My top 5 Liberals

One of my dear friends has a catchphrase of positively describing certain people to be in his “top 5”. Loosely following on from that, I thought that it’d be good to compile a list of my top 5 Liberals. I’m restricting my list to the UK, and I’m selecting my top 5 from the pre-1980s Liberal Party, rather than the modern day Liberal Democrats.

The modern day Lib Dems face many challenges, so it's important to not lose sight of our heritage, as well as the future direction of the party. Whilst certain Liberals in my list had approaches which were specific and right for a certain time/context, there are nevertheless key lessons to take from Liberal titans of the past.

In no particular order:

1) William Gladstone

The Grand Old Man of politics, William Gladstone became the first leader of the ‘modern’ Liberal Party. A former Conservative who refused to sacrifice his free trade principles, Gladstone also had firm religious convictions, and an oratory power which appealed to the working class. He gets on to my list due to his immense presence in Liberalism, and his views on free trade which are held to this day within the Liberal Democrats. Serving as Prime Minister four times in the 19th century, he had a legendary rivalry with Conservative Benjamin Disraeli. Although used in a negative sense, I still find this particular quote about Gladstone (from Disraeli) amusing: “If Gladstone fell into the Thames, it would be a misfortune. But if someone fished him out again, that would be a calamity”. Despite this, Gladstone's summary of the differences between Conservatism and Liberalism still holds today; "Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear".

2) David Lloyd George

Clement Attlee rightly gains plaudits for his role in shaping the welfare state, but it was Lloyd George who laid down the foundations. Whilst Gladstone is rightly considered a Liberal hero, it was a necessary move by the likes of Lloyd George and Asquith to move away from laissez faire to a ‘New Liberalism’ platform designed to use the state more as a vehicle for combating poverty. Free school meals were provided for children in 1906 (made compulsory in 1914), pensions were introduced in 1908 for those over 70, and National Insurance was created in 1911, which gave the working classes a contributory system of security against unemployment and illness. These measures were met with considerable resistance from the Tories, especially as they were financed by taxes on the rich by the provocatively titled ‘People’s Budget’ in 1909. A fantastic orator, Lloyd George as Chancellor defended the budget designed for “raising money to wage implacable warfare against poverty and squalidness”. Lloyd George also gets bonus points for emulating the rhetoric of another Liberal hero of mine in FDR; Lloyd George’s economic proposals for combating the Great Depression were entitled ‘Lloyd George’s New Deal’.



3) William Beveridge

Historically, the Labour Party is synonymous with the National Health Service. My Labour opponent at the 2015 General Election went as far as to say “we (Labour) created it; we own it”. Not only was he wrong about the Labour Party ‘owning’ the NHS (it belongs to the people), but it was the work of the Liberal William Beveridge who shaped the NHS. This isn’t a dig at the excellent work of the 1945-1951 Labour administration, but rather at those who are ignorant of history. Beveridge commissioned a report in 1942 on how a post-war Britain should look. Specifically, Beveridge highlighted “five giant evils” which had to be tackled; ‘Want’, ‘Disease’, ‘Ignorance’, ‘Squalor’ and ‘Idleness’. Beveridge’s call for a National Health Service, which was created and implemented in 1948 by Attlee’s administration, was part of the report’s “cradle to grave” approach which helped to shape the post-war consensus period. The NHS greatly expanded upon Lloyd George’s 1911 National Insurance Act, and the fact that it remains free at the point of use to this day is testament to its efficacy and popularity, as well as the enduring legacy of the 1942 Beveridge Report. More private elements have crept in over the years, but we are lucky in Britain not to be reliant on the US healthcare model, even after the good reforms of Obamacare. Beveridge was also an advocate of ‘full employment’, which he defined as 3% or less. George Osborne has also called for ‘full employment’, but refuses to define it, presumably because he doesn’t aim to be as ambitious as the great William Beveridge in this field. 

