Feeling Used - Confession of a Gay Christian Lib Dem

It has been a long time since I have blogged and that is not really like me. Today I am once again not feeling well it has been a tough 12 months for me health-wise. However, something has happened today that makes me feel used that makes me feel like I have to write.

Speaking today on Premier Christian Radio the former Lib Dem leader Tim Farron has said that he now regrets the statement he made during the last general election when he said he did not think gay sex was a sin. This is the latest in the line of remarks he has made since he stood down as leader of the party that has worried me.

I am on record in this very blog as being one of the first LBGT+ Lib Dems to support his bid for the leadership. Based on the conversations I have had with him in person and online about LGBT+ issues and his and my faith.

In my case of course I feel ostracised from the Christian community for being gay and from the LGBT+ community for being a Christian. Now of course Tim Farron is able to support the Lib Dem idea of marriage equality because as a true liberal, LGBT, Christian I knew that the state had no right to interfere in how individual faith groups govern themselves. No LGBT+ Christian wants a faith group to marry them in a same sex marriage that doesn't want them.

Today however now I'm not sure if all the conversations I have had with Tim have really seen the progress I thought I had seen. I'm not longer sure if my sharing of my struggles led to him making the decisions he had done or whether this was for expediency and acceptance within the party. I know there are members of my party who are Christians who have risked their position within their church for standing up for LGBT+ issues.

Tim is saying that one group that did not give him advise from within party HQ was fellow Christians. Yet I know many within the party who are Christians of all backgrounds who have been supportive of all that the LGBT+ Lib Dems have brought forward. I also know some who have been against. But nobody shall be enslaved by conformity is and underlying core value of our party. The equal marriage policy that our party brought forward into law allowed freedom for religion and religions. Somehow today it feels that some of the Christians and one of the most prominent ones regrets having allowed freedom from religion.

One of friends in politics who took the other stance when Tim made those comments  during the general election today has said he expects acts of contrition, maybe this is what this is or maybe I was just used and had wool pulled over my eyes. 

Have I been played? Have I been used? Tonight I don't have the answers. But I do feel hurt by the comments today taking back a comment I lauded at the time it was made. Something I said at the time that proved the leader got it and stood by his liberalism above all else.

Now? Who knows?

Time after Tim

This evening Tim Farron has announced that he will step aside as party leader at the time of the Parliamentary recess so that the Liberal Democrats 104,000 members at last count can have a say in the new leader.

In his resignation statement Tim says:

"From the very first day of my leadership, I have faced questions about my Christian faith. I've tried to answer with grace and patience. Sometimes my answers could have been wiser.

"At the start of this election, I found myself under scrutiny again - asked about matters to do with my faith. I felt guilty that this focus was distracting attention from our campaign, obscuring our message.
...

"A better, wiser person than me may have been able to deal with this more successfully, to have remained faithful to Christ while leading a political party in the current environment."

I did come out in support for Tim's bid to become leader very soon after the last general election. Indeed I had written to him as soon as I got back to Northern Ireland after that horrible night two years ago to encourage him to stand.

It is a sad day for our society and our Liberal Democrat party if someone of faith does not consider he is able to lead the party and be true to both. Long before Tim stood as leader I did have discussions with him about his faith and the work on LGBT+ issues that I was working on.

As a fellow Christian but also a gay man I was convinced then, as I am now, that Tim Farron is no homophobe and in no way stands in the way of LGBT+ rights. Indeed at every step of the way he has backed every reform wholeheartedly. I was ashamed with the way the media and especially Cathy Newman would continue to drag up question they dared not ask the rectors daughter with a record of voting against LGBT+ advancement who resides at Number 10.

For the past 2 years I have been proud to be one of the Lib Dem cockroaches that Tim mentioned early in his leadership. One of those who would be hard to kill off as we started to fight back.

I am sad that he felt the need to step down and list his faith as one of the obstacles he saw in leading our party. I wish him well in the future and for the moment while I have my own idea who should be next I would encourage all members to think carefully about who can continue to lead the fight back our party still needs.

Dear Cathy Newman, your interview was a sin against journalism

Forgive me for having better things to do on a Friday evening, especially in a week I have spent many hours playing competitive bowls, that to watch Channel 4 News and your interview of my new party leader Tim Farron. But I finally got around to it this morning and have some comments to make.

Firstly, Tim Farron's views on abortion are ones that a number of us can take. I've known a number of single women who became accidentally pregnant at inopportune times in the their lives and with men who were inappropriate or unable to become the father figure to the child they were carrying. I believe the decision of those women as to what they should do under those circumstances is entirely up to them.

