Crikey

It sounds like you want to go back to Brown so he can treat you like Keira Knightly again. Don’t do it. Labour deserve a stint in the wilderness. The Greens appear to be the only decent alternative yet.

But, I will let Nick woo me too, he has an opportunity to be bold and to push for some real Liberalism where it matters. A Great Repeal Bill would get my backing, theres a few dozen pieces of legislation that could do with removal and the Lib Dems have an opportunity to offer one thing you don’t hear at elections often enough – “We will do less than the last guys!”

So you detest Labour, are tired of them and their incompetent ways, feel let down by them, feel cheated by them – but you won’t vote for the only party that can get them out of power?

Hmmm.

Oh dear! Even you cannot bear the truth of where the politics of Britain is going. What a sad state of affairs.
But you fail to tell us that the parties you mention above all have policies that will provide even more increasingly authoritarian bills, an army of management consultants, and an economy built on rabid consumption and cheap foreign debt, because they all follow without exception like lost sheep EU directives.

Not one of the parties mentioned have any policies that will return to the public the rights and legal protections stripped away by Labour.

Not one of the parties mentioned have any policies of smaller government, to strip out the dead wood, the non jobs, the quangos, the fake charities and the financial links between government, unions and big business.

Not one of the Parties mentioned have any policies to turn back the tide of private companies issuing fines and duties, removing their legislative protection and restoring habeas corpus as a cornerstone of all law.

And most importantly none of the mentioned parties have a policy to turn our economy around, to move it from the Debt based economy that it is now to one that is based on Capital, based on sound money.

Tinkering, that’s all they offer, tinkering and more EU legislation, with little difference between them other than the colour of their rosettes.

LPUK is the one to vote for, where Liberty comes first, where State interference in your life comes last, a programme based upon the rule of law, where Government governs by consent rather than Rules by laws, where British policies will take precedence over those imposed from elsewhere.

Want to see where all these parties now sit on the political map, then read on.
http://lpuk.blogspot.com/2009/05/political-map-ianpj-of-lpuk-gives-his.html

If you really want a Liberal Britain, there can only be one way to go, that is away from authoritarian rule.

LFAT, that says far more about our dreadful electoral system than it does about Aaron.

Sheesh!

You know, if it were not this sort of honesty from the Labour grass roots blogoshere (which is getting ever louder), I would be utterly convinced of the inherent evilness of the whole Labour movement.

Posts like this and the Gurkha rebels/abstainers reveals that there are some good people in the party with good intentions (even if I disagree with basic premise).

I understand the ideological impasse having suffered it over another party in another country.

It’s very tough in this country as all the major parties are ideological hybridized mongrels. Old Labour/ NuLabour – Liberal conservatives/old school Tories – Liberals/Social Dems. Jesus, even the BNP is full of socialist ideology now.

The Greens? Economically, they are straight out of Revelations, the horsemen of the Apocalypse.

The reality is, as Letters from a Tory points out, that the conservatives are the only ticket to escaping the Brownite cabal. The Lib Dems would probably copulate with Labour in the event of a hung parliament, the Stazi state intact. Bugger that!

It might go against the grain for genuine Labour voters, but the Brownite cancer need to be expunged in order to claim your party back.

“LPUK is the one to vote for, where Liberty comes first, where State interference in your life comes last,”

Unless you’re an immigrant of course.

“LPUK is the one to vote for, where Liberty comes first, where State interference in your life comes last,”

Unless you’re an immigrant of course.

Wow, I had high hopes for the Libertarian party but it seems you subscribe to the Migration Watch UK view of Asylum Seekers and Immigrants, with policy documents like these who needs supporters?

Two points:
How would you deport over 700,000 illegal immigrants using a “small state” solution? Since you oppose an amnesty I am looking forward to a reasonable, cheap, efficient system, within the rule of law.
How does the State deciding who can enter a Labour market in anyway match Libertarian Principles?

Not that Labour are any better mind.

@IPJ – Want to see where all these parties now sit on the political map, then read on.

Oh my God, every non-libertarian political party is horrifyingly authoritarian! I must vote for LPUK!

