Dear Nick, The Lib Dems are more than the sum of their Front Bench

Overnight there have been two stories which have had some of us rather exercised. When an issue has me on the same page as Lord Bonkers, the party leadership really ought to be worried! I have never made any secret of my opposition to the coalition, Jonathan is a supporter, but now even he finds himself questioning the dismissal of Matthew Oakeshott. For me, I think the most disturbing part of this story is the quote Jonathan cites from a party spokesperson "Both Lord Oakeshott and the party leadership agreed he could not speak for the party when he did not support the party's policy"..............ah, so now we get the measure of what is happening, Lib Dem policy is being conflated with coalition policy. It's all a bit Animal Farmish for me, before we know it we will all have morphed into pigs, I mean Tories.........and any of us who won't will find ourselves off to the knackers yard with Boxer! Actually Matthew Oakeshott, did support party policy, like Vince Cable used to, like Danny Alexander used to. I have some sympathy for frontbenchers who can't really come out against their government, but Matthew was not a minister, if he can't speak out who can? As a member of FPC I sit on two of the "Parliamentary Policy" committees - my understanding of the rationale for those committees was that those committees in general and their co-chairs in particular, were there to ensure party policy remained distinctive within parliament and that they were the standard bearers for our policy. Last night's events should really put the wind up the lot of us.

And then there is the letter, headlining the news this morning, from the 91 leading Lib Dem councillors, raising legitimate concerns but then being warned by Andrew Stunnell to effectively put up or shut up. Sadly he demonstrates his disconnect from the party by arguing that these councillors should "stop fighting amongst themselves"...........er.................I DON'T think they are fighting among themselves, quite the opposite, they appear to be agreeing with each other! And therein lies my point......it is the FRONT BENCH who appear to have lost touch with the grassroots. It reminds me of my army days when pals got promoted and suddenly "went native" and forgot where they had come from. Or the brilliant colleagues I have known who got into management and suddenly saw their erstwhile co workers as the problem and started implementing the very policies they had argued against as practitioners. Andrew Stunnell would do well to listen to these front line councillors - an Egyptian "you can make bricks without straw" mentality is unfair and unwise and frankly counter-productive. One wonders for example whether in Norfolk the cost of getting rid of their youth service will end up costing them far more in the long run.

Yes coalition involves compromise but not subjugation - a lesson that our front bench would be well advised to learn, and learn quickly.

The Problem with Faustian Pacts.............

...........is that they have a habit of coming back to bite you in the bottom! The car crash that is happening before our eyes is exactly what happens when you dispense with integrity for the sake of expediency. And please less of the "putting the country first" - actually - that is why we are Lib Dems isn't it? That is why we have Lib Dem policies surely? If we thought Tory or Labour policies were better for the country we'd adopt them. Please, give me a break........or do I mean brake? Mind you, it's maybe too late for the brake - it's been snowing and we'll only go into a worse skid.

So.......now let's all abstain why don't we? It's a noble plan for the sake of party unity........if this was just about party unity. But it's not. It's about party credibility. It's about whether we will have a truly liberal alternative at the next election. It's about whether we are true to the fourth pledge of our manifesto - to "clean up politics". No amount of Febreze like spin is going to disguise the stench that is duplicity. And make no mistake, what is going on is truly duplicitous. We know that from the honest reflections of David Laws. The right in our party may not get their way on the conference floor, but they sure as hell have through the coalition! As Steve Richards in the Indy today so perceptively pointed out "An unexpectedly clear picture emerges from Laws's account. They wanted the outcome they got. They willed it. At the top they are now happy with the policies they are pursuing. But in working towards such an outcome they have ended up implementing some major policies that are so far removed from their pre-election pledges that they are heading towards the cliff's edge. They hurtle towards a precipice because of the broader context. Clegg made "trust" the key issue at the last election, especially in the first televised debate. If Clegg and Laws had been less ready to form a coalition with the Conservatives, they might have given some more thought to the deadly consequences for their reputation". A fair deal by cleaning up politics.

The fact is, that the Orange Bookers NEVER wanted our policy on tuition fees, just look at the battle we had to keep it! And so now we see the absurd spectacle of Vince (who deserves better than this) having to hint that he may abstain in order to keep the party together. NO Vince - abstaining should be the ONLY option if you are not going to keep your pledge. After all, a couple of thousand party members voted for you to abstain by backing the Coalition Agreement. And this because the amendments to hold MPs to the pledge to vote against were blocked. What's that about tangled webs and deception?

