DOCSLIB.ORG

John Barrett, Sir Alan Beith, Sir Menzies Campbell, Sandra Gidley, Paul Holmes and Richard Younger-Ross

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
John Barrett, Sir Alan Beith, Sir Menzies Campbell, Sandra Gidley, Paul Holmes and Richard Younger-Ross House of Commons Committee on Standards and Privileges John Barrett, Sir Alan Beith, Sir Menzies Campbell, Sandra Gidley, Paul Holmes and Richard Younger-Ross Eleventh Report of Session 2009–10 Report, Appendix, oral and written evidence and formal minutes Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 16 March 2010 HC 491 Published on 19 March 2010 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Committee on Standards and Privileges The Committee on Standards and Privileges is appointed by the House of Commons to oversee the work of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards; to examine the arrangements proposed by the Commissioner for the compilation, maintenance and accessibility of the Register of Members’ Interests and any other registers of interest established by the House; to review from time to time the form and content of those registers; to consider any specific complaints made in relation to the registering or declaring of interests referred to it by the Commissioner; to consider any matter relating to the conduct of Members, including specific complaints in relation to alleged breaches in the Code of Conduct which have been drawn to the Committee’s attention by the Commissioner; and to recommend any modifications to the Code of Conduct as may from time to time appear to be necessary. Current membership Rt hon Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP (Conservative, Kensington & Chelsea) (Chairman) Rt hon Kevin Barron MP (Labour, Rother Valley) Mr Andrew Dismore MP (Labour, Hendon) Nick Harvey MP (Liberal Democrat, North Devon) Rt hon Greg Knight MP (Conservative, East Yorkshire) Mr Elfyn Llwyd MP (Plaid Cymru, Meirionnydd Nant Conwy) Mr Chris Mullin MP (Labour, Sunderland South) The hon Nicholas Soames MP (Conservative, Mid Sussex) Mr Paddy Tipping MP (Labour, Sherwood) Dr Alan Whitehead MP (Labour, Southampton Test) Powers The constitution and powers of the Committee are set out in Standing Order No. 149. In particular, the Committee has power to order the attendance of any Member of Parliament before the committee and to require that specific documents or records in the possession of a Member relating to its inquiries, or to the inquiries of the Commissioner, be laid before the Committee. The Committee has power to refuse to allow its public proceedings to be broadcast. The Law Officers, if they are Members of Parliament, may attend and take part in the Committee’s proceedings, but may not vote. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at: www.parliament.uk/sandp. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Mr Steve Priestley (Clerk), Miss Rhiannon Hollis (Second Clerk) and Ms Jane Cooper (Committee Assistant). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to The Clerk of the Committee on Standards and Privileges, Journal Office, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6615. John Barrett, Sir Alan Beith, Sir Menzies Campbell, Sandra Gidley, Paul Holmes and Richard Younger-Ross 1 Contents Report Page Introduction 3 Referral 3 The Commissioner’s findings 3 The Committee’s approach to this inquiry 6 The public interest 6 The property sale windfall analogy 7 Advice from the House authorities 7 The position of other Members 7 John Barrett 8 Summary 8 Mr Barrett’s evidence and the Commissioner’s conclusions 8 The public interest 8 The property sale windfall analogy 9 Advice from the House authorities 10 Mr Barrett’s comments on the Commissioner’s report 11 The effect on the public purse 12 Conclusions and recommendation 13 Sandra Gidley 15 Summary 15 Ms Gidley’s evidence and the Commissioner’s conclusions 15 The public interest 15 Advice from the House authorities 16 The property sale windfall analogy 16 Ms Gidley’s comments on the Commissioner’s report 17 The effect on the public purse 18 Conclusions and recommendation 18 Paul Holmes 19 Summary 19 Mr Holmes’ evidence and the Commissioner’s conclusions 19 The public interest 19 The property sale windfall analogy 20 Advice from the House authorities 20 Mr Holmes’ comments on the Commissioner’s report 20 The effect on the public purse 21 Conclusions and recommendation 22 Richard