Actually, wait – I haven’t considered the possibility that this “political map” is little more than a sliding scale with “Nice” at one end and “Nasty” at the other. What, don’t you like Nice things? The Scientologists play a neat trick like this on the unwary too – take this test and Oh My God, You Need More Scientology In Your Life! Whowouldathunkit.

(While you’re here, I’d suggest that a Scientological Party of the United Kingdom’s policy proposals would prove equally popular with the electorate – I’ve got a fiver here that says the Monster Raving Loonies will outpoll LPUK at national level.)

@LFAT – So you detest Labour… but you won’t vote for the only party that can get them out of power?

I’d sooner lose a nut to a threshing machine, thanks. I’m expecting a Cameron administration’s bullshit to be essentially identical to Labour’s, with roughly twice as many counterproductive crackdowns on the general concepts of “Evil” and “Foreign”. Even in a moment’s pique, I’ve got my soul to consider.

@Aaron

Indeed – not to bore people, but it’s the bullshit that’s the problem. The New Labour project has been all about bullshit from day one, far more concerned with maximising the number of headlines painting the party as tough/compassionate/prepared to listen etc. than any unifying theory or plan.

That’s why we wound up with all the bans and the immigrant-baiting. Even in 1997, Tony Blair and co. seemed to believe that coming down hard on the side of the majority in any debate where the public were split by at least 51/49% was a sure route to popularity.

On practically every half-assed initiative Labour attempted, the one unifying trait was that they were almost all vote-grubbing, headline-grabbing bullshit. ID cards? Bullshit. Banning everything? Bullshit. ASBOs? Bullshit. Wars? Bullshit. I suppose it might be a coherent plan, if you think about it – call it a Grand Unified Theory of Bullshit.

That’s why you don’t need to look for totalitarian power grabs or manic anti-freedom schemes – Labour lack the basic competence to institute any such plans. Their speciality is content-free PR stunts, nothing more.

Looking around, it’s hard to find anything other than the same crap from other major party, and see a number that are significantly worse. Why, some of them even have representatives in this thread.

‘It sounds like you want to go back to Brown so he can treat you like Keira Knightly again’

Is that a reference to the recent campaign against domestic violence, in which Keira Knightley played an abused girlfriend?

If so, i think your simile is flippant and offensive. I’m sorry to go off topic.

Aaron: good post. Low on suggestions for the future but aren’t we all right now?

Heh, LFaT, I guess that’s the mentality of the nation the Tories are hoping for to mask the reality of that they’ll be voting for a wasps nest rather than a hornets nest.

“alcohol-fueled jaunts across Eastern Europe, for a bunch of windmill-loving hippies? Probably not”

Come over to the dark side, Aaron…

Step 1: Note that technology is cool.
Step 2: Note that right now the impending eco-collapse is on course to happen _whatever_ we think about it.
Step 3: Fast cars. Fast bikes. Fast trains. Clever Stuff. Fun Stuff. Beer.

http://www.aptera.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Cf89tawZX8
http://www.seat61.com/
http://www.carbonneutralconcrete.ie/
http://www.ttxgp.com/files/TTXGP_teams_riders.pdf

There are more proper scientists and fewer woos in the Greens than most people think. There may be reasons why you don’t want to join them, but this image of hemp-wearing knownothings is way out of date.

LettersFromATory said: “So you detest Labour, are tired of them and their incompetent ways, feel let down by them, feel cheated by them – but you won’t vote for the only party that can get them out of power?”

Frankly I don’t see the point in that, because the reason left liberals feel let down and cheated by Labour is precisely because since at least 2000 it’s been like having the Tories in power the whole time, except with a different PR agency. In practical terms the resulting policies will be identical.

Sure, the Tories say they wouldn’t have embarked on Labour’s recent adventures in Keynesian economics, and would both avoid the public debt and keep the economy stable, and keep essential services operating smoothly – but then they would say that, wouldn’t they? always says you can have your cake and eat it, in the run-up to an election. They don’t have to deliver the cake.

jungle, the last Tory government left a structural deficit in the public finances, and the early Brown crowed about fixing it, about prudence and stability. It didn’t last – even before the credit crunch, the golden rule was dead.

