miss_s_b: Peter Falk as Columbo saying "just one more thing" (Fangirling: Columbo)
As well as my own post on this matter, lots of other people have written long and/or interesting posts on this, not least on Lib Dem Voice. As much for myself as for you, gentle reader, I'm going to collect the links to my favourite ones here.
  • Nick Barlow is a proper political scientist, and you can tell this reading his article which is logically structured and argued, and contains a lot of clear and understandable points, most of which I thoroughly agree with.

  • Anders Hanson, former chair of the Yorkshire and Humber regional Liberal Democrats, has a very long, thoughtful, considered piece here. I think he's particularly right about the need to own a policy area or several.

  • The fabulous Mortimer posted her five* ideas quite quickly, but I think they are all good ones. Plus, she's even swearier than me.

  • Andy Hinton, in the midst of linking to lots of other people, points out that perhaps the problem last week was that we hadn't given the voters anything to vote FOR. His whole piece is worth reading, though, not least for the fact that he admits he's just setting out thoughts as they occur to him.

  • I've ummed and ahhed about linking to David Howarth's piece on the SLF because I think the very first point is absolutely dead wrong and couldn't be wrongerer. But the rest of it is very good indeed.
miss_s_b: (Politics: Goth Lib Dems)
So, apparently, there are well over seven thousand of you guys now. Welcome! In order to help you acclimatise to the culture of the party there's a couple of things you ought to be reading.
  1. The back of your membership card* is the first and most important thing for you to read as a new Lib Dem. The front will have some sort of pretty picture on it, and your name, and your membership number. The back will say on it:
    The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity.
    which is an extract from our Constitution and is something that is graven on most of our hearts. Regardless of the fact that I have recently called for a constitutional convention, and I genuinely think that we should rebuild from the ground up (hopefully with your help), the idea that the words "no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance, or conformity" won't be a part of that is unconscionable.

  2. On Liberty by John Stuart Mill. You can read this online, but my favourite version** is this 1912 edition which also contains two more of Mill's essays - on running the government and on feminism - and an Introduction by Millicent Garrett Fawcett. You might be a bit put off the idea of reading a dry work of Victorian philosophy, but I promise you, it's worth it.***

  3. The Liberator Songbook. You can buy a copy here and there are some extracts online here, for example, or here. You don't have to attend Glee Club at conference - and indeed, many Lib Dems look upon it with total embarrassment - but a read of the songbook will give you an idea of the culture of the party. We like to extract the urine. We extract the urine out of ourselves, each other, other political parties, the political system, and ourselves all over again.

  4. The Electoral Reform Society's Guide to Voting Systems. The one thing everybody knows about the Lib Dems is that we are in favour of "PR". Most people don't know what PR is. Most people think we had a referendum on PR in the last parliament. We didn't, we had a referendum on AV, which is not a proportional system. You, as a new Lib Dem, are going to get asked about "PR" a lot. Familiarising yourself with the various voting systems is probably a plan. The favoured system of the Electoral Reform Society, The Liberal Democrats, and myself is Single Transferrable Vote, which is known everywhere else in the world as The British Proportional System, because we invented it. We like it because it gives the most power to voters. We use STV for all internal elections, and it's in use in various parts of the UK, but not yet for general elections. If you are pushing for proportional representation, please specify that we want STV, not nebulous "PR".

There are lots and lots of other things you can read as a Lib Dem. An Intelligent Person's Guide to Liberalism by Conrad Russell is one I would fully recommend, I am very fond of The Journal of Liberal History, many people would recommend the free back issues of Liberator magazine, and I'm sure the people in the comments will have many many more recommendations; but I would say the four listed above are the absolute essentials.



* when it arrives, which will probably take a while because there are a lot to produce and the new ones are actually quite fancy
** I like this edition so much that I keep giving it to people as a present ;)
*** The bit most often cited by Lib Dems is The Harm Principle: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." - we often discuss the implications and applications of it, but few of us don't think it is a guiding principle.
miss_s_b: (Default)
They don't use pencils in polling stations so they can run out your vote and give it to the tories. They use them because they don't run out of ink, don't smudge, and are generally reliable.

