Scots Lib Dems try to bar Yes campaign?

An interesting snippet reaches LOWA towers about what can only be described as anti nationalist paranoia from the Scottish Lib Dems.

The Yes to independence campaign asked the party's conference committee whether it could exhibit at this year's main conference in Glasgow in September - but bizarrely the Scottish Lib Dems objected claiming that it might lead to "threatening or otherwise unacceptable behaviour". However the UK (federal) party saw sense and allowed the Scots Yes Campaign "to exhibit at federal conference should they wish to do so. Allowing them a platform to express their views and engage in a debate with conference attendees would be preferable to shutting them out."

Well quite.  

And quite how what's left of the Scottish Party can think trying to censor the legitimate voice of civic nationalism can help their case is beyond me.  Maybe they're being advised by John McSharkey?

Cameron proud of No to AV campaign

David Cameron has sent the following email to Tory supporters - so my spies tell me...

Not only is he proud of the No campaign he is clearly incredibly defensive about the NOTW hacking scandal. One might think he's a little under pressure for his employment of Andy Coulson and his vast number of smooches with Murdoch. He's also claiming credit for Lib Dem policy on Equitable Life.

Dear X,

As the summer break approaches, I am writing to thank you for all your support over the past few months, particularly in the run-up to the AV referendum. This victory was a crucial moment for our Party and our country - and it was only possible with the tireless campaigning of Conservative supporters across the country. We can be truly proud of the campaign we fought and the result we achieved. Our voting system is safe, and electoral reform is off the agenda for a long time to come.

As recent weeks have shown, being in government produces all sorts of challenges that need a clear response. The hacking scandal has been shocking in terms of the dreadful things that have happened, and profound in terms of its long-term impact. I hope you agree that with a Judge-led inquiry now being established; a proper police investigation under way; the BSkyB merger now off the agenda; and maximum transparency being delivered, we have dealt decisively with this issue.

Overall, I believe we can be proud of the progress we're making in government. In all the years in Opposition, I had a clear idea in my head of the kind of government I wanted to lead: one that thought about the long term instead of tomorrow's headlines; one that did the right thing by decent, working people; and one that restored Britain's standing in the world. In our actions of the past few months, we're making progress on all three fronts.

First, we're doing what's right for our country in the long term, however difficult that may be today. One of the big tests in recent months has been our plans to modernise the NHS. The decision to pause those reforms was the right one. It gave us the time and space to get the involvement and support of doctors and nurses, and we came back to the table with a package that is changed for the better, but not changed in its fundamental drive to make the health service more dynamic, efficient and effective.

We've applied the same long-term approach to pension reform. We all know that the pensions system as it stands is unsustainable, and that to duck this challenge would have been a dereliction of our long-term duty to this country. The decisions we have made on raising the pension age are tough, but right. However choppy the political waters may be as we pursue these plans, it is vital we stick to the course.

Second, we're doing the right thing by decent, hard-working people. Nothing so undermined the value of responsibility in this country than the woeful welfare system allowed to spiral out of control by the last government. That's why in June we launched The Work Programme, the largest-ever welfare-to-work scheme of its kind. We're bringing in a whole range of new providers and paying them on the results they achieve - getting people into work and keeping them in work.

We're also doing the right thing by the Equitable Life policyholders who were so cruelly let down. In Opposition we promised to help those people, and it's a promise we have kept. Last month the first cheques were sent out - the start of a three-year programme of payments totalling £1.5 billion.

And third, this is a government that is restoring Britain's standing in the world. In little over a year, through one Spending Review and two Budgets, we have restored this country's reputation for economic competence. At a time when the shadow of sovereign debt problems is falling across Europe, we can be more confident than ever in the action we are taking. Market interest rates in the UK - vital to encouraging the investment we need - are falling; in so many other countries they are rising.

Holding a Strategic Defence and Security Review when our inheritance was a MoD budget that was out of kilter by £38 billion was always going to be difficult, but we now have a long-term plan to deliver the right defence forces for Britain's future. Our plan to increase the trained strength of our Territorial Army from 14,000 to around 40,000 in the next few years is something that all Conservatives can be proud of.

And just as we have shown responsibility in our domestic affairs, so we are playing our part in global affairs. Along with our allies, we continue to enforce the UN resolution in Libya, protecting the civilians there from Qadhafi's murderous regime and pressuring him to go. In Afghanistan, we continue our efforts to pursue a lasting political settlement. The transition of security responsibility to Afghan control for selected districts throughout the country is just about to start and, in line with progress in this area, we have made some plans for modest troop reductions by the end of 2012, with the ultimate aim to have no UK troops in combat roles by 2015.

We have also made good progress in meeting our promises to limit immigration and stop powers being passed from Britain to Brussels without a referendum, and we have severely limited Britain's exposure to future EU bailouts.

So while the day-to-day of politics can sometimes be tough, I hope you can be proud that you have a government that does the right thing for the long term, that is on the side of responsible people, and that is restoring Britain's standing in the world.

I wish you and your families a relaxing summer.

With best wishes,

David Cameron

What the AV referendum question should have been

Nearly all referendums ask whether voters support a particular piece of legislation or a proposition. It is highly unusual for them to be asked to vote on a whether they support bits of a bill.

Given the AV referendum was shoe-horned into a bill reducing the number of parliamentary constituencies, shouldn't we have been asked to vote on this question yesterday?

Do you support the introduction of the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill that reduces the number of MPs and introduces the alternative vote system for electing them?

Just a thought.

AV - why the yes campaign deserves to lose

Later today people across the UK will decide whether they want to change the voting system for Westminster elections. And it looks like they will decisively vote to keep the current first past the post system.

This is despite the YES campaign leading in the polls for most of the campaign - until the last few weeks in fact - and it having the far stronger messages.

So why has the YES campaign so spectacularly crashed and burned? In my view there are two fundamental reasons. The first is the strategic decision to hold the referendum on local election polling day, particularly the polling day that sees the majority of shire districts up for election. These areas are the Tory heartlands with relatively high turnouts of elderly voters - those least likely to vote YES.

I remember talking to a senior Lib Dem official as the bill was pinging between the Lords and the Commons wondering why the party simply didn't call Labour's bluff and delay the referendum until the Autumn where a stand alone referendum would have been more winnable. I was told this would have meant internal coalition issues in terms of delivering Tory votes for the bill and that anyway the advice was that a joint council election and referendum was more winnable due to the likelihood of gaining Labour voters in the mets. That was a strategic mistake that made the task of winning for yes more difficult.

The second mistake was tactical. Despite what you might believe from the interweb and NO campaign, the YES campaign is in fact dominated by Labour - not the Lib Dems. (It was the main reason for Clegg taking a back seat and Mili minor trying to take over). So when the NO campaign used prominent Labour figures to go negative, the YES campaign didn't effectively rebut - mainly because the Labour figures wanted to avoid an internal row.

The YES campaign should have immediately rebutted the NO's assertion of the £250m cost of AV and gone on the offensive against some of the Labour dinosaurs in the no campaign - whose expenses were somewhat questionable - by way of illustration that the campaign could not be trusted. But once the YES team allowed the £250m to become established it was game over.

And this was all before the YES campaign fell apart with Chris Huhne's hissy fit over the NO campaign tactics. All it showed - as every good Lib Dem campaigner knows - was he was rattled and encouraged the Noes to ratchet up the pressure even more.

All in all it's a textbook case of how not to do it. And it's a shame as any alternative electoral reform is now probably impossible as a result.

I will be voting yes.

Warsi leaps to top of sack race with Boulton interview crash

Tory Chairwoman, Baroness Warsi, must now be favourite for the chop in any Cabinet reshuffle. The car crash of an interview with Sky's Adam Boulton that is doing the rounds of the interweb is so dire it is worth repetition...



It's not just a one off though. Sayeeda Warsi is usually pretty dreadful when interviewed or when involved on a panel discussion even when she has strong arguments to put across. But here her material is about as thin as it can get illustrating the paucity of the NO to AV campaign's arguments.

And given her job is about communicating Tory policies and achievements within the coalition if she can't communicate effectively - what is the point of her?

Are the BNP one of No to AV donors?

At the end of March the Yes to AV campaign published its list of major donors. It challenged the No campaign to do the same.

The no campaign refused to do so at the time. And to this date it still refuses to do so. Is this because Nick Griffin's racist party has donated cash to their campaign? Or is there another reason?

I don't believe it! Yes to AV get it right....

While attending a meeting at my local Lib Dem MP's office (every constituency should have one). I came a cross a rather good piece of direct mail from the Yes campaign.

It put three good reasons why people should vote yes on May 5th - making MPs work harder for their constituents, getting rid of jobs for life and giving voters a greater say.

It even mentioned the expenses scandal and the need to clean up politics. And the fact there is a big correlation between the MPs supporting the no campaign and those with dodgy expenses is something I've blogged about before.

So far so good you would think? But...

I wonder if anyone at Yes HQ though that putting actor Richard Wilson's name to it was quite the best idea. Given his most famous character, Victor Meldrew, is known for his catch phrase 'I don't believe it'?

David Owen, Margaret Thatcher, referenda and Vicky Pollard

In March 1979 the Scots voted narrowly 'Yes' in a referendum to set up a Scottish legislature - but not by enough to overcome the requirement that a total of 40% of the electorate should approve.

It was a time when the Conservative party were a significant force in Scotland - particularly in rural areas and the North East and their strident opposition was clearly important in delivering large 'no' votes in these areas.

But their opposition took the form of 'vote NO and we'll bring in something better'. In an eve of vote message to the Chairman of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Association, Margaret Thatcher wrote, "Many people of all parties, as well as Conservatives, believe that the right answer to the Government's proposal is NO. A NO vote does not mean that the devolution question will be buried. It will open the way for all parties to explore together a lasting alternative arrangement which can enjoy the support of the whole British people."

The Scots had to wait a further 18 years for their wish for self government to be fulfilled and in the meantime the Conservative and Unionist party collapsed to insignificance north of the border.

Move forward 32 years and we have another referendum and another politician asking people to do a Vicky Pollard and vote 'no, but yeh, but no...'

Owen wrote in Sunday's Independent "...a principled "No to AV, Yes to PR" can keep the door open for real reform. Popular demand for PR won't go away after a No vote...I urge you to vote for constitutional change because you believe in it. Electoral reformers who vote "No to AV, Yes to PR" will help to establish that it is the best system. Stand firm with the courage of your own convictions."

Sounds familiar?

No, but yeh, but no, but yeh...

Just say 'argh' to AV

Hours of mindless fun...