Aaron, you want radical, but radical what? Socialism? Liberalism? Clearly not environmentalism. But surely you must have a direction before you decide you want it radical.

My Labourology here:
http://joeotten.blogspot.com/2009/05/labour-where-can-it-go-from-here.html

“Labour’s recent adventures in Keynesian economics,”

This isn’t Keynesianism. Keyesianism is something that is consistently applied over a cycle or several cycles.

No, tax and spend bailouts when the waxen wings of an Icarus economy melt off, is not Keynesianism. JMK would be rolling in his grave. Let’s call it what it is – tax and spend.

I want what I can’t have.

You said it bud.

So, let’s get the straight. Every old liberal/social democrat I know in the Lib Dems is complaining about the radically ‘libertarian’ direction that Clegg is taking the party, away from the soft social democracy face of CK, but IPJ thinks that the Lib Dems have moved away from liberal/libertarianism?

I think that says more about him and his extremist splitters than it does about the Lib Dems. I hadn’t read their immigration policy before. I thought libertarians believed in free peoples and free movement? Joke party with joke policies. Have they even put up a candidate for election anywhere yet?

Aaron:

Do you know what I want?

I want smart politics from dedicated, capable and resourceful people. I want a hint of radicalism – a party that’s prepared to upset the rightwing press and blow the lid off that stuffy morgue called Westminster.

I want a party that doesn’t accept the status quo of establishment bullshit, which means being a Briton is like living in a casino where the house always wins.

I want brave, intelligent progressive politicians who aren’t obsessed with the permanent campaign.

You want electoral reform for that to happen mate.

Which is, ultimately, why I joined the Lib Dems. Sure, they’re not perfect, they have flaws, and they have to work within the existing, stupid, system. Clegg hates it, hates PMQs, hates the stupidity of chasing the media soundbite.

But they’re the only chance we have of getting politicians actually elected that could make a real difference anytime soon. That’s the only reason why I’m putting effort in.

But, really, it depends on where you’re registered to vote. Each constituency has a different fight, with different candidates, and different odds of winning.

Anthony

if it were not this sort of honesty from the Labour grass roots blogoshere

This site is not, nor has it ever been, part of the Labour blogosphere. Some of the contributers are Labour members or supporters. Most aren’t. But you’re right though, it’s not the members or even the supporters that have made the Govt seem awful.

It’s the system. If power corrupts, the bloody useless system (that they did promise to change) corrupts further.

Left Outside. Clegg proposed a Great Repeal Act when he was Shadow Home Secretary, that’s been renamed the Freedom Bill because research showed no one outside politics wonks understood what a Great Repeal Act would be.

Cameron says he wants to reduce the number of MPs, but has no solid proposals. Reducing the power of Westminster and the number of MPs sent there has been Lib Dem policy for ages.

Aaron

I just don’t trust that Clegg dude. I wanted him to win, but he’s been so cowardly. I like my politicians with gumption. C’mon Nick, dissolve my knickers with a ballsy position on weed or something

Have you read the current policy on canabis? Calling for a royal commission to investigate all the effects, positive and negative, to come up with a sensible policy that takes reality into account? Can you imagine such an investigation coming up with any proposal that isn’t legalise? It’s a very cunning way of promising it without actually getting a thousand tabloid scare stories.

I don’t know where you get the cowardly from. I’ve met him several times now, and heard him speak even more. The media barely cover him, but from banking reform to parental leave, radical decentralisation of health policy to liberalising the school system, let alone the radically liberal tax policy.

I’m very happy with the direction he’s taken the party. I used to say I joined despite many of the policies, the headline issues (STV being paramount) were enough. Now? I feel at home there, it’s good.

I think you can easily have European holidays and the Green party. I had a lovely time in Croatia and Slovenia last year.

Pure curiosity. Which of CamoTory and LaBrown do you reckon is the giant douche, and which the other?

I can sort of see the crumbling crusts of the Cameronian sandwich; but I can’t see anything at all inside it.

Easy to see what should be the beef in NuLab, and even easier to smell that it is what South Park said. But there is nothing holding it together.

And either could be the giant douche.

“I think you can easily have European holidays and the Green party. I had a lovely time in Croatia and Slovenia last year.”

I hope you walked.

I suppose that’s what Obama promised.
I’d say stick with Labour and try to create the change you want to see. Remember that the grass is often greener on the other side. It’s very easy to go for an easy option. Respect or the Socialist Workers Party have lots of nice, easy policies that are appealing but simplistic and unrealistic. Stay with Labour and fight it out

“I hope you walked.”

Nope, but it was the only time I flew that year. I’ve checked party policy and it doesn’t call for an end to air travel. I know the stereotypes are tempting, but it’s better to resist them where they’re unfounded.

I do genuinely love tofu, though, if that’s any help.

@Penny Red “Is that a reference to the recent campaign against domestic violence, in which Keira Knightley played an abused girlfriend?

If so, i think your simile is flippant and offensive. I’m sorry to go off topic.”

I was referring to the abuse commercial, but I wasn’t trying to be flippant, Aaron had already mentioned that he felt like an abused partner and that’s what I was referring to. Sorry for any offence.

@MatGB, Freedom Bill here I come. You’ll be pleased to hear that I am almost certainly going to vote Lib Dem in the next election. And not solely as a vote against the other two parties, the Lib Dems do appear to be the only party with proper policies. Still not feeling like becoming a paid up member though.

“I was referring to the abuse commercial, but I wasn’t trying to be flippant, Aaron had already mentioned that he felt like an abused partner and that’s what I was referring to. Sorry for any offence.”

Don’t be sorry. God forbid that an advert striking enough to stay in our minds is actually referenced in the correct context. Clearly it’s something that can only be referenced by other women? I can’t keep up with all the anti-offense brigade’s rules.

Howabout the SLP?
http://www.VoteLiberalist.org

We’re both socially and economically liberal, like in the description.
We’re run predominantly (but not all) by young people, so are willing to shake things up a bit.
We’ve had a bit of decent coverage, and we have fairly radical policies.

” I hadn’t read their immigration policy before. I thought libertarians believed in free peoples and free movement?”

It’s an issue that depends to divide libertarians (as does abortion, believe it or not). There are those who are happy with free movement providing there is no welfare state for the newcomers to sponge off of (which seems to be the LPUK position). There are those who favour free movement even with a welfare state to sponge off of because they believe that the immigrants will bankrupt it and bring it crashing down. Then there are those who believe in free movement even with a welfare state to sponge off of because they’re opposed to restrictions on free movement in principle.

There are those (anarcho capitalists) who point out that in a pure libertarian society everything would be privately owned therefore any immigrant would have to have permission from the owner of the property he was entering. There are minarchists who believe that as long as the state exists and has control of the borders it should allow anybody in and those who say that it should act like a hypothetical private owner would and implement restrictions (presumably based on public opinion). Etc.

“God forbid that an advert striking enough to stay in our minds is actually referenced in the correct context”

The “correct context” for referring to a domestic violence advert being that Aaron, um, doesn’t like many of Labour’s policies?

In response to Aaron’s article:

For the most part, the past 12 years have been “smart politics from dedicated, capable and resourceful people”, and Labour has “govern[ed] with some savvy, with an eye on making the country a progressive one”, and there has been more than “a hint of radicalism”, even if it hasn’t managed to make Britain a place “with skills and infrastructure that would be the envy of the world”. As for upsetting the right-wing newspapers, they have been in hysterical fury almost every day over this or that which the government has done.

Achieving things in government is hard, and it is easy to remember only the bad things and forget or take for granted all the good things.

Genuine question, if you are now a classical liberal and before that were interested in right-wing libertarianism, at which point were you a Labour supporter, and what did you like about Labour then? I’d have thought classical liberals and libertarians would never have liked what Labour stood for.

