Kate Forbes misses out the liberalism of same-sex marriage legislation

 So Kate Forbes, who at the time of writing this, is running in the leadership election of the Scottish National Party has said she would have voted against same-sex marriage legislation at the time, if she had been elected to Holyrood. She is also accusing others of being illiberal who speak out against her views.

The irony is that same-sex marriage was from the time was written as policy the whole way up to legislation shows how liberal you can be, while not excluding other. You see same-sex marriage legislation could have forced faith groups to carry out such marriages. However, nobody in a same sex relationship wants to celebrate or have that recognised in somewhere they don't feel welcome. That is why in my opinion one of the key phrases in same sex marriage legislation is "allow faith groups that wish to do so". 

You see prior to SSM legislation nobody could carry out a same sex marriage, not in civil law, in a faith setting or in Scotland by a humanist celebrate. At this point I'll ignore the fact that at Lib Dem Federal level the policy for Same Sex Marriage had to be amended to allow humanist celebrants to carry out mixed sex mrriages (which had only been possible in Scotland up until then). You see when drafting the policy in Scotland it was clear that nobody would be forced to carry out same-sex marriages. 

But I hear you say what about making registrars carry out same-sex marriages. Those who raise an argument about this based on their religious perspective seem to leave their religious views at the door when they marry divorced couples or even couples who Kate Forbes would say were wrong already had children.

You see SSM is a legislation that enables faith groups to come to their own decisions. With the exception of the Church of England and Church in Wales that some people thought it would be better to legislation against those churches solely making a decision on their own, and thus amended to exclude them from the enabling to carry out such marriage if they wanted to.

But it is something I have faced through the 13 years that there has actually been a Lib Dem policy in place for SSM. Something that I am proud to have had a hand in When people in faith groups accuse it of impinging on them when n fact the only thing impinging on them is their own views. It is ironicly something that I still struggle with coming from my own church The Presbyterian Church in Ireland, although I do feel excuded from there because of the judgement those in high places put on people from the LGBT+ community. In a strange way Covid actually makes my church accessible to me once more even though I haven't set foot in it for years.

The irony is that today a spokesperson for the Free Church of Scotland, of which  Kate Forbes is a member said:

"It is lamentable that Kate's honest adherence to simple traditional values would, for some, disqualify her from contributing to the public good of Scotland.

"Kate Forbes is standing on the basis of her policies - the fact that she is being criticised for her Christian convictions shows a level of bigotry that has no place in a pluralistic and diverse society." 

As I have pointed out above the views themselves are actually protected in the legislation she is opposed to. But the Free Church like one or two others likes to play the victim in all this.

It was faith that made homosexuality illegal in the first place and every step of the way LGBT+ people have had to slowly move towards equality, not getting there in one step like banning did, but incrementally. At every step we are told that people of faith don't agree with loosening the hod they have over our civil lives, while some of our are also in dialogue with them in relation to our faith lives. Kate Forbes has put this front and fore of her campaign during her launch, yet apparently we are not to take her stances as a step towards leading a Government as a possible move to restrict freedoms. If we speak up against it we are the illiberal ones, despite constantly bending over backwards to get small change after small change to not upset those with certain faith views to object to everything.

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.

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.

John McCallister Delivers

One of the phrases that is often used on election literature is [INSERT NAME] Delivers.

Well this morning that became literal for one of the candidates in the Ulster Unionist leadership race. At 7am the wife of John McCallister went into labour a week early and the MLA for South Down ended up being talked through the procedure for delivery of his son Harry James by Ambulance Control. He certainly did deliver and showed calmness under pressure.

It couldn't be more timely an event for McCallister only yesterday former UUP now Independent MLA David McClarty said:

"The reason why I would possibly plump for Mike is that John is a young man with a very young family, and leadership of a party is so time demanding that it’s not fair on a young family. 

"There will be criticism directed at him, and families experience that criticism and take it to heart. When you’re in politics you develop a think skin and it’s like water off a duck. But wives don’t, and families don't, and that happened with me when I wasn't selected by the Ulster Unionist Party. It hurt badly but it hurt my family even more and a young family doesn’t need that pressure."

