I was interviewed at teatime by Radio Four for their new iPM slot, a new podcast support to the PM show. The have entitled the piece "Ming Campbell - My part in his downfall", although that is massively overstating the case.
I do feel, and made clear a number of times to the interviewer, that bloggers are more of a litmus test for the party, and whilst we didn't fire the shots, we might be guilty sometimes of loading the weapon.
The printed press, of course, would like the Party and bloggers to take the rap for Ming's demise, but again, I made the point that we are not all "in the know", and tend to report and comment in our blogs on things that the press and media are reporting.
Anyway, I am sure I rambled on too much, but you can click HERE to go to the iPM website. I'd be interested to hear your views.
Update : I changed the headline from "Lib Dem Bloggers" to "Norfolk Blogger" when I realised I was the only person who had been interviewed.
Showing posts with label Ming Campbell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ming Campbell. Show all posts
10/16/2007
10/15/2007
Ming's resignation is certainly not news to revel in, but it is cause for relief
I am sorry it has come to this point, but Ming Campbell's resignation as leader was required if the party was not to suffer a dreadful fate at the next election.
It is clear that Ming himself knew that he could not brazen things out until 2009 and has accepted the inevitable that a new leader is needed to ensure the party makes progress. He should be thanked for showing that wisdom.
As someone who had met Ming, supported him in his leadership campaign and rather likes him as a person and spokesman for the party, I am very relieved that he has decided to go because there was a real danger of all the good Ming has done being erased by the damage his leadership was doing to the party in the polls and in real elections.
I certainly don't revel in it, but I am mightily relieved.
It is clear that Ming himself knew that he could not brazen things out until 2009 and has accepted the inevitable that a new leader is needed to ensure the party makes progress. He should be thanked for showing that wisdom.
As someone who had met Ming, supported him in his leadership campaign and rather likes him as a person and spokesman for the party, I am very relieved that he has decided to go because there was a real danger of all the good Ming has done being erased by the damage his leadership was doing to the party in the polls and in real elections.
I certainly don't revel in it, but I am mightily relieved.
10/13/2007
Idle chatter from an occasional dissident
Criticising Ming Campbell is, in his words "Idle chatter from an occasional dissident". If only it were true.
I, like many others, tempered my criticism of Ming in the run up to the phoney election because we knew that speaking out loud on this issue would affect the party. Now, with the phoney election out of the way, we need to return to the issue at hand, and that is whether Ming Campbell is the best person to lead us in to the general election in 18 months time.
if we are saying that he is, then what does it say about the Liberal Democrats as a party. We have a leader who had great qualities, but does not command the respect of the public, is seen as ineffective, and lacks the political sense to be able to judge the country's and party's mood on the Euro reform treaty, working with Labour and a host of other issues.
Are we really that short of talent that we don't have anyone better ? For that is what the Ming supporters are saying. We have nobody better able to lead the party in to an election.
If they are correct, if Ming's supporters are right, then we ought to seriously consider the way we vet our candidates and re-evaluate the way the party recruits because we must, absolutely must, ensure we have MP's who can command public respect, are politically savvy, but most importantly, are able to inspire the general public, and it is this area that Ming sadly fails in.
Ming today claimed that speculation surrounding him is " idle chatter from an occasional dissident", but the problem is that we have fewer and fewer dissidents because most people, unlike me, are reacting to Ming by turning their affections to another political party. They don't speak out against Ming because the 5% frop in the party's support in the polls means that they are speaking highliy of the new party they support, not harking back to the Lib Dems.
I know, I will get lots of abuse and I will, like last time have some very literate big wig in the party write a fully researched piece of text that points out that I am wrong in every part of what I have said. However, do the opinion polls really tell us lies ? Were the Scottish and Welsh elections really wrong ? Were the local elections proof enough ?
Anyone who argues that the Tories failed to improve their position because they replaced Duncan-Smith with Howard was obviously not involved in fighting the Tories at the last election. IDS was, like Ming, respected and well liked. On a personal level people tell me too that is a real gentleman. However, the Tories knew he was leading them to a worse defeat than in 2001, so they acted.
For all the Lib Dem success at the last general election, we should remember we only won 62 seats. If we fail to do better than that, and the polls and recent elections suggest we won't, then we need a leader in charge now who can improve our position.
Some in the Liberal Democrats may want the press to go away and stop running stories about Ming, but the fact that Ming has had to launch yet another comeback and we are still struggling in the polls shows the press are not simply making things up. there is a problem, there is a boil, but nobody has the guts to lance it for fear of the pain.
I, like many others, tempered my criticism of Ming in the run up to the phoney election because we knew that speaking out loud on this issue would affect the party. Now, with the phoney election out of the way, we need to return to the issue at hand, and that is whether Ming Campbell is the best person to lead us in to the general election in 18 months time.
if we are saying that he is, then what does it say about the Liberal Democrats as a party. We have a leader who had great qualities, but does not command the respect of the public, is seen as ineffective, and lacks the political sense to be able to judge the country's and party's mood on the Euro reform treaty, working with Labour and a host of other issues.
Are we really that short of talent that we don't have anyone better ? For that is what the Ming supporters are saying. We have nobody better able to lead the party in to an election.
If they are correct, if Ming's supporters are right, then we ought to seriously consider the way we vet our candidates and re-evaluate the way the party recruits because we must, absolutely must, ensure we have MP's who can command public respect, are politically savvy, but most importantly, are able to inspire the general public, and it is this area that Ming sadly fails in.
Ming today claimed that speculation surrounding him is " idle chatter from an occasional dissident", but the problem is that we have fewer and fewer dissidents because most people, unlike me, are reacting to Ming by turning their affections to another political party. They don't speak out against Ming because the 5% frop in the party's support in the polls means that they are speaking highliy of the new party they support, not harking back to the Lib Dems.
I know, I will get lots of abuse and I will, like last time have some very literate big wig in the party write a fully researched piece of text that points out that I am wrong in every part of what I have said. However, do the opinion polls really tell us lies ? Were the Scottish and Welsh elections really wrong ? Were the local elections proof enough ?
Anyone who argues that the Tories failed to improve their position because they replaced Duncan-Smith with Howard was obviously not involved in fighting the Tories at the last election. IDS was, like Ming, respected and well liked. On a personal level people tell me too that is a real gentleman. However, the Tories knew he was leading them to a worse defeat than in 2001, so they acted.
For all the Lib Dem success at the last general election, we should remember we only won 62 seats. If we fail to do better than that, and the polls and recent elections suggest we won't, then we need a leader in charge now who can improve our position.
Some in the Liberal Democrats may want the press to go away and stop running stories about Ming, but the fact that Ming has had to launch yet another comeback and we are still struggling in the polls shows the press are not simply making things up. there is a problem, there is a boil, but nobody has the guts to lance it for fear of the pain.
9/16/2007
Ming on Sunday AM
On Andrew Marr's programme this morning Ming rejoiced in telling Andrew Marr that the Lib Dems had
"pushed the Tories in to second place in Ealing and Sedgefield"
THIRD PLACE Ming, THIRD !!!!
"pushed the Tories in to second place in Ealing and Sedgefield"
THIRD PLACE Ming, THIRD !!!!
How many times do you say something before it seems somewhat forced ?
Nick Clegg did a good job of defending Ming's position on the EU constitution this morning on GMTV, although this may well be that as a former MEP Nick thinks as Ming does on this subject even if the feeling is that the membership and parliamentary party would prefer a referendum
There was, however, one answer to a question that stood out for me, and that was when he stressed his continued support for Ming.
In answer to the Steve Richards question "There are continuing questions, in some ways they've intensified rather than gone away, about the leadership of Ming Campbell, do you want him; are you absolutely certain he will be your leader up to the next election? "
Nick Clegg's answer included this "I fully, fully, fully support him in doing that"
One "fully" indicates your support. A "fully, fully" shows your true support. But three, a "fully, fully, fully" seemed a little forced, a little over eagre.
I'm sure I am reading too much in to it.
What was interesting was that Nick Clegg singled out the four potential front runners in any future (post general election) leadership race when he added " Ming moved with extraordinary speed to calm the nerves of the party, and then take a risk frankly, a gamble with people like me, David Laws, Chris Huhne, Norman Lamb and others putting us in important positions in the party, allowing us to create new ideas."
My overriding feeling from Nick Clegg is that he would make a fantastic leader. A know Tories who mix in Westminster circles who say they admire Nick Clegg and that Toy MP's genuine fear him as a future leader. Certainly despite is "fully, fully, fully" seeming a little over dramatic and forced, he did nothing on GMTV to suggest that he would make the same mistakes that Ming has in recent months.
There was, however, one answer to a question that stood out for me, and that was when he stressed his continued support for Ming.
In answer to the Steve Richards question "There are continuing questions, in some ways they've intensified rather than gone away, about the leadership of Ming Campbell, do you want him; are you absolutely certain he will be your leader up to the next election? "
Nick Clegg's answer included this "I fully, fully, fully support him in doing that"
One "fully" indicates your support. A "fully, fully" shows your true support. But three, a "fully, fully, fully" seemed a little forced, a little over eagre.
I'm sure I am reading too much in to it.
What was interesting was that Nick Clegg singled out the four potential front runners in any future (post general election) leadership race when he added " Ming moved with extraordinary speed to calm the nerves of the party, and then take a risk frankly, a gamble with people like me, David Laws, Chris Huhne, Norman Lamb and others putting us in important positions in the party, allowing us to create new ideas."
