Thec lastoa Journal of Liberalli History (issuet 88, autumnion 2015) was a special an issue on the 2010–15d coalition t and theh Liberale Democrats. 2015 Unsurprisingly, it triggered e a rangel of responses,ec includingt a numberion of letters (see page 25). Here, Michael Meadowcroft considers the implications of the party’s targeting strategy for the outcome of the 2015 election, and Roy Douglas queries the decision to enter coalition in the first place.

Targeting: its effect on Liberal Democrat performance in the 2015 general election Michael Meadowcroft

y concern that the Autumn 2015 issue of the MJournal of Liberal History would be too close to the end of the coalition, and to the general elec- tion just a handful of months ear- lier, to enable a rigorous analysis of governmental decisions and of the Liberal Democrats’ strategy made me predisposed to be critical of the editorial decision. I was largely wrong, and the articles under the rubric ‘Coalition and the Liberal Democrats’ provide valuable mate- rial for the record and for further research. Remarkably, however, all these accounts of the past five years wilfully ignore the consequences on the Liberal Democrats’ perfor- mance of its targeting strategy. It is a remarkable omission when, argu- ably, it had a pervasive and malign was thereafter unchallenged and it viable party. We do not just have effect on the party’s vote generally could be applied unilaterally from a constituency targeted but also and was a major cause of the mas- the centre with increasingly dra- individual wards within other con- sive reduction in votes almost eve- conian selection and support meas- stituencies. What is more, when a rywhere and of the derisory vote in ures. As far as I can ascertain there previously Liberal-Democrat-held many constituencies. was no review of the principle of ward loses its councillors, unless it Put at its simplest, twenty years the strategy and of its effects over can demonstrate its massive com- of targeting, under which, year the twenty years from its introduc- mitment to winning it back, pref- by year, the party’s financial and tion up to last May’s election. The erably with one of the previous campaigning resources were con- disastrous results suggest that, even ward councillors, it gets struck off centrated on fewer and fewer con- on its own terms, the strategy had, the target list so that the party con- stituencies (and local government at best, failed to deliver and at worst tracts more and more and areas that wards) has left the party with just it had so hollowed out the party in had previously had a significant eight MPs and 8 per cent of the the 550 plus seats that were not tar- number of activists are written off popular vote. Whilst vividly true gets that its base vote was minimal and lose any party presence. The in its own terms, this statement and that the party, no longer hav- City of Leeds is a good example of ignores a host of other factors that ing a presence in some 85 per cent the problem. There is, of course, impinged significantly on the strat- of the country, could not withstand the Leeds North West constituency, egy and its effects. the adverse icy wind that blew brilliantly held by Greg Mulhol- The figures show clearly that fatally as a consequence of a coali- land in May. However, in 2004, the introduction of targeting prior tion with the Conservatives. in addition to the four wards in to the 1997 general election coin- this constituency, there were eight cided with an increase in the num- other target wards, six of which ber of MPs elected from twenty in The consequences of were won. By 2014 there were only 1992 to forty-six in 1997; and the continued targeting four such wards, just two of which one was assumed to be so self-evi- Targeting applied to individual were won. Thus in the run up to dently a consequence of the other wards for local elections has added last May’s general election 75 per that the efficacy of the strategy to the problems of maintaining a cent of the city was written off by

20 Journal of Liberal History 89 Winter 2015–16 Thec lastoa Journal of Liberalli History (issuet 88, autumnion 2015) was a special an issue on the 2010–15d coalition t and theh Liberale Democrats. 2015 Unsurprisingly, it triggered e a rangel of responses,ec includingt a numberion of letters (see page 25). Here, Michael Meadowcroft considers the implications of the party’s targeting strategy for the outcome of the 2015 election, and Roy Douglas queries the decision to enter coalition in the first place.