Somebody had better not tell the Prime Minister David Cameron, or his Deputy Nick Clegg, nor the leader of the Opposition Ed Miliband that as all three have young families. As for that matter does Barack Obama.

Just when is it right to take the leadership of a party Mr McClarty? Is it when you are ready and the party decides you are ready or is it only when you are old and grey with kids off to University or whatever. Because if the latter had McAllister had children while he was a teenager rather than now at 39 they would be through University, but would being a teenage father have made him any more able to be leader of a political party? Of course we cannot tell.

Who next to lead the UUP?

Yesterday the news in the poll that the Ulster Unionist had the least influence of the five parties in the Northern Ireland Executive. Today three weeks ahead of the party's AGM the leader Tom Elliott has said he will not be seeking re-election for that position.

So who next to try and lead the UUP.

Basil McCrea was the runner up to Elliott less than 2 years ago and is an obvious contended to throw his hat into the ring. He was always seen as more liberal that Elliott especially when it came to issue of inclusion. The Donegal born MLA for Lagan Valley would clearly have a clear advantage of knowing who was supporting him last time out.

Danny Kennedy, the UUPs only minister at the Department of Regional Development, was as recently as this weekend denying that he would be challenging Elliot. Of course now there is a vacancy so all bets are off. As a former deputy leader of the party until the last leadership change he has the experience of ministerial office since 2010. The Newry and Armagh MLA is almost certainly going to throw his hat into the ring, trying to secure the more conservative branch of the party that took Elliott to the top job after the General Election

The former UTV journalist Mike Nesbitt has only been the MLA for Stangford since May last year, but because of his previous profession his is obviously a lot more assured in front of the camera than Elliott ever appeared to be. He may have only been an elected politician for 9 months but he is an assured character who oozes authority through his voice.

The current deputy leader John McCallister was seen as being given the role to appease the McCrea camp. The two men are from the same strand of the party, so it is unlikely that the two of them will both seek the leadership. He is another strong performer and someone who as  Health Spokesman has been great at challenging Edwin Poots over the issues that he tends to want to sweep under the cover.

Looking at the four possibles I see it most likely being a battle between McCrea and Kennedy as possibly just the two candidates. No doubt we'll learn more over the next few days.

SDLP elect new leader

The second UK political party leadership election result of the week was announced earlier today in Belfast. The SDLP were replacing Margaret Ritchie after just 19 months with a man, this is not me being sexist but a reality that there were only male candidates in the contest for party leader.

There were 348 votes cast, making the quota for election of 175.

In the first round

Alex Attwood 46
Connall McDevitt 105
Alasdair McDonnell 127
Patsy McGlone 70

Alex Attwood eliminated


2nd Round: Transfer of Attwood's 46 votes

Connall McDevitt 131 (+26)
Alasdair McDonnell 140 (+13)
Patsy McGlone 76 (+6)

non-transferable 1

Patsy McGlone eliminated


3rd Round: Transfer of McGlone's 76 votes

Connall McDevitt 152 (+21)
Alasdair McDonnell 188 (+48)

non-transferable 7

Alasdair McDonnell elected with vote exceeding quota

Alasdair McDonnell the MP and MLA for South Belfast was therefore elected to be the new leader of the SDLP.

Before Margaret Ritchie announced she was resigning she said that she did not feel it was possible to be an MP, MLA and leader of the party, but at the time she said such triple jobbing was 'a fully justifiable position'. The issue of double (triple) jobbing is one that the people of Northern Ireland find themselves in the largely unique position of finding their politicians in. The election of another double jobber as leader makes it hard to see how any of the big parties are going to break the double (triple) jobbing culture. Only the Alliance and Greens have effectively removed double jobbing from their ranks. The election of a new leader doing two jobs one at Stormont and one at Westminster by the SDLP makes it hard to see how the parties are going to get out of the two jobs mentality.

Who next to lead SDLP?

