![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
LibDem Hustings.
Jun. 27th, 2015 03:11 pmThis morning I went to the hustings for the Libdems' leadership election.
I have been trying hard not to make a decision - to wait until I had heard both candidates speak. I have read blog posts and watched videos by both.
Tim Farron was in Edinburgh earlier in the week, holding an informal open meeting for party members in a pub. (He was drinking coffee, I had a pint.) I have heard Farron speak many times over the last few years, as party president, and I was a bit concerned that gave him an advantage over Norman Lamb for my vote.
At today's hustings, each gave a speech (in the absence of the other, presumably so they didn't steal each others' ideas, but in the presence of the press). Then they answered questions, in the absence of the press and any non-members.
There seemed to be very little between them: as Farron said, they probably agree on more than 95% of the issues. Both speeches were good. They each covered their political beliefs and values, and the direction they would like to take the party: Lamb wants to become the party of new ideas, building links with academics and intellectuals to build policy. (He is a visiting fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford, so he's got a start there.) Farron wants be the voice of the poor and the disposessed - to stand up for the underprivileged.
Lamb spoke about his achievements as a minister, particular focusing on mental health issues. Farron concentrated on his achievements as an MP and how he would fight for the party.
Farron seemed more impassioned, Lamb more managerial. Indeed, Lamb seems to have many of the major characters in the party on his side, particularly people whom I respect like Lynne Featherstone, as well as several other former MPs.
I'm sure each would be fine. But Farron's speech stirred me much more than Lamb's. It's not that I disagreed with it all, but I agreed at an intellectual level, where Farron's worked intellectually AND emotionally.
So I shall be voting for Tim Farron.
I have been trying hard not to make a decision - to wait until I had heard both candidates speak. I have read blog posts and watched videos by both.
Tim Farron was in Edinburgh earlier in the week, holding an informal open meeting for party members in a pub. (He was drinking coffee, I had a pint.) I have heard Farron speak many times over the last few years, as party president, and I was a bit concerned that gave him an advantage over Norman Lamb for my vote.
At today's hustings, each gave a speech (in the absence of the other, presumably so they didn't steal each others' ideas, but in the presence of the press). Then they answered questions, in the absence of the press and any non-members.
There seemed to be very little between them: as Farron said, they probably agree on more than 95% of the issues. Both speeches were good. They each covered their political beliefs and values, and the direction they would like to take the party: Lamb wants to become the party of new ideas, building links with academics and intellectuals to build policy. (He is a visiting fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford, so he's got a start there.) Farron wants be the voice of the poor and the disposessed - to stand up for the underprivileged.
Lamb spoke about his achievements as a minister, particular focusing on mental health issues. Farron concentrated on his achievements as an MP and how he would fight for the party.
Farron seemed more impassioned, Lamb more managerial. Indeed, Lamb seems to have many of the major characters in the party on his side, particularly people whom I respect like Lynne Featherstone, as well as several other former MPs.
I'm sure each would be fine. But Farron's speech stirred me much more than Lamb's. It's not that I disagreed with it all, but I agreed at an intellectual level, where Farron's worked intellectually AND emotionally.
So I shall be voting for Tim Farron.