@6 Anthony Lawrence: The reality is, as Letters from a Tory points out, that the conservatives are the only ticket to escaping the Brownite cabal.

That’s nonsense. Your vote will affect only the result in your constituency, not the whole country. So if you’re in a Lab-Con marginal, LFAT is right. But if you’re in a Lab-LD or LD-Con marginal, he’s wrong.

And if you live in a safe seat, who you vote for will make bugger all difference, so you might as well vote for the party/candidate you like best regardless of how well you think they’ll do.

The Lib Dems would probably copulate with Labour in the event of a hung parliament, the Stazi state intact.

I think this is unlikely. If there is a hung parliament, it’s likely that LD+Con together would have a majority but LD+Lab wouldn’t; in this cicumstance it’s likely Clegg would go for Cameron rather than Brown.

Furthermore if the LDs are seen to be propping up a government that’s just been defeated, it’ll make them unpopular.

Penny Red @ 10 – I understand your objections to the New Labour/domestic violence analogy but, well, bear with me a bit…

Blair treated the Labour party like an abusive partner largely by dragging it further and further to the right, with Iraq as the worst example. The party put up with it because it thought it wouldn’t get any other way of being/staying in power: it was grateful to win an election or two after so long without any success. Whenever Blair was in serious trouble (or he just needed to get through the party conference), you could always tell because he was perfectly capable of doing the equivalent of kissing, making up, bringing the party chocolates and remembering its birthday. The party would feel loved again, which just set it up for getting thumped with the next set of stupid policies. And when all else failed, there was always the threat that it would never get a better a leader/be in power ever again, or that the really nasty Tories would come along instead. We could blame the party (let alone MPs) for being too spineless to do something about it sooner, or Labour voters for not voting New Labour out of office(especially in 2005), but they (we?) still hung on for the few good times they could remember – and now even that has gone, and many, like Aaron, have finally decided to walk out (in a manner of speaking).

You’re right, such an analogy does marginalise the reality of actual domestic violence, but as an analogy as to why the party still cannot face up to what it has done in Iraq, why it may never be able to deal with Blair and his legacy, let alone realise what has been done both to it as well as in its name, it helps me get my head round some of the last 12 years.

Rather like Mat GB, I have to chuckle at the number of furious lefties within the Lib Dems who are angsting about being dragged “to the right” (vis, towards proper liberalism) and the number of furious former lefties outside the Lib Dems who are now leaning towards wanting proper liberalism. Can’t you all just swap places? Nice article anyway, Aaron.

reason left liberals feel let down and cheated by Labour is precisely because since at least 2000 it’s been like having the Tories in power the whole time

To take a quote from the Independent:

“We have had over the past decade the largest increase in public spending that has ever taken place in peacetime. It is also the largest increase that has occurred, proportionate to GDP, of any major economy during that period.”

I don’t remember anyone at the time telling me that the Tories would have increaced government spending so much. People stuck with Labour because it threw money at all their favorite causes. Now the money has run out.

We all have to bear in mind where we live & engage in some measure of tactical voting- short of us all moving en masse to marginal constituencies, like them bloggertarians in America who all moved to New Hampshire.

Results in 2005 in my constituency were as follows.

Labour- 52.6% (virtually impossible to remove)
Conservative 20.0 % (unlikely to get much further than this & I’m surprised they got so many votes at any stage, though admittedly those living in the few middle-class enclaves & that are more likely to turn out).
Liberal Democrat 14.8%
BNP 6.9 % (possibly higher this time)
UKIP 2.3 %
Veritarse 2.2%
Independent 1.1%

I am basically stuck with a choice between Conservative & Lib Dem if I want to make some kind of electoral statement against New Labour, pointless as it obviously will be given their inevitable victory in this seat.

Currently leaning towards LD as they are likely to be an opposition voice in this constituency & nationwide. But when you live in an area like this, you wonder why the fuck you’d bother to vote in the first place. I imagine a lot of youse are in a similar state.

As for the Euro elections, they will be much more interesting!

@ Lee (23) 100% behind that sentiment.

To Aaron in the OP – spectacular post, sir! I have said I will be going for the LibDems – and this from an old socialist like me!