the party and only in Leeds North elections – welcome to be sure but and in working men’s clubs etc. East and Leeds East, where some achieved at great cost. My conclu- as well as producing a great colleagues disobeyed central party sion is that there was an argument deal of coverage in the local instructions, were there even one for targeting for a single election newspapers. Also, there is at constituency-wide election address, but not thereafter. least a minimal value in tying (they just held on to their deposit in up activists of the other parties Leeds North East.) It is no wonder to inhibit them from work- that we poll derisory votes in most The issues ing against the party in its key of the city. Perhaps the most seri- There are seven questions that need seats. ous consequence of such targeting to be addressed in the light of recent 3. Does targeting produce sig- is that it does not hold out the pos- elections, and particularly that of nificant extra workers in key sibility of revival. If party instruc- May 2015: seats? Some additional workers tions are followed, no one gets any 1. Does the party wish to be a certainly transfer their activ- support whatever in working sac- national party with at least a ity to help in key seats but it rificially in a non-target ward with minimum active presence in is only the dedicated party the determination to win it – as was every constituency? If so this members that do so, as most a key method of success before the is incompatible with target- local activists only see a need strategy. ing as practised up to the 2015 to be involved in their own general election. Unless there patch. Also, there is a dimin- is a widespread national pres- ishing return as the lack of Statistics ence there is no point of con- local activity causes activists to The national statistics for the six tact for potential members, for become inactive. elections, 1992 to 2015, are reveal- the media, for campaigning 4. Is there a value in having as ing (see Table 1). to change illiberal local poli- large a national vote as pos- It would appear that apply- cies, or for applying national sible? I certainly believe that ing targeting after the 1992 gen- policies and campaigns locally. there is. I would not dispute eral election achieved what it set At the very least, the Liberal that winning seats and hav- out to do: it traded a reduction in Democrats cannot be a politi- ing a significant parliamen- the party’s national vote for a large cal party making the argument tary presence is crucial, but the increase in the number of MPs for Liberalism and seeking to extended influence of the par- elected. However, the results in the recruit and sustain those who ty’s MPs, their moral authority following three elections hardly have a personal allegiance to and the political legitimacy of justify the risk of ending campaign- that philosophy unless there Liberalism is underpinned by a ing in a majority of constituencies is a party locally to join and massive national vote. It is also in order to release party activists in to participate in, and this important to the advocacy of them to go and work in the desig- applies to ensuring that there electoral reform. nated seats. Clearly there was still a are activities for surges of new residual perception of a widespread members such as after the lead- party presence in that the total poll ers’ debates in 2010 and post- Table 1: Liberal Democrat performance, 1992–2015 remained roughly the same in 2001 election in 2015. Year LD votes LD % MPs elected and actually increased in 2005 and 2. What is the value to seats that (million) 2010. This had disappeared by 2015 are designated as target con- 1992 6.0 17.8 20 after thirteen years of a widespread stituencies in activity across 1997 5.2 16.8 46 lack of local campaigning activity the board? In Leeds, over the and faced with the adverse political fifteen years it took to win 2001 4.8 18.3 52 circumstances of that election; but the West Leeds seat it was cer- 2005 6.0 22.0 62 even before 2015, the trade-off of tainly helpful that there was 2010 6.8 23.0 57 ‘presence’ for seats only produced activity across the city that was eleven additional MPs over four commented on in workplaces 2015 2.4 7.9 8

Journal of Liberal History 89 Winter 2015–16 21 coalition and the 2015 election

