Thursday, February 09, 2006

The Jurys still out

At least according to the Guardian it is. The article goes on to say

Yet this contest is primarily about the manner, approach and tactics of the
contenders, not their political direction. The candidates' programmes are
remarkably similar and offer little to challenge the views of grassroot Lib
Dems, who are determined to defend their power in deciding what they stand for.

and I would concur so far. As has been said elsewhere I shall wait for tonights Question Time and Saturdays hustings in Slough before marking the candidates and seeing where that leaves me

Tag Lib Dems


Paul said...

What that Guardian leader excerpt confirms is what I have felt all along - the LibDems are actually the only really united party of the main three, mainly because we agree our policies in such a structured, democratic way. Cmaeron's Chocolate Orange/Queen stripping initiatives are in direct conflict with the views of most Tory members; ditto Blair's Schools policy and Iraq war policy.
That is why I am not concerned about the minor squalls of the past month or so. If we had another Thorpe scandal (going on for months, involving criminal allegatsion) then I would be worried. But the sum total of our problems has been a Scot who likes whisky (shock, horror, probe - hasn't anyone seen or read "Whisky Galore"?) a very silly adulterer and a bisexual who said, correctly, that he isn't gay. Set against the huge vibrancy of the LibDem activist base and our extraordinary (almost natural, unconscious) consensus on the main issues, these are minor things which will be forgotten in a few months time, just as the Flight and Johnson scandals in the Tory party last year have now been forgotten.

Tony Ferguson said...

I agree that there are positives in that Party Conference is the arbiter of policy and as a party we are remarkably unified. I think there may be areas of policy though where we will find ourselves less unified. Transport, Roads, Cars and taxation thereof springs to mind. We may all be relatively unified over the need to do something but the what and the when may cause more problems either because of differences of opinion or differences of tactics e.g. how far can we afford to get ahead of public awareness and opinion