Well done, I was rather inspired by you post. Fair brings a smile to my face.

Hey y’all.

Thanks for the positive feedback.

Libertarianism? Been there, done that. I’m a small-state liberal, but I have a visceral hatred for any party that would stem the flow of workers. Libertarianism is, in my view, purely about individual freedom, regardless of geographical origin.

MattGB,

Thanks, seriously.

I’ll look closer at ol’ Nick and the LibDem’s policies (isn’t the fact that I have to “look”, part of the problem?). I probably will vote Lib Dem at the next election, but if the media wont come to Clegg, he needs to make a few noises…

isn’t the fact that I have to “look”, part of the problem?

Yup. But what can be done? The media, for the most part, ignores him. Every so often, he’ll get some good coverage (the tax policies did), or get invited onto, say, Woman’s Hour for a good, sympathetic interview on his views on parental leave (in which he largely parroted a policy document Jennie helped write at her first conference).

He got amazing coverage last week, all over the place, over the Gurkha thing, and that’s something he picked up on and started campaigning on ages ago (invited a bunch to attend conference last Autumn, top guys, really liked them, although doing their conference passes was hard work, names were, well, Nepalese).

During the next general election, he’ll get coverage, the media can’t ignore him then. But watch how it’s played—the Daily Mail will play up his tax cuts agenda but play down his raise taxes on wealthy agenda. Why? They sell loads of copies in places like, say, Sheffield, where the Tories are dead in the water, but the Lib Dems are seriously challenging.

I reckon the next GE will be very interesting to watch, lots of unusual 3-way marginals, the vote that’s been Labour since 1992 pretty much all to play for, a bunch of Tory voters coming back to the polls having been staying away for a decade. And the media, overall, won’t know where to jump.

If people don’t like the battered partner comparison, how about the abused dog always returning to it’s master with it’s tail between it’s legs no matter how bad a beating it takes?

“and those who say that it should act like a hypothetical private owner would and implement restrictions (presumably based on public opinion). Etc.”

The thing is, the ‘immigrants aren’t allowed on my private property’ argument can be used in favour of any form of protectionism.

“You can’t drive that Japanese junk on my property”
“You can’t drink that french wine on my property”

Etc.

So the question we have to ask is why the private property argument is deployed to justify the exclusion of foreign people, but never deployed to justify the exclusion of foreign goods and services?

the question we have to ask is why the private property argument is deployed to justify the exclusion of foreign people, but never deployed to justify the exclusion of foreign goods and services?

Because, and let’s make this clear, people extolling such a contradiction aren’t in any way racist. They just don’t like furriners.

If people don’t like the battered partner comparison, how about the abused dog always returning to it’s master with it’s tail between it’s legs no matter how bad a beating it takes?

Steve Bell had Prescott down for that role years ago.

“Genuine question, if you are now a classical liberal and before that were interested in right-wing libertarianism, at which point were you a Labour supporter, and what did you like about Labour then? I’d have thought classical liberals and libertarians would never have liked what Labour stood for.”

Actually, Don, I was just looking through Fabian history and was surprised that they seemed to plump for Henry George’s radical theories on rent over Marx’s theory of surplus value for quite a while until events shaped the worldwide left in rather more definite direction. Many libertarians have quite a lot of time for Henry George. In fact, it is still reflected in the left-libertarianism of Hillel Steiner. It might also, have been decent for classical liberals to vote for Labour when they appeared to have a better attitude towards civil liberties than the Tories and were not intending to do anything too radical economically.

“So, let’s get the straight. Every old liberal/social democrat I know in the Lib Dems is complaining about the radically ‘libertarian’ direction that Clegg is taking the party, away from the soft social democracy face of CK, but IPJ thinks that the Lib Dems have moved away from liberal/libertarianism?”

You are missing the possibility that the centre has shifted in a more radically statist direction, giving the impression that the LibDems have got more libertarian because they are simply failing to catch up with the other centrists. In fact, they are still moving away from liberty, just more slowly than the other parties, giving the impression of relative radicalism.

