Showing posts with label Liberalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Liberalism. Show all posts

Sunday, 7 June 2015

Values, Vision and Liberalism: It’s Time for Tim

Following on from a very difficult general election result, the leadership election is on to see who will take the Lib Dems through this tough time. Despite only having eight Members of Parliament, the Liberal Democrats have fielded two fantastic leadership candidates, Tim Farron and Norman Lamb. Both of these candidates are miles ahead of anything on offer in the Labour leadership election.

During our party's time in Coalition with the Conservatives we were undoubtedly a moderating influence on the Tory right. From raising the tax threshold, to the pupil premium, to restoring our civil liberties, to ensuring same-sex marriage, to defending workers rights, the Lib Dems achieved many progressive policies. However it is clear that during our time in Coalition we lost trust and we lost identity.

The party might only have a handful of MPs but it's vital that we choose a leader who is able to inspire Liberal Democrat supporters and regain the trust of those millions of voters that we have lost. The party needs a radical vision and a reassertion of our progressive liberal values. Beyond everything else we need a leader who is going to challenge the status quo of British politics and challenge the inequalities of British society and Britain's political system. I believe Tim Farron is the man to achieve this and to revive the cause of British liberalism.

Tim Farron has grasped a fundamental truth of modern politics, which is that in order to enact change you need to create a movement. A movement from the grassroots to the green benches of the House of Commons. A liberal movement committed to liberty, equality and community. A movement that understands that people need to be free from an overbearing state but also free from poverty and social inequality. Tim Farron has correctly identified the need for a house building revolution in Britain. Such a mission should be at the heart of any liberal movement along with tackling climate change and protecting Britain's human rights, civil liberties and EU membership.

For the last two decades millions of people across the country have become disillusioned and alienated from mainstream politics. This has resulted in the rise of nationalism in both Scotland and England. Those most alienated by British politics have been the most vulnerable members of society. I for one hope that Tim Farron can give a voice to those who have often been left voiceless. A hundred years ago, the Liberal Party was at the heart of a campaign to achieve social reform and to tackle the extreme poverty of the industrial age. Today the Lib Dems need to rediscover the spirit of the new liberals and restore a sense of community and compassion to British politics. The Lib Dems must champion hope over fear.

For any party or movement to succeed it needs a strong campaigning spirit. The community politics of the 1970s proved that even a small party with a few MPs can make a big difference. Tim Farron is a committed and experienced campaigner. He understands the importance of community politics and grassroots campaigning. I've seen first-hand what a committed campaigner Tim is in Westmorland and Lonsdale. He's taken what was a Tory safe seat less than two decades ago and transformed it into the safest Lib Dem seat in the country.


Britain needs radical liberal activism. It needs a liberal movement committed to liberty, social justice, the environment, house building and the EU. It needs the Lib Dems to spearhead this movement in Parliament and at the grassroots. The Lib Dems need a committed experienced campaigner leading the party. We need someone who can restore trust in the Liberal Democrats. We need someone with values, vision and with liberalism in their heart. It’s time for Tim Farron!!!

Saturday, 6 June 2015

Where the Lib Dems Went Wrong

For the Liberal Democrats the general election was the worst in terms of seats won since 1970. No one expected the Lib Dems to be reduced to just eight seats. This article will examine where the Lib Dems went wrong and what could account for such a dreadful result.

Losing Trust
The Liberal Democrats were right to go into Coalition, but we made a few massive mistakes none bigger than the decision over tuition fees. For much of the last few decades the Lib Dems prided themselves on trust. In the 2010 general election hundreds of thousands of young voters voted for the party over its policy to abolish tuition fees. Famously, Nick Clegg and a few other Lib Dem MPs broke their pledges not to increase tuition fees (although 21 Lib Dem MPs kept their pledges). This action to increase tuition fees was seen in the eyes of many young voters as a betrayal. Despite the repeated attempts by Nick Clegg and other Lib Dem ministers to explain the new tuition fees policy, their message was simply ineffective given the loss of trust. More than any other issue tuition fees destroyed the Lib Dem reputation for trust from which the party never recovered during its time in Coalition.