With Margaret Ritchie tonight announcing that she will step down as leader of the SDLP and not put her name forward in the forthcoming leadership election, the obvious question is "Who next?"

He stepping aside frees up her loyal lieutenants much in the same way that another leader called Margaret did, despite her topping the first poll in a leadership contest. So who are those lieutenants who might stand in her place against the challenge of Patsy McGlone.

The obvious first option of someone who is freed up is Alasdair McDonnell the MP and MLA for Belfast South, who came runner up to the Ritchie in the leadership contest in 2010 and as the Deputy leader under the previous leader Mark Durkan. Although one of the things that Ritchie said today in her resignation announcement was that she did not feel it was possible to be an MP, an MLA and lead a political party. That may be a coded remark, despite her saying criticising any of her colleagues that she hypocritically it would seem doesn't want a double jobber to once again be the leader. If it is seen as that it will work against the Ormeau Road Doctor.

Another contender would have to be the SDLP environment minister Alex Attwood the MLA for Belfast West. His history includes helping to negotiate the first nationalist Lord Mayor of Belfast, Alban Maginness in 1998. He is one of the three ever present SDLP MLAs with a long history of political experience.

North Belfast MLA Maginness of course was the SDLP choice for Justice Minister at the re-election period, and is another of the original intake and unlike John Dallat the other of the triumvirate still seems to want to take on high office. As a Barrister Maginess used to be a ever present sight walking past my window between City Hall and the Law Courts when I worked on Chichester Street.

However, with one issue being the slide in SDLP support there is a possibility that one of the new generation might step up to the mantle, someone like Conall McDevitt. Though many rule him out for his lack of time in Stormont, he has been around the top of the party since 1996, was involved in the Good Friday talks and been in or around the power of the SDLP ever since. Of the other SDLP MLAs the most prominent is possibly Delores Kelly.

I'l wait and see who throws their hat into the ring unlike some SDLP branches who even this even with only one declared runner have nailed thier colours to the mast.

Six Votes In It: Ed Miliband's Margin of Victory

Because the Labour Leadership election is not down under one member one vote just how close was the final outcome. After all1.3% is a pretty close race. But all the talk of the Unions winning it for younger brother Ed need to be looked at in light of the six people who actually cost it for David.

My friend and once upon a time blogger Mark Thompson has actually done the maths.
With just 1.3% in it David only needed a 0.65% swing so from the smallest electorate making up 33.33% of the electorate that was the MPs and MEPs. Each of their votes counted as 0.1253% overall for the entire election. Five of them comes to just 0.6265% whereas six comes to the magic 0.7518% or but another way 50.1018% of the vote enough to have edged out his younger brother.

The Unions Anoint Ed

Well in the end it really was a nail biting finish. It was down to the fourth round of the ballot that decided the result between the Milibands. In the end it came down to:

MPs 53-47 to David;
Members 54-46 to David;
Unions 60-40 to Ed.

Overall Ed 50.65% David 49.35%

Yes I was doing the maths in my head before the result for David was declared first (how much of a geek am I?) even turning and saying it. I knew before that forty nine came out of the Chair of the NEC's mouth which Miliband brother was next in line. But the split is that he lost out in two of the three colleges. The members and MPs/MEPs were not behind him, but the Unions were.

However, Nick Robinson and Laura Kuenssberg were talking over round two declarations and most of round three to tell us that David Miliband was smiling and Ed was looking tense, before Nick 'declared' the result for David. My friend Helen Duffet posted a tweet 'Ed Miliband wins title of Labour's best pokerface. Watch 'im.'

So in honour of the new Labour leader's performance before the count was declared here's this.

UUP Leader Elect Elliott : My Reader

Last night the Ulster Unionist Party elected Tom Elliott MLA for Fermanagh and South Tyrone as their new leader. This morning he said:

"What I want to see is a party that actually represents the population of Northern Ireland.

"I want to see for the Ulster Unionist Party the same as I want to see for the people of Northern Ireland - that is a working together, that is an integration, not a carve up between two parties or two sections of our community.

"I want an all-embracing party that actually represents Northern Ireland."