I am frankly ashamed of what is happening at the moment. OK, I never wanted this, but I would have thought someone may have had the gumption to see this coming. I'm sorry I didn't, but I was so fixated on the fact that I didn't want the Coalition Agreement to start with, I never did the forensic analysis of it that it deserved - I opposed the lot of it, why bother?

Our manifesto was clear and fully costed, don't you remember the recognition of that in the press? No bold uncosted promises, no pipe-dreams - all the figures there in technicolour. I have gone back to Nick's speech at the manifesto launch and I will leave it with you - my emphasis (my comments in brackets).

"A fair deal by cleaning up politics.

We will break up, once and for all, the rotten political system dominated by the two old parties and put power into people’s hands. (yes by rendering impotent the third party!)

You will have the right to sack your MP if they are proved corrupt.
You will have as much influence as everyone else over our government because we will stamp out big donations, clean up lobbying and change the voting system so that every voter’s choice matters.

And you will once again be able to look at our Parliament with pride, not contempt, because we will make sure every MP who avoided capital gains tax or flipped their home for personal gain is brought to book.

These are four steps to a fairer Britain.

They are promises you can trust. (so what part of trust don't I understand?)

Together they will change our country for good.
If we do things differently, for once.
If we learn from the mistakes of the past and try something new…
We can turn anger into hope.
Frustration into ambition.
Recession into opportunity for everyone.
There is one other major innovation in this manifesto.
There isn’t a line or policy in this book that will cost money that we haven’t accounted for with savings elsewhere.
We have scrutinised public spending line by line, and found the savings we need to pay for all of our priorities as Vince explained. "

Apocalypse Now, Apocalypse Later

You know when you eat something bad and feel like you want to throw up? For ages you think you couldn't feel any worse - then you actually do throw up and its horrendous. That more or less encapsulates how I have felt since the coalition was formed. That sick feeling in my stomach started on that infamous Tuesday evening when the coalition nuptials took place and has continued, getting worse with each new announcement - leaving me devastated this Tuesday with the budget - and culminating in the meeting of CHYPS (Confederation of Heads of Young People's Services) I went to last Thursday.

When I warned at the special conference that we would find ourselves locked into all sorts of things that would turn our stomach, I had no idea how prophetic my words would turn out to be, nor how quickly they would be fulfilled. I find myself surrounded by Lib Dem friends beaming with delight, constantly pointing out how much of our manifesto is included in the coalition agreement and the budget.........but to me its a bit like this. The doctor tells you what a wonderful job he has done in mending your broken leg while totally ignoring the fact that he has chopped the other one off! Oh yes, a modest increase in CGT is to be welcomed, but a devastating increase in VAT? Oh yes, great to give an additional £150 to poor families, or to take so many more out of paying tax, but what a joke when those same people will find themselves far worse off with benefit cuts and additional regressive taxes - and for so many, no job at all not to pay taxes on!!!!

Some of my dearest Lib Dem friends think I have made a mistake speaking out and should try to be a little more diplomatic, well frankly that is a bit like saying you should let your enemy overrun your country, raping and pillaging at will, with just the odd polite "would you mind stopping please?"

Of all the budget measures this week, for me the most worrying is something that has gone relatively uncommented on. That is a the promised 10% cut in housing benefit for those unemployed for over a year - so not only are we going to rub your nose in it, we are going to tip a load more shit over you while we do it. The massive cuts in the public services, particularly in some areas like the North East where 60% of all jobs are in the public sector, will not only take away people's livelihood, possibly for years to come, but they will also face the double whammy of either losing their homes because they can't pay their mortgage, or losing their homes because they can't pay their rent.

So, back to last Thursday. I had been invited, as chair of the Youth Policy Working Group, to go and speak to the heads of young people's services from across the country. Like me they were gobsmacked that there was virtually no mention of young people in the coalition agreement. Given we had some key commitments to young people in our manifesto, votes at 16, equalising minimum wage, additional educational, training and job opportunities for that lost generation of nearly a million "NEET" young people, statutory youth service, the fact that none of this appeared in the agreement is deeply worrying. Not only that, but sending the opposite signal by cutting the Future Jobs Fund. Nearly everyone there reported having to make massive cuts, usually around 30% and this is BEFORE the budget measures kick in. There is a very real fear that in many areas the Youth Service and Connexions will disappear altogether. The fact that youth services are non statutory means they are top of the hit list - and after all, young people can't vote until they are 18 and then they are less likely to vote anyway.

