I can’t support the coalition anymore

I never wanted to have to write this post, but I just can't do it any more. I can't go on while being kicked in the face by the government and still support it.

I have to admit, I'm not very happy with the coalition from a personal prospective. I earn just a few hundred pounds over the new 50% tax band threshold* (this was an error I meant 40%). Which in itself is fine, I don't mind paying 50% tax on this income. But this put me in the squeezed middle. The movement of the threshold will result in my partner from 2013 will no longer receive child support for my son, a loss of over £1,000. National Insurance is also going up above £35k.

The government have also cut the office where my partner worked. This means that I am the only income earner as we can't really afford to pay for childcare despite the support provided with child care vouchers which would cover about 10%-15% of the cost if working full time.

Also I only live in a one bed flat so I need to move however I don't have the equity for a 10% deposit (flat has gone down in value) so I will need to rent. That's fine I'm not asking for a council house (although I won't expect to get one if I tried, and if I did it would take too long). If the banks offered some better mortgage deals which accepted lower deposits then perhaps this would help. Why are the government not doing more to encourage the banks to lend at better rates?

Before you say it was my choice to have a baby. Actually due to a medical condition we thought that we could not have children. But low and behold we have had a son (Landon), a miracle baby. We won't have an apportion for us its not right (although I fully support the rights of other to have them) and we didn't know if we could ever have this chance again. So actually we had no choice and I'm extremely happy we had a wonderful son.

I also understand that I'm still lucky to live in Britain and not many countries where these benefits would not be paid. But as these benefits exist, should couples like us should not be encourage to live apart to get greater benefits for our son. Surely it is unfair to have one family earning £80k (£40k each) to still receive child benefit when a family earning just over £40k lose this benefit.

So I can no longer support the coalition as it is detrimental to the up bringing of my son. I blame the banks and the last government for the financial mess we are in as a country but I also blame the coalition for the way the taxes and cuts are being distributed. I still support the Liberal Democrats as I believe in what they/we stand for as an independent party. However many Tories or Lib Dems never voted for a child benefit cut which although progressive is essentially unfair to many families in similar positions and does not encourage families to say together.

* This was an error I meant 40%

Killer Lib Dem

Or this may as well be the headline of this Guardian article here on Chris Jefferies who has been arrested but not charged with the murder of Joanna Yeates.

 

The article is covered in Lib Dems references and quotes because among other things Chris Jefferies was a Lib Dem Activist.

 

H/T to @kiramadeira for her tweet 'Still really confused by the Lib Dem focus here? Vile RT @guardiannews: Joanna Yeates landlord Chris Jefferies'

Ed Miliband is after me

Ed Miliband has asked Lib Dems to help draw up Labour policy. I'm not sure how I can get involved in this. but I am tempted.

 

I guess this is a political ploy to split the Lib Dems between left and right. This won't be as easy as Ed thinks as many Lib Dems are left and right across a number of issues. Plus I haven't forgotten what Ed said "that he had a plan to make the Lib Dems an endangered species, and then extinct".

 

Also think its a myth that orange bookers are on the right, they just have a different strategy on how to raise people out of poverty which on the face of it appears more right wing. However if successful the orange book plans could raise higher numbers out of poverty then simply using the benefits system. Of course neither yellow or orange book plans are in full action within the coalition.

 

I disagree with Ed Miliband on his comments on areas of common interest like social mobility. It is an interest of the Lib Dems of course, using the pupil premium for example to help address this. However I feel under labour some people became stuck in poverty rather than given both carrots and sticks to climb out of poverty. The UK still does not feel socially mobile after having a Labour government for such a long time.

 

Labour also need to remember that to win over Lib Dems they need to address Labours record on civil liberties and centralisation. Lid Dems are fans of localisation, Liberty and left wing reforms such as prison reform as well as progressive politics.

 

There is no home for me in Labour but I am always willing to listen. Lets see what they come up with.

Some Lib Dems planned to abandon tuition fees pledge

Lets face it. Lib Dems members knew one thing about coalitions. The minor party generally does badly in the next general election. So we knew this was going to be hard. But damn it, this is very difficult indeed.

The headline should really read 'A small group of Lib Dems planned to abandon the fees pledge'. This is because the same Lib Dems who were part of the negotiation team are the same Lib Dems who knew what was in the negociation document. So it's really they who planned to abandon the pledge. The rest of us had no idea.

Nick Clegg did try to get the Liberal Democrats to drop this policy and he failed. Because the Liberal Democrats are a democratic party it meant that he didn't have that much control over policy and has to accept some polices voted on by the party members.

As I said in A pledge is a pledge. End of . There is not much defence to a pledge. To pictures of you standing infront of a pledge, when knowing that the two parties you may have to negociate with both support tuition fees and won't pull back on it. Knowing times are hard and this would not be affordable. This was the big error. Perhaps the biggest error Clegg and the negociation team made. For a group of people so clever it is quite shocking that they didn't back away some MP's including themselves from this pledge.

It is right in a first past the post election system for the rest of the party to remain ignorant of the negociation document because you have to fight for a government not for a coalition. However I think now we have had a recent coaltion perhaps we should release some details of our priorities for negociation before the next election so atleast people will understand the difference between negotiable policy and non negotiable policy. I still feel that the Lib Dems where caught between a rock and a hard place after the electorate cast their vote.

I would also add that perhaps a policy to scrap tuition fees was not as fair as it first seems. Me and my brother did not go to university but my mum still paid through her taxes for others to go to uni. This doesn't seem fair. So I think it is more fair for graduates to pay something torwards their university education. The new system is like a back door graduate tax. It is a progressive system. The main problem with it is the cost or rather the cuts to higher education. I agree with some cuts because I don't think the state should pay the full cost but its the high level of cuts that have made the new system so expensive.


It's worth listening to Stephen Nolan on last night show with Rob Wilson MP who wrote the book where this detail is revealed. Iain Dale, Mehdi Hasan, Dr Evan Harris and Helen Duffett discussing this topic from about 1.45 hours in. click here.

Have Lib Dems lost their innocence‏?

The problem with being out of power is that people accuse the party of not being capable of being in power and of having high and mighty ideas that in reality are not practical. This practicality of policy takes a tougher test when spending needs to be cut. The reality test is something Labour may have to consider at some point during the next few years as you can't campaign on making cuts later if there is not a recession and that time has passed.

Of course I would say that Lib Dem policies were practical and great steps have been made to justify the cost of these policies in recent times. But now the Lib Dem's can say look we can handle power. Problem is we also can't say, look we are different as we have not been tainted by power. We can not appear as innocence and separate ourselves from the two bigger parties because we are now part of the same homogenous group of those that have been in government.

Making a case for being different, refreshing and for change will not perhaps be possible. It's going to be very hard to change our way of campaigning now that we have been bloodied by government.

Liberal Democrats have lost their innocence or at least I know I have. Because we are no longer the sandal wearing geeky Liberal but a suit wearing embattled Liberal.

Lib Dem Special Conference next time let the media in

I attended the Liberal Democrat Special Conference details of which have been blogged by Jennie Rigg, Mark Reckons and theuglytruthandthebeautifullies.

This meeting was not required. I thought it was brave of the Liberal Democrats to hold this conference to make amendments to the agreements and to vote on the memberships agreement. This is risky because if the party did not achieve the required 2 thirds then I believe there would of been a crisis within the party and further later confirmations votes may of been required. Can you imagine how uneasy Lib Dem MP's would of felt know that they did not have full support. The media would of also ask questions on the support amongst it members.

Was this the reason why the media were left out? Why was this meeeting a closed meeting? 100 people have left the party since the coalition agreement (im told more have join in that time). I feel the Liberal Democrats missed a trick here. There were some great speeches some of these could of made the news and atleast should of been shown on the parliament channel. Arguments for and against could of been heard and understood by the wider members and supporters.

The event was filmed as there was a large screen behind the stage. I hope all of this footage will be released as there was nothing to hide, nothing to fear and plenty of democracy that could of been shown.

If there is a next time Lib Dems, please make it an open meeting.

Update: Stephen Tall doesn't blame the Lib Dem media team for exercising some caution on this particular occasion

Election Prediction

I noticed Tory Landlord has come up with his election prediction. He believes Tories: 36%, Labour: 29%, Lib Dems: 25% Others: 10%.

Here are my prediction.

The Conservatives will win the election with a minority government short by say 10 MP's with 37% share of the vote. The Conservatives will not work with the Liberal Democrats and the Liberal Democrats will not work with them due to a disagreement on voting reform.

Labour will have an even worse day at the polls then currently predicted and will get 27% share of the vote.

Liberal Democrats share will be about 26% and will come third just, Lib Dems will only have about 90 MP's. They will still lose only one seat to the Conservatives.

UKIP will win 2 seats including Nigel Farage and the Greens will win 1 seat, Brighton. The BNP will not win in Barking, Labour will. I'm also expect say 2 Independents to win and both nationalist parties to gain a seat each.

I think whoever wins the election will become very unpopular very quickly (poison chalices) as all parties said they had no plans to raise VAT the winner would be seen as a liar because the winning party will raise VAT.

So to sum up my prediction for the most unpredictable election I have been able to vote in is.

Tories: 37%
Labour: 27%
Lib Dems: 26%
Others: 10%.

UPDATE Lib Dem Voice has a prediction post here

I have gone for the above plus, 92 Lib Dem MPs 72% turnout, PM David Cameron

Is there not already an amnesty rule?

There has been many stories about the the Liberal Democrat Policy on Immigration which I blogged 'Immigration - What to say on the doorstep'. I Think I should point out the current so called 14 years residence rule.

As far as I can find out, no main party has a plan to remove this rule. This is why Nick Clegg has been saying that the other parties are not being honest with the public.

The current 14 years residence rule works like this.

If you have remained in the United Kingdom lawfully for 10 years, or have been here for 14 years unlawfully without a deportation order issued then during that time, you may be able to apply for indefinite leave to remain or in other words periment residence.

The requirements are that evidence that you have lived in the UK for 10 or 14 years. If someone has lived in the UK lawfully for 10 years then you simply need to provide evidence that you have been granted permission to stay.

It someone has been in the UK for 14 years unlawfully then that person needs to provide evidence that they have lived here for the 14 years. You would need documents from some official sources such as your bank, school, doctor’s surgery, copy medical records etc.

Some things are taken into account these are; age, connections in the UK, personal history like character and employment record, domestic circumstances, criminal record, compassionate circumstances, and representations made on that persons behalf.

The application is normally made from within the United Kingdom. There is a fee for the application. The application is made on an application form and the person will need to prove that they have satisfied the above requirements through documentary evidence.

In some ways the Liberal Democrats plans are more strict for example you need to be able to use English which is not a current requirement.

I was going to link to the Home Office Website but the details appear to of just been removed.

Local Blog: Facebook groups in Bracknells election

A Bracknell Facebook group has been setup for the Bracknell Liberal Democrats by a Richard Doyle. There is already a national Facebook group for the Liberal Democrats (with over 127,000 members) which like this Bracknell group it was not setup by Liberal Democrat members but by a interested members of the public.

Phillip Lee the Conservative candidate also has a Facebook group here and Good bye Andrew Mackay here.

Paying When your Dead

A post on the Bracknell Liberal Democrat website by Ray Earwicker, PPC for Bracknell has raised a very interesting issue, see here.

In this post Ray talks about 'ash payments' which are made by grieving relatives to doctors. the charge is £73.50 for each cremation form they sign.

It states that 'Figures obtained by the Liberal Democrats show that almost £15million was earned nationally in 2009 by doctors signing a form to release a body for cremation'. Our local hospitals have charged a total of £39,973 for Heatherwood and Wexham Park and £62,338 for Frimley Park.

Now just think about this for a moment, this means that if someone dies the doctors get paid and that grieving families have to pay it. I really think this is wrong on principal, A charge for a death? doctors always do whatever they can to save a life and im sure don't take this fee into account, I just think this charge is unnecessary. I agree with Ray that "the government must take action". I think there is no need for these charges.

Lib Dems Become More Realistic

Nick Clegg today outlined the Liberal Democrat four priorities called 'Four steps to a Fairer Britain' which are ;

1.Fair taxes.

2. A new, fair start for all children at school.

3. A rebalanced, green economy.

4. And clean, open politics.

Nick Cleggs speech can be read here

My blog is not about this speech however its about the fact that he has delayed some of the key policies as they are too expensive and that no party is telly the truth when it comes to the required spending cuts to reduce the countries deficit.

The policies being removed from the manifesto are; extending free childcare, free personal care for the elderly, "citizen's pension" and delaying introducing free tuition fees too six years (It will now be rolled out over these 6 years - starting with final year students).

I actually agree with this as the Lib Dems do need to be more realistic on how much we can afford to spend. I also think that the Lib Dem activists should be more realistic about what is possible and therefore I agree with Nick Clegg and not with the probable back lash from Lib Dems. After all these policies have not been forgotten and will be added later when they can be afforded. But for the moment are removed so as not to cause any of the usual confusion.

I also think that the whole tax credit systems costs way too much in administration for both the government and the people requesting tax credits. Having a higher tax starting rate of £10,000 (as the Lib Dems propose) would be more simple and would infact cut administration costs.

I would also point out that no party, (Even the Conservatives) are being realistic on what we need to do to pay back Britains debt, which is why I was pleased to see that the Lib Dems are now moving in this direction.

Labour and the Tories have been going at great guns at each other recently over each partys funding gap in their policies. The holes the media and the parties have found in each others policies is all the proof you need that both parties plans do not go far enough. The parites are making promises they can't keep. This is why I'm please too see the Lib Dems getting real on their policies. Now all Parties and us (the public) need to get realistic on spending cuts.

Whats scary about this is, one of these parites will be in power this year and their plans don't appear to be ready to handle this counties money problems.

Of course we are not the only country which a deficit problem see Bracknell Blog World Debt Crisis.

New Year Love bomb by David Cameron Working?‏

There has been quite a lot of blogging from Lib Dems on the continued Love Bombing of the Lib Dems by David Cameron. David Cameron New Year message can be read here on Iain Dales Blog.

Cameron has been using the same words as Nick Clegg such as progressive politics, fairness and change. Using these words of course does not mean that the Conservative party is any of these things especially when compared to the Liberal Democrats. I really see the Lib Dems 10k tax threshold for Income Tax and National Insurance for example as a fairer tax policy then the ones offered by the other two main parties. This would give more incentive for low earns to work too, More carrot than stick.

Mark Reckons thinks that this tactic is pathetic and transparent here, Liberal Neil believes that it could back fire here and the Norfolk blogger believes that the Tories offer a false Liberalism and would cut taxes for millionaires here.

Personally I think if Cameron can get this message out to the general public that this could work for them to a point. I know the Tories have done this in the past and will be really pushing this point home during the general election. This tactic could also damage the Lib Dems vote from wavering Labour voters because they could see the Lib Dems being more like the Tory party itself and rather then changing to Lib Dems may just abstain.

