Two days left to pick your Liberal Voice of the Year

On New Year's Day, Liberal Democrat voice launched their annual search for the Liberal Voice of the Year poll, chosen from a shortlist of people who are not members of the Liberal Democrats.And, thanks to some internet wizardry, we get preferential voting this year. The poll closes on Sunday, so make sure you have your say if you haven't already by voting here.

The shortlist is made up of nominations submitted via the Lib Dem Voice readers' survey. Again, it is shamefully low in female nominees. Putting a photo up of Naomi Long MP when the actual nominee is the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland does not extract us from a pretty embarrassing hole. I have to take my share of the responsibility for that - not as a member of the Lib Dem Voice team, and this is not a criticism of Stephen Tall - but as a blogger. I obviously voted in the poll, but I didn't do much to drum up any potential nominations for women. This will not be the case next year, believe me. Although there have been a number of female winners, like Shami Chakrabarti and Aung San Suu Kyi, there have been a pathetic number of female nominees.

I hope that the sole female nominee will win this year. She certainly deserves to. Malala Yousafzai is an example to everyone. We all stand up for our liberal beliefs, but it's really easy to do so. All that happens to us is that we get the odd bit of abuse online from other party's trolls (hello to any cybernats reading this) or we get shouted at on a few doorsteps. Not pleasant, but we're not in any danger.

All Malala wanted was to go to school. To have the same rights to education as a male child. That doesn't always happen in Pakistan and it takes a huge amount of courage to speak out on these issues. If you do, you face a real danger of violent repercussions. Malala is not much older than my daughter, but already she has suffered a critical injury for her beliefs. She was shot in the head by the Taliban in October and it's amazing that she's still alive. She's now in this country and was recently discharged, albeit temporarily, from hospital in Birmingham. You don't get much more liberal causes than advancing education and you don't get much braver than this 14 year old. My first preference was never going to go anywhere else.

I can't actually remember the exact order of my preferences. Hacked off and Leveson were near the top. 38 Degrees were higher than they otherwise might have been because of marks taken off other nominees. The Alliance Party has stood up for liberal values in some areas this year, but fell short on equal marriage, so they were mid table. Obama was mid-table too - extra judicial killings  and drone attacks are not examples of liberal behaviour despite his many attributes. Sharing the bottom were Sam Bowman and Rowan Williams. In fact it was the Archbishop on the bottom not just because of equal marriage but because of that utter mess on women bishops.

Last year, many people were surprised that Mark Littlewood won. If you don't want to see a repeat of such an unexpected result, you know what to do....

Liberal Democrats should have none of this honours for departing ministers business

I just want to quickly add my voice to that of Stephen Tall, who has said that Liberal Democrats should not accept honours for departing ministers.

However sad I might be to see Nick Harvey, Paul Burstow, Sarah Teather and Andrew Stunell leave government, there's something unpleasant about that sort of political patronage. Honours are there for exceptional performance, not routine stuff.

Our Nick Harvey is in line for a knighthood and Stunell and Burstow get made Privy Councillors. I can cope with the latter a bit better as there is an advisory role where their experience might be helpful. However, membership of that august body is hardly open to the rest of us - maybe opening it up to ordinary people is something the Lord President of the Council, one Nicholas William Peter Clegg, might like to consider. At the moment it looks like a place for retired gentleministers.

So three of our departees have had stuff - you have to ask why not Sarah Teather. Jobs for the boys? Or maybe she turned them down flat - in which case, well done.

And don't get me started on Ashcroft getting on. We can't stop the Tories appointing who we like, but we can be annoyed about it. Surely their obvious honouring of someone who gives them shedloads of cash will make people draw their own conclusions....

That Nick Clegg leadership poll: what the papers say

Strangely, that Liberal Democrat Voice poll which showed that members were split 47%-46% on whether Nick Clegg should still be Liberal Democrat leader at the next election has attracted a bit of coverage in the press.

The Guardian suggests that:

Clegg is vulnerable because he is seen as one of the few people at the top of the party who is ideologically sympathetic to the Conservatives.

Well, that's maybe because Polly Toynbee and the Guardian are always trying to paint him that way. David Cameron, on the other hand, who is probably in a better position to judge, is always whinging about how that pesky Nick Clegg is stopping him from doing the proper Tory stuff he really wants to do.

The Daily Mail says David Cameron is going around telling people Nick Clegg's position is precarious. That would be the same David Cameron who's having severe problems with about a third of his parliamentary party.

The Sun says Cameron is frightened Clegg will be toppled. He clearly hasn't either read the poll, which only has 14% of people wanting him to go this year or next, or the Liberal Democrat constitution. There are only two ways to trigger a hostile leadership election: A no confidence motion must be passed by a majority of MPs or 75 local parties, after quorate general meetings, can send a request to the party president.  I cannot see either of these things happening any time soon. They also, bizarrely, say that Vince Cable has put himself forward as leader. Let's look at what the Financial Times article actually said:

Should a vacancy arise for the leadership of his party, might he be a candidate? “I wouldn’t exclude it,” he replies in his flat, nasal tones.

It's not quite watch out, Cleggie, I'm coming to get you, is it?

The Mirror mentions it in passing in a story which says that plans to issue a revised Coalition Agreement have been delayed.

The Liberal Democrat blogosphere, on the other hand, has been largely silent which indicates that we really don't see this kind of stuff as a big deal. Whether we're fans of Nick or not, bloggers generally have a reasonable knowledge of the party and clearly nobody thinks there are  any imminent leadership shenanigans afoot. Frankly, our party is not known for deference to its leader. We are generally a bolshy and argumentative lot and the fact that only 14% want him to go this year is a pretty good show. I'm fairly certain Paddy, who is pretty much universally adored now, would have had higher anti ratings in his time.

I wrote my response in a comment to the original piece but other than that, the only person I can see who's written anything else is our Stephen Tall himself, who asks whether he was right to publish the poll. He said, in response to somebody who had complained to him:

For the record, I’m a fan of both the Coalition and Nick Clegg as anyone who’s read my stuff will know. But I think it’s important that members who disagree with me — and who feel at least as passionately about the party as you do — have the opportunity to express their views, even if they’re not very convenient. Indeed, even members of Nick’s team I’ve spoken to feel it was a reasonable question to ask. A good friend will always let you know the truth.