this candle fade but neither can we cherish it as the be-all-and-end-all of our quest in politics. Sorting out or nation's finances and delivering a fairer and more equal society is what we must now be for. Electoral reform is one piece in this jigsaw of fairness but there are many others. For now, that one piece in the jigsaw has been lost. Whilst we go about finding it over the years ahead, let's not take our eyes off the other pieces on which can play a constructive and positive role in Government over the remainder of this parliament.

A Vote for a New Politics in Northern Ireland - Vote Alliance

It's been all-go for me on the Welsh Liberal Democrat front over recent days, weeks and months and there's just days to go before polling day.

But whilst I'll be doing my best to elect Elizabeth Evans to the Welsh Assembly here in Ceredigion, there'll also be elections around the country in England, Scotland and not forgetting, Northern Ireland.

There, I'll be keeping a particularly keen eye out on developments as one who has a deep interest in Irish politics. I'm particularly hoping for a good night for the non-sectarian Alliance Party. They are the Liberal Democrats' sister party in that part of the Union but more importantly than that, they are the sensible, liberal voice that Northern Ireland desperately needs to move the country forward from the divisions of old.

Here is a short, and I think, very innovative clip that the party has used in the run-up to these elections (apologies for it not being totally in sync - that's my fault, not the Alliance Party's fault!).



After winning a historic election last May in Belfast East and in doing so, electing the first ever Alliance MP to Westminster in Naomi Long, I hope to see them further consolidate and grow their presence in the Stormont Assembly this coming Thursday.

Northern Ireland needs the Alliance Party.

Good luck to them on Thursday.

Lib Dems in Coalition Government Gives CABs a Crucial Reprieve

I was very pleased to hear this weekend that the Westminster government has found £27m to continue for one more year at least, the excellent support that CABs give with the Financial Inclusion Fund.

I should declare an interest here as I am the Chair of the Cardigan & District CAB and Joint Chair of the Shadow Ceredigion CAB Trustee Board and I can not over-state the amazing work that the volunteers and staff members do to help vulnerable residents in our locality - particularly in what are economically trying times.

But for some time now, a cloud has been hovering over the CAB service because it has seemed that the Financial Inclusion Fund would be axed at the end of this March.

Here in Cardigan, we have used the funding to provide 2 caseworkers who have seen 280 new clients over the past 12 months, but with the sword of damocles hanging above their heads, we have had concerns about the provision of debt advice if the funding is not continued or replaced.

In the last few days before the announcement was made, Ceredigion's MP Mark Williams spoke in a Westminster debate on the availability of debt management advice.

He commented:

“The Government are rightly looking at where cuts can be made to reduce the deficit, but I am concerned that scrapping the Financial Inclusion Fund could be a false economy.

“Many people have benefited from debt management advice, and it has allowed people to manage their debts while staying in work.

“A phone and online advice service is no substitute for face-to-face advice, particularly for vulnerable clients and those with mental health problems, who may find it difficult to understand what can be complex issues over the phone.

“I hope that the Government will rethink this, as it is vital that we have this advice in place during what have been difficult financial times for many.”

He also wrote to Lib Dem Business Minister Ed Davey MP, urging him to retain the funding. I'm delighted that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Mark Hoban MP has now made the announcement.

It may only be a one-year reprieve at present but it's great news for the CABs across the UK and most importantly, for the clients who rely on the advice and support given.

Yes2AV Campaign has the 'Big Mo'

Here in Wales, we're rather busy fighting for a 'Yes' referendum vote - that's the referendum for extra powers to the Welsh Assembly on March 3rd (more to follow in a blog post next week).

But that doesn't mean that we're not doing our bit to get a decisive 'Yes' vote in the AV Referendum on May 5th. Indeed, my current Cardigan Focus newsletter which is currently in production has the generic 'Yes' template literature in it, quoting me as a keen supporter.

