1. Which of the following activities do you
consider the most dangerous and why?
- taking a single
ecstasy tablet
- taking an
advanced motorcycle riding test
- giving birth
Giving birth. Around 100
women die every year in the UK whereas between 10-17 people die from taking
ecstasy. Statistically ecstasy may be more dangerous because far fewer
people take it than give birth. As far as I know, no-one has
actually died taking the motorcycle test.
2. What four pledges would you put on the
front of the next Lib Dem manifesto?
1.
To build more affordable and social housing
(
with a costed figure of say 400,000 homes a year)
2. To create new jobs in a
greener economy (again, a costed figure as large as possible)
3. To reduce borrowing by
taxing wealth and by cracking down on tax avoidance.
4. To promote peace
through international law and to avoid military adventures.
3. A genie
appears and tells you that you can remove one law and make one law; what would
you remove from the statute book and what would you add to the statute book?
Remove: Section 5 of the Public Order Act, which outlaws
abusive and insulting words or behaviour.
Add: All childcare to be
tax deductible - the biggest contribution there could be to gender equality.
4. What balance
should the committee give to the views of the leadership, the parliamentary
panels and the membership in setting policy priorities?
FPC should listen
to all these but the dialogue should be two-way. We want to support the
parliamentary leadership but not to restrict our policy formulation to topics
that fit the Westminster bubble. The party desperately needs to
offer the public an independent message - what we stand for, not just to pose
as the brakes on the Tories. Fighting the next election on the
economic competence of the coalition would be disastrous.
5. How would you
change the party’s procedures on gathering and analysing evidence when
formulating policy?
I have served on
policy working groups and watched with increasing dismay the current process
where, although staff work very hard, the choice of witnesses is somewhat
random. We need to invite evidence publicly and not be afraid to
hear from specialists who disagree with us. Their contributions can
only strengthen our policies. Loss of the Short money has left the
party desperately short of policy staff. We also need to involve
more party members and to use the hidden expertise they possess. In
the East of England I have started a process of identifying where that
expertise lies. I have tried unsuccessfully so far to revive the
old Liberal Party practice of a travel
pool for working groups, so that the cost of taking part is the same for all
whether they live in Kensington or Newcastle or Penzance.
6. Which is more
important - freedom from ignorance, poverty or conformity?
I have always
emphasised freedom from conformity. There is no great value in the
freedom to be the same as everyone else. Conformity carries ignorance and
poverty in its train, ignorance because alternatives are suppressed and poverty
because growth and opportunity require innovation and choice.
7. Are you a
member of any (S)AOs or other pressure groups which might give us an insight
into your policy priorities?
I am chair of
Liberal Democrats for Peace & Security and have campaigned persistently
against nuclear weapons. I am a member of Liberty and Amnesty and a
former president of the Young European Federalists. I have also worked
for years with Environmental NGOs and professionally lobbied the European Union
on environmental policy and regional policy.
8. Which external
bodies would you like to see audit the manifesto to see if our policies are
workable?
Honestly, I
hadn't thought about it. Actually auditing after we have written the
manifesto is too late. We should seek external critique of our
polices as we develop them not when it's too late.
9. What proposals do you have to improve the
process of negotiating policy priorities for a coalition agreement in the event
of another hung parliament?
Other countries
allow a sensible period of time but the markets and the British media will
probably not. I understand why preparations before elections for
negotiations afterwards have to be confidential, but the negotiators should
have guidance from FPC and conference as to red lines. I think it is a
mistake to put too much into an initial coalition agreement. As the
likely minority partner we are in a stronger position if the majority partner
has to come back to us to negotiate on issues. Any coalition
agreement must also provide for wider negotiation of new policies than the
present quad of two MPs each. In any such discussion, the party outside
parliament should also be represented.
10. If elected,
how do you plan to engage with the wider party?
I want more
members to be involved long before policy gets to federal conference. The
current process of policy formulation is something of a secret garden and
indeed a garden made up of plants from within the M25. As a start in the
East of England, we (the Regional Policy Committee) have arranged for regional
consultation sessions on defence and on work / life balance, subjects which
will be debated at federal conference next Autumn. I would like FPC
to engage with regional committees and for committee members to explain the
policy process to local parties, something I would be glad to do myself.
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