Conservative Blogger JR I think has got David Cameron's tactics down to what he is trying to do. Sway a few votes in the South West of England see JR's post here. JR writes 'This is prime Lib Dem/Conservative marginal territory. There are 18 Lib Dem held seats in the region and 8 of them would need a swing of just 5% (from LD to Cons) for them to turn blue. A further 8 would be taken by the Tories if there was a 9% swing.' JR points out that the conservatives need to gain seat of the Lib Dems in order to avoid a Hung Parliament.

Im also hoping that the next general election does result in a hung parliament as I would like to see the Lib Dems have a modern taste of power (since the days of David Lloyd George (Liberal Party)). This may be scary to some (perhaps especially to non Lib Dems) but I think this would be good for the party. This would demonstrate that a vote for the Lib Dems is not wasted, showing that they can handle real power other than private members bills and all party parliamentary groups etc. After all in the short term this is the only realistic power that the Lib Dems can have other than running major city councils.

David Cameron's love bombing perhaps shows that they would be willing to have a coalition with the Lib Dems and that they are no longer feel the need to compete with Labour but are now turning there attentions to the Lib Dems.

Local Blog - Questions For South Central Ambulance Service After Weak Performance‏

I attended the Reading Housing, Health & Community Care Scrutiny Panel in order to raise some questions after a recent comment left on this blog here. This was chaired by Redlands, Reading Lib Dem Councillor Daisy Benson, she has written a report on this meeting here.

This was after the Care Quality Commission rated the South Central Ambulance Trust performance for attending calls on time as 'Weak' See Bracknell Blog story here.

The South Central Ambulance trust gave a detailed presentation of why they had preformed as 'weak' in the report and explained how they were going to meet the target. The main reasons given were;

1. Increase in Demand from many area of society (i.e. Drunks and nursing homes, end of life.), Psychiatric referrals.

2. Effective 90 second drop in call time due to changes in the way the call is measured (i.e. from the start of the call not when the ambulance is sent). This required an improvement of 26%, the service achieved 19% improvement.

3. Difficulties in recruiting staff as many services were recruiting staff (including Australia) at this time to meet the new standards.

4. Degrees now required when the service could previously train the staff themselves.

5. Their own heart attack data was not correctly recorded.

6. Blood pressure was not always recorded.

7. A&E waiting effect.

After the presentation I asked a few questions.

I asked two questions the first was 'Does the pay structure of the ambulance staff adversely effect the recruitment and retainment of staff. And if so can pan and incentives be improved by offsetting against the high cost of cover/agency fees?"

The reply was quite long and included information about the agenda for change and detail about recruitment issues as listed above. (Which is the pay rate structure used by the service). They also added that they had recruited 300 additional staff.

I then asked "I do know about the agenda for change and the pay band structure but I am concerned about retaining staff as I am aware that this is an issue for some stations?", I was informed that it was not in Reading (perhaps I should of asked about Bracknell, however this was a Reading meeting so I didn't). I was also told that they have just recruited 17 more staff in the West Berkshire area. I do regret not asking about ambulance station Bracknell itself especially after the chair Councillor Daisy Benson did allow me to ask another question.

The South Central Ambulance is however confidant that they will meet the call targets (at the moment they are within the target but the winter months are normally harder to achieve). The service is also adding or added a new call centre service which allows better coordination between the 3 call centres and joined up emergency response allowing each sit to cover the other when busy.

I believe the representative from the Trust were very open and honest. The Reading councillors did raise a number of questions and there was a lot of concern about making partnerships work with other health related services to improve performance.

I was also concerned that the merger between the 4 counties of Hampshire, Berkshire, Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire that the old ambulance stock purchases for Oxford had delayed the purchase of Berkshire ambulances.

I will keep an eye on this and the other healthcares stories and attend meetings when I can, in order to raise more questions if required.

Readers of this blog may also be interested to read this story on Get Bracknell here http://www.getbracknell.co.uk/news/s/2062437_trust_action_on_child_protection where the NHS Berkshire East has been judged in a review to not be meeting the Care Quality Commission standards relating to ensuring staff can spot child abused.