So I'm pleased to see this ukpollingreport that announces the result of a ComRes poll for tomorrow's Independent on Sunday on the exact question that will be put to the British public in May. 40% said they would vote in favour (up 4% on the last poll a month ago) with 30% against (no change) whilst 30% said they don't know (down 4%).

So whilst there's still a lot of undecideds out there that need to be convinced of the merits of changing the electoral system, it is a shot in the arm for us progressives who see the referendum as an opportunity to shake up a tired political system. It shows that there is a positive movement from 'undecideds' to the 'Yes' camp.

As UK Polling Report concludes:

"As we know, there’s a noticable difference between the results produced by the YouGov question that summarises the systems and asks how people would vote in the referendum, and the question here that asks people to say yes or no to the question that will be asked in the referendum. However, it is notable that both questions have shown a significant shift towards AV over the last fortnight. Momentum seems to have shifted in YES campaign’s direction".

There's much still to do (in Parliament this week to get the legislation through in time and on the streets) but the evidence points to the Yes camp having that muchly required and sought after commodity - momentum.

Daily Telegraph bemoans the Lib Dem tail wagging the Tory dog - Damn Right Too

Today's Daily Torygraph editorial has bemoaned the Lib Dem influence in the Coalition government.

The comment here attacks the Lib Dems for having too much infuence over the Tories in comparison to our mutual Parliamentary sizes.

It states:

"We appreciate that our political leaders are in uncharted territory and will sometimes find it difficult to plot a consistent course. None the less, there is undoubtedly too much of the Lib Dem tail wagging the Tory dog".

Well all I can say, is thank God for that.

The Torygraph complains about Nick Clegg's comments this week about the "outrageous plans to force Universities to accept quotas of pupils from state school on pain of a huge fine". Well if Universities are going to be free to charge higher tuition fees than before then damned right they should be forced to ensure that pupils from state schools have the opportunity of taking up degrees.

It bemoans the fact that the Lib Dems are 'banker-bashing' - again, hell yeah. It's totally unacceptable to see such large bonuses for executives in banks that have been bailed out by us the tax-payer.

It chastises the Lib Dems because we're a party that "doesn't like Trident". Again, why should we? It's a waste of money to spend tax-payers cash on a defensive set-up that was built for the Cold War. Our conventional forces in Afghanistan could well do with better resources and the savings made by not renewing Trident would help us to better support our front-line forces.

More Power to the Lib Dem Tail
This is why the UK is benefiting from having the Lib Dems in Coalition. Imagine how reactionary a Tory-only Government would have been?

There's a real liberal hue running through this government and whilst not every policy or decision made is to our liking as liberals, we must accept that this is a coalition where two disparate political groupings have come together in the national interest. But it's clear that without our positive, progressive and compassionate input, things would be a lot tougher for the country

If the Daily Torygraph are complaining about our influence in government then the Lib Dems must be doing something right.

Put Out The Trash Day - Coulson Quits No.10

What unfortunate timing.

Andy Coulson has managed to announce that he's quitting as David Cameron's Director of Communications at the same time that sees Labour reeling from Alan Johnson's sudden resignation, when Tony Blair has had to confront the Chilcot Inquiry once more, and when a suspect has been arrested. for the murder of Jo Yeates.

A coincidence? Pull the other one.

News of The World Phone Hacking
Coulson resigned as Editor of the NOTW back in 2007, saying that he took ultimate responsibility for the scandal that resulted in Royal reporter Clive Goodman being jailed for conspiracy to access phone messages. Private investigator Glenn Mulcaire was jailed for six months on the same charge.

Coulson has since denied any knowledge in the scandal but it has continued to haunt him during his 3 year stint as David Cameron's main PR man. Coulson was interviewed by the police last November but the following month, Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer said no new charges would be brought in the case, owing to a lack of admissible evidence.

Nevertheless, some public figures are taking civil legal action against the newspaper, and documents disclosed in those cases have led to new developments.

A Cloud Over No.10 Downing St
It was an eye-catching appointment when Cameron employed Coulson whilst he was Leader of the Opposition and many political commentators thought it ill-advised of Cameron to keep him on when he became Prime Minister.

Cameron's judgement really has been questioned on this issue and I'm amazed that Coulson has lasted this long.

Resignation
He's now leaving because the continued media coverage of this scandal "made it difficult for me to give the 110% needed in this role".

Or, was it a matter of damage limitation? Did he and Cameron realise that he wasn't going to last and waited for the ideal PR moment to let the decision go public? Only last week in a BBC interview, Cameron was asked if it was true that Coulson had offered his resignation - the PM declined to answer. So it would seem that this has been bubbling underneath the surface for some time.

Answers Please
But this isn't the end of the matter. We need to get to the bottom of this squalid mess. How widely known and how deeply affected was this illegal surveillance? What has been the extent and the role of the Metropolitan Police in all of this? What does this mean for News International? Where is the ethics in all of this?

Coulson may be gone, but the stench of gutter journalism remains.

It's clearly, in West Wing parlance, 'put out the trash day'. But that trash is still stinking.

Miliband & Balls - More Edd the Duck than Ed Murrow

This one will be un-Cole-like brief post but it really is interesting times for the Labour Party.

Goodbye Alan
I’ve always rather like Alan Johnson and thought that he was one of Labour’s best electoral bets to take over from Gordon Brown. But he didn’t stand so we’ll never know. What we do know is that Ed Miliband’s surprise decision to make him Shadow Chancellor barely 3 months ago was a mistake. Gaffe after economic gaffe left him floundering and didn’t give Ed the kind of media coverage that he wanted as he tried to stamp his newly found authority over his bewildered, election battered party.

But for all his error prone pronouncements of late, his standing down from the Shadow Cabinet, like with David Miliband before, will be a big blow to Labour. These are two big respected beasts that they can scarcely do without right now.

Balls in more ways than one

As opposed to the inherently more likeable and reasonable Johnson, I’ve still yet to find any redeeming features in the shape of Ed Balls.

He’s a typical, Brownite/Prescottite tribal Labour bully-boy bruiser. His language is the kind that will put people off politics and he’ll rub up the wrong way as many if not more people than he’ll positively persuade with his arguments.

The Ed Show
So, we now have 2 prime Brownite Labourites at the helm of the Labour Party - both of whom happened to be called Ed.

What kind of show are they going to put on for us I wonder.

A more statesmanlike, responsible and reasonable opposition to the Coalition? Or more of the same juvenile, childish behaviour that we have become far too accustomed too since the autumn?

I expect it'll be less Ed Murrow and more Edd the Duck.

Liberty Vs Security - Lib Dems get Detention without Charge Progress

An issue of much discussion within the Coalition government seems to have found a reasonable compromise as the BBC News website reports here.

Detention without Charge
Home Office Minister Damian Green announced in the House of Commons this morning that the Government is not intending to maintain the 28-day limit to detain terror suspects without charge when its 6 month extension lapses next Tuesday. Instead, it will revert back to 14 days. Home Secretary Theresa May is to report fully on anti-terror measures in Parliament next Wednesday.



The Liberal Democrats campaigned to reduce the limit after Labour in Government continued to increase it and in doing so, erode fundamental liberties in the name of security. Indeed, in November 2005, Tony Blair suffered his first ever Commons defeat as Prime Minister after 8 years, when he tried to increase the limit to a mind-boggling 90 days. How would you like to be detained for 3 months without charge? Well thankfully, 49 Labour MPs rebelled against their leader and the amendment was lost by 322-291 votes. The 28 days amendment won the day by the similarly narrow margin of 323-290 votes.

Control Orders
In the wider debate, there is a power struggle going on within the coalition between the securocrats and those who deem a re-balancing between liberty and security as essential.

This decision is most certainly a step in the right direction. Personally, I think 14 days detention without trial is too much. What about the terrorists the securocrats will bellow. Well, what about the fundamental tenet that underpins (or is supposed to underpin) our legal system - that of innocent until proven guilty?

Before jumping onto the security bandwagon, people should ask that question of themselves. How would we like it if a member of our family was detained without charge? Not very nice is it.

It was Benjamin  Franklin who framed it in a way that those who value liberty have failed to better in the 200 years since.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Getting the balance right is of vital importance and the Government's first responsibility is to protect its citizens. But it must also ensure that it protects us from an overwhelmingly powerful state.

We should not wish to be an authoritarian state. Labour got the balance wrong and even their senior members now admit so.

This is not George Orwell's 1984 and I hope it never will be, because what kind of living is that?

Labour - the new Thatcherite Republican Party

It has surely been a mind boggling 24 hours for Members of the House of Lords.

Their mamouth all-night sitting came to an end earlier today after almost 21 hours. This isn't the longest sitting in its history but it certainly gave the Prevention of Terrorism Bill debate that ran from 11am until 7.31pm between 10-11 March 2005, a run for its money. It is also likely to be the first of a number of all-night sitting over the coming days and weeks so that record may go yet.

Why? Well, Labour are adament that they will destroy the Coaltion Government's Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill which needs to be passed by mid-February for the AV Referendum to go ahead as planned on May 5th.

Filibustering - American Style

Labour have talked and talked and talked. They will of course argue that their cause is legitimate but the reality is that they're looking to deliberatley cause trouble for the sake of it. They argue that the Bill is 'political'. Well, bringing in AV which is Labour Party policy and which is supported by their own leader certainly shouldn't rankle. As far as the equalisation of constituencies is concerned, making every vote as equal in weight as possible as the next one is a laudable objective. If that so happens to mean that a number of overly populated Labour seats of old will need to be revised, then so be it.

If anyone is 'playing politics' here then it's the increasingly infantile Labour Parliamentary Party.

Their West Wing style filibuserting efforts of trying to talk the bill to death will not be successful. The Coaltion Government are united in its resolve to conclude this business on time and I am confident that they will.

No, No, No - Are Labour the new Thatcherites?!
It was Labour's great nemesis Margaret Thatcher who famously exclaimed 'No, No, No' in the House of Commons as her Prime Ministership came towards its end. Yet, now ironically, it's the Labour Party themselves that are sounding more militantly Thatcherite in their negativity than ever before.

Not only Thatcherite, but also like her beloved Ronald Reagan's own Republican Party.

Since 2008, I have witnessed with growing incredulity the American Republican Party's complete and utter obstinance against the democratically elected Democratic Congress' political wishes. You can disagree with decisions made but do so in a pro-active manner. Heckling and shouting for the sake of it without giving a viable alternative is irresponsible opposition. Sadly, the Democrats undeservedly lost control of the Lower House of Congress last November and the Republicans now have a foot back in the door.

Now we see the Labour Party here talk and act with the same vitriolic sentiment. Since the election last May they have been quick enough to damn any initiatives that the Coalition Government have put forward. On the biggest single issue, the economy, they have not put up any detailed alternative to the Coalition's spending cuts. But then how could they when Ed Miliband has a 'blank piece of paper'.

Indeed, one of the most illluminating blog posts that I've read in a long time was on this very point and was published yesterday by The Very Fluffy Diary of Millennium Dome, Elephant. I really encourage readers here to read it as it makes the point that Ed Miliband can't differentiate between the deficit and the debt (two very different things) and also adds that Labour wasted an opportunity to fix the roof whilst the sun was shining a decade ago.

A travesty to British Democracy
This sour-grapes rubbishing of anything coalitionist is now this week being witnessed with this House of Lords fiasco. What kind of democracy do we live in that can see such ridiculous scenes as we have witnessed these past 24 hours? On that point, what type of political party would stoop to such levels? Well, the Labour Party, clearly.

