Why I'm angry with the Lib Dems

It's been a long time since I've blogged, but I've been thinking a lot since the election, and I've taken a bit of stick from certain quarters for my irritation with the Lib Dems. So, I decided to try and put down my thoughts about precisely why I'm so angry with them.

First, I accept I have a slightly different viewpoint than some, as I used to be a member of the Lib Dems - in fact, I was the Lib Dem's parliamentary candidate for Loughborough in 2005. I left the party for 3 reasons. 1 - During the election campaign, I could not argue against the record of the Labour party in terms of the improvements to the country since 1997, 2 - The manner in which the party dealt with Charles Kennedy's alcohol problem left a bitter taste in my mouth (not very liberal I thought) and I was concerned about the direction that Nick Clegg might take the party in (I was never a fan of the orange book brigade), and 3 - My local MP was someone worth fighting for and someone for whom I wanted to campaign. So, I decided to join the Labour party early 2006, and I know this was the right decision.

Events of the last few weeks have vindicated my decision. The Liberal Democrat party I was part of would never have sold out in the manner that I believe has happened. The way in which the Lib Dems seem to have changed their views on such key policy areas as immediate cuts in government spending mystifies me and raises questions about how "democratic" the party actually is - how much of a say do the members actually have on the upper echelons and the direction they go in. The orange bookers that lead the party seem to have been given carte blanche to do what they like. If I hadn't left the party in 2006, then I can safely say that without a shadow of a doubt I would have done so this month for this reason alone. Tuition fees - a key plank of the Lib Dems pledge seemingly gone - another example, the commitment to smaller class sizes, gone ... what is happening.

However, it doesn't stop there. The events over the weekend have annoyed me too. For the same reason that the Charles Kennedy incident annoyed me. I have a great deal of sympathy for David Laws, and can even (just about) understand his warped logic that justified his actions to himself. He was wrong, and right to resign, but when issues of sexuality and a lack of security in "who you are" come into play, you can make really daft judgements. What bothers me though out of all of this is the way in which Clegg seems to have gone silent. I bet people could point to lots of Internet, TV and newspaper articles that point to Clegg's sanctimonious "holier than thou" attitude during the election campaign, including the moment in the final debate at which I wanted to throw something at the TV! It seems, that the Lib Dems aren't that different to the "other" parties. I'm not defending or trying to big up Labour here, but to portray yourself as whiter than white, when it turns out you're as murky as the rest strikes me as a bit rich.

During the election, I had to deal with people telling me they were voting for the "new politics" of the Lib Dems. I'm angry with the Lib Dems because they were prepared to convince people this was true. However, what it really meant, was they were voting for a party prepared to sacrifice any scrap of Socialist principle to get a seat for their "liberal conservative" leader on the front bench. They were voting for a party that were prepared to portray themselves as the unscathed decent purporters of the "new politics" whereas they were in fact tarred with the same brush.

I am proud to be a member of the Labour party and will be proud to campaign under the new leader (whoever that may be) for the only decent, progressive, mainstream party that has a realistic chance of winning the next election. I hope that people who supported the Lib Dems in 2010 will consider joining me!

REAL Democracy!

Well, I got quite excited tonight. I like being a Councillor - I like the fact that I can make a difference with issues that people have, and I like belonging to the Labour group - they're a decent bunch and it's nice to have an ideological bond with people!

However, that aside, I sometimes get frustrated in meetings when people start talking about issues that any amount of talk isn't going to change. When people start indulging in the yah-boo politics that is undoubtedly influenced by the poor coverage we get of Westminster (and Prime Minister's Question Time in particular).

So, tonight was exciting, because we put forward an amendment (only a minor one), and one that my colleague Geoff Gay spoke on really well. The council's constitution was to be updated, and part of this was renaming the Plans Committee the Development Management Committee. Geoff's argument (and quite rightly) was that this was an unnecessary moniker change, as it took away a layer of accessibility and understanding between the public and the Council. As I said only a minor amendment, but an important point about making sure people understood what they were engaging with.

So, there was some to-ing and fro-ing, with front bench Tories arguing about needing the change from an internal point of view (they failed to grasp that this was about common sense and maintaining a degree of connection with what the public understand).

Geoff then demanded a public vote, and the amendment was carried thanks to a unanimous vote from our side (Lib Dems included) and 7 brave Tories! Why did I get so excited about this? Because, for the first time it felt like we'd influenced something! It felt like democracy was actually doing what it's supposed to be doing - genuine debate bringing a genuine decision rather than the Punch and Judy style that we often see.

Perhaps I'm being a little idealistic, but I'd much rather see a genuine debate than attempts at point scoring and snideness. Maybe, if the leaders of our political parties focussed on solid policy rather than point scoring then maybe we would see a far improved level of genuine democratic engagement? DOn't get me wrong, a large part of my enjoyment of the evening came from watching the Tories squirm and watch them realise they'd lost the vote, but when people are prepared to debate, consider and talk properly ... maybe that's what's needed?

Annoyed

It's been a while since I've blogged, but events of today have REALLY annoyed me ... Some of us are (optimistically) holding onto the belief that the Labour party might actually be able to build on an improving poll position and take a really strong fight to the Tories at the next election.

Then what happens? Two of the old guard (by which I mean Hoon and Hewitt) pop up and start suggesting secret ballots etc. What the f*** are they doing? Is their own personal gripe with Brown such that they can't see that their actions could have damaged the party? These people first and foremost have been elected to represent their constituents as a representative of the LABOUR party. Loyalty is really important, and what we need above all else is for those at the top of our party to realise that what they do has a DIRECT impact on what we as activists have to deal with. When we ring a voter, or knock on a door, the person we come into contact with will have their view of the Labour party influenced by the picture created by the selfish actions of people like Hoon and Hewitt. And then, naturally, such "heavy hitters" as Field, Clarke and MacTaggart (who?) wade into the argument voicing their support ...

Those of us that are campaigning in particularly close marginal constituencies could really do without this kind of thing ... Thanks a lot!!

Should mention Tom at Bage Blog whose far superior rant prompted this spewing of bile from me!!