On one occasion  I was actually asked by the mother of one of the young women in my church youth group what advise she should give her daughter who had found herself pregnant. I probably shocked that mother by saying that whatever that daughter decided to keep the child, or to give it up for adoption or to abort it so she could get on with the life plan she had, the most important thing was that her mother supported her in her decision. That is a liberal answer and one that Tim was alluding to.

From personal experience I have faced the dilemma of a girlfriend being late. While we waited to see if she was just a little late before buying a testing kit we discussed the possibilities. Both of us were of the opinion that no matter what the circumstances we at that time were in we would work around the fact that there was another mouth to be fed in our lives. That was our personal opinion, our personal decision after considering the various options together. As a Christian when faced with that decision the option of abortion was considered.

As for challenging Tim on whether he believes homosexuality sexual practise is a sin or not shows a clear misunderstanding of:

a) what the liberal party is about
b) that all Christians are the same

Tim was quite right to point out that the Liberal Democrats believe is religious freedom for everyone. That means that there are Christians, Humanists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Pagans, Atheists, Shintoists and whatever living tooth by jowl within the Liberal Democrats. Indeed our party policy on same sex marriage didn't single out any particular religion but gave all faith groups and humanists the right to self-determine their own position on whether to carry out same-sex marriages or not. That is how the Liberal Democrats deal with religious diversity and diversity of the population as a whole.

As one of the many LGBT+ people within the party who also has a faith I can account for the fact that not every member of a faith group within the party is diametrically opposed to same-sex relationships, those who are in them and those who are sexually active. Tim and I have had a number of rather frank discussions about this in the past, not as accusational and finger pointedly as your brief exchange yesterday. Yes Tim absented himself from the vote on the third reading of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill but he was present and voted for the second reading, as well as its subsequent divorce and annulment provisions and extension to armed forces personnel serving overseas.

Unlike many of those who have used language in the past (if not so much these days) that homosexuality is a sin who voted against it at every stage here is a man who has actually voted for and actually spoken in Parliament and asked questions positively about LGBT rights. Unlike many of those he actually takes part in debate around the issues that he publicly expresses concern or lack of understanding over, as someone blocked by many Northern Irish politicians for asking much simpler questions that the ones I have bombarded Tim with down the years this is a true reflection of how he views LGBT+ people.

Cathy there is one final thing you should be aware of, there were a number of prominent LGBT+ members of the party who were supporting Tim just as there were supporting Norman. People who were instrumental in getting the party and then Government to accept same-sex marriage. If these people had in anyway felt that Tim's faith in anyway hindered him from representing them as leader that would have been news. But the LGBT+ members of our party were as split as other sectors based on the individuals and what they could do for the party and not based on faith, LGBT friendliness or other criteria. We were looking at the person who could lead our party, represent liberty and freedom for all and help promote the ethos of who we are as Liberal Democrats.

We have been demonised by Labour, the Conservatives and the press (yourself included Cathy) for years while in coalition. The result in my opinion is a far more marginalising government than that of the past five years, one that is not supporting those who need it most, but actually making their lives tougher. David Cameron claims to have a faith yet does not seem to take Jesus' command to feed the hungry, cloth the naked and care for those less fortunate than yourself at face value. Maybe you should challenge him on that, Tim at least does care about social housing, the poor who have to attend food banks and are hit by the bedroom tax. Maybe you only have a limited view of what those of faith are all about, but they are a broad spectrum too, just like the Liberal Democrats.

Considering the interview started out asking the leader of the Liberal Democrats about the news that our troops had been involved in bombing raids in Syria all that liberal stuff was lost by Ms Newman's personal agenda on these other issues.

I want to be proud of what we couldn't do in Government

Yes as Liberal Democrats we now have a record in Government nationally. We have to admit there are some things that as the junior partner of that Government we were unable to prevent, but there were other things that without us would not have been achieved.

However, that is our record in Government and enough people will have written or have yet to write about those achievements. What I want us as Liberal Democrats to focus on are the things from our 2010 manifesto that we were unable to achieve in Government because the conservatives would not want us to.

Why should I do that?

Simple the reason is it shows that we are our own party, not one that can be absorbed into either the Conservatives or Labour, or even fit nicely in alongside the Greens. Sure there are components of what we as Liberal Democrats stand for that all three of those parties listed can agree with and that goes for the SNP and Plaid Cymru as well, there are even elements that Euroscpetic UKIP can agree with Europhile Lib Dems over. But the raison d'être that makes Liberal Democrats tick is the thing that would infuriate any of the other parties.

It is the things that we couldn't get into a programme of Government with the Conservatives that make us not Conservative poodles. The manifesto we decided to put out for the last election was lacking in the conviction, as many radical ideas and a clear liberal agenda of those in the past. We were positioning for Government not position for liberalism.

That is what I want our party to be proud of our policies that other parties want to shy away from. Those policies that are based on need, science, making society fairer for all not one group or another. Only the Liberal Democrats can look past the demands of the richest that the Tories bow to, or the Unions that Labour still kow-tow to no matter how much they claim to have changed. We do however stand up for business and the workers. Realising that one needs the other and vice versa but that there should be opportunity for everyone to get on with their life unencumbered by too many constraints.

When looking at who to lead us forwards as a party while both candidates are truly liberals, I want the one whose prime objective is to make us liberal first and as a result give us a voice in Government, not aim for a voice in Government as the prime goal diluting our liberalism to appeal to both Tories and Labour.

In recent days I've seen too many of the Normtroopers say that they want to be led back into Government without any mention of liberalism. If that is your aim join the Tories or Labour and have an easy ride into Government. The reason I got into politics was to stand up for liberal values. Looking at what the current Government is doing on welfare, refusing to accept refugees who risk their lives from resettling here, accelerating removing the wind farm subsidy, restoring the snoopers charter and forgetting the "Northern Powerhouse" when it comes to trains shows that there needs to be a liberal voice.

That liberal voice needs to appeal to the many people who basically share our liberal values. That liberal voice needs to reach out to them so that local candidates and activists can get alongside those people on the doorsteps and harness that renewed enthusiasm for our party. That voice needs to connect to the people about the things on their hearts.

I know that voice in the one that Tim Farron can give our party and make us strong again. Strong in our values, strong in our liberalism and as a result strong in our council wards, devolved Governments and Westminster.

Proud to be supporting Tim Farron for leader

On the evening after the long night of the sgian dubhs I had the clarity to write about how Liberal Democrats can take the offensive on to 2020. I therefore admit that I was already looking for the general to lead us into the sound of gunfire that was still resounding in the ears of all our candidates, activists and supporters (as some used more that merely sgian dubhs).

The fact of course was that that blog post on the Friday after polling day got picked up by BBC Tees (indeed I have now been on twice since polling day) to talk about the Lib Dem Fight Back before it was really a hashtag.

Therefore on the Monday after the General Election I found myself being interviewed by Neil Green about what was happening in our party. The surge in membership, the attitude in the party and who might be the candidates in a leadership contest. Then he asked the question, who would I be supporting.

The answer was one I probably was aware of how I'd respond on that Friday. It certainly was by the following day as I'd sent an email to Tim Farron urging him to stand and also promising my support. The afternoon as I listened to the tributes in the commons I became more and more certain that I was right.

Yesterday on BBC Tees I had to talk about Charles Kennedy, so I know the emotions that those who spoke in the commons felt as they spoke, even more so those who addressed their comments to young Donald in the gallery. But I also talked about the highlights of Charles's leadership which led me to think of all the stuff he had done for the party before the big Iraq rally. The grounding was already in place ahead of the 2001 election and working towards 2005. I was ready to stand up above the parapet and be a candidate for our party before Iraq became an issue because of the passion that Charles showed for liberalism.

Therefore I know what we need know as we face the fight back, the rebuilding, the march towards the gunfire to say we ain't dead. We need someone able to enthuse that passion for liberal values, able to communicate with the established activists who are hurting, the new ones full or enthusiasm and the general public who we want to vote for us in council and devolved elections before we get to 2020.

Both Norman and Tim are Liberals to the heart, but I believe that Tim stands head and shoulders above as the one who can reach out to the voters to ensure them our values are the same as in 2010, 2005 or 2001. He is also the one who has been engaging with many of us who are stalwarts of the party who have been hurting and it seems engaging with the new members who now are over 25% of the members.

I'm backing Tim to be the leader to kick start carry on the Lib Dem fight back. I'm convinced that as I pound the streets, tap the keys and face the public or journalists that he'll be speaking the liberalism that will inspire, encourage and spark voters to turn to us again. Something that will be enhanced by the troops he is respecting, inspiring and walking alongside every step of the way.

I can't wait until I have the ballot in my hand, to give that promised support to Tim.

Open Letter to Lib Dem MPs

Dear Nick Clegg and Lib Dem MPs,

Like all of you I signed a pre-election pledge to vote against any increase in tuition fees and to seek to introduce a fairer alternative.

Like most of you I probably had a picture taken signing it. As you can see from the picture I signed it right next to the name of the Deputy Prime Minister up in Perth at conference.

I'm pleased that in light of the Browne proposals at least 30 of our Liberal Democrat MPs are prepared to honour the pledge that they signed before the election by voting against. I am ashamed that Vince Cable last night tried to persuade them otherwise and neglect what the people who voted for them said they wanted.

Greg Mulholland has said:

"I am trying to make it clear to government that we simply wouldn't accept a rise in tuition fees. I hope that the government will heed the message and will come up with a proposal that isn't an increase to fees."

That is what we agreed to. We have delivered on fairness to students here in Scotland and again at the weekend decided to maintain that is a challenging debate to change, I which Tim Farron also spoke strongly in favour of student. We have stood by this principle for a long time and now is not the time to compromise on such a long held position. Indeed this sort of standing up for our principles might just be the sign that tells the media we are not the Tories lapdogs, we are not Tory-lite, we are our own party.

Student funding is something we have long been distinctive on. I'm proud of that fact and that students and their families recognise that. We're now the ones to fight that corner. Let us stand up and be counted in doing just that.

Stephen Glenn
2010 Westminster Candidate Linlithgow and East Falkirk


Update: There is now a Facebook Group called Lib Dems Against Scraping the Cap, joining other PPCs, AMs and others.

Why I'm Backing Tim Farron for President

I've already blogged, quite early on in the presidential campaign that I was backing Tim Farron and I got to see both he and Susan Kramer in action on Saturday. I was glad to say that he proved again that the reasons I had for backing him on the day.

Both candidates, as Caron has written already, had the chance to address conference. There is the West Wing episode Freedonia where the question is asked "What is the Presidential Voice?" or course you have to be President to use the presidential voice. So how did the two speeched by the candidates size up.

Susan took, IMHO, the easy option of speaking in the pre-manifesto debate. Saying that a lot of it didn't apply in England, where the Lib Dems are still working to implement a lot of what we have achieved in Scotland already. But she basically spelt out why she should be president in what she had to say. All excellent stuff but hardly a presidential voice. Tim on the other hand took on the issue that was the hot potato of the day, and has become the Elephant in the coalition* this week, student finance. He called the system in England already in place a 'basket case' while saying that we should stand by what we had achieved in Scotland in getting rid of tuition fees. Speaking up for the party, even when in coalition on a hot potato of policy difference is surely presidential.

I also happened to be standing next to Tim as he was gathering information on the issue from the best place in the hall to do so, the Liberal Youth Scotland stall. Listening to our undergraduates and what they thought of the issue.

There are the 5 Ws that all journalists need to include (Who, What, Where, When and hoW). What I heard linked to the two names most frequently is Who's Tim and Where's Susan. I witnessed Tim working the room talking to as many members as possible. Even I knowing that Susan was there had a hard time spotting her.

Michael did take his 'I'm for Tim' badge off long enough to ask Susan some questions in relation to Northern Ireland in particular, we'd already asked Tim quite early in the day. I know Caron has asked her questions directed towards Scotland. What I will say for now is that both candidates are aware of the Northern Irish local party (not a branch), more from Michael when Caron edits LibDemVoice on Thursday.

The dynamism, finger on the pulse and way in which he communicated with members both from the platform and in person is what I want from a president and is what I saw from Tim on Saturday. All things that make me happy with my choice of endorsing him as he attempts to become our next party president.

* Other than our blogger of the year.

Stephen Gilbert MP on Why He is Backing Tim Farron for President

Stephen Gilbert MP, who did a brilliant summation on the Lib Dems' equal marriage motion, has come out in support of Tim Farron for party president. Like me his support as an openly gay man has raised one or two eyebrows with his friends. However, like me he has also clarified his position on LGBT rights with Tim himself. On his website he gives Tim's response as:

I am a passionate supporter of equal LGBT rights. But if you look at 'they work for you', I'm classed a s being 'opposed to equal gay rights' because of 2 of my votes on the Equalities bill. This is complete rubbish. I have complained to 'they work for you' about this.

The reality is that my votes on those two amendments were due to me taking what I considered to be a heavily liberal line on freedom of organisation and choice. You might not agree with my take on this, and Stonewall didn't, but Peter Tatchell and Outrage did.

I'm happy to argue whether or not I did the right thing, but please don't think that I'm some kind of homophobe!

Anyone who's known me over the 24 years that I've been a Liberal and a Liberal Democrat knows that this is the most outrageous rubbish.

Long before there was any public majority for LGBT rights I fought for the equalisation of the age of consent and for civil partnerships & the right to marry.

I am a radical liberal to my fingertips - and my anger at inequality caused by poverty and my anger at inequality caused by homophobia come from the same place.

But if anyone still thinks I'm 'a bit of a worry' I'd love them to come and talk to me.

As they say don't judge a book by a cover especially when it is the cover of 'they work for you' which looks at all votes on an issue, even the technical ones. As the man says if you have doubts ask, he's been more than willing to supply answers.

The Field of Four #LDPres

So today we really have the Liberal Democratic Presidential race up and running and unlike two years ago it is causing some real debate with my closest friends and allies within the party. Most of the people I respected then were for Ros.

The Hon. Lady Mark the outgoing consort of our current President is sensible not taking sides or endorsing anyone given his position. However, he did over the weekend post his idea of what was required from his seat whether across the room at home, next to in the car/train or watching his wife the President perform her duties over the past 24 months. This was something I found really enlightening for a job with out job description and what I used to weigh up the four candidates that we have thus far. His listed the roles thus:

Role

The President has three primary roles;

• chairing Federal Executive - which is rather more than just turning up and doing the job. The agenda has to be agreed, papers commissioned, debate managed so as to ensure that all of the business is given a proper airing. The President is also a member of the Chief Officers Group, Federal Conference Committee, Federal Policy Committee, Federal Finance and Administration Committee and the Campaigns and Communications Committee. All meet in London, mostly in the evening, and occasionally on a Saturday.
• representing the membership to the leadership - responding to hundreds of e-mails and letters (some of them astonishingly rude or even abusive), travelling around the country to regional and state conferences, to local party dinners, to campaign events, and then conveying the information and views gathered to the Leader, the Chief Executive and now to the Liberal Democrat parliamentarians in ministerial office.
• representing the Party, as opposed to the Parliamentary Party, in the outside world, to pressure groups, media, lobbying organisations and, leading our international delegations to organisations such as Liberal International and ELDR.

Before going on to deal with resources, time commitment, without touching on what were core competences. He like me has seen various Presidents with a whole host of key competencies down through the years. So far we have four candidates in alphabetical order of first name Jason Zadrozny, Jennie Rigg, Tim Farron and Susan Kramer.

Susan of course has been a London Mayoral candidate and was MP for Richmond Park from 2005 until this year. Jason was our candidate in Ashfield in May losing by just 192 votes. Jennie is a dear friend and Tim had one of our biggest up swings in a held seat much to the derision of my Labour supporting Cumbrian based (at the time) cousin. All bring different things to field.

I'm surprised that Jason wants to stand when he came so close to beating Gloria de Piero. I would have thought the next two years would be far better spent by him building on the reputation he has to keep momentum in local campaigns to aim to overhaul that short gap in 2015. Much as I love Susan she in my view is the most establishment candidate on the list. A London-based President in what can be perceived from the provinces as a London-centric party is not what we need to stand out right now. Besides for the four years before Ros we had another London-based Parliamentarian in the form of Simon Hughes.

That brings my decision down to Tim or Jennie. Now I know the arguments about needing someone outside the bubble to reach to the grassroots. However, that does depend on what you define as the bubble. Yes, Tim is an MP but he also sees outside the bubble, something that struck me in a conversation I along with others had with him in Bournemouth one evening last year.

I love Jennie to bits and love that she will speak up whenever things need to be spoken up about. My concern is that the President over the next term needs to deal with MSM's perception of us a sell outs. While I know Jennie is no sell out, much like myself, I wonder does she have the ability to pull the core of the party along with her.

Tim is also prepared to go against the party flow (sadly the most notable time he did so was to vote against the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007 but he did also resign from the front bench in protest at the party deciding to abstain only on the EU Referendum. So as a gay man I'm kicking him while as a Europhile democrat I'm right in his camp.

My decision was made in what I feel is best for the party going forward as a whole and not based on personal perception. Can an MP represent the Party as opposed the Parliamentary Party? Well yes Simon did so as President and does indeed again now as Deputy leader a role for which he beat Tim. Of course someone totally outside that can truly be a representative of the people.

How would the committees, party grassroots and outside world deal with them both? I can be a pain on committees and throw the occasional spanner in the works, both of these two could do that. As with the party grassroots both have their strengths and would do that in different ways (hey even if Jennie gets a fund of support to help her do so). It is the outside world that brings me to a point of separation. We need to be seen as a the party we have become mature enough to disagree with policy from the Government because that is what party have said, yet able to work in the coalition because that is also what the party have said. Not that we are in two minds merely that party policy is made by conference and Government policy was what our negotiators took to the table and got the closest they could to what the party wanted.

On that final score I feel that Tim Farron will be able to present that case. That most important case for our party right now at this time. That is why I'm endorsing Tim Farron to be the next President of the Liberal Democrats.


Much love and hugs to Jennie though. Also much thanks to those in the party crazy/courageous enough to ask me to stand, there are number of reasons why it wasn't right for me especially at this time.

Word of the day Trolleygarchy*

The plaudits go to Tim Farron Lib Dem Shadow Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary (pictured right) for using the word in the following comment.

"For too long, Britain’s food market has been dominated by a 'trolleygarchy' that has seen profits monopolised by the big supermarkets.

"While the Tories want to sound tough, today’s announcement is like fighting a gun battle with a water pistol.

"Farmers will only get a fair deal if a new regulator is given the teeth to enforce a strict, legally binding code governing the relationship between supermarkets, suppliers, and pricing.

"It is to its shame that the Government has colluded in the dominance of the supermarkets by failing to follow through on explicit recommendations from its own Competition Commission to establish a genuinely independent regulator."

The Westmorland MP was speaking as both Hilary Benn and Nick Herbert were addressing the Oxford Farming Conference. Mr Benn was talking about Labour launching a voluntary code of practise between the supermarkets and farmer. He said:

"We are looking at the Competition Commission's recommendations. It is a very important report that they have produced.

"We have already agreed there is going to be a new code of practice to govern these kind of relationships, which will come in next month, and we are considering how best we can enforce that."

Mr Herbert was promising that the Tories would introduce an ombudsman to "curb abuses of power which undermine our farmers". Herbert went on to say:

"It is not enough to talk loosely about a fair market or the need for better labelling.

"We need action, with a supermarket ombudsman and legislation to enforce honest labelling if the retailers won't act."

This comment from the National Farmers' Union president, Peter Kendall, speaks volumes about the Tories (who yesterday weren't sure of their tax and marriage proposals):

"While we await further details of the Conservatives' proposal with interest, we would look forward to working with any government that sees the creation of a grocery market ombudsman as a priority in delivering the Competition Commission's recommendations in full."

So the Tories are saying the right things without giving the details again of just what they are going to do. How loosely is Mr Herbert talking? Does he actually have a plan or just the sound bites?

I thought on Saturday Dave said that from Saturday they were going to spell such things out? Maybe I was mistaken. Do we have a spelling ombudsman.

Read also: If the squekly wheels on your trolleygarchy take you there visit Jock Coats who considers what a Liberal approach should be.

Postcard From Cumbria

I've just recieved an email from Westmorland's MP Tim Farron which I am going to share with you all.

This is what the weather's been like in my constituency in Cumbria this last week:

I'm sure you've heard about the floods which have forced hundreds of families out of their homes. A life has been lost and repairs could cost hundreds of millions of pounds.

Sadly, as the climate changes over the coming years, events like those of the last week will grow more and more frequent. The cost to society, both here and all over the world, will continue to grow. That is why I need your help to tackle climate change.

There is a big demonstration planned in London next Saturday, December 5, to help persuade the Government to go further in cutting carbon emissions.

It comes ahead of the vital United Nations climate change talks in Copenhagen the following week.

Hundreds of Liberal Democrats have already signed up to come on the march. If you haven't yet said you will come - I would love you to join us. If you're one of the many who are coming along, please bring your friends as well, helping provide a real show of force and a fantastic message to both the Government and the public.

You can let us know you're coming here.

All the details of the day can be found on Act, our new social action network. On Act, you can sign up to the event - as well as talk about how to tackle climate change with other Lib Dem supporters, and much more.

Hope you can make it next Saturday.

Best wishes,

Tim Farron MP
Lib Dem Shadow Shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

While I won't be making it all the way down to London for a Climate Change Rally, I'd have to fly to make all my committments and make it in time. I am attending the simultaneous one in Glasgow from Bellahouston Park to Kelvingrove Park, details can be found on Facebook. If you're Scottish based and you care see you there.