4) John Maynard Keynes

I have already made reference to the post-war consensus period, of which the economic architect was John Maynard Keynes. Keynesian economics helps to get to the core of my values; governments should be active and intervene where markets fail. When I studied A-Level History, we looked at the boom period in the USA during the 1920s, followed by the 1929 Wall Street Crash and subsequent Great Depression. Whilst these were fascinating topics to study, it was immensely frustrating to see how historical figures had been so complacent with regards to the overheated ‘bull’ market and laissez-faire attitudes.  I don’t believe in a ‘market knows best’ approach, nor am I for socialist statism; Keynesian economics strikes the right balance for me; a mixed economy which promotes markets but allows for government intervention. Keynes may well have negative “tax and spend” stereotypes from right wing critics, but he advocated building up a surplus in times of plenty, something which many governments have failed to do.

5) Jo Grimond

Now that the Liberal Democrats are down to single figures in terms of MPs, Liberal stalwarts like Jo Grimond should be emulated as we rebuild. Grimond inherited 6 MPs and 2.7% of the vote from his predecessor Clement Davies, and he kept the Liberal Party going as a force during the dark times. His quote on facing adversity in 1963 is just as relevant to the party now; “In bygone days, the commanders were taught that when in doubt they should march their troops towards the sound of gunfire. I intend to march my troops towards the sound of gunfire”. The Liberal Westminster representation doubled under Grimond’s leadership, and fittingly the seat he gained for the party in 1950, Orkney and Shetland, is held by the party to this day. Over 96% of the vote went to the Conservatives and Labour at the 1955 General Election, but Grimond helped to erode the seemingly permanent two party mould. A supporter of Scottish home rule, Grimond was also an advocate for entering the Common Market, the precursor to the European Union. The modern Liberal Democrats would do well to learn from the courage and determination of Jo Grimond’s Liberalism.


Honourable mentions: H.H Asquith, Paddy Ashdown


As you can see, this isn't particularly a list of Liberal ‘thinkers’ in the sense of theorists such as Hobbes, Paine, Smith and so on. I’m not at all suggesting that these are the best Liberals in UK history, simply that these are the top 5 to influence me personally. I'm tempted to do a top 5 of Conservative and Labour figures, but this list was easier to compile, for obvious reasons!

Tim Farron is best placed to rebuild the Liberal Democrats

The Liberal Democrats are lucky to have two very talented leadership contenders out of their small pool of MPs. You only have to look at the uninspiring Labour leadership campaign to see the difference, despite the significant contrast in MP composition. I will argue very strongly for Tim Farron to be the next leader.

If you trawl through my blog archives, you’ll see that I’ve touted Tim Farron as a future leader in the past. I was always mindful of a backlash at the 2015 General Election (although not to the extent which we saw), and I viewed Tim as the best man to rebuild the party. The Coalition was always a difficult period for the party, and it’s been incredibly difficult for everyone associated with the party to keep plodding on; that’s why Tim shines for me. As the President of the Liberal Democrats for most of the Coalition, Tim struck the balance perfectly for me; he was proud of our achievements and prepared to shout about them from the rooftops, but he wasn’t afraid to be vocal or to vote against what he thought was wrong. When the public’s (and to an extent the party’s) perception was that Nick Clegg had ‘gone native’ with the Conservatives, it was crucial that Tim maintained our identity. That’s not meant at all as a dig at Nick Clegg, and you’ll know from a recent blog entry how much I admired him. However, the party needed someone during those tumultuous years to keep the party rooted in its principles, and Tim did just that. Whenever he gave a speech at Conference or appeared on Question Time, he was always incredibly engaging. He’s an eloquent speaker, but he’s relatable and good at using humour, too. Like the late Charles Kennedy, he has a knack for engaging people who either don’t vote for the party or who aren’t interested in politics; this cannot be understated.