Coalition Conformity and the loss of Identity
The Conservative-Lib Dem Coalition was the first coalition since 1945. Therefore the leadership of the Lib Dems felt an added burden on proving that coalitions could result in stable governments. While no one would doubt that the Coalition was stable, the sense of Coalition conformity that resulted from the commitment to the Coalition ended up in a loss of identity for the party. The Lib Dem identity became almost unrecognisable with both Tory and Lib Dem ministers in every major department. The party also completely failed to successfully differentiate itself from its coalition partners. Although we undoubtedly made the Coalition fairer than it otherwise would have been; ultimately the net result of our efforts was to detoxify the Tory party and toxify our own party.

Demolition of the Local Government base
In electoral terms there was clear evidence that the party strategy was not yielding any reward. From 2011 until 2015 the party lost thousands of councillors. For a party that depends on having a strong local government base in order to win at a parliamentary level, this was a major blow to our ambitions at the general election. Added to this the party suffered massive setbacks in Scotland, Wales, London and in the European Elections. Although our local government base held up relatively well in some part of southern England, in northern England and Scotland it was annihilated. We should have realised much earlier on in 2011 or 2012 that the loss of our local government base was a harbinger of disaster in the general election.

Valueless Centrism
The leadership ditched the party's historic centre-left stance in favour of a committed centrism. Their aim was to try and revive the mythical equidistance of the past. At a time when the party leadership needed to renew its distinctive centre-left values it abandoned them. The strategy of equidistance and centrism was always doomed to fail. How can you be truly equidistance when you're in coalition with a centre-right party and refuse to defend your historic centre-left values? The party has never been truly equidistant, even in the Ashdown years the party was closer to the Labour, shown through the speculation of a Labour-Lib Dem coalition in 1992 and the Blair-Ashdown talks of the mid-1990s. Centrist equidistance was a failed strategy instead we should have outlined a much more distinctive left of centre liberal platform to engage our lost voters and to enable us to much more effectively differentiate us from the Tories.

Defending the Status Quo
People don’t vote for coalitions. I hate to say it but it's true. People vote for political parties. To frame an entire election campaign around forming a future coalition alienated voters from the radicalism of the Lib Dems. The party became the only true defender of the Coalition status quo. Instead of giving people reasons to vote for a future Lib Dem government we were giving voters early compromises on a potential future coalition. No party can both claim to be radical and defend the status quo. This was at a time when other parties were challenging the status quo; the Lib Dems became in the eyes of the public the most uninteresting of the parties. The party's leadership lost touch with its core radicalism and instead became the party of "stability, unity and decency.” The Lib Dems should know more than any other party that there are few votes in defending the status quo especially when you are a third or fourth party.

Learning the Lessons
The party has an uphill battle to regain the trust of the public, especially amongst young people. We should ensure that any future signed party pledges are amongst our election priorities. We failed to do this with tuition fees in 2010 and we paid the price.

In any future coalitions instead of trying to cover all departments we should have ministers in the leading departments and have a department entirely for our ministers to demonstrate Lib Dem policies in action. A good example of such a department would be the Department for Education.

The future leadership of the party should realise that if the current strategy is resulting in massive electoral losses that the party should change it promptly. Equidistant centrism has been a disaster for our party; the party will have to return to its centre-left roots if it is to recover its lost support.


Liberals should never defend the status quo, they should always seek to change it. Losing touch with our core radicalism was the final nail in the coffin of the party's electoral ambitions. The party must learn from its lessons so that in the future the great cause of liberalism can rise again.

Wednesday, 5 November 2014

Lancaster University Liberal Democrats Annual General Meeting Speech 2014

This is the speech I gave to the Annual General Meeting of the Lancaster University Liberal Democrats on Wednesday 5th November 2014.

Check the speech against delivery.

Lancaster University Liberal Democrats

It’s great to be here at the Annual General Meeting at Lancaster University Liberal Democrats. In six months time will we will be having a general election. It's safe to say that this one will be quite different from the one in 2010. In 2010 every other window on campus had an orange diamond poster in it.

