Skip to main content

Carpe Diem

Ming Campbell has a great opportunity to push the Liberal Democrats to centre stage. The Liberal Democrats have always stood up for the socially liberal agenda. The clarity with which we express opposition to the political might of the state is part of the very bedrock of what we do well. The commitment to international law and to the social limits of the state have been two things that have made the Liberal Democrats stand out over the past five years. The opposition to the war in Iraq and the "war on terror" has marked us out as principled and brave.

The next step is to show that our Liberal Democrat vision embraces economic freedom too. The taxation pot is not limitless, and the micro-management of Gordon Brown has created enormous fiscal drag. Even were it desirable (which I strongly dispute), it is just not possible to continue to tax and spend. If Lib Dems get tax right this time- which means setting clear limits on tax rates and tax takes- then there really is a great prize for us. Liberals, by definition believe in limits to state power. The fact is that we have not expressed our economic Liberalism nearly clearly enough. We grew confused- sometimes preferring the producer interest, instead of defending consumer choice. Now we have an opportunity to escape these past mistakes.

We do not need to break with our past- as Labour did, and the Conservatives still do- we need to show why a smaller state, more localism, a bonfire of quangos, and free trade, (domestic and international) are such strong Liberal Democrat traditions- and what that means.

Comments

Tristan said…
Absolutely.

Economic freedom is necessary (but not sufficient) for any other kind of freedom.

Unfortunately, too many people view economic freedom in the light of Thatcher and are conned by the likes of 'War on Want' and other socialistic advocates of economic serfdom under the state.

We need to show that greater economic freedom can spur on the other freedoms and the aims of social liberalism (even if not through the welfare state so much as some wish).

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and

We need to talk about UK corruption

After a long hiatus, mostly to do with indolence and partly to do with the general election campaign, I feel compelled to take up the metaphorical pen and make a few comments on where I see the situation of the UK in the aftermath of the "Brexit election". OK, so we lost.  We can blame many reasons, though fundamentally the Conservatives refused to make the mistakes of 2017 and Labour and especially the Liberal Democrats made every mistake that could be made.  Indeed the biggest mistake of all was allowing Johnson to hold the election at all, when another six months would probably have eaten the Conservative Party alive.  It was Jo Swinson's first, but perhaps most critical, mistake to make, and from it came all the others.  The flow of defectors and money persuaded the Liberal Democrat bunker that an election could only be better for the Lib Dems, and as far as votes were concerned, the party did indeed increase its vote by 1.3 million.   BUT, and it really is the bi

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo