Compromise in politics is important, but there's no point being in a party that clings to tiny achievements and caves on big issues
Last weekend my membership of the Liberal Democrats was due for renewal. After 25 years in the party – including five years as director of policy and eight fighting a parliamentary seat – I have decided not to renew. That decision has been taken more in sorrow than in anger (though I have been pretty angry at various points). But over the past year I have decided that I can no longer support the party in elections, so I feel I cannot remain a member of the party.
Why lapse, and why not resign some time ago? Had I done so, it would have been over economic policy. My history with the current leadership on this subject is quite long, and I have written about it in both New Statesman and for Compass. The crucial point for me is the position we reached in our 2010 manifesto, which was broadly aligned with Labour on the scale and timing of cuts (even if we were clearer than Labour on what the cuts could be). That meant we were critical of the Conservative party's economic plans, saying that they were too harsh, would damage the UK economy, and would hinder, not help, recovery.
Instead, despite what was said to voters in 2010, the party leadership's inclination for small-state, centre-right policies was able to seek its fullest expression in the deal with the Conservatives, contemptuous of the party's election stance, and apparently based on tenuous fears about the UK becoming Greece. The party endorsed this approach with massive majorities for the leadership in relevant committees and a special conference, so what does a party member do if they are unhappy? Leaving is one option. Another is speaking out, which is what I did, often through articles for Comment is free.
As well as criticising the government, one argument I made was for dialogue with those outside the Liberal Democrats with whom we share views. In particular, that meant engaging with Labour. Out of that came a group called Liberal Left, which seeks to make it clear that the Liberal Democrats are a left-of-centre party. Liberal Left has done valuable work in that area and will continue to do so. For many party members, Linda Jack's regular comments as chair of Liberal Left are the only thing that persuades them the party is still a viable centre-left force.
Among far too many members, though, I see an attitude that ultimately makes me feel unable to support the party. Compromise in politics is important. I want to see coalitions in which both sides make compromises. That way, a broad range of views can be represented, there can be stable government, and we can learn from opponents. But I cannot accept that so long as one achieves something in government, a few small things, anything, then any compromise is acceptable when it comes to the big issues.
Members point to a handful of policies such as the "pupil premium", but what has that actually meant? That policy had its origins in a pamphlet I co-wrote with Nick Clegg in 2002. But what we proposed, and what the party later developed and adopted, was meant to be money for disadvantaged children on top of existing budgets, not a replacement for funding being cut from elsewhere.
What's the alternative to membership of the Liberal Democrats? Doesn't it feel like I am giving up? No, to the second question. Bad things happen when good people do nothing. For me, what feels like "doing nothing" is staying in the party and accepting the unacceptable. There are plenty of ways to make a difference in the world without being in a political party, and I already take part in some of those. Meanwhile, Compass offers an obvious political home.
When it comes to elections, the sad conclusion I have come to is that I have more faith in Labour and the Greens to put forward a package of policies that former Liberal Democrat voters can support than I do in the Liberal Democrats themselves. If politics is only about compromises and limited achievements, then the Labour governments of 1997-2010 don't actually look that bad compared with the current one. That should give Liberal Democrats pause for thought given that they argued that it did so much that was either wrong or too timid.
I know that there are some people in the party who will be glad to see the back of any critic of the current leadership. But dissent is part of politics. They should get used to that. Even to all those in the party who haven't liked what I've said, and the rest of the party, I wish a fond farewell, with thanks for all the good times.
• A longer version of this article appeared on the Compass website. It is republished here with permission
     |
 |
| READ THE ORIGINAL POST AT www.guardian.co.uk |