5. Is there a viable alternative Can Liberals learn from history? to targeting? Historically, an Roy Douglas example is provided by West Leeds over the long years the Liberal Party took to win it in n the Autumn 2015 issue of coalition of 1918–22, even though 1983. (Incidentally, West Leeds the Journal of Liberal History, a Lloyd George had more than twice is currently one of the many Iconsiderable number of senior as many MPs behind him as Nick seats in which currently there members of the Liberal Democrats Clegg had in 2010. At the ensuing is no activity whatever.) We gave their views of the 2010 general general election, the Liberals were encouraged activity in all the election and its aftermath. There split into two warring groups. Even Leeds seats and did not seek to appears to be substantial unanim- if those groups could come have ‘poach’ key individuals from ity that the Lib Dems were wise together (which they actually did a other seats; however we had in participating in the coalition. year later), the Liberal Party would special ‘work weekends’ and I contend that this view is wrong still only have been – for the first similar activities for which and that the Lib Dems had a better time ever – the third party of the we asked for outside help – option open to them. I also con- state. The National Democratic and got it, often from many tend that the action they took was Party had also supported the coali- miles away. The same tactic rooted in a fundamentally flawed tion, and every one of its ten MPs could be used now to designate view of the proper role of Lib Dems was defeated. When the National ‘special seats’ to which extra in the political system – a view Government was formed in 1931 effort could be encouraged and which has implications not only for with Liberal support, it was almost directed. the present but also for the more immediately dominated by the 6. Is there a long-term effect of distant future. I shall go further and Conservatives. The Liberals in the the strategy in the target seats? contend that unless the Lib Dems House of Commons promptly split It is curious that there had still take serious and drastic action into two groups of almost equal to be target seats – many of soon, they will have no future and size, plus a splinter of four MPs sep- them the same constituencies deserve none. I base these opinions arate from both. Most members of as in 1997 – after twenty years. largely on the history of the Lib one of the two substantial groups, A concomitant danger of tar- Dems and their predecessor Liberal the Liberal Nationals, and some of geting is that it encourages a I also con- Party. the others, eventually disappeared constituency to rely on outside In the House of Commons of without trace into the Conservative activity rather than seeking to tend that the 650 members elected in May 2010, ranks. A few very important for- be self-supporting. there were 306 Conservatives, 258 mer Labour MPs stayed in the gov- 7. Over a period of time, the action they Labour, 57 Lib Dems, 8 Demo- ernment, constituting themselves establishing of a base Liberal took was cratic Unionists and 6 Scottish the National Labour Party, which Democrat vote of electors who Nationalists, plus a total of 9 from also gradually vanished. identify with Liberal values, rooted in a Plaid Cymru, Social Democratic Warned by such experiences, even if inchoately, and who Labour Party, Alliance, Green and the post-1945 Liberal Party resisted are predisposed to vote Liberal fundamen- Independent put together. In addi- temptations to participate in Con- Democrat even when the party tion there were six non-voters: the servative-dominated administra- is unpopular, is incompatible tally flawed Speaker, who can’t vote and five tions. Clement Davies was offered with targeting which prevents Sinn Fein who won’t vote. Con- a cabinet job by Winston Church- activity to seek out and to sus- view of the servatives and Lib Dems together ill in 1951 in what proved to be a tain these individuals. could provide – did provide – a remarkably benign Conservative proper role comfortable working majority government. Jeremy Thorpe was with 363 seats, against 281 for all offered a job by Edward Heath in Conclusion of Lib Dems other voting MPs. 1974. Both leaders consulted their The party’s targeting strategy had Another option, which is occa- colleagues and, following their a positive impact on the 1997 elec- in the politi- sionally discussed, was a combina- advice, loyally resisted the tempta- tion but not significantly thereafter. tion of Labour and Lib Dems. This tion. If they had acted otherwise, Moreover, by curtailing activity in cal system – would have provided 315 seats: it is difficult to see how the Liberal a large majority of constituencies, it rather more than the Conservatives Party could have survived. has had a malign effect on the par- a view which but well short of an overall majority. So what other options ty’s general presence in the country Whether such a combination could remained? ‘Go it alone: a plague on and has diminished the party’s base has impli- have been formed at all seems doubt- both your houses’ had some attrac- vote. As such it was a contribut- cations not ful, because a lot of Labour people tions in 2010, but it carried its own ing factor to the party’s poor per- would have fought it tooth and nail. risks. A widespread view among formance at the May 2015 general only for the But, if it had been formed, it could Lib Dems at the time was that, if election. hardly have been expected to last no coalition was formed, the Con- present but long, being highly vulnerable to servatives would form a minority Michael Meadowcroft was a Leeds minor rebellions, winter flu or small government, behave with studied City Councillor, 1968–83, and Liberal also for the parties feeling their muscles. moderation for a short time, and MP for Leeds West, 1983–87. He held A coalition in which the Con- then call another general election numerous local and national offices in the more distant servatives were much the largest at which they would win an over- Liberal Party. party has always led to disaster for all majority. Voters could reason- future. others. That was the case in the ably judge that the Lib Dems were