If you WANT to take your own pen and use it, you are free to do so, but frankly I'm happy to trust in an indelible pencil for my vote, especially having seen the mess someone made of their ballot paper by TRYING to rub out what they'd initially voted for.
miss_s_b: (Politics: Liberal)
Obviously we're a bit close to (and a bit bruised by) the drubbing we got on Thursday, and so we're probably not in the best state to come up with sensible suggestions. However, everyone ELSE is writing one of these articles, sooooo...
  1. We already have autumn conference booked and ready to roll. By the time we get there we will have had lots of time to argue about what went wrong and why everyone hates us, and will have come to some conclusions and ideas for solutions. Also, our party constituion is well overdue for a refresh. We should use Bournemouth as an opportunity for a constitutional convention. We should totally redesign the party constituion from the ground up, and by the time autumn rolls around we will have some idea of how we want to go about that.

  2. Our brand has become somewhat toxic. A rebrand is necessary. We should not rush into this. Preferably it should be done after the constitutional convention. We can't, for example, just rename ourselves "the Liberals" because the continuity Liberals would get cross. However, one thing I would suggest is that having seen Sal Brinton's article on Lib Dem Voice, I think turning Libby into a phoenix might be a plan. I like the idea of us putting in our logo that no matter how many times you burn us we will always rise from the ashes.

  3. Things I would like to see us do as a party:
    • Can we get rid of the stupid managerial centrism and go back to being actual liberals and democrats now, please? I've been saying for AGES that applying to be the Rizla you can't slip between the Labservative parties is not going to inspire anyone...

    • The entire system of distributing information to people needs to be completely redesigned. Information should NOT be hoarded but distributed. Foot soldiers cannot fight properly if they do not know what is going on where, and there is a tendency at the top of both the federal and the regional parties to jealously hoard information like gold; information is not gold, it is oxygen, and we die when it is withheld from us.

    • Stipulate that SpAds should be diverse in age and experience as well as race and gender. While new graduates have a place in telling old warhorses the new ways of doing things and the new research that has just come out, they cannot and should not entirely replace old warhorses - but nor should old warhorses entirely replace and ignore young people, because quite a lot of the time the newfangled ways of doing things ARE better. In Calderdale we have young people like James Baker, and more people should listen to him about how to campaign because he's incredibly well versed and keeps himself up to date. But we also have veterans like Pauline Nash, who have buckets of experience of politics and life. BOTH of them are people I turn to in times of crisis. The national leadership could do with similar diversity.

    • The Wheelhouse - aka the Leadership Echo Chamber - should be disbanded and there should be something written in the new constitution of the party that such a horrific method of bypassing the democratic structures of the party to keep power and information for the few and away from the membership can never be formed again.

    • Get rid of the money sink that is nationbuilder - there are free alternatives that people in our party know how to use. Why are we paying for an expensive thing instead of using the free alternative? It's not like we have money to burn now.

    • Related to the above - use the expertise we have within the party, instead of ignoring the experts we have who are already members in favour of horrifically overpaid shiny new experts from abroad.

    These are just a few of the ideas I have at the moment. Obviously some of them are ideas I have had for some time. You, gentle reader, might entirely disagree with some or all of them: lets discuss it? Lets discuss it lots.

I am actually, unexpectedly, feeling pretty upbeat and enthused about Lib Demmery today. A lot of members have joined up in the last 24 hours. We went to the pub yesterday and laughed and cried and sang Losing Deposits* and let all the raw emotion out, and now I, for one, am ready to start the rebuild. I know other people are too - check out the Team Cockroach** hashtag on twitter - so lets get to it, people.