Not that that is necessarily case. Reading Charlotte Gore and some other stuff written here, I think some really cool things are happening with the LibDems right now.

This is a constituency-based democracy. It’s simply idiotic to say things like “you won’t vote for the only party that can get them out of power” because in Aaron’s constituency voting Tory might not be that choice. So how about a really radical answer: do some homework on your local candidates and vote for the person who best represents your views *regardless of their party affiliation*. I know: crazy, isn’t it, that we should actually aspire to be represented by an MP?

(I skipped about 15 comments – curb the verbosity, people – so apologies if someone’s made this point already.)

Richard,

I think voting for the best MP is probably the right thing to do. Then again, the chances of Newark folk voting out Patrick Mercer are slim indeed.

“I know: crazy, isn’t it, that we should actually aspire to be represented by an MP?”

I agree with you completely on this, however it is also somewhat crazy. Governments decide on things that affect us all too centrally these days, and to expect people to ignore that in favour of the MP most likely to do best by them when they’re not being blackmailed in to towing the party line is a little out of touch with reality, unfortunately

Lee – your realism is admirable. While your best chances of picking a great MP remain getting onto the selection committee of your local party (forcing you to choose one), and it’s true that even the best-intentioned MP can be blackmailed by the Central Committee (supposing said Central Committee has even allowed the local party a choice), voting for the best cove is the *only* way to generate reform from the outside.

More importantly, as voters we need to engage much more. If local hustings were well-attended, if sitting MPs heard more at surgeries and in correspondence, if “real” candidates got more votes, perhaps local parties would feel better able to resist pressure from the centre. Parties need to know that inserting professional party drones into seats is a major turn-off.

(Annoyingly, our old Labour MP was pathetic – inactive in Parliament and uncommunicative in the constituency. The Tory is much better. But I’ll reserve my vote until I’ve checked http://www.theyworkforyou.com thoroughly and done my damnedest to find positive things about the LibDem and Labour candidates!)

Richard, ’tis one of the articles I never get around to writing—the disparity between living in a safe seat to living in a marginal. And especially the disparity between living in a seat where the Lib Dems are challenging and one they’re not.

I know it sounds like I’m a bit of a broken record, but I joined the Lib Dems in 2006 while living in Torbay—the sitting MP was elected in 1997 with a majority of 12, and won many awards for being the hardest working MP in Parliament. It was he that got me to join the party, and he remains a hard worker. Because his majority, although larger now (he’s built up a personal vote) is still small.

Contrast that with the neighbouring seat, where the sitting Tory has been there since 1983, has paid his daughter £5K a year to do about half an hours work a week, parked his car for a week in a disabled bay in the local train station while in Westminster during recess (and then blamed it on too many bays, despite never having raised this as an issue before) etc.

When I moved to London, I was suddenly in one of the safest Tory seats in the country—absolutely horrible, no activity at all. Now I’m in a three-way marginal, and the difference is palpable, the sitting Labour MP is bloody good (but retiring), the Tory challenger is a git, but working hard, and our PPC is also campaigning all across the area constantly.

Quite refreshing actually. It’s also related to turnout—that “low turnout” myth? Bollocks, in contested seats, turnout remains high. In safe seats, it’s plummeting.

One point though, because, y’know, I do like facts:

your best chances of picking a great MP remain getting onto the selection committee of your local party

Lib Dem candidates are voted for by the entire local party membership, no selection committee. There is a screening process you have to go through before putting yourself forward, but that’s required to screen out loons, incompetents and nutters (which is a problem, unfortunately). Once selected, you’re pretty secure as candidate until the election, unless you do something that could get any member expelled (very unusual, but again essential). Even then, all the groups that assess these things are elected. The biggest criticism of the LibDem process I’ve seen is that it’s too open, too democratic, and too bureacratic. I don’t think that’s a problem myself.

But for the other two parties I agree with you completely, it’s one of the reasons I favour multi-member constituencies, reduce the power of central committees. I definitely dislike AM systems like in Scotland/Wales, because they increase that power, and I don’t like that.