22 Journal of Liberal History 89 Winter 2015–16 coalition and the 2015 election ducking the responsibility to help we still call for a three-party What played drastic is done about it they face the deal with a very serious economic government. If you, the voters, real threat of parliamentary extinc- crisis, and they would lose ground agree that this is the right way the big- tion in the foreseeable future. – though it is difficult to believe of handling the crisis, then give Reflecting on the catastrophe, that they would have fared as badly us a lot more MPs and that will gest part in would the Lib Dems have fared as they did in 2015. send a message to both other much better if, somehow, they had Suppose, however, that Nick parties which they cannot refuse keeping the formed a coalition with Labour Clegg had greeted the 2010 elec- to accept. and – against all probabilities – tion results with a speech rather Liberals in that coalition had survived for five like this. What would have happened? Per- years? I very much doubt it. There haps the message would have hit existence is little reason for thinking that All three major parties have home, and the Lib Dems would voters would have taken a kindlier been disappointed by the results. have improved their position. Per- as an active view of the junior partner in a coa- We Lib Dems hoped to improve haps it would have failed, and the party in the lition with Labour than they did our position, but in fact have Lib Dems might have slipped back. of the junior partner in a coalition lost a few MPs. Labour hoped to The one thing that is pretty certain bleakest with the Conservatives. retain a majority, but they are is that they would not have sus- So, what can be done? There is a now well short of a majority. tained catastrophe on the scale they years was historical parallel. In 1951 the Lib- The Conservatives hoped to win encountered in 2015. erals were down to six MPs and did an overall majority, but they When the general election of the convic- not improve on that figure until have not done so. The verdict of 2015 approached, disaster for the the Orpington by-election of 1962, the electors might be summed Lib Dems was predictable. Many tion among which brought them up to seven. In up, ‘None of the above.’ people who had voted Lib Dem in 1970, however, they were down to Yet everybody agrees that 2010 were profoundly disappointed. party activ- six again, after which they began a the country is in a dire economic The volte-face over tuition fees had slow climb to sixty-three in 2005. mess and some sort of govern- been utterly inexcusable, for many ists that the What played the biggest part in ment must be formed to try to people had been induced to vote keeping the Liberals in existence as sort it out. We Lib Dems call Lib Dem by the promise on which Liberal Party an active party in the bleakest years for a genuine three-party coa- many – but not all – of the MPs was the conviction among party lition to do so, and are willing later reneged. The Lib Dems had had abso- activists that the Liberal Party had and eager to play our part in countenanced an increase in VAT – absolutely unique policies. There such a government. However, the worst and the most regressive of lutely unique was nowhere else that Liberals we are not prepared to join with all our major taxes. They had made could go. the Tories to do down Labour, fools of themselves over electoral policies. Does that conviction still apply? or with the Labour party to do reform: the referendum was bound For a considerable time it has down the Tories. to be rigged against the idea unless looked as if the aim of the Lib Dems the Tories backed it. Furthermore, was to find themselves in the very How would the other parties have the proposed ‘reform’ would have position which arose so disastrously responded? There is a theoretical been little better than the present in 2010: holding the balance of possibility that they would both voting system and was completely power between Conservatives and have accepted the suggestion and different from proportional rep- Labour. This implied the hope that the Lib Dems could have expected resentation which the Liberals had they could slip a few of their own credit for having suggested it. always supported. Against the people into the