My overriding feeling from Nick Clegg is that he would make a fantastic leader. A know Tories who mix in Westminster circles who say they admire Nick Clegg and that Toy MP's genuine fear him as a future leader. Certainly despite is "fully, fully, fully" seeming a little over dramatic and forced, he did nothing on GMTV to suggest that he would make the same mistakes that Ming has in recent months.
9/15/2007
And nobody believed me ...
I wrote the other day of impending resignations from the Lib Dems in the wake of Ming's decision to stop the Lib Dems supporting a referendum on the EU constitution. At the time, people's comments were generally along the lines that I was speaking rubbish.
So this blog posting must be a figment of the imagination then ?
So this blog posting must be a figment of the imagination then ?
Has Ming lost it or has he pulled off a master stroke ?
After saying that we do not need a referendum on the EU constitution just days ago, Ming Campbell has now suddenly announced that instead we should have a referendum on whether we should or should remain in the EU at all. I am not sure if it is a master stroke or utter folly.
For someone like me, who is Euro sceptical and has concerns about any attempts to extend qualified majority voting (QMV), I would seriously have to wonder whether voting to leave the EU would actually be the best way of opposing the Euro constitution, and therefore others who might conceivably have supported the EU might be forced to vote for withdrawal.
This could, were it not for the EU constitution debate, be seen as an absolute master stroke. It would woo, perhaps on temporarily, many UKIP and anti EU's in to the Lib Dem camp because it would mean that the more Lib Dems that are elected means the more likelihood of a debate and a vote on the whole future of the EU.
I have for some time argued that for pro EU people to win the argument, a national debate and a vote of some kind is required. The general feeling amongst the electorate is that we were tricked in to joining the EEC, we were tricked in the EEC referendum, and since then various government, but mainly the Tories, (specifically Margaret Thatcher when she signed the Single European Act) have given away powers to the EU without any reference to the British people's opinions on the subject. There is a general feeling of mistrust about the EU that goes far deeper than people's mistrust for our own parliament. Yes, this is stoked up and fueled by the British press, but it exists, and a referendum is going to be required at some point.
The question is though, for all the positives about this idea from Ming, what happens now ? If it is to mean anything then this policy must feature highly on ALL election material. We must sell it to everyone, both pro and anti EU. They need to know that only the Lib Dems will given them this unique opportunity. Indeed, this policy could be seen as one of the most important ways in which the Lib Dems can get at some groups of voters that we have never been able to target properly in the past.
There is, however, one fly in the ointment. It means in the short term that we as a party are going to blindly vote through the EU constitution, and no doubt any other piece of EU legislation because of the "catch all" referendum that we would promise at some distant point in the future if we ever had a Lib Dem government. That puts us in an awkward situation with the electorate and actually makes our MP's pretty powerless in parliament.
if we are saying we will only do things when we get in to power then we are saying that you can achieve nothing in opposition, which I don't think is true. Our MP's can be seen ion the intervening period as true campaigner for the people. Our cry should be "let the people decide on the EU Constitution". Instead, only the Tories will be able to say this.
I guess the jury is out on whether Ming's new referendum on the whole EU project is inspired or mad. If he had offered a referendum on that and the EU constitution, I have no doubt it would have been inspired. As it is, the message "We don't trust the people to have a referendum on the EU Constitution but we trust you to have one on EU membership" seems very muddled.
For someone like me, who is Euro sceptical and has concerns about any attempts to extend qualified majority voting (QMV), I would seriously have to wonder whether voting to leave the EU would actually be the best way of opposing the Euro constitution, and therefore others who might conceivably have supported the EU might be forced to vote for withdrawal.
This could, were it not for the EU constitution debate, be seen as an absolute master stroke. It would woo, perhaps on temporarily, many UKIP and anti EU's in to the Lib Dem camp because it would mean that the more Lib Dems that are elected means the more likelihood of a debate and a vote on the whole future of the EU.
I have for some time argued that for pro EU people to win the argument, a national debate and a vote of some kind is required. The general feeling amongst the electorate is that we were tricked in to joining the EEC, we were tricked in the EEC referendum, and since then various government, but mainly the Tories, (specifically Margaret Thatcher when she signed the Single European Act) have given away powers to the EU without any reference to the British people's opinions on the subject. There is a general feeling of mistrust about the EU that goes far deeper than people's mistrust for our own parliament. Yes, this is stoked up and fueled by the British press, but it exists, and a referendum is going to be required at some point.
The question is though, for all the positives about this idea from Ming, what happens now ? If it is to mean anything then this policy must feature highly on ALL election material. We must sell it to everyone, both pro and anti EU. They need to know that only the Lib Dems will given them this unique opportunity. Indeed, this policy could be seen as one of the most important ways in which the Lib Dems can get at some groups of voters that we have never been able to target properly in the past.