Younger-Ross 23 Summary 23 Mr Younger-Ross’s evidence and the Commissioner’s conclusions 23 The public interest 23 The property sale windfall analogy 24 Advice from the House authorities 24 Mr Younger-Ross’s comments on the Commissioner’s report 25 The effect on the public purse 26 Conclusions and recommendation 27 2 John Barrett, Sir Alan Beith, Sir Menzies Campbell, Sandra Gidley, Paul Holmes and Richard Younger-Ross Sir Alan Beith 28 Summary 28 Sir Alan’s evidence and the Commissioner’s conclusions 28 The public interest 28 The property sale windfall analogy 30 Advice from the House authorities 30 Sir Alan’s comments on the Commissioner’s report 31 The effect on the public purse 31 Conclusions and recommendation 31 Sir Menzies Campbell 33 Summary 33 Sir Menzies’ evidence and the Commissioner’s conclusions 33 The public interest 33 The property sale windfall analogy 34 Advice from the House authorities 35 Sir Menzies’ comments on the Commissioner’s report 35 The effect on the public purse 36 Conclusions and recommendation 36 Formal Minutes 37 Appendix 39 Written evidence to the Committee 196 Oral Evidence 205 Further written evidence 235 John Barrett, Sir Alan Beith, Sir Menzies Campbell, Sandra Gidley, Paul Holmes and Richard Younger-Ross 3 Introduction Referral 1. In May 2009, a national newspaper alleged that at least thirteen Members of Parliament had received “windfalls worth thousands of pounds to give up their right to cheap rent in a deal that led to taxpayers paying substantially more for their second homes.” The newspaper report stated that, following the sale of the Dolphin Square estate in Westminster in 2005, all tenants had received offers from the estate’s new owners of a lump sum in exchange for moving out or paying a higher rent, and that the new owners had also offered £5,000 “to give up the right to pass the tenancy on to family.” It was claimed that “Many MPs accepted the windfalls and stayed in the flats while the taxpayer picked up their higher rental bills.”1 2. Between 29 May and 6 June 2009, six Members wrote to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, asking him to rule on whether their decisions in respect of the offers from the new owners had been appropriate. In accordance with established procedures, the Commissioner sought the approval of the Committee for him to accept the self-referrals. The Committee agreed that the Commissioner should undertake an inquiry into each Member who decided to make a self-referral. The six Members who did so were: John Barrett, Sir Alan Beith, Sir Menzies Campbell, Sandra Gidley, Paul Holmes and Richard Younger-Ross. As well as taking part in the Commissioner’s inquiry, all six Members gave oral evidence to this Committee and all but Sir Alan submitted written evidence, which is published in full with this Report. The Commissioner’s findings 3. The Commissioner sent us a report of his investigation on 17 February.2 In his report, the Commissioner has set out his findings of fact for each of the six Members, and each will be considered separately below. 4. The Commissioner was told by Members that the Dolphin Square flats had been run by the Dolphin Square Trust, a non-profit making body, which had held down rents to a level below market rates.3 Many Members found the flats a useful and low-cost place to stay when in London. Each of the six Members who self-referred claimed Additional Costs Allowance (ACA) which covered all or (in one case) part of the cost of their rent at Dolphin Square, except for periods when Parliament was dissolved. 5. In 2005, Westminster City Council sold the head lease of the flats, and a long negotiation ensued.4 In October of that year, letters were sent to all tenants making them a number of different offers. The aim of the new owners appears to have been to encourage existing tenants, many of whom were on long leases which guaranteed advantageous terms, to give up their right to those terms. The Members who self-referred received the offers from the 1 Appendix, paragraph 2 2 Appendix 3 Appendix, paragraph 12 4 Appendix, paragraph 13 4 John Barrett, Sir Alan Beith, Sir Menzies Campbell, Sandra Gidley, Paul Holmes and Richard Younger-Ross new owners, and each decided to accept a payment. The amounts accepted varied, as did the rights and benefits in exchange for which the payments were offered. The six Members used the payments in a variety of ways, although none decided to pay any of the money received to the House. The facts of each case are examined in more detail in later sections of this Report. 