* which some of the other patrons found a bit disturbing - but there ain't no Gallows Humour like Lib Dem Gallows Humour.
** when Tim Farron was party president he said that we are like cockroaches after a nuclear war - we are made of stern stuff and we survive. It led to a lot of sneering news comment. It also led to lots of people proudly claiming the name of cockroach, probably because there ain't no gallows humour like lib dem gallows humour. A lot of the electorate probably think we are as low and bothersome as roaches right now, so it seems apt. And our exoskeletons are strong, and we WILL spring back when the labservatives stamp on us.
miss_s_b: Vince Cable's happy face (Politics: Vince - happy face)
I am writing this as I listen to John Humphries pretend to interrogate the prime minister. Humphries asks questions in an aggressive way, he talks over Cameron, he words things provocatively... but he still lets Cameron avoid giving a single proper answer. Cameron is at this very second saying how he needs to address the big questions and not duck them while ducking Humphries' questions. It's show business for Cameron, because he gets to tell everyone he's submitted himself to a grueling Humphries interrogation; but it's also show business for Humphries because he gets to appear to be the fearless interviewer, speaking truth to power. It's all bollocks. Both Cameron and Humphries are dancing a choreographed dance around pre-determined limits, and neither of them strays for a nanosecond from the formal pattern.

David Cameron and George Osborne have both visited Calderdale more than once in this campaign. Nobody knew they were coming before they came except for the press and a select few in their own party and a few council officers. Each event was carefully stage managed. No ordinary people were to be allowed anywhere near. No inconvenient questions were to be asked. And it's not just the tories - Labour and my own party are as bad. Every top rank politician lives in abject terror of a Gillian Duffy Moment, so they allow the party machines to collude with the press in the Battle Bus culture in which pre-selected journos go to stage-managed photo calls in which only the most photogenic and meek ordinary people are even allowed into the building.

This isn't how politics should be. For a very few politicians it's not how it IS - people like Tessa Munt and David Ward haven't gone very far down this rabbit hole. But since being in government our leadership and leading figures have swallowed that this way of behaving is the way to do it - certainly it applied when Vince Cable came to Halifax. It's all so fake, and people can see it's fake, but when they tell politicians they detest the fakery politicians just stage-manage things all the harder.

And this, by the way, is yet another reason why Nicola Sturgeon is doing well this election - she has let the great unwashed come near, unlike any of the Westminster leaders.

Frankly, I don't care what either of the Labservative parties do because they are both as bad as each other, but I really really wish my party would stop doing this shit. And I swear to you, gentle reader, that I will do everything I can within the party to stop it happening.

If we can't have discussions with any ordinary member of the public, we don't deserve political success, and if a Gillian Duffy Moment happens, if we can't deal with THAT we don't deserve political success either. A politician who has to be insulated from people who disagree with him unless they are carefully stage managed is no politician at all.
miss_s_b: (Politics: Democracy)
Like the BBC poll tracker, I've not changed much since January. In January, I said the seat distribution would be:
Lab - 277
Tory - 265
LD - 45
SNP - 35
(Northern Ireland I'm not confident to predict so their 18 go here)
Plaid - 4
Independent - 3
Kipper - 2
Green - 1
I'm going to amend that somewhat today, to:
Lab - 259
Tory - 266
LD - 45
SNP - 55
(Northern Ireland I'm not confident to predict so their 18 go here)
Plaid - 3
Speaker*** - 1
Independent/Other - 1
Kipper - 1
Green - 1
The biggest swap there has been from Lab to SNP*, and I do think the tories will be the biggest party, just, because of it. The Indy/Other I think will be an NHA candidate somewhere. UKIP are down to one because I now think the only seat they will keep is Carswell, and Farage won't win Thanet.

I still think nobody will offer the LDs enough to get a coalition past special conference, which means we are into pretty uncharted territory. I can't see even Labour having the brass balls to go for minority government in those circumstances, so maybe we'll end up doing a Belgium?

Anyway, I look forward to being hoist by my own petard on Friday, when this is all proved horrifically wrong... As for Calder Valley and Halifax, and my local council elections, I know what I expect to happen, and I know what I want to happen. We'll see how disappointed I am on Friday when Merran McRae reads the results out... ;)



* I know people with money on the LDs having more Scottish MPs than Labour on Friday**. While I think this will be the case, and that's what my prediction is based on above, I'm not brave enough to put money on it.
** The LD number hasn't shifted to the SNP at all, because I was already counting us losing most of Scotland in January. My prediction for the number of Scottish LDs is 3. No, I'm not naming names which 3, that would be cruel.
*** Bercow was originally elected as a Tory, but is bound to be impartial and can't vote in most circumstances
miss_s_b: (Politics: Democracy)
The guardian website/tomorrow's print observer has a somewhat hysterical article about how we could face long coalition negotiations after the election. I'm not going to pick holes in their prediction for the most likely outcome of the election, although it doesn't chime with mine*, I'm just going to pick out one paragraph to pick holes in:
While the Lib Dem rule book gives the party’s MPs the main say on whether to approve a new coalition, there will be a special conference of senior party officials that will vote on the deal. Although the decision of the conference is not binding, according to the rules, senior figures say if the conference votes the deal down, Clegg will have to accept defeat.
To take the wrong bits in order:

1, "While the Lib Dem rule book gives the party’s MPs the main say on whether to approve a new coalition" - errr, no. Caron wrote a very good article about this a week ago. The MPs get the first vote after the negotiating team has negotiated in consultation with the reference group. The MAIN say, the decision as to whether it goes ahead or not, is taken by special conference.

2, "there will be a special conference of senior party officials that will vote on the deal" - voting reps are not in the sense of the words most people will understand "senior party officials" - not unless you think the vast majority of the active membership are senior. There's THOUSANDS of us. Most local parties don't even fill their quota of voting reps because there aren't enough people who want to go vote on things at conferences, and the only reason special conference is not one member one vote is the almighty cock up FE made of trying to introduce OMOV at Glasgow.

3, "Although the decision of the conference is not binding, according to the rules" - yes it is. This is just a plain factual error. It wasn't binding in 2010, but we changed the rules in 2012.

4, "senior figures say if the conference votes the deal down, Clegg will have to accept defeat." - well yes he will, because the decision is binding. And not only is the decision binding but to agree to a coalition (OR confidence and supply) special conference has to vote in favour by a 2/3 majority or more.

It really is going to be quite difficult to persuade 2/3 of lib dem members to vote in favour of ANY coalition deal with ANY party after the amount of stuff that was in the agreement this time around that the tories reneged on. We voted in favour of an agreement which gave us a good chance of electoral reform and supposedly guaranteed lords reform; neither of those things happened. Without cast iron guarantees of those things, and no shilly-shallying about referendums or anything, there's no way on earth you'd get a bare majority, never mind a 2/3 majority.

Similarly, the idea that any coalition involving UKIP or the DUP would get a 2/3 majority of members voting for it is just laughable in the extreme. I'd be amazed if you could herd the cats long enough to get a 2/3 majority for either of the Labservative parties on their own, to be honest.

I'm reasonably certain that this is why our Cleggy is drawing so many red lines this time around, by the way. He knows he'll not get an agreement past special conference, so he's scuppering it before it gets to that point, then he can spread his hands wide and say "well we TRIED to form a stable coalition but the other parties just wouldn't budge enough".



* I still say we're going to get a minority Labour government that'll collapse in acrimony and infighting within 6 months, and then we'll get another election.
miss_s_b: (Music: Progtastic Rock Wankman)
Sky news have been busy bunnies in the leadup to the election, creating these horrific lovely videos of the political leaders. If you haven't seen them, they're embedded below





What I want to know is, which of these do you think is most excruciatingly, buttock-clenchingly awful? I mean yes, there's some skill involved in clip selection and editing and whatnot, but honestly...

Poll #16651 Which is worse?
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: Just the Poll Creator, participants: 8

How far did you make it through watching General Affection?

less than ten seconds
1 (12.5%)

about thirty seconds
1 (12.5%)

the whole thing, baby
6 (75.0%)

How far did you make it through watching Ballot Ballad?

less than ten seconds
2 (25.0%)

about thirty seconds
1 (12.5%)

the whole thing, baby
5 (62.5%)

Which is worse?

General Affection
2 (25.0%)

Ballot Ballad
4 (50.0%)

I couldn't possibly choose. They're both excruciating
0 (0.0%)

What do you mean worse? They're both awesome, and no I HAVEN'T had my medication today, why do you ask?*
2 (25.0%)




* I'm allowed to ask that question cos I haven't had mine.
miss_s_b: Vince Cable's happy face (Politics: Vince - happy face)
The FT has spent a huge long article endorsing the tories, and three lines towards the end of it saying "oh by the way, in a seat where the tories aren't a choice, you might as well vote Lib Dem, they're acceptable". Many of my fellow LDs have greeted this with almost orgasmic cries of joy that a serious paper has endorsed us.