Tim’s constituency work is another considerable strength. He turned a previously safe Conservative seat in the Lake District (Westmorland and Lonsdale) in to one of the few Lib Dem strongholds. On a personal level, I know a staunch Conservative who’d never vote for the Lib Dems nationally, but does so locally in the Lakes due to the casework done by Tim. Furthermore, Tim is ‘untainted’ with the kind of policies which were inevitably levelled against the party; tuition fees (“It was never about fees; it was about trust”), the bedroom tax and increasing VAT. This isn’t to say that Norman is unprincipled, but it does offer a quick rebuttal for Tim in the event of old arguments rearing their head again. Despite this, Tim hasn’t gone down the route of washing his hands of all responsibility. Many of the 2010 Labour contenders were quick to distance themselves from the winning formula of Blairism (rightly or wrongly), despite having been involved with the Blair project in most cases. Both Tim and Norman have reiterated the correct assertion that forming the Coalition in 2010 was the right decision, rather than going for a ‘pleasing everyone; pleasing no-one’ stance of “ok, you’re right; we shouldn’t have done it”. As Tim pointed out in the hustings debate hosted by Victoria Derbyshire, a party should be ashamed of itself if it doesn’t try to win and gain power.

In some leadership campaigns, there is a preference for a particular candidate simply because of the paucity of suitable alternatives. In my opinion, the only sensible choice for the Labour leadership is Liz Kendall, and that in part is due to the uninspiring candidates on offer (Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Jeremy Corbyn). However, should Tim sadly lose the contest (which is highly unlikely), I would still be delighted with the next choice; Norman Lamb. A lot of credit is due to Norman for his work on mental health as a minister during the Coalition, something which helped to significantly shape our NHS policy in the 2015 manifesto. I still want Norman to play a significant role under a prospective Tim Farron leadership platform, and would even go as far as to recommend that he should be the deputy leader of the party. Norman is clearly passionate about Liberalism, and I don’t want us to lose his talents.

On a personal level, a key thing for me is that Tim is a fellow Christian, and he’s not afraid of saying so. I must clarify that this isn’t a deal breaker in my choice of leader; I strongly supported Nick Clegg, who is an atheist (although he has since stressed that he leans more towards an agnostic viewpoint now, and he attends church with his wife Miriam). However, it is immensely encouraging to see another Christian in politics. Tim has written for the ‘Liberal Democrats Do God’ compilation of essays edited by the Liberal Democrat Christian Forum, and he is right in stressing that “we must never seek to legislate to force people who are not Christians to live as if they were”, despite the Bible saying many things that “society will feel uncomfortable about with regards to personal morality”. The Bible calls for Christians to engage with politics, and I find it reassuring that a prominent MP is doing likewise. There’s a common perception that Christianity and Liberalism don’t mix, but I think Tim makes a strong case for suggesting that the two are not incompatible.

From what I’ve seen of the debates between Norman and Tim, they have been pretty respectful. Whilst Tim has the upper hand on issues such as tuition fees, he hasn’t stuck the knife in or laboured on the point. Similarly, Norman has said that he respects Tim’s faith viewpoints. However, I find it sad when some members have criticised Tim for his faith standpoints. I don’t think Tim’s views on abortion or gay marriage should disbar him from the leadership, neither would those views in any way affect how competent he would be as a leader. For the sake of clarity, on gay marriage Tim did not vote for it on the third reading of the bill, but did so on the second reading. Tim and Norman’s differing views on assisted suicide also should not be deal breakers for either candidate.

I’m told that 20,000 people have joined the party since the General Election, which is remarkable. It’s vital that the new leader makes sure that these new members are engaged and kept on board, but also that the existing membership is maintained. After a crushing defeat in 2015, the party needs to rediscover its identity, rebuild and fight for liberal values. Tim is best placed to do just that.

The good, the bad and the ugly; what to expect from the Tories

The Conservatives won their first overall majority since 1992 (the year I was born!) on polling day, and in theory should be ‘freed’ from the shackles of coalition. However, as with John Major and the last majority Conservative government, I fear that David Cameron will be held hostage to the many rebellious Tory backbenchers in his ranks. I’ll briefly outline below the good and bad policies to expect from the Tories in the next Parliament.


Good:

• Tax free minimum wage. Raising the income tax threshold was deemed unaffordable by David Cameron in the first TV debate of 2010, but the policy was adopted after the Liberal Democrats made it a red line in coalition talks. The Tories have shamelessly tried to take the credit for it ever since, but I very much hope that Cameron delivers on his manifesto pledge to increase the threshold from £10,600 to £12,500 in the next Parliament, meaning that anyone earning the minimum wage won’t pay any income tax. If the National Insurance threshold can be aligned to this, low and middle income earners will receive a further tax boost. This policy is crucial if the Tories are to convince anyone that they’re on the side of workers.