Following my input was a brilliant presentation predicting the future for the sector, central to which was a warning of the apocalypse to come. The fact that given the 25% cut in public sector and the fact that cuts would not be evenly spread, unprotected services like the youth service were very vulnerable - the predicted cuts in the long term being up to 50%. Equally as vulnerable will be the voluntary sector, for whom 50% of their funding comes from the public sector. Ironic really, given the Tory mantra of the "Big Society" which will rely so heavily on the voluntary sector.

The impact of these cuts cannot be underestimated. And this is where I am afraid I totally find myself parting company with Nick Clegg and Vince Cable. Nick rightly points out that we have a responsibility to our children to get out of this mess - but the irony is that by cutting services to the most vulnerable, by decimating youth services, the very children and young people he wants to protect will have their life chances blighted before they even start! Even more ironic is that we know all this is likely to cost more in the long run. We know crime rises when youth provision is cut. We know that if we don't provide adequate children's services more children are likely ultimately to end in care, or worse. We know that poor housing, poor nutrition, social exclusion, means worse health outcomes and a greater burden on the NHS. Only this week a report by David Stuckler warned the budget cuts would increase the death rate and today we hear that poorer families will be hit 6 times harder. Or Professor Joseph Stiglitz quoted in the Indy saying this strategy will ensure the recession is longer, slower and harder than it needs to be. Calling this a progressive budget is a bit like calling the Pope an atheist.

I for one am praying for our backbenchers, lead by Simon Hughes, to rebel - to at least push for amendments to the budget that make it fairer. To challenge the notion that it has to be like this, this is not the universal view of economists after all. Lets face it, this approach has far more to do with neo-liberal ideology than economic necessity. As someone who rejects the simplistic solutions of both left and right, I am frankly far more interested in what works. Yes, make cuts, there is slack, there are the trappings of a Big Brother state, the unnecessary targets and bureaucracy, the quangoes, the attempts at social engineering, the ASBOs, Trident.......oh forgot, we won't even consider Trident. But for goodness sake, don't cut the roots off the very measures that contain the prospect of recovery. Don't condemn another generation to the very thing you bleat about, namely a welfare dependent culture. Don't get hoodwinked by the ideology that cares more about monetary than human cost.

My worry is that the debate is being framed around the merit of cuts or tax rises, rather than the far more fundamental question about what sort of society we want to be part of, my worry is, that when the dust has settled and cleared, when we discover we have cut off our noses to spite our face, no amount of hand wringing and apologies from Osborne and Cameron will disguise the fact that it was us, the "progressive" Liberal Democrats, who held their hands while they destroyed our future. Broken society? We've seen nothing yet.

When even Evan Harris and Tony Greaves desert you.........

Well, all over bar the shouting - actually, no shouting whatsoever. Today's special conference, while spawning arguably one of the best conference speeches ever, delivered by Simon Hughes, proved to be more of a triumphalist rally rather than a serious examination of the potential pitfalls of sleeping with the enemy.

The nine amendments to the motion, all of which I supported, I hope will go some way towards dealing with some of the concerns of the activists. However, the very genuine concerns about our MPs abstaining on the issue of top up fees, were not dealt with satisfactorily either by Chris Huhne or Nick Clegg.

But, in all conscience, I was one of the 12-35 (numbers are disputed) who voted against the motion. OK, so my political heroes, Evan Harris and Simon Hughes lead the progressive charge to support it. Even Tony Greaves was persuaded. Maybe this is the point I should concede defeat? Seriously, I wish I could. I was one of the standard bearers for Nick in the leadership election. I had a look back at my "10 Reasons to Vote Nick Clegg" my last reason was that "I would trust him with my life so I know I can trust him with my party". Well, I would still trust him with my life, I now need him to prove I can trust him with my party. This is a high risk strategy, which could make our party irrelevant for a generation. And I am a Liberal Democrat because I honestly believe liberal democracy offers the best hope for us to renew our society, to make it fairer, freer, more equal and more just. Without us there is a vacuum.

