British Democracy Forum - View Single Post

Dane Clouston · 28-07-2008, 12:12 AM

Just to confirm that having controversially joined the newly formed SDP while being Chair of the Oxfordshire Liberal Group at the time of the merger, I was very happy about the merger, but left the merged LibDems because it became a kind of heresy in that party to want to leave the EU and the CAP. I did join UKIP for a while but left because the local activist was of the school of thought (or whatever!) that thinks that "all tax is theft"! I then rediscovered the Liberal Party when Steve Radford spoke at a meeting in Reading opposing the Euro (which the DimLibs of course supported - thank goodness they had no influence at the time). He is a charismatic leader and speaker with a far wider Liberal and Liberal Party view than just EUscepticism.

I originally thought it was the original and continuing Liberal Party but later discovered that it was a re-formed Liberal Party with the original Liberal Party Constitution. That is the sense in which it is the continuation Liberal Party. I rejoined it with a great sense of relief and greatly enjoyed the 120th Liberal Party Assembly in 2005 and those since. It is a currently small but historically great party, with a long history, and I hope will play a part in influencing the LibDems away from their EUphoria towards support for taking us out of full membership of the EU and the CAP and into a looser European Economic Area with Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway and other countries which wish to follow, including Turkey - this would help Christian/Muslim relations - not that I am either - and save Turkey's face if and when France and Germany do not let Turkey into the EU. And maybe Russia in due course..

I do so agree with Tom Wilde when he says "I think there is a difference between a defining policy and a distinguishing policy. EUscepticism is not the defining policy of the Liberal Party, but it is currently the policy which most clearly distinguishes us from the LibDems."

When I was standing for Parliament for the Liberal Party in Newbury in 1974 (C 24, Li 23, La 10) I clearly distinguished my position from the Conservatives and Clause IV Labour by calling for "A far fairer country (with greater equality of opportunity in education, health and the inheritance of wealth), without nationalisation".

Today, if I were standing, I would distinguish my position from ALL other parties by calling for "A far fairer country, (with greater equality of opportunity in education, health and the inheritance of wealth), without full membership of the EU and CAP". This does not of course define the Liberal Party. But it is what we (most of us) believe and would be electorally effective and popular, particularly in the forthcoming 2009 EU elections.

Incidentally, in the interest of greater equality of opportunity for all, rather than privilege for the few, in addition to a basic minimum British Universal Inheritance for all at 25, I would also personally (not yet Liberal Party policy) be in favour of putting VAT on all expenditure on private education and private health, in order to exacerbate what I read is the current squeeze on the middle class into the free National Education Service and the free National Health Service and so to use the proceeds and their involved influence to improve State Schools and the NHS (preferably without prescription charges) for all.

28-07-2008, 12:12 AM	#61 (permalink)
Dane Clouston Newbie Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 4	Dane Clouston Just to confirm that having controversially joined the newly formed SDP while being Chair of the Oxfordshire Liberal Group at the time of the merger, I was very happy about the merger, but left the merged LibDems because it became a kind of heresy in that party to want to leave the EU and the CAP. I did join UKIP for a while but left because the local activist was of the school of thought (or whatever!) that thinks that "all tax is theft"! I then rediscovered the Liberal Party when Steve Radford spoke at a meeting in Reading opposing the Euro (which the DimLibs of course supported - thank goodness they had no influence at the time). He is a charismatic leader and speaker with a far wider Liberal and Liberal Party view than just EUscepticism. I originally thought it was the original and continuing Liberal Party but later discovered that it was a re-formed Liberal Party with the original Liberal Party Constitution. That is the sense in which it is the continuation Liberal Party. I rejoined it with a great sense of relief and greatly enjoyed the 120th Liberal Party Assembly in 2005 and those since. It is a currently small but historically great party, with a long history, and I hope will play a part in influencing the LibDems away from their EUphoria towards support for taking us out of full membership of the EU and the CAP and into a looser European Economic Area with Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway and other countries which wish to follow, including Turkey - this would help Christian/Muslim relations - not that I am either - and save Turkey's face if and when France and Germany do not let Turkey into the EU. And maybe Russia in due course.. I do so agree with Tom Wilde when he says "I think there is a difference between a defining policy and a distinguishing policy. EUscepticism is not the defining policy of the Liberal Party, but it is currently the policy which most clearly distinguishes us from the LibDems." When I was standing for Parliament for the Liberal Party in Newbury in 1974 (C 24, Li 23, La 10) I clearly distinguished my position from the Conservatives and Clause IV Labour by calling for "A far fairer country (with greater equality of opportunity in education, health and the inheritance of wealth), without nationalisation". Today, if I were standing, I would distinguish my position from ALL other parties by calling for "A far fairer country, (with greater equality of opportunity in education, health and the inheritance of wealth), without full membership of the EU and CAP". This does not of course define the Liberal Party. But it is what we (most of us) believe and would be electorally effective and popular, particularly in the forthcoming 2009 EU elections. Incidentally, in the interest of greater equality of opportunity for all, rather than privilege for the few, in addition to a basic minimum British Universal Inheritance for all at 25, I would also personally (not yet Liberal Party policy) be in favour of putting VAT on all expenditure on private education and private health, in order to exacerbate what I read is the current squeeze on the middle class into the free National Education Service and the free National Health Service and so to use the proceeds and their involved influence to improve State Schools and the NHS (preferably without prescription charges) for all.