Entries from May 2010 ↓

And why the candidates should be tested out at our Annual Conference.

I was at a brilliant social media event tonight.  A number of non-aligned delegates raised some pertinent points:

1. If Labour’s future leaders are to be “authentic”, they’re going to have to produce their own web content and they’ll have to do this over time not just during elections.

2. We need a “Labour Uncut” approach. That’s a clever way of saying we have to be clearer about our stresses and strains, be more transparent about our policy dilemmas; be more up front with our work in progress

3. A Labour Uncut approach should not fear giving credit to the new government when they do good things. A number of people praised the commitment to ending ID cards for example. Others looked forward to the repeal of the Digital Economy Act. Amen to that.

4. Others said that they looked forward to Labour’s innovators finding imaginative ways of holding the government to account in the digital space. Someone said that this is the first new government of the Internet age. Of course, Labour is also the first new opposition of the internet age.

5. One last thing. It isn’t half great not worrying about a call from Downing Street if you say something too controversial. I almost feel sorry for the social media friendly ministers in the new government. Almost, anyway.

JH: That was a very positive and constructive meeting. We talked about how the national interests could be best served by politicians working together in the best interests of the country

EM: What about the Liberal Democrats’ interest?

JH: Well it’s the national interest which is the absolutely critical thing. The country is in a very difficult situation, we need political reform, we need economic reform, we need a better deal for the kids – the pupil premium, and we also need a better tax deal for the low-paid.

EM: What was decided about the bottom line because David Cameron has laid where he doesn’t really want to move, what do the Liberal Democrats say in that regard?

JH: What we say is that we want to put the national interest first and that what we are looking at is the four planks on which we fought the general election campaign. To think that we might sort of do anything other than what was in our manifesto is somewhat surprising.

EM: How does your education policy dovetail with the Conservative policy?

JH: Well interestingly they seem quite positive about the pupil premium which makes that perhaps a very easy issue to settle.

EM: And voting reform?

JH: Well the political reform is a much wider issue than just voting reform. In theory they support the Wright Report reforms for instance.

EM: What about changing the voting system which is what so many people shouting outside want to hear about?

JH: Well exactly and changing the voting system is one something we want to see.

EM: But you’re being promised an inquiry which isn’t the same thing as getting the change?

JH: Well I’m not going into the details of the negotiations, I’m not on the negotiating group.

EM: I just wondered what the mood of the meeting was?

JH: Well the mood of the meeting was that we should decide what to do in the national interest.

EM: That’s a phrase that you’ve repeated several times and people can interpret that a hundred ways I guess. I’m asking you abut an important detail about a central plank of Liberal Democrat policy.

JH: I would have thought to most people in the country, when the country is in such financial problems as it is, that people would want us to be focussed on the economic situation and what’s good for the children and things like that.

EM: So forget voting reform for now is that it?

JH: I’m not saying forget voting reform for now, what I’m saying is we have four planks to the manifesto and those are the planks that we’re looking at in negotiations.

January 2010: “Lib Dems ‘should say no deal to coalition’ – John Hemming”