So, called as the first speaker after the amendments were moved (I understand there was a bet on FCC about when I would be called!) it seemed the idea may have been to get the awkward squad out of the way. Despite my fear that this new marriage made in heaven may be the Hammer Horror version of Pride and Prejudice - the adorable Mr Darcey turning into Count Dracula, my fellow delegates were far too smitten to give a damn.

But I was gratified that one of my fellow delegates came up to me afterwards to say that my speech (also calling for those of us who I regard as the backbone of our party to stay) had persuaded him that he should not resign, but like me, stay and fight.

When Labour became New Labour I felt so much for my Trade Union pals who felt they had to leave with no home to go to. This week I have really come to understand how they felt. Tuesday evening/Wednesday morning felt like a bereavement. I watched the nuptials on Wednesday morning as if in a daze, surreal. This is the moment I should have been shouting from the rooftops, overcome with excitement, OUR Nick in No 10! But it passed me by, I was too devastated.

Yes I understand all the arguments (more than well rehearsed in 4 hours this afternoon), but however much I understand them, I can't at the moment change how I feel. I am angry with the Labour dinosaurs who blocked a truly progressive alliance, I understand we were backed into a corner, that this is more about damage limitation than a true meeting of minds and ideologies........but I can't change how I feel.

I am genuinely relieved that our involvement in government is already mitigating against the worst excesses of the Tories. I understand why Labour may uncomfortable......A Tory majority government would have been likely to be so unpopular they would have romped home next time, a Lib Dem coalition makes that less likely. It also, I hope, means less people will suffer and even die, because of a right wing Tory government.

Who knows what the coming months will bring. Vince Cable lifted the lift on Pandora's box, telling us that things were far worse than Labour had let on and that it was going to be "bloody awful", but that we could make it less so. That is the best I can hope for.

Oh, by the way, for those of you who were there - I have a pair of pink fluffy handcuffs, one careful owner, never used - free to the person who can demonstrate they will have some use for them :-) or maybe I should auction them on Lib Dem Act????

Tories in pre election meltdown..............

Many thanks to my dear pal Paul Walter for drawing my attention to this via Twitter. OK, I admit it, my iphone has changed my life! I am discovering a cornucopia of "things you always wanted to know but never dare ask" - following not only my favourite Lib Dems, but the likes of "I am trying really hard not to morph into a Lib Dem" Kevin Maguire, "if you think you're hard enuf" Charlie Whelan, "honest guv" Andrew Rawnsley "I used to be Linda Jack's fave MYP" Richard Angell and "one day I'll get a life" Chris Paul. Actually Chris.....just teasing......you are doin good, for anyone not following him - he will do your donkey work for you - well worth following even if he does your head in with his anti Lib Dem rhetoric from time to time :-)



So. Burbler extraordinaire lead me to this unbelievable piece of Tory reeeeealpolitik on Conservative home. If anything ever exposed their shallow, value free, excuse for a serious response to the very real problems this nation faces......this is it. Seriously - we need to get this on our billboards toot sweet!



A little analysis - when you plaster this all over your flagship website.............er...........Mr Mannering - get over here fast!



(1) Don’t panic! The Tories are still 7% ahead in the ConHome Poll of Polls. We’re almost certainly further ahead – where it counts - in the marginals



Ok......."almost certainly" code for - we really don't know. The totally hilarious assertion in this bit is "all the right policies are in place" - er right............would the Tories know a policy if it jumped up and bit them on the bottom? Have a look at their website and play spot the policy - or more exciting - spot the policy that will still be the policy int morning...



(2) Clarify the economic message. In the vote of Tory members I tested four descriptions of the party’s economic message. The official description, supplied to me by George Osborne's office, came bottom in the voting.



Yes, Mr O, he who fades into insignificance against Mr C.........even your loyalist supporters despair that the media rates our Mr C higher than you :-(



3) Raise the dangers of a hung parliament..............er, flippin 'eck, don't let the Lib Dems get a sniff of power, people might realise they really are the "real alternative"!