However despite recent setbacks, LU Lib Dems must be a campaigning society and must be unafraid to put the case for liberalism and the Liberal Democrats to the students at Lancaster University over the next few months.

Lancaster Local Elections

On the same day as the general election we have the local elections taking place in Lancaster. It is very important that students from the Society have the opportunity to stand in the local elections especially here on the University ward and in the Ellel ward that encompasses South West campus.

Locally we should aim to get as many Lib Dems elected and potentially once again hold the balance of power on Lancaster City Council. To do this, it is very important that we rediscover community politics and we should start right here on the university campus.

General Election 2015

The next general election will be the toughest since the merger of the Liberal Party and the SDP in 1988. Things will be very tough in Labour leaning areas however don't be surprised if we make gains against the Conservatives.

Locally for example we should aim to regain the Lower Lune Valley Ward from the Conservatives. Nationally too we stand a very good chance of taking marginal seats off the Conservatives; seats such as Bosworth in the East Midlands, Watford in Eastern England and Camborne and Redruth in the South West.

A Free and Just Society

We Liberal Democrats must not forget our historic objective of creating a free and a just society.

The Labour Party cannot be trusted with our liberty. New Labour sought to erode our civil liberties with ID cards and 90 days detention without charge. Furthermore let's never forget their illegal invasion of Iraq.

The Conservative party cannot be trusted to achieve social justice. Our party has been absolutely right to oppose housing benefit cuts for young people, the Tory fire at will proposals and our party conference has voted against free schools and the NHS reforms.

We should also congratulate Andrew George for introducing a bill to protect the most vulnerable from the worst aspects of the bedroom tax.

In government, we've protecting civil liberties by scrapping ID cards, limiting detention without charge and by removing innocent people from the DNA database. Furthermore, we were absolutely right to oppose Theresa May’s Snoopers Charter.

We have also helped to create a fairer society. We have lifted low paid workers out of paying income tax. We have helped the most disadvantaged children in the country through the pupil premium. And Steve Webb has ensured the fairest and most generous pensions system in a hundred years.

Also we must not forget that we have done much to create a more equal society. It was Liberals who abolished slavery and who gave women the right to vote; and we must also be proud that we have introduced equal marriage giving gay and lesbian couples the same rights as heterosexual couples. Thanks to Lynne Featherstone.

We are also going to tackle inequalities in health care. One of our priorities at the next general election will be to ensure that mental health issues receive equal care and have equal waiting times with physical health issues. This will save many lives and help many more.

The Green People’s Budget

In 1909, David Lloyd George gave his People's Budget, which laid the foundations for the welfare state. In the 21st century, it is time for a new People's Budget. A Green People's Budget is needed to tackle three of the big issues facing modern Britain; climate change, unemployment and housing shortages.

This Green People's Budget would directly stimulate the building of new houses and green infrastructure such as wind turbines, solar panels, geothermal and tidal energy sources. Britain desperately needs new homes and to ensure a safe future, we need to be doing a lot more to tackle climate change. The Green People's budget would aim to achieve both, and in the process will grow the economy and will create thousands of new jobs in the housing, environmental, and science and technology industries.

Now I know what you're thinking how is this going to be paid for?

Firstly, I'm not sure why we spend billions of pounds every year on an outdated Trident nuclear defence system, which heaven forbid we will never use. At the very least we should cut back the number of nuclear weapons and downgrade to a cheaper weapons system; or potentially consider scrapping our nuclear weapons entirely.

Secondly, the original People's Budget placed great emphasis on land value taxation and I think it's about time that land taxes were introduced on wealthy estates and on wealthy land owners.

Tim Farron often talks about creating a new consensus. I hope that the Green People's budget will be a central pillar of the new consensus that we Liberal Democrats want to create.

Freedom from Authoritarianism, Freedom from Poverty, Freedom from Climate Change

In the next few months, in places like this campus our party will begin the road to recovery.

