Nick Clegg needs an occasional kick up the backside...

Ooh, it's all kicking off at Liberal Democrat Voice today as two daily editors, Paul Walter and Nick Thornsby debate the Coalition, the reshuffle and Nick Clegg's leadership. Paul argues that he can't support the Coalition or Nick Clegg's leadership any more because of David Laws' renewed high profile role and the Tories' promotion of Hunt and elevation of the notorious Lord Ashcroft to the Privy Council. 

I've made a comment there that I thought was worth re-posting here. Do come and join in the debate. 

Here's what I think about Nick and his leadership:

Ok, I’m going to stick my oar in and say that I am 100% behind Nick’s leadership.

That’s not to say that I think his performance has been flawless. Mistakes have been made that could and should have been avoided and he needs to make the effort to re-connect with his party’s activists. I had my own moment of fury on the reshuffle – I am severely unimpressed that our white, middle class, male, privileged team decided just to hand the equalities brief, from which Lynne Featherstone was doing such marvellous work, to the Tories. That ranks high on my short but significant FFS list – the things the Coalition has done that I can’t live with.

We are in Government at a really rubbish time. Even at the best of times, when we were in Government in Scotland, when we were implementing stacks of ground-breaking Liberal Democrat policy and had shedloads of money, the Party and the Holyrood team’s relationship was fraught with tension. Now we’re in Government during the worst period of economic trauma since the 1930s. I’ve recently read Alistair Darling’s book Back from the Brink and while I disagree with some of the decisions he made, I’m not sure I could have come anywhere close to coping with the dire economic shockwaves which were and still are going around.

I just think what would have happened if we hadn’t gone into coalition. We’d have had another election within 6 months which the Tories would have won and they would right now have already done things like cut housing benefit for all under 25s. The Human Rights Act would be in tatters and heaven knows what our relationship with Europe would be like. And children would still be locked up in Yarl’s Wood. Oh, and all the nasty web snooping stuff that the Liberal Democrats have insisted on further scrutiny under the liberal-hero eye of Julian Huppert, would le law now. Probably with Labour support.

When there’s no money, we have given low earners a tax cut, when the Tories would have prioritised rich dead people, Nick has led magnificently on mental health and the pupil premium, We’ve had the biggest ever cash rise in the state pension and Nick personally insisted on benefits going up in line with inflation last year.

On David Laws, one of the values we hold dearest is rehabilitation. David has taken his punishment, acknowledged and shown remorse for what he did – which was motivated purely out of a desire to protect his privacy rather than for personal gain. Never forget that had he been open about the relationship at the time, he could have claimed pretty much double the cost. He has atoned and is not going to re-offend. Is it therefore the liberal thing to keep him out in the wilderness? Every Lib Dem who’s gone on the media this week, on any phone in, has had a hard time from the tabloid reading public about David. We should not give a monkey’s. It may not be the popular thing, but it’s the right thing to do. He’s done his time and he clearly has the skills to do the job that he’s doing, however weird the combination of nukes, kids and jobs in his portfolio.

I am very encouraged by Ryan Coetzee’s appointment to replace Richard Reeves. This guy is a political street-fighter, not a policy guy and I expect a much more robust media strategy.

We Lib Dems are in a tough place at the moment. We aren’t making the most of our leader’s talents as I wrote last week. I was livid that we didn’t play to his strengths when he came to Scotland.

Nick Clegg’s current approval ratings are nothing to write home about, especially in Scotland. If we keep wasting opportunities to show off the real Nick, he will continue to be depicted as the bogeyman in London. Scotland has two young, talented, passionate, radical Liberal Democrat leaders. Scots know that Willie Rennie has not been shy in taking on the SNP establishment, supporting equal marriage and highlighting Alex Salmond’s links with Murdoch and how he’s panda-ed to China over human rights. It’s important they have the chance to learn more about Nick’s progressive, liberal, ideas and actions. They will find more common ground than they expect.

I’ll also leave you with some advice I had for him in March about how he needs to reconnect with the party.  More than any other, we rely on our activists being motivated enough to get out on the doorsteps. 

The last thing on earth I can imagine they want to do is to come out and soothe a scratchy party that they think doesn't understand them, but the more remote they become, the wider the gulf will get. Certainly, they can't be telling us the awful internal secrets of day to day Government life, but they can reassure us when we get a bit worried. For our part, we need to show them that we appreciate the things they are getting through and imagine what it must be like to have to deal with the likes of Eric Pickles, Theresa May and IDS on a daily basis.

In turn, we activists need to try to walk a couple of miles in his shoes. He spends his life doing the best he can to make Liberal Democrat values happen while having eyes in the back of his head to check that the Tories aren’t doing silly things.

If we change leader now, I’ll bet you anything that within 3 months, even the most well loved party darling would not have as high approval ratings. Being in Government is tough. We’re only going to make it tougher if we dump Nick. He needs the occasional kick up the backside, as all leaders do, but he deserves his position.

Feet firmly on the Ground

I have decided not to be a floating voter any more. The various events and policy pronouncements of the past week have made me feel that the Party has the best future with Nick Clegg as leader.

I don't expect to agree with everything he says on policy, and will contribute to the debates through the Party's proper channels at the appropriate time.

I've gone for Nick because:

He has the personal skills to really connect with people. I saw the way he got the East Midlands on his side in 1998 during his selection contest. It was going to be a bit of a longshot for a Brussels based outsider to end up on top of the list, but he blew the Selection Committee away at his interview and worked so hard to meet people, listen to them and persuade them to support him. I am confident htat he will do the same on a larger scale with the country.

He has the authority and exprience to lead Nick can speak with authority and credibility on many issues. If anyone can bring people round to our position on Europe, he can. His record as Home Affairs spokesman has been excellent - a pragmatic approach on immigration and vehement and constructive opposition to ID cards.

Now why is a peace loving hippie like me not supporting the anti-Trident candidate? If you look at the small print, Chris's bomb might not be as big and flashy as Nick's, but it's a bomb nonetheless. Neither of these candidates are up for unilateral nuclear disarmament so the issue is neutral between them.

I've also been impressed by how Nick has handled Scotland. He's come, he's listened to the Scottish Party and activists. He has been prepared to understand how politics is different up here and hear ideas on where the Party needs to go.

Much as I respect Chris, the People's Veto idea, which I fear could paralyse Parliament rather than enliven it, and the English votes for English issues statement made me realise I could not support him.

With Nick, what you see is what you get. I know I'm going to disagree with him on some points in the future, but I believe he has all the qualities to take the Party forward.

People's Veto and ID Cards

When I first heard of Chris Huhne's plan for a People's Veto my initial instinct was that he had gone absolutely mad. In this hysteria-filled media misinforming technological age, how on earth could you ensure the veracity of a petition against a piece of legislation to start with? We should surely place greater store on our Parliamentary democracy and seek to strengthen that rather than give credence to what looks on the face of it like populist pandering. You only have to look at what goes on the ballot in American elections to see how discriminatory, prejudiced laws are passed. In fact, the Bush campaign in 2004 was instrumental in using referenda against gay marriage to ensuring people came out and voted for their candidate.

The issue Chris mentioned was the Iraq war. It's clear that although Pariament voted against it, a huge number of people in the country opposed it. However, with the best will in the world, even if you count the most optimistic assessments of the numbers who came on to the streets do not account for more than 3-4% of the population with the rest not really bothering to engage in the process.

What would happen, if Chris were PM and a vocal minority wanted to ban homosexuality? We have no need to kid ourselves that there are probably enough people who feel that way to at least equal the number who opposed the Iraq war on the streets. Would he let "the people" veto a freedom and a core principle that we hold so dear? I can't imagine that he would, but he needs to answer the question. I can see how the idea might engage people in the political process but the laws that Parliament pass might well become bland and inoffensive when they need to be more radical.

When I heard Nick's refusal to have an ID card, I jumped up and down with delight. This is more like it. Our leader would defy the law like an old fashioned radical Liberal. At the moment he has 8.5 years left on his passport. What happens when it comes to May 2016? Is he seriously going to restrict himself to these shores when he has close family in other parts of the World? If so, I applaud him. But has he really thought this through? The framework for ID cards is in place. Much as I would like to see the whole infrasctructure overturned, realistically we have to face the fact that it might not be and I suspect Nick will be enjoying holidays in the UK for a long time to come if he honours his pledge.