However, how all-embracing a party can it be if the leader of the UUP is not prepared to attend Pride events of GAA sporting events. As my friend and colleague Mícheál pointed out not in certain communities. 3000 Versts asks questions about what direction the UUP is going to take, again asking will it retreat back to Orange Order and the 'unionists'. Over at Slugger O'Toole there is still a warning that the party need to take off the brake and come out of reverse, something that must not be forgotten simply by the size of Elliott's victory.

Slugger carries this analysis of the result, much in line with the feeling on BBC Northern Ireland's Hearts and Minds last Thursday:

"The DUP will be happy tonight. Alliance will be happy that the UUP won’t be steering too far into their centre ground. And the SDLP will be upset that they’ll still not have a credible ally in the centre ground – the UUP and SDLP tend to succeed together and fail together."

So the reforming campaign of Basil McCrea had fallen by the wayside. Does it seem that the UUP have taken the lesson from the 2010 election that being too liberal is not the way to reach out to Northern Ireland? If it is and Elliott retracts to the right the fight for certain parts of the community of Northern Ireland will become harder once again.

Maybe No Dusty Bin but 3-2-1

Earlier today Sally Bercow tweeted this

It got me thinking what would have been the five cryptic clues that Ted Rogers would have read out on the show 3-2-1 for the five Labour Leadership contenders.

For younger readers 3-2-1 was a Saturday evening entertainment/quiz show by Yorkshire Television which had sketches intermingled with cryptic clues for contestants to try and guess what prizes they were. One of the prizes was Dusty Bin for which the contestants actually got a new bin and a small souvenir version.

So here are my set of clues can you tell who is who:

I'm off to the races and that suits me fine
But this two horse race needs a new winner this time.
I'll energetically bring about change
My words once laid out the Scottish range.


I've jumped to the challenge since I was born
But Swedish robes have my reputation torn
Some call me tasteless, but net beware
Our kids are best under two parent care.


I'm no coach potato any day of the week
I'm the first or so my tutor might speak.
Some Finns aren't so white I learnt to my cost
My child will be educated bugger the cost.


My ancestry is an important part of who I am
But I do with education is like American.
Though not with the Tracey's international rescue
Grey matter was the porn writer's 'hey you!'.


JFK was a way to help with my studies
But my family and animals is part of the stories.
It's good to talk but not always while driving
But second homes really ought to be in the West Riding.

I'll give you the answers tomorrow.

UKIP Leadership Election Rules In Full

Now that Lord Pearson of Rannoch has stepped down as leader of UKIP after less than a year in the post it seems appropriate to review their leadership election rule. Here are the new rules to ensure that someone who is in Lord Pearson's words "not much good at party politics" fills the post again.

1. A returning officer shall be appointed.
2. A deputy returning office shall be appointed.
3. The returning officer shall withdraw to the corner of the room where he/she* shall have their his back to the leadership candidates
4. The returning officer shall press play on the music device that is located in the corner.
5. The deputy returning officer shall invite the leadership candidates to stand and walk around the room.
6. The deputy returning officer shall remove one of the chairs that the leadership candidates were sitting on whilst they continue to walk around.
7. The returning officer at a time of his choosing shall press stop or pause on the music device in the corner of the room.
8. The leadership candidates shall attempt to sit on the chairs.
9. The deputy returning officer shall eliminate the leadership candidate left standing once all chairs are occupied from the race.
10. Repeat steps 4 to 9 until there is just one chair and one leadership candidate Mr Farage remaining.
11. The remaining leadership candidate shall be asked to sign a pledge never to get in a plane trailing a banner on polling day.
12. Once the above affidavit has been signed and witnessed by the Returning Officer and Deputy Returning Officer the signatory shall be invited to lead the party.

Let the party games begin.

* There are no women in UKIP are there?

Balls Quitting Labour Leadership Race is Well...Just...That

There was speculation over the weekend that once the largest union Unite had given its endorsement to Ed Miliband and not Ed Balls that the latter would step down from the leadership race. He is however being backed by the Communication Workers Union.