Also please do go and to sign Russ Bryant Number 10 Petition can be signed here for keeping Heathwood hospital open in light of the Trusts funding issues.

Charlotte Gore - Better Than Ever?

Charlotte Gore recently changed her Blog site from a Lib Dem Blog to a non-partisan Libertarian blog (which is where her true heart really is).

I think Charlotte Gore is much better for it. Charlotte did not feel free to blog as freely as she wished. Charlotte Gore has held herself back from some articles through I expect a sense of loyalty. I also very much agree with Charlotte that the Lib Dems do have some central left tendencies. I think we are slightly held back by our central/left tendencies myself.

Charlotte Wrote "The adventurous, insatiable hungering drive for liberty, for free trade and free minds, to allow society to become whatever the individuals within make of it? As far as mainstream politics goes that idea is dead. Reds, Red Tories or Red Liberal – take your pick.

It’s not just the Lib Dems that need sorting out. It’s the whole political system and, sadly, the emphasis on voting systems and financial propriety don’t impress me much at all when on the other hand Lib Dems seem to seek the power to dictate the destiny of the British economy for our own good."

Charlotte Gore is right that the 3 main parties (yes I said it) are too socially close. Was it New Labour that did it? By moving Labour to the right they also managed to move the rest of us to the left, to become less radical and more moderate. Is this the real reason for low turnouts? lack of Blatant clear choice? Both the Tories and Lib Dem change slogans don't appear to be working.

I am still a Liberal Democrat because I believe in almost all of their current policies and their values. As per the web site (http://www.libdems.org.uk/) "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.". Now I admit that's an almost impossible task but one worth going for I reckon.

The Lib Dems are however a Liberal party too and this does cause conflicts within the party as we have members who are Greens, Liberals and Social Democrats (minor left, fairness, social justice) as well as some members who are slightly to the right. Of course if the Lib Dems were a full liberal party then I think they would not survive. This is because total liberalism simply doesn't work on all issues (for example it works great in economic terms but not so well say in law enforcement).

I also don't feel this hold me back from being critical. It's worth remembering that criticising your own side is very important because they can't always be right and it’s good to learn from criticism and take it onboard.

Anyway I wish Charlotte well in her new blogging life, I think her blog is going to get better and better and do go and read That’s it. They broke me.

Also Do have a listen to http://houseofcomments.co.uk/ where Charlotte Gore talks about a non-partisan blogging the future.

How Rude Cybersquatter Website Address Update

It appears that a John Pepin currently owns www.libdem.org.uk, which is currently directed to the UKIP Website.

It also appear that John Peterson owns the web site domain http://www.labourparty.org.uk/ which is currently directed to a web site called don’t vote Labour.

These domains are owned in the hope that the parties pay a sum of money to claim the domains. See this link here on Cybersquatters.

Oddly enough it also appears that no Conservative website name has been registered other than the ones already used by the UK Conservative party or other Conservative parties.

Perhaps I should Cybersquat http://www.myconservatrives.org.uk/ with http://www.libdems.org.uk/ in the hope of getting some money from them.

Mark Pack of Lib Dem Voice has noticed that this web site has been owned for quite some time and has pointed to a numer of web sites.

Richard Gadsden has commented that "political parties do not have rights in respect of their names comparable to those held by companies or trademark holders" which would make it hard to use nominet's dispute process to reclaim the Lib Dem name.

Thanks to Steve whose blog site is http://greengabbles.wordpress.com/ and Twitter account is http://twitter.com/stevegabb for the heads-up on this article.

Irelands Yes Vote a problem for both the Tories and Lib-Dems

The Yes vote in Ireland poses a real problems for the Tories and the Lib-Dems
Now that Ireland have voted yes to the Lisbon Treaty, I see that David Cameron is promising a referendum on the treaty IF the Poles and Czechs manage to delay ratification until he wins the GE.

I understand from press reports that ratification by Poland is imminent but that there is even some sort of undercover agreement with between the Tories and the Czech President to try to delay the Czech ratification!

If this ruse fails and it is ratified by all 27 members before the Tories win, then it seems to me that Cameron will still have to promise to run a referendum on the treaty in view of the strong euroscepticism in his party and throughout the country!

Goodness knows exactly how the Lib-Dems plan to play this EU situation now?

The simplistic IN/OUT referendum the Lib-Dems have said they will promise us in their Manifesto may not come across to the average voter as being much different to a Yes/No treaty referendum promise from the Tories.

So, presumably there are not many votes to be won by making such a promise now?
But, a No result in a treaty referendum after ratification would just mean the UK would be asked to run it again until we got a Yes vote - just like Ireland, wouldnt it?

What would that achieve, other than more chaos, ditherring and confusion - and a continued half-hearted UK commitment to the EU, with UKIP and the BNP becoming increasingly active?

Can the Lib Dems still steal some votes from the eurosceptics over this situation?

I think so, but only if the Lib-Dems offer a clear middle course option in their IN/OUT referendum!

I.E,

IN as the EU stands?

IN subject to a list of specific major EU reforms that they demand on behalf of us voters? or

OUT? if they don't get them!

Unlike both the Labour and Tory parties, this would show the voters that the Lib-Dems are not only very tough negotiators for the UK's best interests, but also that they really are truly a liberal, democratic and a progressive party - offerring the prospect of a real change for democracy in the UK.

In my view this, and only this 3 choices referendum, will lay the UK's EU membership issue to rest once and for all.

And it will prove to the voters that, while the Lib Dems may be broadly supportive of our EU membership, that thay really are constructively critical of many aspects our EU membership at the same time - as I have so often heard them claim!.

Okay, I say, Lib-Dems - prove your credentials!

Billbloggs

Please note: This blog post was post by Dazmando for and on behalf of Billbloggs as a guest post.

Are conferences bad for political parties‏?

Going to the Lib Dem conference and watching the news about the conference almost feels like two completely different events. All this news about disunity is really not the case at all. Can a political party not have a conference where there is no open discussion? What would be the point of a conference where we all agreed?

I prefer politics when you don't just have a bunch of robots following every command of the leader. It is good to question them as it will produce in the end better policies.

I can predict that something will happen at the Labour and Tory party conferences where they are also shown in a bad light due to some internal disagreement. But let’s bear in mind that some of this disagreement is part of the process and we should be pleased that it exists for the good of politics.

Of course the usual positive point for any political party is the main rally, the leader’s speech at the end of the party conference. But from the public’s point of view taking a whole month of conferences into account, I do wonder if conferences are bad for political parties‏. I guess some exposure can hurt them.

Dont Believe Anything You Read Apart From This

Before reading the stories in some media like the Daily Express story of the pound being less than euro (at the time of writing its 1.10 or a tourist rate of 1.05) Its true that this could happen soon, but it is not true that it has happened at your highstreet bank. Of course behind the headline they do state that this is the price at airports around the UK. But airports are one of the most expensive ways of buying currency.

Also the headlines that the Lib Dems are dropping their policy to abolishing tuition and top-up fees is not true. Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg is proposing to delay the abolishment of tuition fees until it can be afforded now that's quite a different thing altogether. This demonstrates how hard it is to get your point across in some media outlets without a few exclusions of your words.

I am now at a point were I almost don't believe anything I read. We all know that the media often reports a certain part of a story and many papers are well known for there political alignment. The media may offer a certain twist but when reading the media (in media I include all written and TV media)

Don't simply believe a story because you want to believe it or it reinforces something you think is true. Check it out first you may find that it is simply untrue. That's one thing I have learnt from the media as there has been a few subjects I was going to blog about but when doing some research I find that there are stats on both sides of the story or other doubts.