6. The three offers are summarised in the Commissioner’s memorandum, as follows: • Option A, “Cash and Go” version, which would involve the current tenant being paid a sum of money by the new owners of Dolphin Square, who would secure vacant possession of the flat; • Option A, “Cash and Stay” version, which would involve the current tenant being paid a sum of money by the new owners of Dolphin Square, and staying in their flat at a higher rent, on an assured shorthold tenancy, with no security of tenure on expiry of the fixed term; • Option B, a fixed term lease that could run until June 2034, starting with a rent the same as the current rent but gradually increasing year on year.5 The Commissioner was also told that a separate offer of £5,000 was made at the same time to those long-standing tenants who, it was believed, might have a right to pass the tenancy on to their children.6 7.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In October 2007, Menzies Campbell Resigned As Leader of the Liberal Democrats After Just Nineteen Months in the Post
    CampbEll AS LEadER In October 2007, Menzies Campbell resigned as Leader of the Liberal Democrats after just nineteen months in the post. On page 45 we carry a review of his autobiography. In July of this year Journal Editor Duncan Brack interviewed him with a view to supplementing the story told in the book. 38 Journal of Liberal History 60 Autumn 2008 CampbEll AS LEadER Q: Your autobiography has relatively both socialists. So I suppose it school when he was fourteen; little to say about why you became was a series of factors: being his first job was as an office boy and remain a Liberal, apart from more politically aware, being in a tea import company. That being attracted by Jo Grimond and attracted by Jo Grimond, seeing was thought by his parents not the Liberal position on Suez. Can what some thought might be a to be a very stable existence, you say more about why you joined Liberal renaissance, reading John so he went and he served his the party? Stuart Mill, and not wanting to apprenticeship as a joiner, and he MC: My parents were both do what might be expected of worked on one of the ships that Labour – neither of them were me – none of these was of itself was built on Clydeside as part of activists, I think their member- the compelling factor, but taken the effort to deal with the worst ships had probably lapsed by the together I joined the Liberals. of the recession. His brother was time I was a teenager, but they Political debating was the a great ladies’ man and used to did talk a lot about politics.
    [Show full text]
  • 18/Spring 98
    Merger Hopes and Fears Were They Realised? Alliance into merger: how has it worked? Rt. Hon. Alan Beith, MP examines the myths and the realities. It seems an age since a number of us were the Tories at the one after. The Social Democrats who backed merger, condemned to endless meetings in often miserable and had to put up with undisguised bitterness – but never smoke-filled – rooms for the merger and calumny from others in their party as a negotiations between the Liberals and the SDP. Was result, saw merger as essential to the continu- ance of their mission to provide an electable it really only ten years ago? Were we once in separate and responsible alternative to the Tories. They parties? Did the process of merger really have to be realised that what they had achieved in detach- so painful and damaging, given that the party which ing so many from the Labour Party and at- tracting significant new support would not last emerged became, after the first couple of years, a if they remained in competition with the Lib- very congenial party to be in and one which is now erals. They hoped to advance many policies enjoying well-deserved success? which they found they shared with Liberals. Then there were the fears which made the It is instructive to look back to the hopes negotiations so difficult. Liberals feared that and fears which surrounded the Alliance and Liberal identity in the minds of voters would the merger. Liberals hoped to prevent the dis- be lost, and that Liberalism itself could be dan- sipation and division of their potential support gerously diluted in the philosophy and poli- which resulted from competition between the cies of the new party.