We must always be a party that will stand up for the social justice of the most disadvantaged members of society; and be a party that will stand up for the civil liberties of everyone in society.

We must have no time for the politics of nationalism wherever it comes from UKIP or the SNP. We must always remain proud to be a pro-European and a pro-immigration party.

British politics needs radical reform; we need to reform our voting system, start electing the House of Lords and ensure federalism for the whole of the UK, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, Cornwall and the English regions too.

Above all, we must reject the authoritarianism of the Labour Party, the Thatcherism of the Conservative party and the xenophobia of parties like UKIP. Britain faces many challenges in 2014 and only the Liberal Democrats have the answers to them.

Liberals are the champions of freedom; freedom from state authority, freedom from poverty and freedom from climate change. Young people must be the vanguard of this Liberal Movement.


Now, let’s get out there and build the freer and fairer society that we all want to see; and let’s ensure that no one is enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity.

Wednesday, 29 October 2014

Radical Liberalism: The Lost Political Tradition

The Struggle for Freedom and Democracy

Liberalism is one of the oldest political traditions. Its roots stretch back to 1688. Far from being a philosophy of the status quo, liberalism has a rich radical history. For centuries it was the philosophy of radical political and social change. It is time that the lost political tradition of radical liberalism was rediscovered.

The father of liberalism, John Locke, laid the foundations for the philosophy in his Second Treatise of Government in 1689. Government was only to be justified through the consent of the people and should any government violate the fundamental rights to life, liberty and property; then the citizenry had a right of revolution. Right from the beginning, there were two aspects of liberalism which often came into conflict with each other. These were the political aspects such as liberty, individual rights and government by consent; and the economic aspects such as private property, capitalism and a limited state. The political aspects became radical liberalism and the economic aspects became laissez-faire liberalism or modern day neoliberalism.

In 1776, the American revolutionaries took up arms against the British Empire. In the Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers echoed John Locke by stating that man had unalienable rights such as "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Liberalism also inspired the French Revolution which began in 1789. The radical liberal philosopher, Thomas Paine wrote a staunch defence of the revolution in his "Rights of Man." Liberalism throughout the 18th century was seen as a radical revolutionary philosophy. In the name of “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity” the old aristocratic tyrannies were to be challenged and overthrown in favour of democratic governance.

Whose Land is it Anyway?

Liberalism's challenge to the power of the aristocracy took a different form at the end of the 19th century. Many nations in Western Europe had become republics or exchanged their autocratic monarchs for constitutional monarchs. In constitutional monarchies such as the United Kingdom, the aristocratic land owners drew their wealth and power from the land and as a result many had wealthy estates. It was this fact that made radical liberals such as Henry George support land value taxation.

The taxation of land became a popular movement especially within the British Liberal Party in the early 20th century. Working class Liberals supported land taxation as a means of shifting wealth away from the aristocratic land owners towards the working poor.

Social Liberalism and Freedom from Industrial Inequality

Throughout the 1800s, liberalism had been the philosophy of the Industrial Revolution. Liberals such as William Gladstone had pursued a policy of laissez-faire. A century earlier liberalism had proclaimed "Liberty, Equality and Fraternity" now it appeared to be the philosophy of a capitalist industrial elite. Liberalism was derided by socialists as being a bourgeois ideology, which they thought should be overthrown and replaced by a “dictatorship of the proletariat.”

It appeared that radical liberalism had run its course and that it would soon be replaced by socialism. It was at the turn of the last century that the radical liberalism of the 18th and 19th centuries became the social liberalism of the 20th century. Social liberal thinkers such as Thomas Hill Green and Leonard Trelawny Hobhouse argued that liberalism needed to promote social justice in order to help the industrial poor. Equality was therefore seen as a means to advance liberty. Social reform was needed to combat the tyranny of unrestrained industrial capitalism. As a result liberals began to support welfare policies and workers rights.

The British Liberal Party under Herbert Asquith and David Lloyd George began to lay the foundations of the welfare state. In 1942, another social liberal William Beveridge published a report calling for social security from the cradle to the grave and founded the modern welfare state. Liberalism had therefore gone from being a philosophy of a laissez-faire elite to a philosophy with a genuine concern for the welfare of the poorest.