There is, however, one fly in the ointment. It means in the short term that we as a party are going to blindly vote through the EU constitution, and no doubt any other piece of EU legislation because of the "catch all" referendum that we would promise at some distant point in the future if we ever had a Lib Dem government. That puts us in an awkward situation with the electorate and actually makes our MP's pretty powerless in parliament.
if we are saying we will only do things when we get in to power then we are saying that you can achieve nothing in opposition, which I don't think is true. Our MP's can be seen ion the intervening period as true campaigner for the people. Our cry should be "let the people decide on the EU Constitution". Instead, only the Tories will be able to say this.
I guess the jury is out on whether Ming's new referendum on the whole EU project is inspired or mad. If he had offered a referendum on that and the EU constitution, I have no doubt it would have been inspired. As it is, the message "We don't trust the people to have a referendum on the EU Constitution but we trust you to have one on EU membership" seems very muddled.
9/13/2007
Why would I have two different e-mails from the BBC asking for interviews ?
It is strange that we have managed to go all summer without anyone needing to have a go at Ming Campbell, and arrive just a few days short of the Party conference without the press managing to manipulate a story along the lines of "Ming must go", then Ming's announcement about the EU referendum (don't start me on that) allows the press to jump on a real story or dissent against him.
Anyone with an announce of political common sense could have prevented the press from having a chance to run these stories. but now they cannot be stopped because they are true.
Why else would I have two e-mails from different parts of the BBC (Radio and TV) asking for interviews ?
I am not going to do them, but anyone who does cannot be blamed because had Ming had an ounce of sense when he did his interview on the EU constitution, then all this could have been avoided.
Anyone with an announce of political common sense could have prevented the press from having a chance to run these stories. but now they cannot be stopped because they are true.
Why else would I have two e-mails from different parts of the BBC (Radio and TV) asking for interviews ?
I am not going to do them, but anyone who does cannot be blamed because had Ming had an ounce of sense when he did his interview on the EU constitution, then all this could have been avoided.
Members to quit in wake of Ming's referendum "no" ?
Having spoke to one or two people I know, largely by e-mail, but a couple face to face in the wake of Ming's refusal to let the British people decide if we should accept the new EU constitution, I am amazed at the number of people who say they are quite prepared to quit the party over the issue.
Sadly, given comments like these from some Lib Dem bloggers, the feeling seems to be that you can only ask for a referendum on this issue at the general election, and given the party's policy at the moment, someone like me can only express their wish to have a referendum by voting Tory. I am afraid that I have opposed the Conservative party throughout my political life, but if others feel like I do about the issue, and people are already telling me that they are prepared to quit the party, then Ming is going to have real problems, and the party could be heading for disaster.
What an absolute own goal and, yet again, a sure sign that Ming has got no political awareness about what real people want from the Lib Dems. Members will leave over this intransigence.
Sadly, given comments like these from some Lib Dem bloggers, the feeling seems to be that you can only ask for a referendum on this issue at the general election, and given the party's policy at the moment, someone like me can only express their wish to have a referendum by voting Tory. I am afraid that I have opposed the Conservative party throughout my political life, but if others feel like I do about the issue, and people are already telling me that they are prepared to quit the party, then Ming is going to have real problems, and the party could be heading for disaster.
What an absolute own goal and, yet again, a sure sign that Ming has got no political awareness about what real people want from the Lib Dems. Members will leave over this intransigence.
9/12/2007
Ming is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong !
It is being reported by Shane Greer on Iain Dale's blog that Ming has ruled out the Lib Dems supporting a referendum on having an EU constitution. If so, what a catastrophic and misguided political move it could prove to be.
Ming may support the EU, but most British people are now deeply sceptical of the EU. This does not mean they are anti it, but a further deepening of the EU's powers, or indeed for that matter a taking away of EU powers needs to have the approval of the British people. If the EU constitution is 96% similar to the old constitution then people will want to vote on it. After all, the last constitution apparently did need a referendum.
And for those who support the EU, don;t be under any misapprehension that you are going to strengthen the EU and people's faith in it by getting the new Constitution through without a referendum. The only way to really engage people in the EU and make people like it again is to have a referendum, win the argument and sell the EU to everyone.
By denying the party the right to say that we trust the people on leaflets in a forthcoming election we leaving Lib Dem candidates hamstrung around the country. Ming is wrong on this.
Ming may support the EU, but most British people are now deeply sceptical of the EU. This does not mean they are anti it, but a further deepening of the EU's powers, or indeed for that matter a taking away of EU powers needs to have the approval of the British people. If the EU constitution is 96% similar to the old constitution then people will want to vote on it. After all, the last constitution apparently did need a referendum.