(4) Deploy the party's very sensible immigration policies. We may have overplayed it at the 2005 General Election but we are in danger of underplaying it this time. Now here they refer to the "sensible" policies of Chris Grayling - linking to this - One of the other crucial ingredients in the Tory commitment to end Labour's uncontrolled immigration policy is the introduction of a cap on the inflow from outside the EU. It may be impossible to set the cap exactly because the party has rightly promised to consult with business and the key public services on their needs for specialist and seasonal workers. We could, however, announce an overall target for net immigration. A commitment, for example, to limit net immigration to an average of 50,000 per year - within an annual flexible rage of 30,000 to 70,000 would be indicative to voters while allowing employers flexibility to influence the inflow of economic migrants.
The announcement should be made soon - to avoid being made in the heat of an election campaign - and ideally after a couple of good opinion polls. The worst time would be after a bad opinion poll and the announcement would then risk being presented as a panic measure. - You couldn't make it up!



5) Stop announcing new policies (unless we have a pledge as potent as the 2007 inheritance tax policy up our sleeves!) and focus on the best ones we already have. The Tories have loads of policies but we can’t go into a campaign with two hundred bullet points. We need to highlight just a few key pledges. Doesn't this just say it all?! The "potent 2007 inheritance tax policy" - yeah right - let's take care of the rich and the poor will take care of themselves a reverse of the take care of the pennies mantra if ever I heard it. And loads of policies................where, please, are they hiding? Certainly not on the Tory website,

.

(6) Hague is a golden asset. No Comment.



(7) Remind voters on a daily basis of Labour's failures. Yep


(8) Put someone in 100% charge of campaign co-ordination. I’m hearing lots of stories of too many chiefs in the Tory campaign (all able) but no overall chief. We don’t (alas) have Lynton Crosby co-ordinating this campaign but we need someone in absolute charge and able to give the campaign 100% attention. Who is that? George Bridges? The question needs answering and kinda now. WOT?!


(9) Cameron can show that he's stronger than Brown by being the election's straight-talker.

Straight talker...............are you havin a laugh??????



(10) This election is a choice between decline and recovery. Well, not entirely sure about this, but if this is the case, it would be really interesting to stack up the Os-spawn solution with the Capable solution.........

Nick Clegg - Our hero!!!

For the last 15 months or so my frustration has been that the nation has really not grasped the essence of Nick Clegg. He has been characterised as "Cameron Lite" - a bit like mistaking Handel for the Spice Girls. One speaks from a depth of conviction, a preparedness to stand by those convictions regardless of the consequences .........the other from the shallowness of expediency, popularism and the need to secure as many votes as possible, for the least amount of effort in the shortest amount of time. Clegg is prepared to nail his colours to the mast, however unpopular his position - Cameron on the other hand plays a cunning hand of poker - never revealing his hand, but somehow executing the exquisite bluff that leaves the unsuspecting believing he has actually said something!

So today I was delighted - at last - not before time - the nation is beginning to see what our man is made of, what many of us have always known - that we have a leader who will fight for what he believes in - popular or not. He has undeservedly had his light somewhat hidden under the remarkable "bushel" that is Vince Cable (!) but at no time has he shown the slightest irritation or pique. He has clearly demonstrated his underlying motivation - not for his own grandisement - rather of his undeniable commitment to the achievement of a truly liberal and just society. The motivation and commitment that leads Nick to champion the just cause of the Gurkhas will lead him to demonstrate what separates him from the shallowness of Cameron and the arrogant discordant disconnect of Brown (if Clegg is Handel and Cameron is the Spice Girls - maybe Brown is Stockhausen - (with apologies to Stockhausen fans!) admired by a few but unintelligible to most of us!)

Oh dear, this is sounding a tad to sycophantic - don't worry Nick/Tim/Matthew/Greg et al..........normal service will resume before you can say Jack Robinson.........or is that Linda Jack?!

150 Lib Dem MPs......OK Guys - What's the Strategy?

I read Karin Robinson's article on LDV with interest, coming to it late having been away this weekend. We all know, however uncomfortable, it is always essential to listen to how outsiders see us. Cosy consensus is an inevitable default position when we only ever talk to ourselves. I found it particularly pertinent as I have driven back from the South West today mulling over the challenge we face if we are truly to make the breakthrough we all yearn for in British politics.

Nick Clegg took over the leadership with a vision for 150 Lib Dem MP's - Karin accuses us of a paucity of ambition - 150? No way..........if we really want to see transformation in this country I agree, we have to aim higher, we have to talk and think big. We will never achieve any of our goals if we languish in 3rd place. Our policies are the only ones that can truly transform this country, if I didn't believe that, if you didn't believe that, what on earth would we be doing in the Lib Dems?! We would be accepting the dodgy advice of the n'erdowells languishing in the comments pages of Political Betting who think we would be better off defecting to the Tories and Labour!

