Liberal Democrats - where next for them?

[bramling]

They had a major difference from the policies of the other parties this time … not that it did them much good.

Even if it had worked, where would it have left them in 5 years time? They did well off the back of the Iraq war, yet look where they are now. Likewise locally, they’re good at kicking off about potholes or bin collections, but eventually people come to realise that in reality they’re no different to anyone else - worse in fact as they have a habit of over-promising, under-delivering and being a little economical with truths.

Meanwhile no one really knows which direction the top of the party leans - not helped in any small way by the recent massive churn in leaders (and to be fair they haven’t been helped by losing seats and thus not getting as much air time).

I’d say things are pretty terminal for the Lib Dems. Their traditional tactics aren’t cutting through at the moment, and they don’t know which way to turn. Perhaps a crumb of comfort might be if the young abandon their cult-like following of Corbyn and need somewhere else to dance around?

 

[radamfi]

Third parties are not viable under the current electoral system. The Lib Dems should stop taking part in FPTP elections and instead forge an alliance with Labour in return for changing the voting system.

 

[bramling]

Third parties are not viable under the current electoral system. The Lib Dems should stop taking part in FPTP elections and instead forge an alliance with Labour in return for changing the voting system.

I don’t think it would be legitimate to change the voting system without a referendum, especially if the change was done in a way which benefited one or more parties.

The difficulty with a Labour alliance is that the Lib Dems don’t actually align that well with Labour on many issues. How would that have worked over the Iraq war, for example?

 

[radamfi]

I don’t think it would be legitimate to change the voting system without a referendum, especially if the change was done in a way which benefited one or more parties.

The difficulty with a Labour alliance is that the Lib Dems don’t actually align that well with Labour on many issues. How would that have worked over the Iraq war, for example?

Brown offered the Lib Dems a change to AV without a referendum in 2010. The Lib Dem/Labour alliance would only be for the one FPTP election. They would be able to go their separate ways subsequently.

 

[56 1/2]

I think they ruined themselves by Clegg (Oh sorry. Sir Nick) jumping into bed with Cameron much to the horror of Liberal die hards. I think they need to completely reform as a party or perhaps go back to the old Liberal Party,

Master29 has a great idea, joining with the "democrats" aka "the gang of three" was the ruination of the Liberal Party, they had a streak of center radical, of addressing the issues without dogma and doing the right thing. The gang of three were much more middle ground inoffensive and ineffective. Center radical requires strong minded characters as MPs, is that so bad?

And then the tuition fees, LDs promised no tuition fees then doubled back in coalition, every one who went to uni since will be repaying their student loan for many years to come, will they forget?

 

[Master29]

Third parties are not viable under the current electoral system. The Lib Dems should stop taking part in FPTP elections and instead forge an alliance with Labour in return for changing the voting system.

Much like with the States. I've never even heard of a 3rd Party there. Several European countries have forged alliances for this very reason. Doesn`t Finland operate under a Coalition of four at present?

 

[Enthusiast]

I still think of them in the same way as I think of Rosé wine

 

[gswindale]

And then the tuition fees, LDs promised no tuition fees then doubled back in coalition, every one who went to uni since will be repaying their student loan for many years to come, will they forget?

That's the problem with coalitions. Compromises have to be made somewhere and unfortunately for the Libdems this is an area where they did so and it hasn't been forgotten.
I am reasonably sure that there were Conservative pledges made prior to the 2010 election that got abandoned due to the coalition, but nobody keeps bringing those up.

 

[bramling]

That's the problem with coalitions. Compromises have to be made somewhere and unfortunately for the Libdems this is an area where they did so and it hasn't been forgotten.
I am reasonably sure that there were Conservative pledges made prior to the 2010 election that got abandoned due to the coalition, but nobody keeps bringing those up.

This is what happens if one relies on a volatile group like students. Evidently the lesson wasn’t learned, hence last week’s result when again they attempted to ride of the back of a bandwagon issue.

 

[56 1/2]

This is what happens if one relies on a volatile group like students. Evidently the lesson wasn’t learned, hence last week’s result when again they attempted to ride of the back of a bandwagon issue.

If volatile is voting on the best government not party brands then volatile is a good thing.

If I were early 20s with a typical £55,000 student debt I would be angry till it was paid back and then angry again because paying that back will push buying my own place and maybe a family into my 30s

Was charging for education another gerrymander like council house sales to enslave the masses with debt.

 

[matacaster]

If volatile is voting on the best government not party brands then volatile is a good thing.

