Nick Clegg speaks at the Liberal Democrat spring conference in York last month. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

The progressive Lib Dem policies that no one knows about

How many know that the party still aspires to abolish tuition fees and plans to review the bedroom tax? 

When I wrote last week that Lib Dem MPs who had supported party policy by voting against an increase in university tuition fees were likely to receive some sort of credit for this from the electorate in 2015, a senior political journalist asked me if I hadn’t got that the wrong way round – that surely the rebels had voted against party policy?

But in fact this wasn’t the case. Lib Dems who trooped through the lobby supporting the government were in fact the actual rebels, whereas those who voted against the government were - in party terms – bowing to the will of conference and towing the line. Indeed, party policy is to review the system after next year's election with a view to abolishing tuition fees altogether. A fact that I suspect eludes most people.

And there lies the biggest issue for the Lib Dems at present. If senior political correspondents get confused about the minutiae of party policy, what chance for an electorate where nine in 10 voters fail to recognise a photograph of the Secretary of State for Defence, and the Foreign Secretary frequently gets confused with Ross Kemp?

We saw another example of this type of contradiction the other day on the bedroom tax. You might imagine that the bedroom tax enjoys the support of the Lib Dems, but in fact party policy is to review it, Nick Clegg has ordered said review and when you know that, suddenly Tim Farron's intervention against the tax last week all makes sense. Or at least, it makes sense until 24 hours later the majority of Lib Dem peers end up supporting it.

It’s almost like we want to confuse people.

It is into this vacuum that well-written and provocative contributions like Jeremy Browne's new book get confused with party policy and a set of proposals, approved by conference, ready to present to the electorate as a programme for government. And before you know it, you’re being asked whether it's true that the Lib Dems will cut the top rate of tax for the rich on the day that we take thousands more at that the other end of the scale out of income tax altogether. Which doesn’t help. And that’s not Jeremy’s fault – it’s his job to say what he thinks.

The next month will see Lib Dems campaigning hard on one policy that we are both clear about and well known for – our support for the UK’s membership of the European Union. But after that, we need to start filling in the void on every other policy area – because we’ll have just 12 months to tell people what it is we actually believe. 

At the moment – EU and the Mansion Tax aside – I’m not sure many people actually know. 

Richard Morris blogs at A View From Ham Common, which was named Best New Blog at the 2011 Lib Dem Conference

Richard Morris blogs at A View From Ham Common, which was named Best New Blog at the 2011 Lib Dem Conference

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Like it or hate it, it doesn't matter: Brexit is happening, and we've got to make a success of it

It's time to stop complaining and start campaigning, says Stella Creasy.

A shortage of Marmite, arguments over exporting jam and angry Belgians. And that’s just this month.  As the Canadian trade deal stalls, and the government decides which cottage industry its will pick next as saviour for the nation, the British people are still no clearer getting an answer to what Brexit actually means. And they are also no clearer as to how they can have a say in how that question is answered.

To date there have been three stages to Brexit. The first was ideological: an ever-rising euroscepticism, rooted in a feeling that the costs the compromises working with others require were not comparable to the benefits. It oozed out, almost unnoticed, from its dormant home deep in the Labour left and the Tory right, stoked by Ukip to devastating effect.

The second stage was the campaign of that referendum itself: a focus on immigration over-riding a wider debate about free trade, and underpinned by the tempting and vague claim that, in an unstable, unfair world, control could be taken back. With any deal dependent on the agreement of twenty eight other countries, it has already proved a hollow victory.

For the last few months, these consequences of these two stages have dominated discussion, generating heat, but not light about what happens next. Neither has anything helped to bring back together those who feel their lives are increasingly at the mercy of a political and economic elite and those who fear Britain is retreating from being a world leader to a back water.

Little wonder the analogy most commonly and easily reached for by commentators has been that of a divorce. They speculate our coming separation from our EU partners is going to be messy, combative and rancorous. Trash talk from some - including those in charge of negotiating -  further feeds this perception. That’s why it is time for all sides to push onto Brexit part three: the practical stage. How and when is it actually going to happen?

A more constructive framework to use than marriage is one of a changing business, rather than a changing relationship. Whatever the solid economic benefits of EU membership, the British people decided the social and democratic costs had become too great. So now we must adapt.

Brexit should be as much about innovating in what we make and create as it is about seeking to renew our trading deals with the world. New products must be sought alongside new markets. This doesn’t have to mean cutting corners or cutting jobs, but it does mean being prepared to learn new skills and invest in helping those in industries that are struggling to make this leap to move on. The UK has an incredible and varied set of services and products to offer the world, but will need to focus on what we do well and uniquely here to thrive. This is easier said than done, but can also offer hope. Specialising and skilling up also means we can resist those who want us to jettison hard-won environmental and social protections as an alternative. 

Most accept such a transition will take time. But what is contested is that it will require openness. However, handing the public a done deal - however well mediated - will do little to address the division within our country. Ensuring the best deal in a way that can garner the public support it needs to work requires strong feedback channels. That is why transparency about the government's plans for Brexit is so important. Of course, a balance needs to be struck with the need to protect negotiating positions, but scrutiny by parliament- and by extension the public- will be vital. With so many differing factors at stake and choices to be made, MPs have to be able and willing to bring their constituents into the discussion not just about what Brexit actually entails, but also what kind of country Britain will be during and after the result - and their role in making it happen. 

Those who want to claim the engagement of parliament and the public undermines the referendum result are still in stages one and two of this debate, looking for someone to blame for past injustices, not building a better future for all. Our Marmite may be safe for the moment, but Brexit can’t remain a love it or hate it phenomenon. It’s time for everyone to get practical.