Would you like vanilla or vanilla?

So far we've had two competent campaign launches for leader. No embarrassments, no technical failures, no farcical elements at either. No sparkles, but you would get the impression that both of those guys could organise a civilised tasting session a vineyard.

Both of them seem to be saying similar things in slightly different ways. From Huhne it's "a fairer society, people in charge", from Clegg it's about empowering communities and ordinary people.

There are subtle differences, though. Huhne talks about being our champion and taking the fight to our opponents. That's nice, and subtle. We're right already and he's going to make the rest of the world believe it. A good thing to do if you want people to vote for you. I want to see from him that he's looked beyond the leadership election to the general election.

On the other hand, Clegg talks about taking us out of our comfort zone and inviting in all those people with liberal values into our tent. We have to change to fit in with them. Bit more worrying, there. We might have to adopt things that we are slightly uneasy about, but it's probably a bit more realistic. He used the liberal word a lot and the democrat word not once. I want to see from him that he will take the Party and its activists seriously and will lead by inspiration not by diktat and indifference.

Both of them get a minus point from me for failing to mention Scotland or Wales at all in their pronouncements so far. Remember we ran this place for the last 8 years and did some good stuff. They both need to prove that they understand Scottish and Welsh politics and realise that there is less appetite for the economic liberal model up here.

The devil will, of course, be in the details of their ideas. This is only the start of the campaign and a lot could change.

I still fervently wish that there was a wider contest - I'd quite like a bit of choclate and strawberry, or even some pistachio. For no other reason than it gives us the opportunity to showcase our talents and ideas. I suspect the media won't bother much with a contest between 2 such similar contenders so we need someone else in there to mix it up a bit.

I need an undecided column.........

If you had told me a week ago that I would even contemplate voting for Nick Clegg, I'd have cheekily retorted that I would rather take up rugby than do any such thing. Don't get me wrong, I like the guy and worked hard to get him selected at the top of the European list in the East Midlands for the 1998 elections. His excellent credentials are, however, blighted by his stance on economic affairs. I have a lot of affection for public services and social justice and I don't think the economic liberal model works for things like healthcare - look at the US where most of the poor and vulnerable have no access to decent health insurance.

I haven't got the first clue how I would vote in a Clegg/Huhne fight. For the first time in my life I have sympathy for those who have told me on doorsteps up and down the country that they don't know who they are going to vote for. I have never participated in an election in that position - I've known right from the start of the campaign where my loyalties lie.

I'm quite looking forward to the campaign that nobody really wanted to have right now.

Battle of the Babies

Facebook now has 3 groups supporting babies to be Liberal Democrat leader - Magnus Dundas, Noah Maxfield and Donald Kennedy. It's all a bit of harmless fun and a good way to celebrate how lucky we are to have these lovely children in our midst.

Maybe in 30 years time these three boys will be in the Lib Dem cabinet, with my Anna as Prime Minister:-)

Don't let it be a Duel

Rumours reach my ears that the leadership contest may only be between Chris Huhne and Nick Clegg. Neither of these would be my first choice and I don't relish the prospect of choosing between them. This isn't to say that I don't like them - both could do the job, but it's a bit like having to choose between cheddar and double gloucester - we need some gorgonzola, or some brie in there.

I think it cheats the members to prevent them having a full debate about the future direction of the Party. I don't know where people get the idea that Huhne is a leftie from - a Huhne/Clegg contest is simply a duel between the centre right and a little bit more centre right.

I hope that MPs reflect on this and don't just rush to back either of these without exploring other options. Who is going to be this contest's Huhne? Remember he came from nowhere last time so there is still an opportunity to steal the limelight from the two frontrunners.

It is particularly disappointing that no candidate of the left of the Party has yet emerged. I would have hoped to see either Steve Webb or Paul Holmes on the ballot.

The Party needs and deserves a wider choice and I hope that the MPs will realise that and reconsider their positions.