On Radio 4s World This Weekend Balls has denied that he is quitting, coming out saying that he was "fighting to the end and I'm fighting to win". He went on to say that he was never a front runner for this race having neither the early organisation of some of his rivals, nor the CLP (Constituency Labour Party) and union endorsements of his rivals.

"My message to local party activists, councillors and union members is this: I am fighting to defend the jobs and front line public services in your local communities.

"I will carry on fighting to stop unfair tax rises and the withdrawal of essential benefits, I will carry on fighting to defeat a coalition hell-bent on cutting public services, putting up VAT, cancelling new schools and turning recovery into a double-dip recession.

"I am fighting to win this leadership contest to continue these campaigns, to give a voice to our communities and constituents and to show that as leader I would be best placed to set out an alternative plan for jobs and social justice for our country."

I'm a wee bit concerned with that middle paragraph and am wondering what he was doing about the unfair tax rises and if not withdrawal the obstructing of people being able to access essential benefits easily under the 13 years of Labour. Also during the election Labour were relying on the first quarter's mediocre growth figures as signs of recovery. The second quarter, 2/3 under the coalition government have show significant strengthening (which could all be down to one month) and less chance of a double dip than there may have been going into May's election.

I'm glad that Balls is not stepping out of the race, just wish he and the other contenders will start to admit they have left the UK economy in a state and stop trying to blame everything on someone else. It isn't becoming of them and the British public won't be taken as fools.

Messers Ed Talking Balls Over Iraq

Is there a war going on?

Today Ed Balls said in the Telegraph that the war on Iraq was was "wrong" and "a mistake". Going on to say:

"We shouldn't have changed our argument from international law to regime change in a non-transparent way. It was an error for which we as a country paid a heavy price, and for which many people paid with their lives.

"Saddam Hussein was a horrible man, and I am pleased he is no longer running Iraq. But the war was wrong."

Ed Miliband told the Guardian the decision to go to war was taken "led to a catastrophic loss of trust in Labour" adding:

"I was pretty clear at the time that I thought there needs to be more due process here.

"As we all know, the basis for going to war was on the basis of Saddam's threat in terms of weapons of mass destruction and therefore that is why I felt the weapons inspectors should have been given more time to find out whether he had those weapons, and Hans Blix – the head of the UN weapons inspectorate – was saying that he wanted to be given more time. The basis for going to war was the threat that he posed.

"The combination of not giving the weapons inspectors more time, and then the weapons not being found, I think for a lot of people it led to a catastrophic loss of trust for us, and we do need to draw a line under it."

You'd think there was a leadership election on or something. Oh yes there is.

Of course Balls was an advisor for Gordon Brown at the time of the invasion and is going to some lengths to try to distance himself from the decision that was backed by his then boss. Strange then that he also says if he had been an MP at the time he would have voted for the decision based on the evidence provided and at the same time saying:

"It was a mistake. On the information we had, we shouldn't have prosecuted the war."

So on the information he was privy to he said we shouldn't have prosecuted the war yet at the same time says if he'd been elected he would have voted for it. Huh? Is it just me that finds that argument doesn't add up.

Miliband was in the states at the time unlike big brother David but said he had 'some very heated arguments' with Gordon Brown about it but decided it was better to fight for climate change from inside the cabinet. That would be fighting so hard that you couldn't even get the party to make Parliament cut their own carbon emissions by 10% in 2010 as part of the 10:10 initiative that you said you supported in principle, right?

Well as the only two leadership candidates who weren't elected to the House of Commons at the time of the vote to go to war on Iraq these two may have been able to put a line under it. Sadly they failed to do that with their diversionary tactics.

Five Men and a Lady

Diane Abbott has announced she is tostand in the Labour leadership race. At last there is some diversity.

I don't just mean in her race or gender either. Now we have a diversity of views. When John Cruddas announced he wasn't standing I thought we were heading towards a vanilla election not just the white middle-class males, some would say all five looked like brothers rather than just the Milibands, but also in their opinions.

