Answers
to Jennie Rigg’s questions to FCC candidates
1. What ratio do you think is the ideal balance
for keynote speeches, policy debates and Q&A sessions on the main stage at
conference?
I think policy debates should have the lion's share of the time,
certainly over 50%, probably more, then Q&As and finally keynote
speeches. Ministers can make speeches all year round. This is
our time as party activists.
2.
How do you plan to make conference more inclusive?
This is my main theme. Going to conference can cost
hundreds of pounds and our policies will suffer if those with harder lives
can't contribute. I want Conference Office to help organise block travel
bookings and car sharing, to match up local members as hosts with reps who need
cheap accommodation and we need to provide alternatives to the ridiculously
expensive food available at conference centres and hotels.
Constituencies should consider subsidising their reps. I support the use
of the internet and skype as well but it's important for people to be
physically present if possible.
3.
What is your favourite conference venue and why?
Brighton, because of the wide range of accommodation and
restaurants from the cheapest to the most luxurious. I also have happy
memories of performing in the Liberal Revue there. I like Harrogate
too but it may be too small now.
4.
What is your opinion on the proposal to make conference one
member, one vote?
I hadn't heard the proposal but if it means more members can
attend and vote, that would be a good thing. However, see answer to
question 2. We don't just want the better off members to decide
everything.
5.
What would you do to make conference more affordable for the less
well-off within our party?
See detailed answer to question 2. This would be my most
important objective if elected.
6.
What is your opinion on the proposal to allow non-attending
members to participate in conference - remote voting, speeches by skype, etc.?
I'm in favour of using Skype to let people participate, to
follow debates and even to speak. I'm not sure about voting.
There would need to be very secure systems in place. This could be very
important for people unable to travel because of disability, poverty or
occupations like teaching.
7.
How much consideration do you think FCC should give to avoiding
embarassing our frontbench when it selects motions and amendments for debate?
Almost none. I successfully proposed an amendment at the
Special Conference declaring our right to continue to make policy as an
independent party. The only caveat I would make is that sometimes a
Lib Dem minister may be able to achieve amendments to legislation or policy by
quieter methods which would be undone by the fog-horn of conference, but that
minister would need to convince us that this was so. Mere embarrassment
would not qualify.
8.
What are your views on whether outside experts should be
allowed or encouraged to speak on the main stage?
This should be exceptional. For example, I would
have wanted to hear Hans Blix on Iraqi armaments before the UK went to
war. There is limited time on the conference floor. Experts can
speak at fringe meetings.
9.
Where do you stand on conference security in general and
accreditation in particular?
I fully support the airport-style security which make us all
safer. I totally oppose accreditation as an affront to democracy.
No state agency whould have any say in the selection of our representatives at
conference. I drafted, promoted and summed up for the resolution which
conference passed last year condemning accreditation and I shall continue to
oppose it and seek to end it.
10.
If elected, how do you plan to engage with the wider party?
Even when it does a good job, FCC does seem a little mysterious
and its decisions opaque. I would favour more openness about
meetings and their decisions whenever possible. I would make myself
available to talk to local parties about conference organisation.
We used to have a two-stage agenda process which gave members more say over
what was debated. The sausage machine of FPC-appointed working
groups producing lengthy reports hasn't always been an improvement and can
limit debate rather than encourage it. I want to explore ways in which
members can have more influence on the final agenda.
11.
Are you standing for any other committees, if so which ones, and
if elected to more than one, how do you plan to divide your time?
I'm also standing for FPC. The actual number of
meetings for both committees is not too demanding. If elected to
both, I would have to reconsider the amount of time which I currently spend on
local and regional party bodies.
No comments:
Post a Comment