If all those who said they would vote for us thought we really had a chance and did so, there is no doubt we would be in power within two general elections. People are crying out for change, frankly, with the moral high ground Vince has taken for us on the economy, we should all be out there with our crampons and ropes to take the rest.

At the moment we have a target but from where I sit, no strategy. It is the strategy we need pretty damn quick. The fact is we do have people in the party who have that strategy, I spent yesterday speaking to one of them. The problem is, if as a party we are to embrace that strategy we have to loose our grip on outdated, stale and tired campaigning. We have to dump the mantra "but we've always done it this way and its always worked and anyway the Tories are copying us so it must be right", we have to be ready to obey Nick's injunction - risky and radical........not only in terms of policy, but perhaps more importantly - strategy.

The results of Labour's mismanagement is leading to total despair and ruin for so many. In particular the life chances of our young people are being blighted - 40% of the unemployed are 16-24. People are losing their livelihoods, their homes, are in mental distress and in some cases are taking their lives. Change is not an option it is an imperative. And crocodile tears apologist Cameron has absolutely NO answers. We do, we can, we will!

Bankers

A few years ago i had my interview for my current post at the FSA. One of the questions I was asked was "How do you think you will get on with a bunch of bankers?" Well, as I often say - it was a bit of a culture shock for me, but I like to think it was more of a culture shock for them!

So I have been following the debate of the last few weeks and the comments from my bosses with interest. As a trade union negotiator when "Single Status" was being agreed, one big issue was the unfairness of bonuses that were paid to predominantly male roles such as refuse workers, as opposed to predominantly female workers, such as school meals staff. So from my perspective this current debate, which rightly points out how bonuses have fuelled a risk culture, is missing one big point. Bonuses are demonstrably discriminatory. Harriet Harman has correctly pointed this out, but her words appear to have fallen on deaf ears. We need to look at bonuses, not just in the banks in near public ownership, not just in the banks more widely, but across the board. I am pleased the EHRC are doing some work on this. Having represented a black woman banker at a hearing where the bonus system had clearly discriminated against her (interesting in the light of the revelations last week about senior bankers not being qualified, she was the only one in her department who WAS qualified, had been tipped for greatness by the press when she was in her 20s and yet had seen all her male white colleagues leapfrog over her when it came to promotion and bonuses), I had my eyes opened to how the system is open to abuse, both directly and indirectly.

Two or three days before it sunk the Titanic was warned it was approaching an ice field, ignorance, arrogance or indifference meant it ignored the warnings. Vince Cable has been a clear and lone voice about the banks and personal debt for many years. No one listened. The tragedy is that it is not the wealthy bankers who may miss out on the odd £million who will suffer, no, they will already have their lifeboats ready and their life jackets at hand. It is those (rather like the poor souls on the Titanic in third class) who bear no responsibility for this situation whatsoever, they don't have loans or mortgages or credit cards, they struggle to make ends meet already, but it is their jobs that are going and it is their futures that is being blighted.

Nick Clegg wins the battle, but will he win the war? (or is it the other way round?!)

Today I have had the great privilege of being a judge in the Children and Young People's Services Awards. It was inspirational, and although I am sworn to secrecy about who we shortlisted, suffice to say that we read of many many wonderful projects going on up and down the country to improve the life chances of children and young people. But, I also met a fellow Lib Dem, someone who unprompted told me she was planning to leave the party in the light of what she perceived as our drift to the right. She was proud to be part of the party that was prepared to raise taxes for the rich to invest in excellent public services. She was happy with the 1p for education and 50p rate. She was at a loss to understand what was happening with our apparent about turn. I hope I persuaded her to stay..........but I left worrying about how many other members up and down the country are, as we speak, wondering about renewing their membership.

I fear this position on tax may only be a hairline fracture in Make it Happen, but it is a fault line that runs all the way through it and has the potential to develop into a chasm. A chasm between us and the electorate (we lose our credibility when we can't cost promises) and a chasm within the party. The amendment very clearly sought to be a uniting amendment. To get the whole party behind what is an excellent document. The deliberate misrepresentation of that amendment and the decision not to accept it for what it was, left nearly half of us feeling ignored and disaffected. Make it Happen is the lynch pin for our party, it is the Standard around which we should be massing, if ANY motion should have been passed unanimously in Bournemouth - this was it!!!! As well as clearly being very upset at the lack of diversity in the debate, at times I wondered if I had been teleported two weeks hence and I was sitting in the Tory conference! Frankly, if you closed your eyes you could have been forgiven on many occasions for thinking you were listening to Tories. It chilled me to my bones.............