Now all us political wonks know that Diane is more free-flowing with her views on the new Labour project, on the This Week sofa, sipping the Blue Nun proffered by Andrew Neil, she has disagreed with both Blairism and Brownites in the past. She truly is a breathe of fresh air into the Labour leadership contest.

Maybe sitting those weeks in the studio with ex-leader Charles Kennedy and the man who missed his chance for leader courtesy of the voters of Enfield Southgate in 1997 Michael Portillo she knows she is up for the task at hand. As she said launching her campaign:

"The other candidates are all nice and would make good leaders of the Labour Party but they all look the same... We cannot be offering a slate of candidates who all look the same. The Labour Party's much more diverse than that.

"I looked at the field and said 'If not now, when?' And 'If not me, who?'

"It's important that we recapture the civil liberties agenda from the Tories and the Lib Dems.

"It's important that we re-energise the party and bring democracy back to the party.

"We need a proper debate on immigration, where children of immigrants like me also have a voice."

If I were a member I'd probably vote for her. As a member of another party I'd be worried if she actually won. She may well be the person to shake up Labour and give New Labour it's Clause IV boost. Depends how the party is felling about such a shake up. In the words of the classic Goodness Gracious Me Sketch the party may still want the 'blandest thing on the menu' maybe Diane is just too spicy for the Labour Parties tastes.

The Attitude Check - The Leaders' Responses Part I

Johann Hari has now completed his set of three interviews in Attitude with the three major party leaders. There are some questions which are specific to one leader and his party but several which are generic across all three. Over the next few nights I will be looking at those and giving my opinion on how they responded. Here is how Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg responded to the opening question they all were asked.

Why should people vote for [your party] at the next general election:

Brown: Because we [Labour] are the anti-discrimination, anti-prejudice and pro-equality party. We've always been determined to protect and defend the rights of the people who need the protection of the law. I think the whole history of the Labour movement has been to take on prejudice, discrimination and vested interests where they exist. If we've not done enough until 1997, we are to blame for that. But we have done a huge amount since, we've got a lot more to do, and in our blood, in our DNA, is a determination to speak up for equality and against inequalities and against injustices. I am really proud that once people have won rights, you can't ever humiliate them again. You can't ever go back. My view is: you start from the dignity of every individual. You want a society where every individual has the chance to realise their potential to the full, and any barriers that exist - like prejudice - is dismantled. And so, my position, starts from a principled position. Some people might think - this guy is a son of the Manse, brought up in a very Presbyterian environment. But I've always been very proud that the Church of Scotland has a much more egalitarian view about gay rights than others.

Sadly for the Prime Minister the way he speaks even comes across in the written word as dour. Also this is a position statement there is a lack of clear reasons why we should vote now, apart from the one line "we have more to do".

Clegg: I want anyone from any community to vote for us because of the values we [Liberal Democrats] represent, not because they think we tick a particular set of boxes. We are a liberal party who believe in tolerance. We have the longest and proudest record of campaigning for gay rights in British politics. The main reason I want people to vote for us is not some sort of segmented appeal because we've got a vision of Britain could be that I believe lot of folk - gay, straight, white, black, Asian, women, men - can support.

Nick Clegg is the only one not wholly cuffed by the fact he is speaking to a gay publication. He's setting out the ideals, elsewhere in the interview come some of the specifics. He's showing the tolerance that he talks about by not pigeon holing, the other two talk of some other worldliness but Clegg is all encompassing, not boxing you in don't look at us just for tick boxes.

Cameron: Above all because I think the country needs change. Change in terms of sorting out our economy, in terms of improving public services, and in terms of some of the things that are going wrong in our society. I think I can say to gay people that not only is it change we need, it is a changed Conservative Party that faces you at the election. Not that we have a perfect record on all of these things, I know. But there have been some major changes that have taken place under my leadership.

I know there are gay people who have conservative values, such as wanting us to be supportive of business and enterprise, wanting to have strong defense believing in strong defense of liberty and so on - but in the past they have felt held back [from voting for us] because the Conservative party was sending them a signal that we didn't support them or their lifestyle. That has changed. I think we can look gay people in the eye and can say you can now back us both for the values we have but also because we now support gay equality.