• £8bn for the NHS. The NHS Chief Executive Simon Stevens has said that the NHS will need an extra £8bn a year by 2020. Again, the Liberal Democrats were the first to meet this pledge, with the Conservatives following suit (although they didn’t say how they’d afford it). Extra NHS funding is a must, so I welcome this pledge. However, the government needs to look at how this extra money is spent, and I hope that mental health is seen as a top priority.

• Cutting the deficit. I don’t agree with the composition of the cuts that the Conservatives are proposing, but the deficit has to be addressed in order for public spending on key services such as the NHS and education to gradually increase again in line with a growing economy. The Tories have set 2018 as the target for eliminating the deficit (the same year as Liberal Democrat plans), and after missing their 2015 target it’s vital that the 2018 goal is achieved.

• 30 hours free childcare per week for 3 and 4 year olds. This policy builds upon the coalition’s 15 hours of free childcare for 3 and 4 year olds (and 40% of two year olds). A good move for helping families across the UK.

• Postgraduate loans. A coalition announcement from the last Autumn Statement, it has curiously slipped under the radar a little bit. This will entail government-backed loans of up to £10,000 from the 2016-17 academic year, benefitting 40,000 students. It’s crazy that students who get good grades are unable to continue their studies after undergraduate levels simply because of finances; I think this policy is a fantastic idea.

Bad:

• Scrapping the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights Act is often subjected to misrepresentation from the right wing press, who often (wrongly) associate it with the European Union. The Human Rights Act is a scapegoat for the likes of The Daily Mail, who often blame it as the reason terrorist subjects cannot be deported. The proposal to scrap the Human Rights Act was blocked by (you guessed it) the Liberal Democrats. I’m not an expert in law, but this proposal seems ham fisted at best.

• EU referendum. I question the motives for the EU referendum. Is it really with the best of intentions, for ‘giving people a say’, or is it simply a manoeuvre to silence UKIP and the Eurosceptics in the Conservative Party? Whilst there are still concerns over the economy and the NHS, I’m worried that Parliamentary business will mainly consist of trying to get a deal from the EU prior to a referendum in 2017. I can already predict vitriol from Eurosceptics when David Cameron (presumably) publically recommends a vote to stay in the EU. A tempting thought, however, is that the referendum could ‘lance the UKIP boil’, so to speak.

• £12bn of welfare cuts. One of the biggest misconceptions about the welfare bill is that the bulk of it is spent on the unemployed. In reality, pensions take up the vast majority of welfare spending. Not only is a further £12bn of cuts to welfare a significant amount (the Liberal Democrats wanted £3bn of welfare cuts), where will these cuts fall? The Tories plan to lower the benefit cap from £26,000 a year to £23,000, but there has been scant detail about any further plans for cutting welfare. It’s of great concern as to where the £12bn will come from, and who will be affected as a consequence.

• Civil liberties. With the authoritarian Theresa May no longer beholden to Liberal Democrat resistance, it looks like the ‘Snooper’s Charter’ could be revived. The Liberal Democrats blocked this intrusive piece of legislation during the coalition, but despite consensus on issues such as scrapping ID cards, it doesn’t look like civil liberties will be prioritised in the next Parliament. Expect fierce criticism from the likes of Shami Chakrabarti. 

• A law to prevent tax rises. Seriously, who thought up this idea? A law designed to prevent tax increases for income, VAT and National Insurance, it’s straight out of the US Tea Party book. It’s not only shortsighted, but it’s a window dressing policy designed to ensnare political opponents. It reminds me of George Bush senior’s “read my lips; no new taxes” pledge. Remind me of how that one worked out...

Ugly:

David Cameron: “For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'”. This is a worrying sign of things to come.



I’ll leave you with a quote from William Gladstone, one which is still very applicable today, and which sums up the current situation and approach:


“Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear”.

