Internal Democracy or Autocratic Pronouncements?

All of those of us who were elected to FPC last year were elected on the basis of their manifesto. It is not unreasonable therefore for the electorate to expect us to stick to our guns and do what we said we would do. 

I said "The run up to the next election this is a crucial time for the party. It is essential to have members on FPC who are prepared to challenge and to work hard to ensure our manifesto is the best it can be. We need strong and bold commitments, especially those on the front of our manifesto that could turn out to be our red lines. Our key pledges must seek to reduce inequality, protect the planet for our children and resist the continuing attack on our civil liberties and human rights. Our approach to the economy has to demonstrate how we balance the need to reduce the deficit with the responsibility to care for the most vulnerable. That is why I support the calls within the party for a living wage and against unfair welfare cuts. That is why I particularly welcome Nick Clegg’s commitment to parity for mental health care. That is why I am committed to policies that protect our civil liberties and human rights, that invest in green technologies and measures to tackle climate change. That is why I am for a manifesto that has a commitment to our children and young people at its heart." 

It was clear on Monday night that many of us felt the same about the need to include civil liberties on the front cover, and there was a strong call to include housing. A lone voice admittedly, I called for a living wage to be included. But, let's be clear, the die was cast long before we assembled in Committee Room 17 on Monday night. Let's not look at framing a manifesto that is anchored in our values, no we must look to our private polling, to attracting the mythical voters in the centre rather than seeking to build on our core vote and attract back those who were once attracted to a party seen as to the left of Labour. And frankly, to get something out before our pesky internal democracy could interfere. Let's be clear, our internal democracy is the lifeblood of our already wounded party, to ignore it is not only rude and arrogant it is also foolish. 

The battle now is to see what we can achieve on the balance between tax rises and spending cuts, to do what we can to protect the most vulnerable in our society, to do what we say we exist to do - or is that too much to ask?

What's the point of FPC? Ask Nick Clegg!

On FPC we have spent a good deal of time debating the pre manifesto. A couple of weeks ago we had a marathon 4 and 3/4 hour jobby. We are no spaniels eagerly rolling over for our tummies to be tickled. Most of us have been elected by our peers on a clear mandate, one we abandon at our peril. Of course, we all want to be helpful to our elders and betters, but, none of us ever forget - this great party of ours still retains a legitimacy that the other two Tory parties have abandoned - namely democratic decision making. But, I wonder, for how much longer? How long until we have moves to sideline FPC and more importantly conference? How long before time for debate is reduced even further to make room for fripperies that ensure we don't ever again debate anything as controversial as fairground goldfish and abolishing the monarchy? And all in the name of giving our parliamentarians "wriggle room" - space to say what they want to when they want to without let or hindrance from them tiresome activists!

I raise this issue as I was slightly taken aback this morning to here Nick Clegg talking about "aspirations" and reducing the shopping list of policies as he launched our pre manifesto. Most alarming was hearing him apparently threatening to abandon two of our flagship policies, abolishing tuition fees and free care for the elderly. Was this what FPC agreed? NO. Is it likely that this will be agreed by our SOVEREIGN DECISION MAKING BODY - FEDERAL CONFERENCE? NO NO NO!!!! So why did he do it? I hope to get the chance to ask him tomorrow when he comes to Luton - watch this space :-O

Conference ...... what's the point?

I have just voted in the LDV poll. Of course I would have preferred a poll that allowed us to prioritise, I also enjoy the socialising, fringes, general buzz..........but of course the highlight for me is the debate. Despite my occasional :-) moanings about stuff, I am rather proud that we do still have a process in policy making that involves the membership. If political activism is about anything it is surely based on the premise that collectively we can achieve more than we can on our own. When we lose the link with our grass roots to my mind we not only lose our legitimacy we also make worse decisions. I know there are some in our parliamentary party (because I have heard them) who would rather cut the feckless activists out of the process altogether, life would be so much easier wouldn't it. Yes, but we would fast turn into a think tank of the great and the good who never go near the great unwashed but presume to have something to say on how to make their lives better.....oh yes, just like Labour and the Tories!

There are flaws in the current process that I would like to see something done about. For example, I don't like the fact that parliamentary spokespeople can effectively block any motion/amendment they don't like. I believe we should have a system where the membership has a say in the policies they want to debate. This could either happen by sending out all competent motions to local parties to prioritise, or by reserving the last day of conference to debate motions prioritised by conference reps (rather as we do with emergency motions). Of course this would give some in the party the heeby jeebies - heavens we might have to debate a really controversial issue.........but I believe it would engender more involvement in the policy making process. As someone who has never had a motion accepted by FCC, I know how demoralising and demotivating it is. In fact the only motion I have ever had debated was one submitted for emergency where the activists prioritised it. Of course FCC may counter by accusing me of writing crappy motions (!)

So, let's see what happens with my various amendments......

What I am pleased about is that an apparent drift towards less policy making and more chatting a la Labour/Tory, seems to be off the cards. At the moment we seem to have it about right.

So, of course I am looking forward to a lively and interesting conference. Will it be possible to amend the motion on Making it Happen? Will we support the status quo in Afghanistan? Will Nick Clegg send us off with fire in our bellies and a song in our hearts???!