And for those who support the EU, don;t be under any misapprehension that you are going to strengthen the EU and people's faith in it by getting the new Constitution through without a referendum. The only way to really engage people in the EU and make people like it again is to have a referendum, win the argument and sell the EU to everyone.
By denying the party the right to say that we trust the people on leaflets in a forthcoming election we leaving Lib Dem candidates hamstrung around the country. Ming is wrong on this.
8/28/2007
Clever ploy by Ming derails Tory relaunch
Tory plans to take control of the news agenda today with the relaunch (or re-hash) of their crime policies have been dealt a clever blow by Ming Campbell's decision to take on Gordon Brown over troop withdrawals from Iraq.
In what should have been a low news day, the Tories might have expected unobstructed top of the news headlines coverage all day with "Dave" doing his tour of the studios. Instead the main news story and the lead on the radio news has been "Gordon Brown rejects Lib Dem calls for immediate troop withdrawals from Iraq".
Ming and his team have sensibly brought up the issue of Iraq at just the right time, with increasing pressure on the government to withdraw from Iraq and silence from the Tories on the subject of the war (after all, they banged the drum in support of the war even louder than Labour did), it is as well to remind the general public that the Lib Dems were right on Iraq all along.
So well done Ming. Let's be wiser in the future too in making sure that the Tories are not given a free run at releasing news stories to a press that are desperate for news. We need to get the Lib Dem message across more effectively and today shows that it can be done, if the timing is right.
In what should have been a low news day, the Tories might have expected unobstructed top of the news headlines coverage all day with "Dave" doing his tour of the studios. Instead the main news story and the lead on the radio news has been "Gordon Brown rejects Lib Dem calls for immediate troop withdrawals from Iraq".
Ming and his team have sensibly brought up the issue of Iraq at just the right time, with increasing pressure on the government to withdraw from Iraq and silence from the Tories on the subject of the war (after all, they banged the drum in support of the war even louder than Labour did), it is as well to remind the general public that the Lib Dems were right on Iraq all along.
So well done Ming. Let's be wiser in the future too in making sure that the Tories are not given a free run at releasing news stories to a press that are desperate for news. We need to get the Lib Dem message across more effectively and today shows that it can be done, if the timing is right.
7/22/2007
I'm starting a "Lib Dems for Cameron" campaign
The knives are out, the gloss has flaked away too easily from Mr Cameron and the some of the Tories have realised that if you take the outer layer away from a vacuum, you find nothing inside except an empty space.
The more I speak to people about Cameron, the more colleagues and friends tell me about what they feel, then the more I feel he is an asset to the other parties.
In simple terms, people view him as something of a toff who will say and do anything in order to gain votes whilst nobody knows what he stands for.
A few weeks ago I was blamed or accused of starting a campaign to get rid of Ming Campbell. I'm now convinced Ming is up to the job of leading us up to the next general election. However, with some Tories now realising that Cameron is performing at the same level as Iain Duncan Smith, it is vital for the Lib Dems (and Labour) that the Tories keep him, so I am officially launching the "Lib Dems for Cameron" campaign.
Tories, I urge you to keep Cameron, for the sake of the country. With your help the Lib Dems will prosper !
The more I speak to people about Cameron, the more colleagues and friends tell me about what they feel, then the more I feel he is an asset to the other parties.
In simple terms, people view him as something of a toff who will say and do anything in order to gain votes whilst nobody knows what he stands for.
A few weeks ago I was blamed or accused of starting a campaign to get rid of Ming Campbell. I'm now convinced Ming is up to the job of leading us up to the next general election. However, with some Tories now realising that Cameron is performing at the same level as Iain Duncan Smith, it is vital for the Lib Dems (and Labour) that the Tories keep him, so I am officially launching the "Lib Dems for Cameron" campaign.
Tories, I urge you to keep Cameron, for the sake of the country. With your help the Lib Dems will prosper !
7/20/2007
A week of ironic contrasts
A few weeks ago I made a few headlines by stating on my blog that I wanted to see a change in leadership of the Lib Dems. I did so because I felt Ming was not up to the task of leading the Lib Dems any further and I needed some convincing that the party could still move forward.
Yesterday's by-election results left me with the feeling that the party can move on and that although we might do better with another leader, Ming is safe and has my support (for what that is worth).
The irony is now that everyone is now looking at David Cameron and asking what he has actually done to move the Conservative Party forward. After all, Iain Duncan-Smith had a series of good results in local elections yet he too had difficulty in making any headway in parliamentary by-elections. Slipping to third in Sedgefield and the poor third in Ealing when the Tories claimed they were in a clear second place further underlines the problems Cameron has.
On Iain Dale's blog there are plenty of comments from Tories who are upset. The general feeling is that Cameron is lightweight and lack conviction. Moreover, many people are adding that unlike Tony Blair in 1994 with his Clause 4 moment and the whole forging of New Labour, David Cameron has moved further in making the Conservative something that the party's activists are not, and in that sense he has left the activists behind.
Some are already letting it be known that Ealing was a disaster whilst it has been widely pointed out that Cameron chose tony lit as the Tory candidate and that he allowed Tony lit to include David Cameron's name on the ballot paper. This says much about Cameron's judgement and his value as a vote winner. People fell over themselves to vote for Blair in 1994 thought to 1997. The situation with Cameron appears to be in direct contrast.
The question for the Tories is what do they stand for these days. When their own Ealing Southall Website is running with lies about their scale of the result yesterday, Tories everywhere need to ask is this really the vision they have of their party. Perhaps Cameron is a good bet, if he can deliver victory. But if he offers neither Conservatism of victory, then what does he offer.
The irony of the week is amusing, It started of on Monday with BBC Radio 4 doing a piece on will Ming Campbell survive, and it ends with questions now being asked about Cameron whilst Ming's position seems secure.
Yesterday's by-election results left me with the feeling that the party can move on and that although we might do better with another leader, Ming is safe and has my support (for what that is worth).
The irony is now that everyone is now looking at David Cameron and asking what he has actually done to move the Conservative Party forward. After all, Iain Duncan-Smith had a series of good results in local elections yet he too had difficulty in making any headway in parliamentary by-elections. Slipping to third in Sedgefield and the poor third in Ealing when the Tories claimed they were in a clear second place further underlines the problems Cameron has.
On Iain Dale's blog there are plenty of comments from Tories who are upset. The general feeling is that Cameron is lightweight and lack conviction. Moreover, many people are adding that unlike Tony Blair in 1994 with his Clause 4 moment and the whole forging of New Labour, David Cameron has moved further in making the Conservative something that the party's activists are not, and in that sense he has left the activists behind.
Some are already letting it be known that Ealing was a disaster whilst it has been widely pointed out that Cameron chose tony lit as the Tory candidate and that he allowed Tony lit to include David Cameron's name on the ballot paper. This says much about Cameron's judgement and his value as a vote winner. People fell over themselves to vote for Blair in 1994 thought to 1997. The situation with Cameron appears to be in direct contrast.
The question for the Tories is what do they stand for these days. When their own Ealing Southall Website is running with lies about their scale of the result yesterday, Tories everywhere need to ask is this really the vision they have of their party. Perhaps Cameron is a good bet, if he can deliver victory. But if he offers neither Conservatism of victory, then what does he offer.
The irony of the week is amusing, It started of on Monday with BBC Radio 4 doing a piece on will Ming Campbell survive, and it ends with questions now being asked about Cameron whilst Ming's position seems secure.
7/17/2007
It appears I am a dissident
I note I was the dissident voice on The World at One today on Radio 4.
To be honest, I was amazed I could do the interview at all given that I had just finished playing football, had been at the hospital the night before, my back was only just holding out, my car alarm started going off halfway through the interview, and about 50 kids were peering at me wondering why I was sat sweating in my car in a football kit in my lunch hour.
For the record, I still believe we would do better with Nick Clegg or Chris Huhne as Leader, and I stand by that. There will be people who would accuse me of stirring it up by allowing myself to be interviewed for The World At One, but I have always felt that if you are prepared to argue a point, you should have the bravery to say it to whoever asks you about it.
However, there is no doubt that the Lib Dem team in Sedgefield and Ealing Southall have played a blinder. There is every reason to hope that Ming will have a good press on Friday, and this has got to be good news for the party.
To be honest, I was amazed I could do the interview at all given that I had just finished playing football, had been at the hospital the night before, my back was only just holding out, my car alarm started going off halfway through the interview, and about 50 kids were peering at me wondering why I was sat sweating in my car in a football kit in my lunch hour.
For the record, I still believe we would do better with Nick Clegg or Chris Huhne as Leader, and I stand by that. There will be people who would accuse me of stirring it up by allowing myself to be interviewed for The World At One, but I have always felt that if you are prepared to argue a point, you should have the bravery to say it to whoever asks you about it.
However, there is no doubt that the Lib Dem team in Sedgefield and Ealing Southall have played a blinder. There is every reason to hope that Ming will have a good press on Friday, and this has got to be good news for the party.
7/13/2007
Six days that will define Ming's standing in the Liberal Democrats
Whilst I took it upon myself to criticise Ming Campbell for making mistakes in his dealings with Gordon Brown and because he lacks what I would call a "relationship" with the electorate there is no doubting that the next six days will decide Ming's fate.
We all know that publicly the parliamentary party are behind Ming, but should the by-elections on Thursday fail to deliver what the party itself would call a "good" result, the outlook for Ming could be bad.
From comments I have received from Lib Dems, particularly those with contacts, there is evidence of people sharpening knives for Ming just in case Ealing Southall and Sedgefield prove to be less than expected. And this knife sharpening is not just amongst MP's. Peers too are, so I gather, less than enamoured with aspects of Ming's leadership style.
Personally, although I have come out against Ming, I am desperate for Lib Dem success next week. The sounds I have been hearing from Ealing are hopeful (Nothing should be read in to that though and used to detract from the Lib Dem effort in Sedgefield as I know nothing of the campaign there) and a good showing in the by-elections could relaunch Ming and assuage some of my doubts. I do, however, live more in hope than expectation.
We all know that publicly the parliamentary party are behind Ming, but should the by-elections on Thursday fail to deliver what the party itself would call a "good" result, the outlook for Ming could be bad.
From comments I have received from Lib Dems, particularly those with contacts, there is evidence of people sharpening knives for Ming just in case Ealing Southall and Sedgefield prove to be less than expected. And this knife sharpening is not just amongst MP's. Peers too are, so I gather, less than enamoured with aspects of Ming's leadership style.
Personally, although I have come out against Ming, I am desperate for Lib Dem success next week. The sounds I have been hearing from Ealing are hopeful (Nothing should be read in to that though and used to detract from the Lib Dem effort in Sedgefield as I know nothing of the campaign there) and a good showing in the by-elections could relaunch Ming and assuage some of my doubts. I do, however, live more in hope than expectation.
7/11/2007
Ming Campbell - The new leader of Her Majesty's Opposition
According to Iain Dale, Gordon Brown referred to Ming Campbell today as the Leader of the Opposition.
Perhaps a sign that Sedgefield and Ealing Southall are going the way of the Liberal Democrats ?
Perhaps a sign that Sedgefield and Ealing Southall are going the way of the Liberal Democrats ?
7/02/2007
Why I regret supporting Ming
We were told when Ming was standing to be party leader that Ming's greatest assets were his experience and his judgment. I now believe that these were lies.Ming has, for me, shown since his election that he lacks these.
The party has drifted in a gentle downward direction in terms of councillors and MSP's. Party membership has not picked up and the press have got it in for Ming. Ah, the press. Is that any reason to doubt him ? Well yes, in my opinion it is. Not because everything the press says is correct, far from it. However, Ming does seem slow to react, he does not have his finger on the pulse of the next generation of voters and he lacks the human touch that Charles Kennedy and Paddy had before him. Okay, so Ming is great at Foreign Affairs. This is, however, no reason to elect a party leader. The reason the press have it in for Ming is that for all his experience, he makes mistakes and does not show enough consistency.
In recent weeks we have seen just how much Ming's judgement has been out of touch.
Firstly, he should not even have considered Gordon Brown's overtures to have Lib Dems in government in Westminster. Surely he knows that this could only work if there was a joint programme of policies with clear Lib Dem input. Ming knew this was not the case but still appointed Archie Kirkwood to speak to Gordon Brown again. This showed a lack of judgment on a massive scale.
Next, Ming tried to extricate himself from the mess he had created by making a robust comment about how Liberal Democrats would not be forming any part of a Labour government. Okay, he made this statement knowing that 48 hours before he was genuinely contemplating it. But his statement was robust enough for me to believe that he meant it.
Now though, with Liberal Democrat Peers Lord Lester and Baroness Neuberger named as advisers to Gordon Brown and Shirley Williams set to follow we have Liberal Democrats working with the Labour government, something that Ming made clear this week that would not happen.
Just last Thursday Ming claimed that there was not enough of a change in direction from Brown If this is the case, why are we allowing people to work with Brown ?
So where is the leadership ? Where is the consistency ? If I can't see it and I am a party member, an activist, a former councillor, a former constituency party vice-Chairman, why should I think for one moment that any member of the electorate should see him as being consistent and meaning what he says ?
The fact that the other Lib Dem bloggers seem to be closing their eyes to this whilst the our opinion poll rating goes down the toilet (12% in one poll this week) should be deeply worrying.
I don't doubt for one moment that Ming is a decent guy doing his very best. The problem is that he lacks a campaigners intuition. He does not seem to know how ridiculous his flip flopping makes him seem with the electorate and how how Labour and Gordon Brown are using him and the Lib Dems. No wonder Labour are up in the polls. People think you can vote Labour and get the bits of the Lib Dems they like thrown in for free !
So I admit it, I made a mistake in voting for Ming Campbell. The biggest mistake I could make now is keeping quiet whilst the party carries on in this awful slide to oblivion. Something must be done now. Some in the party no doubt believe success in the Ealing Southall by-election might give us a bounce. Certainly the Lib Dems are the clear challengers to Labour, but would a win just be papering over the cracks.
It's time for people to stand up and be counted. We read about senior Lib Dem MP's and Peers being angry with Ming, yet all we get is rumour. We need someone to put their head above the parapet and be counted. I'm sure I will get plenty of flak for writing this, being disloyal is not in my nature. However, sometimes, you know you are just saying what others are muttering. For all our sakes, it is time for Ming to go !