I am at a complete loss to understand why Nick Clegg made it such a leadership issue, wheeling out the "big hitters" Vince Cable, Chris Huhne, Simon Hughes. Clearly there wasn't quite the nervousness there was over Trident as Nick didn't need to make a surprise intervention himself. Yes, Nick won, he would have either breathed a sigh of relief or jumped for joy, I know not which.............but at what cost?

View from the top updated....................with a little help from Polly Toynbee!

Having spent most of my working life in drafty decrepit youth centres and on badly lit street corners (as a detached youth worker I hasten to add!)............the grandeur of Canary Wharf never ceases to amaze me. Cheek by jowl with some of the most deprived areas in the country, this fantasy city looms out of the mist (aka smog)..........a private estate, squeaky clean, towering metallic structures housing a virtual small town of 70,000 plus people. The virtually relocated "city" doesn't on the surface appear to have suffered due to the credit crunch. The classy jeweller still sells pieces for £1000's, the caviar bar is still packed, more and more posh shops are opening, rather like The Truman Show, everything seems just a little unreal. Yesterday I had a meeting at Barclays, where their meeting rooms on the 30th floor have stunning views (sadly it was raining so the pic isn't that good), set amongst all the other towers, HSBC, Citigroup, Bank of America..........the list goes on. Here, in the heart of the "city" the place where many of the decisions that have lead to our current problems are taken, the lack of connection with the reality of people's lives is palpable. The fact that for the past few years the only politician warning of our present reality is Vince Cable is something we should be very proud of. It is a fact that the media had often gone to Vince for a comment rather than George Osborne (who he?!). Let's hope that it isn't just the Tories that get the message that they don't have the competence to deal with the economy, but the country at large. However badly Darling is doing, I fear our present problems would look like a walk in the park if Mr O ever took over as Chancellor.

Since penning this piece my pal Martin alerted me to this article by Polly Toynbee which says what I was trying to far more eloquently!

"Focus groups with the super-rich, most of them in the top 0.1% of earners, commissioned for a book I have co-written with David Walker, threw up more questions than answers. How did these people succeed in setting their own terms with government? They were ignorant about the society they live in and indifferent to any but their own kind, and it is now plain that their own financial incentives encouraged wild risk-taking in banks and funds. Alan Sugar-style brutishness rules the roost, though most of these yahoos are not entrepreneurs at all, but market followers who receive their bonuses irrespective of whether results are good or bad.

Adept at frightening the Treasury, they fight even modest attempts at curbing tax avoidance or taxing non-doms, and the Treasury often retreats. Questions will be asked about who ruled Britain in this decade, just as in the worst days of over-mighty trade unions."

That Nick Clegg - what a hoot!

Drawing to the parliamentary end of term, Nick Clegg has attracted a little criticism in some quarters for appearing not to have a sense of humour. He has dealt with PMQs extremely competently but with little of the dazzling humour employed by his stand in predecessor Vince Cable. Although it has to be said, I heard one parliamentarian the other day declaring that he thought Nick was our best leader in a generation when it came to dealing with PMQs.

That said, I have to say I have been disappointed that Nick's sense of humour hasn't as yet really emerged, I am hoping that next term, perhaps when he can relax a bit about the ordeal that is midday on a Wednesday, his real character can emerge. I have always found him to be great fun and very witty. One example was when we travelled back from Birmingham together. I had been chatting away (out of character I know !) about this and that when Nick went off to buy coffee. He asked me if I wanted sugar, my reply was to say no, "Thank God for that" says he "we would have been on to story 143!"

So it was great to read this story from Black Dog in the Mail -
"Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg is no fan of David Cameron's favourite new political book, Nudge, by Richard Thaler, which says human behaviour is best changed by small nudges not heavy-handed laws.
'Thaler says if you draw a fly in the centre of a gents' urinal, men will aim more accurately,' said Clegg.
'Cameron has drawn the fly on the floor.' "

Vince Cable - Cit Ad Parliamentarian of the Year!

Well done Vince!

(Pic from Federal Conference LGA Reception)