government and Much more likely, one or both of many disappointed former support- restrain the larger party from doing them would have refused. The ers, the Lib Dems had nothing to some of the nastier things which it other two parties would have had say which might attract new sup- might contemplate. There was no to sort out the immediate ques- port in compensation. prospect of securing any important tion of who was to form a minor- Some people – I was one of them objectives which were distinctively ity government. It would probably – thought that the ‘incumbency Liberal, with the very improbable have been the Conservatives, but factor’ might have saved twenty- exception of real electoral reform. the possibility of Labour remain- odd Lib Dems who were good con- Whatever else the 2015 general elec- ing in office and awaiting defeat stituency MPs. But this was not tion established, it proved that the in the new parliament could not to be and the party was reduced electors have no time for that sort be excluded. In either case a new from fifty-seven MPs to eight. In of party. general election would probably the country as a whole, there are The best hope for the Lib Dems have followed soon. The Lib Dems no ‘strongholds’. No two Lib Dem today is to cast their minds back to would have been in a position to seats are contiguous. There are the ‘unfinished agenda’ – things for argue in terms like these: only two constituencies, Westmor- which Liberals fought in the past, land and Norfolk North, in which which are still unfulfilled. Some of In spite of the real economic the Lib Dem majority is as great as those things have been superseded crisis, the other parties prefer 3,000 and in Norfolk this may be by events; but many have not. to play silly politics rather than explained in part by the unusually Free trade was always on the attend to the problem. We have high UKIP vote which probably Liberal masthead. However the called for a three-party govern- damaged the Tory challenger selec- voters decide in the 2017 referen- ment, which seems to be what tively. Lib Dems are certainly in dum on ‘Europe’, much will be the voters really wanted, and dire trouble and unless something required to establish something like

Journal of Liberal History 89 Winter 2015–16 23 coalition and the 2015 election free trade as Cobden or Gladstone, benefit of all, is it acting wisely in to the needs of the times were Asquith or Samuel, understood the imposing high tuition fees, which beginning to emerge. I think we term. It remains as true as ever that will inevitably discourage many should watch the Labour Party ‘if goods cannot cross international aspirants? Lib Dems today need to in particular. I have said that a frontiers, armies will’. undo the follies of the 2010–15 coa- Labour–Lib Dem coalition in 2010 For well over a century, Liberals lition. Everyone complains about would probably have been no better fought for a taxation system more weaknesses in the National Health for Lib Dems (or, I may add, for the just and more efficient than the pre- Service. At the root of the trouble country) than the Conservative– sent one, pivoting on Land Value is a shortage of medical and nurs- Lib Dem coalition which actually Taxation. With huge rises in land ing staff. There is no short-term took place. But a lot of things have values – both in an absolute sense answer, but the long-term solu- changed since before the massive and relative to the value of other tion must be greatly to increase the events of May 2015. things – the case for ‘LVT’ today is numbers of people undergoing the If the general election wrought even stronger than it was a century appropriate training. disaster on the Lib Dems, it also or so ago, when it was winning In matters of ‘defence’ and for- wrought disaster on the Labour elections for the Liberal Party. It eign policy, we may look back to Party. Ever since 1918, the Labour is the cheapest and simplest way of Cobden and, indeed, to some of the Party has aimed at forming an raising public revenue. It will play Radicals of much later times. Why independent government. For a major part in the battle against involve ourselves in conflicts, par- most of that period, the domi- poverty. It is a major instrument ticularly in the Middle East, where nant reason for this was that the against unemployment. It will help we cannot hope to determine the Labour Party believed in socialism. deal with many urban problems long-term consequences? As for That faith gradually evaporated ranging from housing shortage to ‘defence’, how much is necessary and it was formally renounced in inner-city decay. It will help the to protect us from attack, and by the late 1990s in favour of what rural environment and the farmer, whom? Would anybody sleep less was called ‘New Labour’, which while boosting food production. It There is some comfortably in their beds if we looked uncommonly like a mild will be of great value in countering abandoned not