Power to the People

Throughout the 1950s, 60s and 70s the Liberal Party in Britain was seen as a political irrelevance by its opponents. It was during this period that the Liberal Party began to believe in placing power directly in people's hands. The Liberal Party leader, Jo Grimond placed great emphasis on cooperatives and workplace democracy. In the early 1970s a new philosophy began to emerge called "community politics." This was the legacy of a left wing libertarian group within the Young Liberals often referred to as "the Red Guards." Community politics emphasised the need for people to use power at the grassroots level. It was not just meant as a campaigning strategy but as a means of creating a more participatory democracy. The radical liberalism that had toppled regimes in America and France was now embarking on a peaceful democratic revolution in the way that power was used within local communities and in the workplace.

Neoliberalism: The Death of the Radical Tradition

If radical liberalism had been about anything it was about putting power into the hands of ordinary people and about holding the powerful to account. This changed in the 1980s as laissez-faire liberalism re-emerged in the form of neoliberalism. Early neoliberal politicians such as Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan sought to unleash free market capitalism, privatise state assets, restrict workers’ rights and shrink the welfare state.

Far from bringing power closer to the people as neoliberal economists argued; in reality power shifted upwards towards global corporations. In an age of economic globalisation the ability of nation states to pursue welfare policies has been limited. Furthermore the ability to hold wealthy corporations to account is limited at best and non-existent at worst. Added to this global institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank advocate and reinforce neoliberal philosophy. Neoliberalism is a reaction against the historic principles of radical liberalism and social liberalism.

Global Radical Liberalism

In the 21st century the principles of radical liberalism and social liberalism are needed to mitigate neoliberal globalisation. Radical liberalism sought to tackle unaccountable power. A new democratic globalisation based on radical liberalism is needed to hold the global corporate elite to account. Global institutions underpin contemporary economic globalisation. Therefore new global institutions will be needed to wrestle back democratic sovereignty from global corporations and the Washington Consensus. Hopefully, global radical liberalism will in time help to replace global neoliberalism.


Radical liberalism might date back to the end of the 17th century; however it is needed once again in the 21st century. Transnational corporations are the unaccountable kingdoms of the 21st century. In the age of globalisation; the lost political tradition of radical liberalism needs to be rediscovered.




Tuesday, 3 June 2014

What is Liberalism For?

What is liberalism for? This was a question that the Liberal Party began to ask itself at the end of the 19th century. Following the defeat of the Liberal Party in the 1895 general election, it became clear that the Liberals had to examine their guiding philosophy. Liberalism, the radical ideology that had sought at the start of the 19th century to provide everyone with liberty and rights had ended the 19th century looking out of touch and unable to address the problems which people faced. The one time philosophy of radical reform looked uneasy and unable to acknowledge the vast inequalities that had emerged within industrial society. The defeat of 1895 helped the Liberals move away from the stale status quo of Gladstonian classical liberalism and towards the philosophy of new liberalism, what today would be called social liberalism (“The New Liberalism” The Liberal Democrat History Group http://www.liberalhistory.org.uk/item_single.php?item_id=85&item=history). The transition to social liberalism enabled the Liberal Party in the early 1900s to become the champions of social reform; by laying the foundations of the welfare state, securing workers rights, and by redistributing wealth through taxation.

Today in 2014, it has become necessary for British Liberals to ask themselves once again, what is liberalism for? For almost 100 years social liberalism had been the dominant political discourse within the Liberal Democrats. In 2004 however a new brand of liberalism emerged in the Orange Book. Orange Book liberalism embodied a fusion between the social liberalism of the left and the old Gladstonian classical liberalism of the right. The answer according to the Liberal Democrat Orange Bookers was to promote a brand of liberalism that was directly in the centre of the political spectrum. The Orange Book narrative was that of a pragmatic party of the radical centre, hence the Liberal Democrats would be a party of power with the opportunity to form coalitions with either the Conservatives or Labour. A situation not too dissimilar to the German Free Democrats (FDP), who had up until recently assumed the de-facto status of being an almost permanent party of coalition government. While social liberalism seeks to foster social justice in order to enable the individual freedom of the disadvantaged, Orange Book liberalism seems to defend the status quo at best and at worst promote policies that undermine fairness and social justice.