Opinion and comment online, be it newspaper comment or blogs is different from alot of media as it is usually clear that they have a certain take on things and you have the chance to reply and put the other side of the story as soon as its published.

I may be a Lib Dem but I am very pleased to have Tories, Labour, UKIP, Greens or BNP voters and indeed undecided and non votes alike to comment and reply to this blog because discussion makes us all think and reminds us that there is always another point of view, this helps to define your own point of view.

Blogs help make the media more open and more democratic because we can get more voices out there with more sides to the story and encourage more discussion.

All the above is my opinion feel free to disagree

Can We Change the Lib Dem Manifesto on EU Membership?

EU membership?

It is a fact that a high proportion of the electorate within the UK are anti- EU.

But, do they really want the UK to leave the EU?

Let us assume that the Lib Dem party manifesto promises an IN-OUT referendum within one year of taking office.

Bearing in mind that they campaigned for such a referendum at the time of the Treaty fiasco in the Commons last year, I think they will lose much credibility if this quietly disappears!

Would this make enough of us inclined to vote for them, and might they actually be elected as a result?

They would declare themselves as being pro-EU and would be campaigning for an IN vote, so it would certainly seem a two edged sword.

Personally, I think it would win them considerably more votes, but not nearly as many as a far more meaningful referendum would.

What if the majority of the electorate really do want us to stay in the EU, but far too many of them will vote for OUT simply because they do not like the way the EU functions at present, nobody seems to listen to their complaints, and the only choice being given is IN or OUT?

What if they really only want to see the way the EU functions reformed?

Why not offer the electorate a referendum that involves two leading questions -:

Do you want the UK to leave the EU? - YES or NO

Do you want the UK to stay in the EU, but wish to see the EU reformed? - YES or NO



During the run up to this referendum the reforms desired by the electorate would become clear, and the UK would be at far less risk of a much feared protest vote for OUT.

In my view, the most democratic party out there, the one laying claim to be doing the most to reform the workings of the EU, should take note!

Billbloggs

Please note: This blog post was post by Dazmando for and on behalf of Billbloggs as a guest post.



Billbloggs has send in an email request to Nick Clegg for him to answer the above question on Sundays Q&A session with him at the Lib Dem Party conference, Billbloggs has also sent a letter to the Lib-Dem news on the above subject for publication.

Mr 10 Percent can I have some more Please!

David Cameron has proposed a number of reforms that he plans to implement if the Conservatives are elected.

I am not going to go over all these reforms here as they have been well reported on. However one of the proposals is reducing the number of MP's by 10 percent from 650 to 585. This on the face of it appears to be a good idea however;

This would result in ever more people not being represented unless we change the voting system to a proportional one. This is because at the moment under the first past the post system we have way too many safe seats (see Mark Reakons report here) Since the 1970 some 50% of seats have never changed hands. If the constituencies are bigger then it follows that they could have even bigger majorities surely the same will happen again. We will still have way too many safe seats. Safe seats that allow career politicians allow the parachuting in of party leaders chosen few and were a contribution element to the expenses scandal.

If the number of MPs are to be introduced then surely its best to actually reduce the size of the government too in line with this change, Do we need so many junior ministers, should we have party whips? Can the senior civil servants be reduced, Do we need so many ministers in-fact we now have around 120 including whips while during world war two we only had 74 how did we win the war with only (almost) half as many!

I believe the Single Transferable Vote or STV would remove these safe seats and should be introduced as part of a reduction of MP's. Of course the Lib Dems have always believed in proportional representation, as it is a fairer system.

STV would also have other benefits of giving more representation to people of candidates they actually voted for, Less wasted votes, balanced list of candidates to win your vote, more competition and more choice, no need for tactical voting,

We should have a PR system anyway but there is an even bigger requirement for STV with less MP's.

An explanation of STV can be found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote


Also see http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/article.php?id=104

And http://www.stvaction.org.uk/