As Party President Tim Farron stated in an e-mail to members earlier today: "I’m all in favour of proper debate but Labour is cynically using the old politics of the worst sort to stop people have their say. Labour peers claim to be offering scrutiny, but that argument vanishes as soon as you examine their behaviour in the debate".

It's even more unbelievable as it's Labour who claim the credit for (semi) reforming the House of Lords in the first place. To be more blunt, it's their cack-handedness that allowed it to remain in a semi-reformed stated for this past decade. Like with other Labour messes that were left behind last May, it's been up to the Coaltion Government to try and put things right.

So there will soon hopefully be progress made by Nick Clegg to bring a final solution to the House of Lords fiasco. But until then, we must watch another as the Labour Party do all that they can to stick two fingers up to the coalition.

It's a real farce - this incident over the past 24 hours and Labour's more general unwillingness to be in any way a reasonable and responsible opposition.

But Labour shouldn't fear for I'm sure there are two emminent politicians who would be proud of their negative and oppositionist 'achievements' - step forward Sarah Palin and Margaret Thatcher.

Why I'm not accepting Ed Miliband's offer of joining the Labour Party

I was planning to blog this a few days ago but have been beaten to the punch by Caron's Musings who wrote an excellent critique for why Ed Miliband's latest invitation for Lib Dems to join the Labour Party should be rebuffed.

To follow Caron's lead on this, what would I rather do than join the Labour Party?

1. Become a Tottenham Hotspur fan (I loathe them);
2. Walk along a mountain face precipice, Italian Job style (I suffer from a mixture of vertigo and claustrophobia);
3. Wind the clock back and go to school naked as happened far too often in those bizzare dreams we all have as children;
4. Sit in a room with David Coulthard for more than 10 minutes (those who know me well know that I have little time for that pompous prat of a lacklustre, talentless ex-Formula One driver);
5. Appear on an Iceland advert (probably the worst made adverts in the history of TV advertising).

So yeah, I ain't joining the Labour Party anytime soon.

Why?
Well, I can't better Caron's observations which are spot on.

• Iraq - an illegal war, enough said;
• Implicating this country in complicity with torture;
• Letting down the poorest by increasing the gap between rich and poor;
• Failing to fix the roof when the sun was shining - meaning we all suffer as a result of their economic incompetence;
• Failing to regulate the banks, either before or after the crash;
• Wasting a fortune on illiberal ID cards;
• Their dissembling over the cuts in spending they would have made if they had won the election;
• The appalling mess they made of the Tax Credit system, and their treatment of thousands of poor families, forced to repay thousands they couldn't afford;
• Imposing control orders on people without telling them even what they were being accused of;
• Centralising public services to the detriment of people using them;
• Taking kids' DNA without parents' permission;
• Storing the DNA of innocent people;
• Running an inhumane and often brutal immigration system;
• Making a hash job of House of Lords reform;
• Refusing to carry out their election promise of brining in electoral reform.

Don't tell me that the Labour Party is a progressive party Mr Miliband. Don't insult my intelligence.

I am not illiberal, I am not an authoritarian, I do not want to be ruled by the unions and I am not obsessed with centralisation. I therefore do not want to join the Labour Party.

A Lib Dem through and through
I am a coalitionist in as far as I believe that we need to be grown up enough to work with others to put the country back on the right track.

That doesn't mean that I agree with every policy that this government comes up with. Why should I? This government is mainly made-up of a Conservative Party that I have little time for. But we must accept that compromise is necessary to move the country forward.

I will disagree with the coalition when I feel it right to do so but that will not hide my pride in the fact that we as Lib Dems are putting our policies into government for the well-being of the people we represent for the first time at a UK-wide level for generations.

Labour had their chance and they blew it and you Mr Miliband sat around the Cabinet table when a number of those decisions were made.

I'd rather jump off a pier into the sea than join the Labour Party (I can't swim).