The liberalism that is currently on offer to the British electorate is bland and seems to lack any radical and progressive perspectives for social change. Phrases such as social justice, tackling inequality, community politics, public services and redistribution have almost become dirty words or perhaps even more concerning, they have become in the minds of some "anti-liberal” words. Radical centrist liberalism far from being radical has become a defender of the status quo. Far from removing the Liberal Democrats from the traditional left-right axis, radical centrism has placed the party right in the middle of it. The Liberal Democrats should be a party of change willing to tear down the status quo, not propping it up through endless coalitions and bland politics. Currently British liberalism is in danger of being a valueless no-man’s land which is neither able to attract voters from the left or the right. This fact has been shown through the disastrous results for the Liberal Democrats in the 2014 Local and European Elections.
 


Whatever happened to the philosophy that guaranteed people's freedoms and wanted to hold the powerful to account through political reform? Whatever happened to the philosophy that created the welfare state? Whatever happened to the philosophy that sought to put power in the hands of ordinary people, while ensuring that the environment was protected for the next generation? Where is the Liberal mission in 2014? The reality is all of these aspects encompass the modern need for liberalism. The liberalism that actively enhances people's lives today while protecting their future for tomorrow. Liberalism (especially social liberalism) is needed to combat Labour authoritarianism, Conservative free market policies and the rising tide of right wing populism.



Liberalism must exist to address the concerns of 21st-century Britain. There are massive wealth and power inequalities in British society. The burden of austerity has fallen too heavily on the poorest, the most vulnerable and those who depend on vital public services. Unemployment is still a massive issue facing Britain, especially amongst young people. There are massive regional inequalities throughout the country with London and the South East seemingly benefiting from a recovery, while the rest of the country lags behind. This recovery is one that is being fuelled by a dangerous housing bubble at the same time when Britain needs hundreds of thousands of additional new homes every year. Many people continue to work in a situation of job insecurity ,where wages are low, future prospects are uncertain, and trade union activity and collective redress is limited at best and non-existent at worst. This is all set against the backdrop of the increasing encroachment of the free market economy into the NHS and the education system. Finally, looming over the world like a shadow is the imminent threat of global climate change. The Liberal Democrats must develop policies to combat these hardships facing many people in Britain today.



What is liberalism for? Liberalism is for freedom, social justice, local empowerment and the future. The status quo is failing millions of people across Britain and the Liberal Democrats need to challenge it. Those Liberal Democrat politicians who are not driven by this sense of mission, by the drive for change, those who forget the history and values of liberalism will surely face the wrath of a disillusioned electorate. Liberalism exists to help the people not to cling onto power; fellow Liberal Democrats we forget this fact at our own peril.

Wednesday, 28 November 2012

Britain’s Many Conservative Parties

It was once believed in Britain that traditional conservative attitudes towards Europe, law and order, immigration, gay rights and nationalism had long been in decline amongst Britain's political parties. However over the last few months British politics has seen a resurgence of traditional conservatism. Three political parties in particular have spearheaded this resurgence. Firstly the Conservative Party, secondly and quite surprisingly the Labour Party and thirdly the UK Independence party (UKIP). This right wing shift in social policy may have grave consequences for British society and is there anyone left to make the case for a more liberal and more tolerant society?

The Conservatives’ Rightwards Shift
Perhaps it is only obvious that a rightward shift in social attitudes and a return to traditional conservatism would happen within the Conservative Party. The Tories, when David Cameron first became leader portrayed a more tolerant view of society. This was coined by the media as "hug a hoody." However following the recent Cabinet reshuffle, the Conservative Party has begun to return to the hard justice traditional conservative policies of Michael Howard in the 1990s. This even lead to the new Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling calling for homeowners to be able to use force to defend their property. This policy was dubbed "bash a burglar" by the media. This has been accompanied by a re-emphasis on punishment and prison within law and order policy, this focus on tough justice was first displayed a year ago in the response to the summer riots.