    [Show full text]
  • Reports to Conference Spring 2015 Contents
    REPORTS TO CONFERENCE SPRING 2015 CONTENTS Contents Page Federal Conference Committee……….……………………….……………..4 Federal Policy Committee......................…………...……………………......9 Federal Executive.............………………... ………………………………...17 Federal Finance and Administration Committee………….….…..............25 Parliamentary Party (Commons)……………………………. ……………...29 …………. Parliamentary Party (Lords)………………………..………………………...35 Parliamentary Party (Europe)………………………….……………………..41 Campaign for Gender Balance……………………………………………...45 Diversity Engagement Group……………………………………………..…50 3 Federal Conference Committee Glasgow 2015 Last autumn we went back to Glasgow for the second year running. As in 2013 we received a superb welcome from the city. We continue to ask all attendees to complete an online feedback questionnaire. A good percentage complete this but I would urge all members to take the time to participate. It is incredibly useful to the conference office and FCC and does influence whether we visit a venue again and if we do, what changes we need to try and make. FCC Changes Following the committee elections at the end of last year there were a number of changes to the membership of FCC. Qassim Afzal, Louise Bloom, Sal Brinton, Prateek Buch, Veronica German, Evan Harris and David Rendel either did not restand or were not re-elected. All played a valuable role on FCC and will be missed. We welcome Jon Ball, Zoe O’Connell and Mary Reid onto the committee as directly elected members. FPC have elected two new representatives onto FCC and we welcome back Linda Jack and Jeremy Hargreaves in these roles. Both have previously served on FCC so are familiar with the way we work. One of the FE reps is also new with Kaavya Kaushik joining James Gurling as an FE rep on FCC.
    [Show full text]
  • Liberal Thinkers
    REPOrt – liBERAL thiNKERS Was such ‘pre-membering’ public Liberal Thinkers adoration, politics or ego? While Bounous conceded that there may Conference fringe meeting, 5 October 2014, with Alan have been an element of personal Beith, John Pugh, Liz Barker and Mark Pack; chair: Malcolm vanity, for example in the cor- ner stone of the Council House, Bruce the timing of the monuments was Report by Douglas Oliver much more suggestive of politically motivated public demonstration. The clock tower in the Jewellery he Liberal Democrat His- twentieth century: Foreign Sec- Quarter was timed in relation to tory Group met on the retary Edward Grey and the man his resignation from government TSunday night of the Octo- often credited with designing the and renewed his links to small busi- ber Federal Conference to dis- modern welfare state, Sir William nessmen. ‘Old Joe’, the tower at the cuss ‘Liberal Thinkers’ in an event Beveridge. Beith recalled that when university of which Chamberlain scheduled to tie in with the pam- he arrived in the area in the early was a principal sponsor, served to phlet of the same name released for 1970s, Beveridge’s ‘first-principles’ distract from the Boer War but also the first time in Glasgow. approach and reflective poise was reminded the community of his Musing upon his long involve- still widely remembered by locals commitment to promoting educa- ment with the party, the discus- in their mutual corner of north-east tion. There are more – and more In his book sion’s chair Malcolm Bruce – the England. Beveridge was known in prominent – monuments to Cham- outgoing MP for Gordon, appear- the area for his sometimes philo- berlain than to John Bright or Tory of essays, ing at his last autumn conference sophical village hall discursives; hero Colonel Burnaby, each popu- as a Westminster representative and whilst he did occasionally lar in his time.
    [Show full text]
  • Liberal History News Spring 2012
    LIBERAL hisTORY NEWS SPRING 2012 Orpington celebrated iberal legend Eric Lubbock seat with a near 22 per cent swing, very effectively’, and his ‘fantastic celebrated the 50th anniver- giving him a near 8,000 majority. team’ who ‘made a big difference’. Lsary of his Orpington by- He went on to hold it until 1970. While Meadowcroft rightly election winner with a star-studded Another veteran of the cam- observed that Orpington did not dinner at the National Liberal Club paign, William Wallace (now Lord ‘herald a great change in politics’ last month, writes York Membery. Wallace of Saltaire), explained how at the time, the final speaker of the A host of big names past and the Orpington by-election was ‘a night, party president Tim Farron, present attended the fifth Orp- world away from today’s world’. who wasn’t even born when it took ington Circle Dinner, chaired by ‘We did most of our canvassing place, argued that it had greater Paul Hunt, to pay tribute to the in the afternoon back then, and long-term significance than is still-sprightly octogenarian and there was nearly always someone sometimes appreciated. to talk about the campaign and its at home,’ he said, noting that many ‘The Orpington by-election significance. of those who eventually voted for rightly occupies an important Former Liberal MP Michael the Liberals were the sons or daugh- place in Liberal mythology,’ he Meadowcroft, who campaigned ters of Nonconformists. ‘What’s said. ‘It was a David versus Goliath alongside Eric at Orpington in more, people were keen to discuss struggle.
    [Show full text]
  • Nations and Regions: the Dynamics of Devolution
    Nations and Regions: The Dynamics of Devolution Quarterly Monitoring Programme Devolution and the Centre Quarterly Report February 2003 by Guy Lodge The monitoring programme is jointly funded by the ESRC and the Leverhulme Trust 1 Contents Contents Key Points 1 Devolution and Westminster 1.1 House of Lords Debate on the Constitution 1.2 New Breakaway Conservative Party 1.3 House of Lords Constitution Committee 1.4 Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill 1.5 Parliamentary Questions to the Wales Office 1.6 The Work of the Territorial Select Committees 1.7 The Work of the Grand Committees 1.8 Select Committee on the Lord Chancellor’s Department 1.9 Minority Party Representation on Select Committees 1.10 Barnett Formula 1.11 House of Lords Reform 2 Devolution and Whitehall 2.1 Edwina Hart accuses Whitehall of obstructing National Assembly 2.2 Helen Liddell Announces Decision on MSP Numbers 2.3 The Future of the Territorial Offices 3 Intergovernmental Relations 3.1 Meeting of JMC (Europe) 3.2 British-Irish Council Summit 3.3 Meeting of the British-Irish Council Environment Group 3.4 Meeting of the British-Irish Council Drugs Group 3.5 UK Government and the Devolved Bodies Launch the Animal Health and Welfare Strategy Consultation 2 Key Points • Assembly Finance Minister Edwina Hart criticises Whitehall civil servants • Lord Norton debate on the British Constitution in the House of Lords • Helen Liddell announces that the number of MSPs will remain at 129 in the outcome of the consultation on the size of the Scottish Parliament. • House of Lords Constitution Committee publishes Devolution: Inter- Institutional Relations in the United Kingdom • House of Lords debate on the Barnett Formula • Second Reading and Committee Stage of the Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill • Seven options for Lords Reform fail to gain a majority.
    [Show full text]
  • Liberal Democrat Conference Agenda
    Conference Agenda Liberal Democrat Autumn Conference 17th - 22nd September 2005 Blackpool The REAL alternative Contents Procedural information 2-4 Wednesday 21st F35 Reports of the Parliamentary Parties of the 31 Information Sunday 18th September Liberal Democrats Consultative Sessions 5 F36 Urgent Issue 31 F1 Report of the FCC 6 F37 Speech by Mark Oaten MP 31 F2 Standing Order Amendments 6 F38 Ending Elective Dictatorship 32 F3 Report of the FPC 7 F39 Road User Pricing 33 F4 Tax Credits 8 F40 Question and Answer Session on the 34 F5 Speech by Steve Webb MP 9 Environment F6 Equal Pay Audits 9 F41 Tackling Carbon Emissions: A Strategy for 35 Sunday 18th F7 Federal Executive Report 10 Clean and Sustainable Energy F8 Appointment of Federal Appeals Panel 10 F42 Speech by Rt Hon Jim Wallace QC MSP 36 2005-2010 F43 Parliamentary Candidates 37 F9 Report of the FFAC 11 F44 Leadership Election Nominations 37 F10 Membership Subscription and Federal Levy 11 F11 Report of the Gender Balance Task Force 12 Thursday 22nd F12 Campaign for Gender Balance 12 F45 Emergency Motions 39 F46 Anti-Social Behaviour 39 Monday 19th F47 Civil Liberties 41 Monday 19th F13 Formal Opening of Federal Conference 14 F48 Presentation of Awards 43 F14 The Future for Europe 14 F49 Speech by the Leader of the Liberal 43 F15 Control of Small Arms 16 Democrats, the Rt Hon Charles Kennedy MP F16 Speech by Rt Hon Sir Menzies Campbell QC MP 17 F17 Review of Millennium Development Goals 17 Standing Orders 44-51 F18 Speech by Simon Hughes MP 19 Federal Party 51 F19 Presentation of Newly Elected MPs 19 uesday 20th F20 Question & Answer with Charles Kennedy MP 19 T F21 Speech by Seif Shariff Hamad 20 See Conference Directory for Conference F22 NHS Dentistry 20 information, Fringe, Exhibition, Features F23 Mental Health 21 F24 Urgent Issue 23 Conference Directory and Agenda Tuesday 20th are available on tape and in large F25 Standards Board for England 24 print.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Future UK Security and Defence Interests
    Transcript Protecting Future UK Security and Defence Interests Bob Ainsworth MP Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox MP Shadow Defence Secretary Nick Harvey MP Liberal Democrat Shadow Defence Secretary Moderators: Dr Robin Niblett Director, Chatham House Sarah Montague BBC 29 March 2010 The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of Chatham House, its staff, associates or Council. Chatham House is independent and owes no allegiance to any government or to any political body. It does not take institutional positions on policy issues. This document is issued on the understanding that if any extract is used, the speakers and Chatham House should be credited, preferably with the details of the event. Where this document refers to or reports statements made by speakers at an event every effort has been made to provide a fair representation of their views and opinions, but the ultimate responsibility for accuracy lies with this document’s authors. The published text of speeches and presentations may differ from delivery. Transcript: Protecting Future UK Security and Defence Interests Robin Niblett: Bob, I'm going to turn to you first – Secretary of State, currently for Defence. Where do we, how do we place the type of conflict that we think Britain should be preparing for in the future? Inevitably today Afghanistan is taking up the bulk of our political and military focus and attention; taking up a huge amount of resources. Obviously it's taken lives and effort. But is this the model of the future? Are we preparing effectively for the kinds of conflicts that might be out there? We have risks from Iran, a deeply changing geopolitical situation with the rise of China; we saw the sinking of the South Korean boat a few days ago.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew Marr Show 16Th September 2018 Vince Cable
    1 VINCE CABLE ANDREW MARR SHOW 16TH SEPTEMBER 2018 VINCE CABLE AM: Vince popped into the studio an hour ago on his way to the Party conference in Brighton and I asked him first about his own future. VC: I want to see the party through the whole of this Brexit argument. If there is a general election in the turbulence generated by Brexit next year I will be there to lead us into the election, out through it. I want to see through these internal party reforms. We’ve got local elections next year. And I’ve got a big programme of work. AM: But you’re not going to be leader of the Liberal Democrats by the end of next year. VC: I think that’s uncertain. I have a series of tasks to do, I’m going to do them, I’m not setting a time horizon. I think it would be foolish to do so with so much uncertainty flying around. AM: Certainly the tone has changed. When we talked in February you said you were really loving the job and you were certainly going to be Lib Dem leader for the next general election in 2022. It doesn’t feel that way now. VC: Well, 2022 is a long time off and I think it’s improbable actually that I will be leading us then. But there is a big programme of work to do. It may take some time. I’m getting on with it. But I’m also looking to hand-help a professional transition to a next generation.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Autumn Conference
    ONLINE AUTUMN CONFERENCE 2021 17-20 SEPTEMBER DIRECTORY NEU Network Help us shape the future of education: be part of the National Education Union Councillor network. Being a member of our network will give you: > Access to written briefings. > Regular information about education issues. > Access to our events for councillors. The NEU Councillors Network is open to councillors from all political parties. The Network is now over 4,000 members strong. Join our Network at neu.org.uk/councillors-network or by scanning the QR code e [email protected] @neucllrs @NEUCllrs NEU2258/0721 NEU2258 Lib Dem advert 2 FP.indd 1 26/07/2021 13:42 CONFERENCE DIRECTORY 1 Welcome to the Liberal Democrat Online Autumn 2021 Conference Directory. Please note that the Conference Directory is available online only and not in hard copy format. Updates to the Conference Directory will be issued periodically up until conference and published online at: www.libdems.org.uk/a21-directory For details of the main auditorium