only Trident but form of Conservatism in domes- the cycle of booms and slumps. reason for a great deal more besides? Much tic affairs and subservience to the As far back as 1929, Liberals money and many lives could be United States in foreign policy. If fought a general election on the slo- thinking that saved by drastic reduction in both the choice of a new leader signifies gan, ‘We can conquer unemploy- weapons and commitments. anything, it strongly suggests that ment’. Alas, they did not win; but the situation As every experienced politi- ‘New Labour’ has also been repudi- they substantially increased their cian knows, good policies are not ated. The Labour Party is casting representation. On the same theme, today may enough. They must be backed by round for new policies and – who later William Beveridge produced have paral- good organisation. That was recog- knows? – it may eventually land up his plans for ‘full employment in a nised by Liberals in the aftermath with policies not wildly different free society’, which for a long time lels with that of 1945, when Liberals decided that from those which I have suggested was largely accepted by all par- their declared objective of a ‘Liberal as appropriate for the Lib Dems. ties. It is urgently needed today. In which pre- majority government’ presupposed That, however, is completely hypo- a sane society, the problem would the creation of strong constituency thetical at this stage. not be ‘What should we do for these vailed in the organisations. Branches were set Labour also faces a major prob- people who haven’t got jobs?’ but up in many places where they had lem of a different kind. Will it ever ‘How on earth do we find people late 1840s not existed for years and existing be possible to create another Labour to do all the work that needs to be branches were given much clearer government? Labour’s great strong- done?’ and the ideas of how to organise. Of course hold was Scotland right down to Long before the First World they failed disastrously in their pri- 2015. Now they (like the Lib Dems War, Winston Churchill was cas- 1850s, when mary objective, but it is a fair guess and the Conservatives) hold just tigating the Conservatives as ‘the that they would have disappeared one Scottish constituency. On top party of the rich against the poor’, old parties altogether long ago if they had not of that, there is a serious prospect with the intended implication that given serious attention to their that within a few years Scotland Liberals were appalled at the mald- were break- grass roots. My own experience will be an independent country and istribution of wealth which pre- in the constituency where I live, out of the UK political equation vailed and intended to rectify it. ing down which was won by the Lib Dems altogether. Wealth is still maldistributed; the in 2010 but lost again in 2015, is Is it possible to secure, not a coa- poor are still much too poor and a and new that Lib Dem organisation, even in lition, but some kind of electoral great deal needs to be done, and can ones appro- hopeful places, is still very far from understanding, with Labour? An be done, to improve the situation. adequate. old question, but a valid one. I have It was Liberals who in 1870 first priate to the All this seems to portend a long before me the ‘official’ party pub- made legislative provision for uni- and stony road back; but politics lication, Liberal Magazine, of June versal primary education. Does our needs of the is full of surprises – good as well 1914, p. 323. This records six by- educational system yet provide any as bad. There is some reason for elections to the parliament of the opportunity for people from disad- times were thinking that the situation today day in which seats that had been vantaged backgrounds to make the may have parallels with that which Liberal at the previous general elec- most of their talents? If the nation beginning to prevailed in the late 1840s and the tion, and one where the seat had needs many people with high 1850s, when old parties were break- been Labour, had been captured by educational qualifications for the emerge. ing down and new ones appropriate the Tories through the intervention

24 Journal of Liberal History 89 Winter 2015–16 letters of a third candidate. It concluded, much more attention than in the There is no The Great War and the Liberal ‘What is clearly wanted is a policy recent past to strengthening local Party (1) of accommodation between Liberal organisations. Lib Dems should, future for a Michael Steed in his very inter- and Labour which will reproduce however, keep in mind the pros- esting article, ‘Did the Great War in the constituencies the coopera- pect of eventually participating in a party which really kill the Liberal Party?’ (Jour- tion which obtains at Westminster.’ major political realignment. There nal of Liberal History 87, summer It would be useful today for both are people in the Labour Party and aspires to no 2015) writes of the belief of the his- parties to consider how many con- there are people in the Conserva- toric Liberal Party ‘that reason, stituencies were won by the Con- tive Party too, who are already more than trade and moral principles could servatives in 2015 where the victory thinking on truly Liberal lines. together bring peace’ as ‘close to a could be attributed to the presence These and many other objec- junior part- raison d’être’ and as ‘an important of a ‘no-hope’ candidate – Lib Dem tives are suggested by the actions nership in constituent in the glue that held in some cases, Labour in others. and policies of Liberals in the his- together the disparate elements A few conclusions seem to toric past. Whether Lib Dems have a coalition making up the party’. Two let- emerge. There is no future for a any future will depend on how well ters in the Manchester Guardian in party which aspires to no more they learn from the past. dominated August 1916 seem to provide sharp than junior partnership in a coali- confirmation of this analysis. tion dominated by others, though Dr Roy Douglas is Emeritus Reader by others. Mary Toulmin, wife of Sir tactical arrangements in some con- at the University of Surrey, a former George Toulmin, Liberal MP for stituencies may well be useful. The Liberal parliamentary candidate, and Bury, wrote to the Manchester job of Lib Dems today is to decide the author of fifteen books, including Guardian on 5 August 1916: on policies aimed not just at deal- The History of the Liberal Party ing with short-term problems but 1895–1970 (1971) and Liberals: The It is difficult for a life-long Lib- at producing a long-term Liberal History of the Liberal and Liberal eral like myself – and one grow- future. It will be necessary to give Democrat Parties (2005). ing more Radical with years – to write with moderation of the present position of Liberal poli- tics. The members of the Liberal Party in the House of Com- mons, with a few noble excep- tions, have slavishly obeyed the dictum of the Prime Minis- ter – ‘Wait and See’. They have waited and they have seen! They Letters see a unity of parties indeed but how achieved? By the con- Labour and the Liberals; tinuous surrender by the Liberal questions for readers Ayrshire Northern at the 1906 gen- Party of all those things it held Anent James Owen’s article ‘The eral election. most dear – a voluntary army, struggle for representation: Labour Anent the report of the meet- right of asylum, respect for con- candidates and the Liberals, 1886– ing on ‘The Liberal-Tory coali- science, education, Home Rule, 1895’ ( Journal of Liberal History tion of 1915’, why did Bonar Law, and international law as touch- 86, spring 2015), Keir Hardie was the Tory leader, who joined the ing the rights of neutrals. refused the Liberal nomination for Cabinet in May 1915, not have to the Mid-Lanarkshire by-election submit himself to a ministerial by- The President of the Yorkshire in 1888. He then left the Liberals election? Such were not suspended Council of Women’s Liberal Asso- and unsuccessfully contested the during the war, as Harold Tennant, ciations, Mary Isabel Salt, wrote on by-election as Independent Labour. Asquith’s brother-in-law, had to 10 August 1916: John Sinclair, a protégé of (Sir) submit himself to an unopposed Henry Campbell-Bannerman and ministerial by-election in Berwick- The letters appearing in your a future Secretary for Scotland, shire when appointed Secretary for columns from Lady Toulmin, was offered the Liberal nomination Scotland in July 1916. Sir William Byles, and oth- but refused, as he did not want to And one more question for your ers, undoubtedly express the oppose Hardie. readers. Some biographers of Wil- opinion of thousands of sincere In 1901, Sinclair, then Scottish liam E. Gladstone state that his rank-and-file Liberals who have Liberal Whip, supported, with Sir brother, Robertson (born 1805) hitherto remained dumb under Henry’s approval, the unsuccess- was educated at Eton and Glas- the impotence of the present sit- ful Scottish Workers Representa- gow Academy. However, Glas- uation, but who are none the less tion Committee (SWRC) candidate gow Academy was not founded eagerly awaiting the first oppor- at a by-election in North-Eastern until 1845. Can any of your readers tunity to battle effectively for Lanarkshire, rather than the Lib- advise where in Glasgow he was the old principles which formed eral Imperialist candidate who was educated? Incidentally, one of the the bedrock of their political also unsuccessful. The interven- original directors of the Academy faith. Some of us are asking our- tion of SWRC candidates resulted was Sir Henry Campbell-Banner- selves whether we can honestly in the defeat of Liberal candidates man’s uncle, William Campbell. remain associated any longer in North-Western Lanarkshire and Dr Alexander S. Waugh with a party whose official

Journal of Liberal History 89 Winter 2015–16 25