The European Union remains a bone of contention for the Conservative Party; an increasing number of Tory MPs are becoming Eurosceptic and vocally attacking Europe on many issues. Many right-wing Tories would like to scrap the Human Rights Act the because of the codification of the European Convention on human rights within it. Some Tories are even talking about Britain leaving the Council of Europe because of this opposition to the European Court of Human Rights.

The Conservatives have returned to their traditionalist roots in regard to many issues that affect society. There are even over 100 Tory MPs willing to vote against same-sex marriage. The notions of hug a hoody have long since faded and the re-emergence of the Nasty Party has taken place.

Labour’s One Nation Conservatism
Lord Glasman shortly after the last general election developed a thesis called Blue Labour. Blue Labour combined the Labour Party's traditional focus on social democracy with traditional conservative values. This conservative social democracy has increasingly crept into the mainstream of the Labour Party. Ed Miliband at the last Labour conference even adopted the Conservative slogan of "One Nation." This slogan had originally been applied to Conservative Prime Ministers such as Benjamin Disraeli, Harold Macmillan and Edward Heath. The thread of one nation conservatism within the Labour Party would no doubt have had former Labour Party leaders turning in their graves.

Labour have continued to pursue very populist policies on law and order usually attacking the Coalition for not being strict and hard enough in tackling crime and punishing those responsible. The Labour Party also remains committed to authoritarian policies such as a CCTV surveillance state and an illiberal DNA database, both of which would erode civil liberties. A few weeks ago the Labour Party allied itself with Eurosceptic Tories to vote for a cut in the European budget. This event in particular showed that the Labour Party is becoming much more opportunistic on Europe and is increasingly unwilling to make the case in favour of the European Union. When Labour does make a progressive argument on the economy, it does so by wrapping it in nationalist terms, for example "how will this work programme help to create one nation?"

Labour’s incorporation of one nation conservatism within its existing social democratic views is very much in the essence of the Blue Labour thesis. When it comes to law and order, Europe, immigration and the concept of the nation, Labour is becoming increasingly traditionally conservative.

UKIP: The Ultra-Conservatives
The UK Independence Party (UKIP) is an emerging force in British politics. In most opinion polls UKIP is only a couple of points behind the Liberal Democrats, meaning that UKIP are now the undisputed forth force of British politics. The party of Nigel Farage is very right wing party and the more conservative than the Tories on both social and economic issues. Their primary objective is to withdraw from the UK from the European Union. They are spearheading Eurosceptic sentiment in the UK. Furthermore they are incredibly anti-immigration and want to prevent hardly any immigration from the EU into Britain. They are the only senior party that is openly hostile and opposed to the concept of equal marriage between gay and lesbian people. This Eurosceptic party as its name and philosophy suggests is profoundly nationalistic in its political views.

An Opportunity For The Liberal Democrats
Considering the increasingly conservative attitudes of the Tories, Labour and UKIP, who is left to make the case in favour of the EU, immigration, civil liberties, human rights and a tolerant view of law and order? The move to the right on social issues may provide an opportunity for the Liberal Democrats to defend a liberal view of society. Their liberalism embodies civil liberties, internationalism and socially tolerant view of law and order. The Lib Dems must use this as an opportunity to defend liberalism in the face of increasingly conservative opponents. Crime, justice and prison policy are almost entirely viewed through conservative lenses by the other political parties. They mst also avoid the populist nationalism of the Tories, UKIP and increasing Labour. Furthermore they must not be afraid to be proud pro-Europeans who are pro-immigration and display an unwavering commitment to internationalism in contrast to the Euroscepticism of the right and the opportunism of the one nation Labour Party. If the Liberal Democrats cannot defend liberal principles amongst the rise of increasingly conservative parties in Britain, no other political party will.