sessions, see the separate Conference Agenda, available at: www.libdems.org.uk/a21-agenda Further information, registration and conference publications (including plain text and clear print versions) are available at: www.libdems.org.uk/conference Contents Feature: 2–3 Welcome to our online Autumn Conference from Ed Davey MP and Mark Pack Conference information: 4–9 Exhibition: 11–15 Fringe and training: 16–65 Friday 17 September 19 Saturday 18 September 27 Sunday 19 September 46 Monday 20 September 59 Autumn 2021 Directory vsn 2 Published and promoted by Mike Dixon on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, 1 Vincent Square, London, SW1P 2PN.
    [Show full text]
  • Lib Dem Manifesto
    Liberal Democrats The REAL alternativealternative More and more people are supporting the Liberal Democrats. Every sign is that we can win more votes and elect more Liberal Democrat MPs. Britain has real problems. Liberal Democrats are putting forward real solutions. Liberal Democrats offer a real alternative. therealalternative.org I believe that the 2001 it is underpinned by costed Tax and replace it with a fair and urgency. We are by far – 2005 parliament will be and credible pledges. We system based on people’s the greenest of the three remembered as the period are determined that what ability to pay. main UK political parties during which the Liberal we promise can be achieved. and this manifesto again Democrats came of age, Our fi gures, based on offi cial Society is still scarred by confi rms that fact. ushering in a new era of costings, all add up. And at inequality. Tackling that truly three-party politics. the heart of our programme is a priority for the Liberal It is a privilege at this That is why we enter this is a determination to Democrats. For example, it’s election to be leading the General Election campaign achieve a fairer and more time that we redressed the most socially progressive with such optimism, unity straightforward tax system scandalous discrimination party in British politics. Our of purpose and public which delivers the social against women in the goodwill. priorities we believe that state pension system. We priorities here at home people want. propose a ‘citizen’s pension’, are clear; our instinctive We have been tested based on residency instead internationalism – through – inside and outside The mark of a decent of national insurance positive and proactive Parliament – as never society is one which creates contributions, which would engagement with Europe, before.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1924 Labour Government and the Failure of the Whips
    The 1924 Labour Government and the Failure of the Whips by Michael Meadowcroft The first Labour government has been the subject of much research aided by a remarkable number of MPs who served in the 1924 parliament who either wrote memoirs or were the subject of biographies. However, though there is a consensus on the underlying strategic aim of Labour to use the arithmetic of the Liberals’ political dilemma to deal the party a lethal blow, there has been no focus hitherto on the day-to-day parliamentary process and the lack of a clear Labour strategy in government. There was neither a tactical decision to have measures that the Liberals could be expected to support, nor a deliberate policy to press forward with more socialist legislation that would please its own MPs, or at least the more vocal of them, and deliberately challenge the Liberal MPs. Instead the government continued along an almost day-to-day existence. The Labour parliamentary party had no collective experience of managing parliament and singularly failed to learn the tricks of the trade, not least as a consequence of the failure of the party whips to function effectively. This analysis focuses on the key role of the party whips and on their responsibility for the short nine-month life of the first Labour government. I have to declare an interest as a paid up member of the Whips’ Union having acted as Alan Beith’s deputy whip, 1983–86. The importance of the whips in a party system is a neglected field of study.
    [Show full text]