Aaron. Newark. Yeah, um vote Expressively. Or see if you can transfer your registration somewhere else (I was legitimately registered in three seats once, very silly).

Good points, MatGB.

If Lee is still looking for real detachment from reality, in my youth I believed that the best route was to ban political parties and force MPs to stand as independents. (That might have been my Christian Anarchist phase.)

Then I went really bonkers and became an activist for the Owen-ite SDP. Ah, the heady thrill of almost upsetting William Hague’s by-election victory in Richmond… My SDP (People’s Front of Judea faction) experience still causes me to be wary of LibDems (splitters!), but I could be persuaded.

Oh I can relate to that—when I lived in Exeter (student then wageslave) there were still Cllrs from the Liberal party—when the SDP split from Labour, a leading Labour Cllrs came with them, the Liberal Leader and he absolutely hated each other. They handled the alliance, but when it came to merger, the Liberal leader refused to be in the same party as the former Labour guy. So there remains a rump Liberal party on the council. Fortunately, he’s stopped running for Parliament now, means Exeter is a 3-way marginal like it should’ve been years back.

Essentially, what matters to you priority wise? I set mine out, the civil liberties stuff like ID cards and similar being top, followed by genuine constitutional reform like STV. On those, of the parties that can make a difference, it’s only the Lib Dems that are sound. Pick the party that’s closest to you on the issues you care the most about, worked for me.

“If Lee is still looking for real detachment from reality”

Hehe, I have my own detachment, but I guess it involves going slightly towards a US system. MPs voted for through STV solely on constituency issues, and a parliamentary house where less MPs are voted for to actually run policy direction on a national basis. I’d scrap the house of lords if this was done to ensure it remained two chamber (anything more is overkill) and ensure that every piece of policy, before it went to constituency MPs for debate and final approval (much as the Lords currently do), filtered through the committee process is actually independently assessed by relevant experts.

On top of this each area (if not constituency) would have some devolved power that allowed them to make decisions on issues relevant areas that only affect that area but are currently too high for the council structure.

One STV set of votes, every two years, for half the countries constituencies each time, and one FPTP vote every 4 years on which of the legal political parties (being parties that have at least half as many MPs to fulfil a cabinet) actually get to guide the country. Proportionally, the parties can then either promote constituency MPs or fill the roles with party members of their choice, I’m not sure which I prefer yet.

The system would also have to go hand in hand with a reform about how back-bench policy is introduced, ensuring greater time for debate and implementation of these motions.

But that’s my own fantasy land, and I’ve not really thought all that much about it, honest!

Aaron – know how you feel mate. Actually, know exactly how you feel!
Good read, but oh so depressing too. Fuck labour, sorry New Labour, just like they fucked us.

#45

“Lib Dem candidates are voted for by the entire local party membership, no selection committee. There is a screening process you have to go through before putting yourself forward”

Not sure how this is different from the Labour Party. In both cases you can argue there’s the potential to abuse the screening system. But I agree with the basic point, that the best way of getting an MP you like is to join the party you feel closest to and who stands a chance of winning in your area. (Maybe with the exception of the Tories – I’ve never really understood how their selection process works.)

Tim, I live in Calder Valley. They selected a PPC, well known respected local Cllr, good friend of a former local MP (see my comments in the Alice Mahon post for more). Then the NEC refused to endorse her, and the selection was rerun. And that’s still an ongoing controversy.

The Lib Dems do things the other way around, you pass a basic ‘approval’ process, then you can run to be PPC in any English seat. It makes a lot more sense to me, having the local members elect a local candidate, then have the national body reject them, just seems counter-intuitive and daft.

And yes, I’ve never understood the Tory process either.

Can I just make just one observation to all those grumbling about Labour not being left wing.

Labour has not moved significantly to the right since the first term. And in some respects it has moved to the left.

What it has done is moved a great deal further towards the shit.

Dodgy wars, ID cards, police brutality, you name it, are not the sole preserve of the right, any more than running out of money is the preserve of the left.

#51 – the Calder Valley selection is unusual in many respects; that’s not how it normally works.