Skip to main content

A song at the final curtain

Thursday at the conference is not usually of great interest. The jaded, terminally hungover delegates are mostly subdued and many have left.

The only highlight is usually the leaders speech, but each year this seems to get a little more exaggerated. I remember Paddy Ashdown coming off stage after one of his "leader's speeches" which ended in fireworks, and balloons and the usual hullabaloo and muttering under his breath "stupid bloody circus" and I know what he means.

Nevertheless, "Ming-the Movie" which will proceed today's celebration of the final curtain on conference will at least let a few people know what an extraordinary man the Lib Dems have accidentally chosen as leader.

Although I disagree with Ming on many issues- I certainly do not regard myself as being on the "Centre left" for example, the fact is that his career has demonstrated a tenacity and an individual substance that is extremely impressive.

Ming is a self made man- an Olympic athlete, a highly successful QC, and a very determined politician. Like Ashdown (and indeed many of his own current front bench) Ming is a serial over-achiever. He does not owe his success to the vagaries of the public school system, to the traditional Scottish virtues of discipline and hard work. It is no accident that the Lib Dems political opponents make such personal attacks on him- they know that he is a solid and impressive man whose "gravitas" is not artificial.

Brighton has been a jolly conference, but also a deadly serious one. The opportunity to screw up was always there, but was strenuously avoided. Despite rather ill informed media comment about divisions, I think that the rigour of the economic liberals is helping the social liberals to define how their goals could be achieved.

So as the balloons fall and the applause continues for an unfeasibly long time I will smile and reflect: following a tough year the party is in decent shape after all. Policy arguments are moving to the Economic Liberal/Libertarian side of the debate, party organisation (with the exception of the English candidates office) is improving sharply. The door is not yet closed.

I always feel we miss out when we don't sing a national song to finish, so in the spirit of the age, I decided to get a cheaper, better, Polish, national song to finish (any errors of grammar are mine):

Jeszcze Partia nie zginęła,
Poku my żyjemy.
Co nam obca przemoc wzięła,
Focusi odbierzemy.

Marsz, marsz, Campbelli,
Z ziemi angliej do Skoci,
Za twoim przewodem
Złączym się z narodem.

Przejdziem Thamesę, przejdziem Forthę,
Będziem Liberalami,
Dał nam przykład Gladstone,
Jak zwyciężać mamy.

Marsz, marsz, Campbelli...

Jak Ashdonwni do Yeovila
Po Torykim zaborze,
Dla ojczyzny ratowania
Wracał się przez morze.

Marsz, marsz, Campbelli...

And if you still insist on a translation:

At yet the Party is not lost,
while we are still alive,
What alien force has seized
we will recalim with the Focus.

March, March Campbell,
from the English Land to Scotland
we shall follow you
to reunite with our people.

We'll cross the Thames and cross the Forth
we shall be Liberals
Gladstone has shown us the way-
how to be victorious

As Ashdown to Yeovil
after the Tory invasion
to save the country
we will cross the sea.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Boże...never thought I'd see Yeovil writtin po polsku.
Cicero said…
Tak- ale mysle wysztko w porzadku w yeovila i w skoci!

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...