I don’t care what the haters say; Nick Clegg was a brilliant leader

In March, I did a blog entry called “Yes, I agree with Nick (mostly)”. In it, I noted that Clegg had gone up in my estimations in recent times, due to him having the guts to take a stand despite his unpopularity. I finished the article by saying “I’m not ashamed to give credit where credit is due, and he is due a lot of it”. In light of this, I’ve little doubt that in the future (be it, 10, 20 or 30 years), history will look more kindly upon Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats.

I had the pleasure of meeting Nick (for the second time) in the week leading up to polling day. At an evening event in Sheffield brilliantly organised by the likes of Iain Gill and Laura Gillmore, you couldn’t tell that Nick had been up since 5am campaigning across the country. He was at ease, confident, engaging and personable. I still maintain that his oratory skills are superior to David Cameron’s, and jibes about him ageing over this Parliament are inaccurate as well as inconsiderate. You will see from my previous blog entry on Nick Clegg (and my public praise of his potential replacement Tim Farron) that I’ve not always been his biggest fan, and the European/local elections in 2014 certainly stretched my patience with him. However, Clegg had the bravery to not only enter in to a coalition with the Tories in 2010, but to see it through and allow for frequent public attacks (see his weekly radio phone in on LBC radio; did Cameron and Miliband ever have a similar arrangement?).

Clegg has always been lambasted. Not long after winning the Lib Dem leadership contest in 2007, Victoria Derbyshire grilled him in an interview over his lack of a public persona. A pop vox was taken around a seat in the country, with the interviewer showing the general public a picture of Clegg, before asking them if they knew who he was. Few did know him, although I did laugh when one person said “Is it Steve? I think I used to work with him”. This then went to the other extreme with Cleggmania in 2010; the media were out to get him as soon as he did the first TV debate, and they’ve done a hatchet job on him ever since. Let me stress that Clegg isn’t the only victim of this; Ed Miliband has had some cruel rubbish thrown at him, too. However, the media often seemed quite happy to go along with the tuition fee line, rarely (if ever) informing the public of both the benefits of the new fee system and the original culprits of tuition fees; the general public often weren’t aware of either aspect.

Tuition fees will always be the albatross around Clegg’s neck, which is quite frankly ludicrous. Many people, especially on the left, stick their fingers in their ears when you tell them these hugely relevant facts: more people are going to University than ever before, you only start paying back the fees when you earn over £21,000 and more people from disadvantaged backgrounds are attending University. Instead, they lament that Clegg “went back on his promise”. Yes, this was a bad thing, but which politician hasn’t gone back on a pledge? I’m not saying that this is right or should be tolerated cheerfully, but cast the first stone if you want to.

How about this jibe; “he sold out to the Tories and let them in”. Great, so the Lib Dems have been punished for going with the Tories…by losing most of their seats to the Tories and thereby giving them an overall majority. People will realise over the next five years just how much of an influence the Lib Dems had between 2010 and 2015, but sadly it’ll be for negative reasons, namely £12bn of welfare cuts, scrapping the Human Rights Act and an erosion of civil liberties. Clegg simply had no popular option in 2010, whichever way you look at it. If the firm rejection of the Labour Party last Thursday is anything to go by, a coalition with Labour in 2010 would not have been a stirring success either.

I feel that Clegg is in an unfortunate position now; he’ll feel duty bound to the party to not quit his seat (there’d be a strong risk of losing the subsequent by-election), yet he won’t have much appetite to soldier on as an MP for five more years. However, his resignation speech shows that he gives a damn. In theory, why should he be sad? He has a very wealthy background, a beautiful wife and kids, a multilingual pedigree which could easily land him a top job in Europe and the kudos of being the first Liberal leader in generations to enter government. Despite these caveats, Clegg does care, and it shows. Clegg’s oratory power and leadership skills certainly kept me going over the course of the coalition, and he encouraged me to think about a different kind of politics back when I was a sixth former.


The party needs to move on and rebuild. There’s no point agonising over whether we should have gone into coalition or not in 2010, because it was the right decision (mistakes were of course made during the last Parliament). It would also be very easy to distance ourselves from Clegg, as if to pretend that he was never a positive force for the party. This would be the wrong approach. We’ve had nearly 10,000 people join the party since polling day, and under a new leadership (my preference is for Tim Farron) we can bounce back, with time. However, let’s not forget the many positive contributions from Nick Clegg, and how great a leader he has been for the party. I want the party to move on and more forward, but I still agree with Nick.

My Derbyshire Dales reflections

3,965 votes. I look on that figure with mixed feelings; sadness because we couldn’t reduce Patrick’s majority (and we came behind UKIP and Labour), but pride that such a significant amount of people backed the ‘New Deal for the Dales’ message. On what has been a very sobering election, I feel a sense of privilege.


I’ve had time to reflect on our campaign in the Dales, and I can honestly say that I wouldn’t change anything about our approach if I was given a TARDIS. Prior to my selection in 2014, the Derbyshire Dales Liberal Democrats didn’t have any social media channels; we not only changed that by building up hundreds of followers on Facebook and Twitter pages, but we revamped the local party website. I was able to get across our (and my) values on a regular basis through various video interviews, whilst getting these values across in person through good old fashioned canvassing. I had great responses from constituents with regards to the election leaflet. Whilst I’ve no doubt that there are many critics of it, the only people to come to me to criticise it were two Labour activists and a Conservative; they were hardly likely to praise it! I was always keen to stand up for young people, but I also felt immensely encouraged by fellow Christians, who appreciated that I was prepared to put my faith above the parapet, so to speak.


I felt saddened by the loss of so many talented MPs, and watching the swing against so many Liberal Democrats standing for election was excruciating. There was more of a stunned silence rather than ranting when we saw the exit poll at home. Whilst this may sound rather hollow, I did well to hold on to my deposit when half of Lib Dem parliamentary candidates lost theirs, whilst the swing against me in the Dales was lower than the swing against the national party. These are small crumbs of comfort, but for myself and many others not much could have been done to prevent the landslide against the Liberal Democrats nationally. On the lighter side of things, me and my family had the novelty of ordering a ‘Ben Fearn burger’ in Matlock, as all of the candidates had burgers named after them. It was certainly strange to hear my brother say “could I order six Ben Fearn burgers, please?”

It hasn’t always been plain sailing, and one door knocking session in particular got me down. One person asked who I was before I’d even approached them, and when I said which party I was with, brushed me off. When I said “well as long as you vote for someone”, they retorted with “you do realise that approach will cost you votes?” I couldn’t believe such a cynical attitude. Another constituent told me they had voted Lib Dem twice but wouldn’t ever again due to the Coalition; after they had slammed a tax cut (the personal allowance increase) which has benefited me and my family, we had the following exchange:

“Very well, would you be prepared to vote for us at a local level? Councillor Burfoot has done some excellent work…”

“I shall be voting Labour”

“Oh ok, which Labour councillor will you be voting for? What do you like about them?”

“.....I shall be voting Labour”.

Clearly, such political passion did not extend to local matters or concerns. Another constituent gave me this response:

“Hello, I’m the Parliamentary Candidate for the Derbyshire Dales. Have you kept up to date with the election?”

“No, but I won’t be voting for you (shuts door)”.

I hadn’t even said which party I was with! This exchange frustrated me as the person in question was the wife of a former teacher that I know of, so I had at least hoped for some sort of conversation based upon a shared context, even if it didn't result in a vote of support. The 7am declaration time at the election count also wasn't fun (we had arrived at around 11.30pm with no sleep), not to mention refreshing the Twitter feed on my mobile to see the loss of MP after MP (losing Vince Cable and Charles Kennedy especially hurt).

The five debates between myself, Patrick McLoughlin (Conservative), Andy Botham (Labour), Ian Wood (Green) and Amila Y’Mech (Humanity) have been lively affairs, and I’m pleased that two of them (Wirksworth and Ashbourne) have been recorded; I had publically called for screened debates in 2014. I felt very nervous before each one, but they are great for democracy, and the exchanges were passionate. I only wish that everyone in the constituency could somehow view them; I’m sure that a lot of orthodoxies would be challenged. I’ve been happy with my performance at each one, and I’ve had people approach me after each debate to congratulate me and to urge me to carry on, whether they were going to vote for me or not.


The groundswell of support has been incredible, from family and friends. I genuinely couldn’t have done it without them. The local party have been immensely supportive, whilst my local church (Darley Dale Hillside) and fellow Methodists have been greatly encouraging. Support mechanisms like these are crucial for sustaining you throughout an election campaign, especially one which for me started in January 2014. People have asked if I’ll stand again in 2020, when I’ll be at the grand old age of 27. This’ll be a politician’s answer, but I honestly can’t commit either way; a lot can happen in five years on a personal and national level. The idea of having the same candidate for two elections certainly appeals to me, as you can build up a base of trust and familiarity in that time, but we’ll see. What I can tell you is that I feel emboldened again to fight for liberal values, especially as membership in the party has gone up by over 7,000 since polling day, giving the Liberal Democrats over 50,000 members.

There’s hope for the future. Many people have said that, whilst not voting for me, they wish me the best and want me to keep at it. This encourages me just as much as people who say that they’ll vote for me, and I mean that. I only get frustrated if people refuse to give me a hearing simply because of my party banner. I’ll leave you with the words of a constituent who didn’t vote for me, but who wants me to continue:

“Dear Ben,

Although I did not vote for you, I want you to know how impressed I, and a number of people I have spoken to, are with your performance in the hustings.

Your enthusiasm, clarity, integrity, as well as your grasp of issues, have impressed us, to the extent that we want to encourage you to continue! We see a great future for you in politics, especially if can refrain from becoming part of the 'machine'.....

More power to your elbow.

The struggle continues”.

Vote for a New Deal for the Derbyshire Dales

We’re now just a matter of hours away from polling day. With my dedicated team, we’ve canvassed Matlock, Bakewell, Ashbourne and Baslow amongst other places, whilst my debates with the other candidates have taken me to Wirksworth, Eyam, Ashbourne, Bakewell and finally Matlock. Whatever the result on Thursday, I have discovered from this campaign just how well you can get through to people when you are committed to a passionate message.

I have been eager to highlight two points in my campaign; firstly, that I want a ‘New Deal for the Dales, and secondly that I want to encourage and involve young people. On the first point, I have unashamedly mimicked a political device used by President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR). FDR was a huge influence for me, and one of the historical figures that launched my interest in politics in the first place. However, the New Deal also represented strong and meaningful reform in the face of vested interests. I’m not demanding a ‘New Deal for the Dales’ purely for rhetorical devices; that New Deal means a better government grant for the Dales (we get one of the lowest grants in the UK), so that services aren’t cut back here so severely, and investment can be made in key areas (one area I highlighted at the debates is that of the much needed Ashbourne bypass). Furthermore, the New Deal that I want also entails better wages (the wages here are the lowest in all of Derbyshire). These statistics come from the Derbyshire Dales District Council Economic Plan, and who are we to doubt the Tory-run District Council, Mr McLoughlin?!


The second key point which I mentioned is young people. Less than half of 16-24 year olds voted at the last General Election, compared with over 70% of people aged 65 and over. Russell Brand urges people not to vote in order to change this, but you get change by voting for change. As long as there is this apathy, policies from the political parties will continue to be skewed towards the crudely named ‘grey vote’. Fortunately, I’ve had good responses both from our election leaflet which highlights this, and also young people from canvassing and email responses. It’s my strong hope that, by standing for Parliament at the tender age of 22, I can encourage other young people to get involved. From interactions with people, my age has been a positive, and has often been seen as a welcome departure from the status quo.

The debates have been lively, especially the last debate in Matlock. They are great for democracy, and it’s good to see passion from the constituents. Two of the debates have been recorded (Wirksworth and Ashbourne), so I’m glad that my calls last year for screened debates have been heeded to a large extent. However, it’s a great shame that the debates couldn’t somehow be viewed by every household in the constituency; I think certain orthodoxies and assumptions would be challenged. The line-up for all but one of the debates has been as follows: me, Patrick McLoughlin (Conservative, and running for re-election), Andy Botham (Labour), Ian Wood (Green) and Amila Y’Mech (Humanity); Irene Ratcliffe stepped in for Botham at Bakewell, whilst John Young (UKIP) also attended the Bakewell debate. The questions have certainly been varied; the Eyam debate had very specific local questions (one question asked what our party’s policies were on the lack of HGV drivers!), whilst the Ashbourne debate didn’t have any local questions at all (despite my reference to the bypass). The award for the most interesting question was definitely at Matlock; “if elected, which law would you repeal, and which law would you enact?” For the record, I said that I’d repeal the bedroom tax, whilst enshrining into law minimum spending (and appointment) requirements for mental health in the NHS.


I have felt hugely encouraged by responses from constituents (via phone calls, emails and face to face interactions) with regards to our election leaflet. The election leaflet is so crucial, as Royal Mail deliver it free of charge to every household in the constituency (some 41,500 homes). You can view it on my website (www.benfearn.com), but I was keen to outline the New Deal and youth message, along with our party’s record in government. With this leaflet, a strong social media presence and good old fashioned canvassing in the streets (all of these aspects are crucial), I think we as a local party have done ourselves proud to fight for our values.


To those undecided or otherwise, I leave you with this final message. I know this constituency is a safe seat, and I’m at the tender age of 22. However, it’s an absolute privilege to have this opportunity to represent the Derbyshire Dales. I want to challenge the status quo, and to not take votes for granted. I want to fight for the Derbyshire Dales; please fight for me.

Why I'm a Liberal Democrat

I became a Liberal Democrat in 2009, when I first took an interest in politics during my Sixth Form days. I knew about my own political heritage; my grandfather was a Liberal councillor in Matlock in the 1970s. However, I wanted to investigate for myself, and not just take my parent’s word for it. The Conservatives were miles away from my New Deal-influenced values, whilst the Labour Party seemed so incompetent and lacking in vision. When I saw a Lib Dem leaflet for the first time, I had mixed feelings; it was refreshing to see such progressive values, but I felt sad that these policies would never come to fruition.

That’s why I became a member in 2010; after the General Election. We had shaken up the old political duopoly, and we had the chance for the first time in generations to implement cherished policies, and I was determined to judge the party over 5 years, not 5 minutes. I’m proud of our links in Liberalism; the Gladstonian belief in free trade, the promotion of an active state to combat poverty by David Lloyd-George, the compassionate economics of John Maynard Keynes in challenging orthodoxies and a harsh ‘market knows best’ approach, and the building blocks for the NHS by William Beveridge. Of course the Liberal Democrats have slogans like any other party, such as “Stronger Economy, Fairer Society”. However, we have distinctive policies behind such slogans. “Fairer taxes” means paying no income tax on the first £10,000 that you earn (this has since gone up to £10,600, with a target of £12,500 by 2020); “a fair chance for every child” means a £2.5 billion a year pupil premium for the poorest primary school students, and “cleaning up politics” means having fixed term (5 year) Parliaments.

We have delivered on these policies; policies which I feel highlight the active role of Liberalism in helping those at the bottom. I am still a Liberal Democrat in 2015 because of this, but also because of the promise of more; prioritising mental health in our NHS, five green laws to protect the environment, an extension of free childcare and the raising of National Insurance thresholds in line with income tax thresholds.

I want to fight for this liberal and progressive vision. That’s why I attended an assessment centre in 2012 to become an approved parliamentary candidate, and I was officially selected as the parliamentary candidate in 2014 for my home constituency of the Derbyshire Dales. I know our party has made mistakes, and I know that we’re not hugely popular. However, I’m a Liberal Democrat because we have a promising vision for the future, backed up by concrete policies and not platitudes. We have a record of delivery and a promise of more. I couldn’t have imagined either of these things being possible in 2009, yet now it’s a reality. At the tender age of 22, that’s quite a vision to be inspired by, and to stand up for.


You can also view this blog entry on the "Why Join the Lib Dems" page: https://whyjointhelibdems.wordpress.com/