If I were early 20s with a typical £55,000 student debt I would be angry till it was paid back and then angry again because paying that back will push buying my own place and maybe a family into my 30s

Was charging for education another gerrymander like council house sales to enslave the masses with debt.

No, charging for university education was a direct result of less than 10% going to university being increased to circa 45% - that had to be paid for somehow. Too many people going to university studying noddy degrees which qualify them to work as burger flippers is not something that your average blue collar ex-labour worker finds palatable to fund. There just aren't that many good jobs for graduates to justify anything like 45% and many appear to just want an easy course for the 'lifestyle experience' (ie getting drunk and having a good social time). The answer is good apprenticeships which are valued.

If the Libdems cannot make a breakthrough with a clear remain policy, a totally confused Labour policy and the 'benefit' of remain ex-Tories and ex-Labour then
- remain was a bad policy (it was)
- their 'leader' was an ineffectual waste of space
- they appear to have taken polls which showed a big remain win (probably commissioned and
undertaken solely in Islington or thereabouts) and proceeded to tell the electorate that they
were wrong last time, Libdems knew best and we should all tip our caps and vote accordingly.

As a result, they agreed to Boris's call for an election when he was in a very bad place. Together with the Scots Nats, they not only gave Boris a get out of jail card but made him King.

In short, they fluffed their best chance since circa 1920, but as a Tory Brexiteer, Thank you!

 

[GrimShady]

No, charging for university education was a direct result of less than 10% going to university being increased to circa 45% - that had to be paid for somehow. Too many people going to university studying noddy degrees which qualify them to work as burger flippers is not something that your average blue collar ex-labour worker finds palatable to fund. There just aren't that many good jobs for graduates to justify anything like 45% and many appear to just want an easy course for the 'lifestyle experience' (ie getting drunk and having a good social time). The answer is good apprenticeships which are valued.

If the Libdems cannot make a breakthrough with a clear remain policy, a totally confused Labour policy and the 'benefit' of remain ex-Tories and ex-Labour then
- remain was a bad policy (it was)
- their 'leader' was an ineffectual waste of space
- they appear to have taken polls which showed a big remain win (probably commissioned and
undertaken solely in Islington or thereabouts) and proceeded to tell the electorate that they
were wrong last time, Libdems knew best and we should all tip our caps and vote accordingly.

As a result, they agreed to Boris's call for an election when he was in a very bad place. Together with the Scots Nats, they not only gave Boris a get out of jail card but made him King.

In short, they fluffed their best chance since circa 1920, but as a Tory Brexiteer, Thank you!

Truer words have never been spoken. 100% agreed.

 

[Butts]

Perhaps Tim Farron can be persuaded to become leader again. He's an exceptional and very popular MP in his constituency. He's Northern so he could help capture some of the disenfranchised Northern voters. They've only a pool of 11 MPs to choose from, so it's not as if there's much choice.

So popular his majority has gone down from over 12,000 in 2010 to less than 2,000 in 2019 !!!!

 

[LWB]

So popular his majority has gone down from over 12,000 in 2010 to less than 2,000 in 2019 !!!!

I live on the boundary of the Kendal/ Barrow constituencies. They keep swapping market towny Furness (sans Barrow) from one to the other. This will affect the Liberal majority quite a bit.

 

[Busaholic]

No, charging for university education was a direct result of less than 10% going to university being increased to circa 45% - that had to be paid for somehow. Too many people going to university studying noddy degrees which qualify them to work as burger flippers is not something that your average blue collar ex-labour worker finds palatable to fund. There just aren't that many good jobs for graduates to justify anything like 45% and many appear to just want an easy course for the 'lifestyle experience' (ie getting drunk and having a good social time). The answer is good apprenticeships which are valued.

If the Libdems cannot make a breakthrough with a clear remain policy, a totally confused Labour policy and the 'benefit' of remain ex-Tories and ex-Labour then
- remain was a bad policy (it was)
- their 'leader' was an ineffectual waste of space
- they appear to have taken polls which showed a big remain win (probably commissioned and
undertaken solely in Islington or thereabouts) and proceeded to tell the electorate that they
were wrong last time, Libdems knew best and we should all tip our caps and vote accordingly.

As a result, they agreed to Boris's call for an election when he was in a very bad place. Together with the Scots Nats, they not only gave Boris a get out of jail card but made him King.

In short, they fluffed their best chance since circa 1920, but as a Tory Brexiteer, Thank you!