Eurgh. Basically we are cheering on the media for treating us as an adjunct to the tories, as opposed to treating us as Labour lite the way they did prior to 2010. Are we so inured to attack from the press that we'll treat ANY crumb from the rich man's table as a five star seven course feast? Well, clearly we are. And we're HELPING them with that "we'd give the tories a heart & labour a brain" graphic.

I am NOT a heart for a Tory.
I am NOT a brain for Labour.
I am a Liberal, and while I'm a pragmatic liberal and will therefore WORK with others, I'm buggered if I'm going to be somebody's comedy sidekick, or celebrate that the FT (or the Economist for that matter) thinks I am.

ETA: goes double for the Grauniad saying "vote Labour (unless you're in an LD tory marginal)" too
miss_s_b: (Default)

Disappointing Songs

Tuesday, April 28th, 2015 10:23 pm
miss_s_b: (Music: Progtastic Rock Wankman)
James and I are discussing songs with really awesome intros, where the actual song comes as a disappointment afterwards. Not that the song is necessarily bad, per se, but that the intro is SO good that the rest of the song can't help but pale behind it.

We both agree on Pinball Wizard by The Who.

I suggested Crazy Train by Ozzy Osbourne, which for the first 30 seconds is all dark drama & then suddenly becomes Status Quo. Also Phantom of the Opera by Iron Maiden and I Fought the Law by the Clash - both of which I LOVE but the intro is definitely the best bit.

James suggested 20th Century Boy by T Rex, A View to a Kill by Duran Duran, & (somewhat controversially in my view) One Vision by Queen - although I'll admit it does sag a bit in the middle.

What would your picks be?
miss_s_b: (Politics: Democracy)
In the parliamentary election:

1, Alisdair Calder McGregor, Liberal Democrats
2, Joe Stead, World Peace Through Song
3, Jenny Shepherd, Green
4, Rod Sutcliffe, Yorkshire First
5, RON
6, Josh Fenton-Glynn, Labour
7, Craig Whittaker, Conservative
8, Paul Rogan, UKIP

If there were a pirate or a loony they'd go in at #2 and renumber the rest accordingly.

In the council election:

1, Jennie Rigg, Liberal Democrats*
2, RON
3, Green candidate who doesn't live in - or even near - the ward
4, TUSC person I've never heard of
5, Nick Yates, who is flying under a UKIP flag of convenience at the moment but is actually a reasonable chap, and only got put THIS low down because of the UKIP flag of convenience.
6, Sitting Tory councillor who thinks it's funny to keep using a photo of my mum on his leaflets
7, Labour tribalist who is so aggressive and vituperative on twitter that I blocked him well over a year ago.

One thing which occurs, which hopefully someone more well versed than me will be able to answer: how would a deposit system for candidates work under STV? Would you have to get a certain percentage of first preferences? Or would it go on overall position?



* it took a LOT of thinking about to decide that one ;) Seriously, though, I do think it's a bit weird that you can vote for yourself, although I totally will be doing - just with a cross, sadly, not a 1.

About This Blog

picture of Jennie Rigg

Hello! I'm Jennie (known to many as SB, due to my handle, or The Yorksher Gob because of my old blog's name). This blog is my public face; click here for a list of all the other places you can find me on t'interwebs.






Flattr this

Ebuzzing - Top Blogs Ebuzzing - Top Blogs - Politics





Goodreads: Book reviews, recommendations, and discussion




==================
Charities I support:

The Survivors' Trust - donate here
DogsTrust - donate here
CAB - donate here

==================


Creative Commons License
Miss SB by Jennie Rigg is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
Based on a work at miss-s-b.dreamwidth.org.

Please note that any and all opinions expressed in this blog are subject to random change at whim my own, and not necessarily representative of my party, or any of the constituent parts thereof (except myself, obviously).

Printed by Dreamwidth Studios, Maryland USA. Promoted by Jennie Rigg, of Brighouse, West Yorkshire.

Subscribe

RSS Atom

May 2015

M T W T F S S
     1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Style Credit

Page generated Monday, May 25th, 2015 11:23 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios