Lib Dem leaderhip - How I'm voting
Jun. 30th, 2015 12:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pseudomonasThis has been quite a boring contest, in many ways, but for good reasons. Both candidates have demonstrated to my satisfaction that they are people of principle, and have liberal, progressive, radical instincts. Policy (as both have reminded us) is made by conference, not by the leader, so is in many ways a secondary concern. I am quite happy to discount both the whisperings that Tim Farron is a secret theocrat and that Norman Lamb is a secret Tory (OK, I exaggerate vastly, but one has to try and make this a bit interesting somehow). Norman, at the London hustings, impressed me with his passion, out from under wraps after his stint as a minister.
In the end, though, I think that Tim is the leader we need at the moment. Why?
■ History: The sad truth is that the media has not grasped the fact of [FX:spit] Cabinet Collective Responsibility. We need a leader who voted against tuition fees (inter alia) if they're not to spend the entire time explaining to the media (which has already settled into its narrative) how the system works and that Ministers don't get to vote freely without abandoning their portfolios. As Tim has said, the fact that he voted against the coalition government on many issues gives him more credibility when defending it.
■ Presentation: To simplify two complex people ridiculously - Tim wins on charisma, Norman somewhat on gravitas. At a point where the party has been near eradicated, our principal problem is "who will get heard best?", and the answer is clearly Tim.
■ Humility: I'm impressed by Tim's willingness to seek advice and his commitment not to surround himself with like-thinkers. Quote (as near as I can remember): If you look at your diary for the day and find it's 90% meetings with other white men, you need to tear it up and start again.
So, Tim it is. I wish him luck, and trust that he will have the sense as leader to make full use of Norman's considerable talents as well.
In the end, though, I think that Tim is the leader we need at the moment. Why?
■ History: The sad truth is that the media has not grasped the fact of [FX:spit] Cabinet Collective Responsibility. We need a leader who voted against tuition fees (inter alia) if they're not to spend the entire time explaining to the media (which has already settled into its narrative) how the system works and that Ministers don't get to vote freely without abandoning their portfolios. As Tim has said, the fact that he voted against the coalition government on many issues gives him more credibility when defending it.
■ Presentation: To simplify two complex people ridiculously - Tim wins on charisma, Norman somewhat on gravitas. At a point where the party has been near eradicated, our principal problem is "who will get heard best?", and the answer is clearly Tim.
■ Humility: I'm impressed by Tim's willingness to seek advice and his commitment not to surround himself with like-thinkers. Quote (as near as I can remember): If you look at your diary for the day and find it's 90% meetings with other white men, you need to tear it up and start again.
So, Tim it is. I wish him luck, and trust that he will have the sense as leader to make full use of Norman's considerable talents as well.