I'm an initially reluctant Remainer who has become more and more convinced that Brexit will be a disaster for the U.K., but I now accept we better just get on with it regardless and, yes, the Swinson-led LibDem campaign was an utterly wrong-headed disaster, and may presage their going back into oblivion for years, assuming Labour see some sense and act on it in the near future.

IMO the increase in students and degrees was led in large part by the government of the day to disguise youth unemployment, which has in effect been massively understated for years, what with zero hours contracts and refusal to let many 'sign on.'

 

[JKF]

The trouble I have with the Lib Dems is that they were at one time seen as quite pro-science and backed a lot of evidence-based policies, and you had a few decent MPs like Evan Harris fighting against quackery and dishonesty. That side of the party seems to have disappeared, and now you have all these dodgy bar charts and similar based on shiftily-worded polling (and in one case a self-selecting newspaper poll) which is just shady and unappealing to anyone concerned about honest use/presentation of data. It’s not a good look, all used car salesman stuff. Not what I want in politics. At the same time you’ve also had a few key figures whose religious beliefs have been in conflict with the party’s socially liberal history which will have deterred younger voters (as well as the university fees stitch-up).

 

[Busaholic]

The trouble I have with the Lib Dems is that they were at one time seen as quite pro-science and backed a lot of evidence-based policies, and you had a few decent MPs like Evan Harris fighting against quackery and dishonesty. That side of the party seems to have disappeared, and now you have all these dodgy bar charts and similar based on shiftily-worded polling (and in one case a self-selecting newspaper poll) which is just shady and unappealing to anyone concerned about honest use/presentation of data. It’s not a good look, all used car salesman stuff. Not what I want in politics. At the same time you’ve also had a few key figures whose religious beliefs have been in conflict with the party’s socially liberal history which will have deterred younger voters (as well as the university fees stitch-up).

The Abortion Act 1967 was passed as a result of young Liberal MP David Steel drawing third place in a Private Members' Bill ballot and choosing the subject, which struck a chord with certain members of the Labour government including, crucially, Home Secretary Roy Jenkins, who later would become a founding member of the 'Gang of Four' (not three as quoted in an earlier posting) which propelled the formation of the Social Democratic Party. In 1979 an MP named David Alton was elected in a by-election for the Liberals, and for the next decade or more was the most vociferous anti-abortion campaigner in Parliament. The Liberal Party of the 1970s had few MPs, but when you consider that they numbered amongst them Jeremy Thorpe, Cyril Smith, Clement Freud and Peter Bessell, all now exposed as having very 'liberal' attitudes to their own outrageous behaviour....

 

[mbonwick]

I live on the boundary of the Kendal/ Barrow constituencies. They keep swapping market towny Furness (sans Barrow) from one to the other. This will affect the Liberal majority quite a bit.

Nothing to do with the minor boundary changes, everything to do with the usual LD tactic of claiming Tim is personally responsible for every positive decision made by Cumbria County Council (a Lib-Lab coalition), even if said decision only happened because of public anger at the original decision!
He's not a bad constituency MP, but people are wising up to the fact that it isn't him that personally gets your streetlight repaired, or pothole fixed.

 

[433N]

Perhaps they just need a leader to return them to their Whig roots believing in the supremacy of Parliament. Then when the public fall out of love with the popularist dictatorship of Johnson (thinking Mussolini here), power will be theirs for the taking.

 

[underbank]

That's the problem with coalitions. Compromises have to be made somewhere and unfortunately for the Libdems this is an area where they did so and it hasn't been forgotten.

No, it's the problem with niche political parties making promises in the full knowledge and expectation not to actually be put into power to carry them out. If the Libdems genuinely thought that they'd get any power, they wouldn't have made promises that they couldn't keep.

Same with Corbyn - he wouldn't have made all those ridiculous bribes (sorry promises) if he genuinely thought he had a chance of winning the GE.

In a proper PR scenario where political parties thought that they had a reasonable chance of having enough power to influence policy, they'd not make stupid promises they couldn't keep.

 

[underbank]

Nothing to do with the minor boundary changes, everything to do with the usual LD tactic of claiming Tim is personally responsible for every positive decision made by Cumbria County Council (a Lib-Lab coalition), even if said decision only happened because of public anger at the original decision!
He's not a bad constituency MP, but people are wising up to the fact that it isn't him that personally gets your streetlight repaired, or pothole fixed.

I live in that area. No one genuinely thinks "he" personally gets things done. But what he does is make a lot of noise to make other authorities/quangos take notice of him and the problems he highlights. For that reason, he's an excellent local MP. Unfortunately, with most public sector/quango matters, it's all about shouting the loudest and persisting to get things done. The days are long gone when you write a polite letter to get the local council to do something - you need petitions, social media campaigns and local councillors/MPs on their backs. Shouldn't be that way, but sadly it is.

 

[mbonwick]

I live in that area. No one genuinely thinks "he" personally gets things done.

I also live in the area. That's the crux of the issue with him - people know how the system works and that's at odds with the constant propaganda we get. Yes, he's good at highlighting the issues, but people are fed up of being told it's "personally because of Tim's tireless campaigning" . The line "the Conservatives haven't done xyz here" isn't well received either - how can they do anything when they're not locally in power?

Then there's the "overly-interested" section of society (like me) that can't stand to see his face claiming a victory for a run of the mill piece of work (e.g. the A591 resurfacing) that had been on the council normal business agenda for years.

 

[underbank]

I also live in the area. That's the crux of the issue with him - people know how the system works and that's at odds with the constant propaganda we get. Yes, he's good at highlighting the issues, but people are fed up of being told it's "personally because of Tim's tireless campaigning" . The line "the Conservatives haven't done xyz here" isn't well received either - how can they do anything when they're not locally in power?

The Tory MP for Morecambe & Lunesdale gets exactly the same criticism, so it's MP's generally, not any political party.

As for local issues, don't you have Tory local councillors? What have they achieved?

In my mind, MPs are for the bigger things, and local councillors for the smaller stuff.

 

[Butts]

Will Jo Swinson be back ?

If she was Tory or Labour they could parachute her into a safe seat - but with only 11 seats could be a problem for the Liberals.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Nothing to do with the minor boundary changes, everything to do with the usual LD tactic of claiming Tim is personally responsible for every positive decision made by Cumbria County Council (a Lib-Lab coalition), even if said decision only happened because of public anger at the original decision!
He's not a bad constituency MP, but people are wising up to the fact that it isn't him that personally gets your streetlight repaired, or pothole fixed.

I don't live in the Westmorland and Lonsdale so don't know precisely what publicity the LibDems have put out there, but I'd really be astonished if the reduction in Tim Farron's majority over the years had anything to do with the kind of electioneering you describe. Most people just aren't interested enough in the minutiae of politics to particularly notice who is responsible for county council decisions, still less to take offence if it turns out the 'wrong' party claims responsibility for something.

Just had a quick look at the election results for that constituency, and it's immediately apparent that the changes in the LibDem vote since 2010 there roughly mirror the changes in the LibDem vote nationally. To my mind, that makes it rather more likely that Tim Farron's success or otherwise is mainly determined by the popularity of the LibDems as a whole, rather than any particular failings on his part.

 

[Busaholic]

Will Jo Swinson be back ?

If she was Tory or Labour they could parachute her into a safe seat - but with only 11 seats could be a problem for the Liberals.

I can't imagine the circumstances in which she could get back. The only absolutely cast-iron LibDem safe seat is Orkney and Shetland, and if their current MP stood down in some sort of deal, the locals would very likely rebel and not vote her in in his place. His untimely death might be another matter, but I still think her candidature would be frowned upon. I've some personal knowledge of the situation in the Isle of Wight seat with the LibDems, where the sitting MP stood down for the 1987 election and refused to endorse the candidacy of his chosen (by the party) successor either publically or privately: indeed, he badmouthed him to anyone prepared to listen. A 5,000 LibDem majority went to a 4,000 Tory majority, and the LibDems haven't come within a mile there since.

 

[Butts]

It's not that long ago the Lib Dems had 60 + MP's under the late Charles Kennedy.
If he could have laid off the fags and booze they would probably be in a better position today !!

 

[433N]

Of course, this assumes that the Lib Dems themselves want Jo Swinson back ; not popular with some of influence in the party I gather (he says diplomatically, not wanting to say too much). Clearly given her electoral destruction, her future political career looks very limited and it might be judicious for the Lib Dems to look for talent elsewhere.

 

[AlterEgo]

it might be judicious for the Lib Dems to look for talent elsewhere.

Ha, but where? That's the question.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I seem to recall reading a while back that the LibDems were considering a rule change so that their leader would no longer need to be an MP. I wonder what happened to that proposal? For a party in their position, having the leader not an MP would seem to make a lot of sense, since it would mean they could get someone who is able to devote themselves full-time to campaigning and being a party figurehead.