Update: Iain Dale has kindly linked to this story. I must make clear that although Norman Lamb is a friend of mine, I have not discussed this article or Ming's recent blunders with him at all.
Further update: Paul Walter's excellent Liberal Burbling's blog gives an excellent critique of what I have written here and offers an alternative viewpoint.
7/01/2007
Lord Lester "I've not spoken to Ming Campbell about working with Labour"
Lord Lester on Radio Five has just admitted that he first spoke to Gordon Brown about constitutional matters a year ago and that he has not spoken to Ming Campbell at all about him working as an adviser to Labour.
Lord Lester said he has spoken to Tom McNally, but wouldn't you expect, given what Ming Campbell said a week ago about Lib Dems not working with Labour, that Lord Lester would have sat down with Ming and discussed this rather than going through a third party ?
The fact that Lord Lester accidentally referred to a Labour Minister as a "colleague" before correcting himself said a lot for me.
Lord Lester said he has spoken to Tom McNally, but wouldn't you expect, given what Ming Campbell said a week ago about Lib Dems not working with Labour, that Lord Lester would have sat down with Ming and discussed this rather than going through a third party ?
The fact that Lord Lester accidentally referred to a Labour Minister as a "colleague" before correcting himself said a lot for me.
6/26/2007
Not the defection Iain Dale and others had been hinting at
For several months, Iain Dale had been hinting and other Tory bloggers ( The Hunter for one) claimed that on good authority, they were expecting a defection to the Tories.
I guess today's news wasn't what they were expecting.
As Nick Robinson said on BBC News earlier, if "Cameron isn't worried about this then I am a Pineapple".
It fits in also rather nicely with Ming's assessment that their is little to separate the Tories and Labour these days. Perhaps it is merely that Labour mean what they say, even if it is wrong, whilst the Tories say it to sound like they mean it.
I guess today's news wasn't what they were expecting.
As Nick Robinson said on BBC News earlier, if "Cameron isn't worried about this then I am a Pineapple".
It fits in also rather nicely with Ming's assessment that their is little to separate the Tories and Labour these days. Perhaps it is merely that Labour mean what they say, even if it is wrong, whilst the Tories say it to sound like they mean it.
5/05/2007
Lessons to be learned for the Lib Dems
Thursday's mixed bag of election results for the Lib Dems really should make the party ponder its future and the way it operates at all levels. Here is my analysis of where we go wrong.
1) Clinging on to power - The Lib Dems tend to be obsessed with clinging on to power even when they do not have the influence to actually be in control. Let me give you an example. In Norwich three years ago, the Lib Dems decided to run a minority administration. As a result, they were in charge, but actually had no power to influence the decisions they were bringing in. As a result, combined Green and Labour council votes were scuppering Lib Dem plans and instead they council introduced watered down and ill thought out rubbish which the Lib Dems were forced to take responsibility for. That explains part of the reason for the Lib Dem decline in Norwich.
Similar things to this happened in North Somerset, where the Tories have been for most of the council term, part of an all party administration, taking and making decisions and taking their allowances too. Then recently, the Tories withdraw, claim to be in opposition and then claim the council is doing it all wrong. So what do the Lib Dems do ? They battle on and try to do their best when in truth, they should decided that without the power, what is the point of being in charge.
Looking at results in Luton I think it shows that minority administrations lack the power to make real change and then get blamed for not delivering change.
2) Guilt by association - Similar parallels to the previous argument about clinging to power could be given in Scotland. However the Lib Dems are taking the blame for working with Labour. The "guilt by association" with Labour has seen the Lib Dems lose out in Scotland, but this was a factor in other council areas where the Lib Dems have worked with Labour (North Somerset comes to mind again). We've got to learn that if Labour are that unpopular in some areas, we need to keep them at arms length.
3) Uninspiring leadership - I supported Ming Campbell when he stood for leadership, so I am in part to blame. however, I supported him more out of a desire to stop Chris Huhne because Huhne as leader would, in my opinion, stop Nick Clegg getting the leadership in two years time. I hoped Ming would hold the fort, keep things ticking over and would be the ideal stop-gap, a Michael Howard of sorts. However, this hasn't happened.
There is no doubting Ming's qualities. His knowledge of foreign affairs, his experience and his drive are clear. However, he does not seem to engage with voters. He lack that human touch that Charles or Paddy had and that is costing the Lib Dems. I've met Ming, I know he is a funny witty man who can really inspire, but the electorate don't seem to be getting this from him.
I doubt Ming would step down, but I'd love to see Nick Clegg in as soon as possible. Until then, I know that Ming is not a liability, it's just that the Lib Dems are lacking that asset that we need as leader.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)