Initial thoughts on David Cameron is that he is trying to overcome the legacy that his party have established through their past actions. Hence the apology, however twice he says "I think we can" either say or look at gay people differently from before. Think and can together are two soft words which may hint at a certain uncertainty. Cameron also hits out at the wider agenda though.

Overall it is a tough start for Cameron, indeed Hari doesn't let him off later in the interview so maybe he is guessing the course that the interview will take. Brown sounds like a lecturer in political history, laying out the history of the party but not giving much of a vision for the future no reason to vote Labour to move forward. Both Cameron clearly and Clegg by implication which is later fleshed out give a reason for hope. It may be that Labour is basically out of ideas but the other two both show an enthusiasm, the snappiness of Nicks answer to the first question being a prime example of bring it on.

For openers I'd give

• Nick 7/10
• Dave 6/10
• Gordon 4/10

More tomorrow at the same time

Did Shakespeare Foresee Such Drama on Twelfth Night, Again?

Well it takes something to put fire in the belly and heat you up on a day like today. This morning before I walked out into -9C I was about to strangle the male present on BBC Breakfast who seemed over excited that it was a mere -6C in North West England. But I digress.

So what has stoked the boilers today? Or rather who? Or rather Hoon, ably assisted by Hewitt. For Geoff and Patricia have had enough. The BBC are covering it live. Come to think of it wasn't it a January evening, though a rather warmer one, back in 2006, indeed 4 years to the day that the last long night of the knives from MPs against a leader took place, it led to me posting this in the wee hours of the morning.

On the 6th January 2006 a letter was going around the Lib Dem MPs in the commons seeking to find support for the notion that Charles Kennedy should resign. Today we find that Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt have sent a letter to Labour MPs to call for a secret ballot to sort out Brown's leadership.

The Prime Minister is doing just what Thatcher did when the plot to get her to stand aside was being hatch, being busy. For Thatcher her trip to France on business may well have been her undoing in her dying hours. One wonders what Brown's visit to a snow command centre will lead to? Indeed Charles Kennedy after the night of the circulating letter fell on his sword. Will the new day bring Brown to the same decision?

UPDATE: Nick Robinson has just hinted live on BBC evening news that unless one of the Labour cabinet comes out and says what they say to him and his colleagues all the time in private, Brown will stay in number 10. How deep is the rift below this surface?

On a lighter side check out Liberal Conspiracy's pics live from the Labour plot.


moar funny pictures

Update 2:

I don't often link to Guido but this is a good take on the whole last 24 hours.



As this is a live and happening event this blog post is liable to be updated.

For example the list of who is for or against having the ballot.

If Heselband Really Wanted a Militine Moment

Overheard in a lift in Manchester was David Miliband telling an aide that he had avoided a Heseltine moment. However, mere words are not enough here is a leaked memo of some other ways to make a Heselband or is that Militine impact.

10. As a junior minister get foreign governments to agree to a entente cordiale and grand concorde indeed. But be economical with the truth while hovering over trains.

9. Set out to be a millionaire by 25, in cabinet by 35 (close we take you policy role as being thereabouts plus foreign office at 41 nice one), leader of the party by 45 and PM by 55.

8. Come up with a grand sell off scheme, council houses were Hezza's thing. So see off the Bank of England or something instead.

7. Do something to really wind up the opposition's local authorities. Hezza was empowered to circumvent local authority planning controls while at Department of Environment, lets just flood low lying Tory authorities on the East Coast and rehouse residents in run down inner cities next to "hard-working" families.

6. You need to have a big spat with the PM over something that really matter a la Westland. Maggie saved the Falklands, Hezza defended defence spending. Gordon wants to save the economy, have a blow out over banks.

5. Need a better nickname that "the boy David" after all Hezza was Tarzan. Do you have any distinguishing tattoos? Have you have more than say 30 sexual partners? We need something here David work with us. No Blakey in allusion to your early ambition to be a bus conductor doesn't do it. Needs more effort.

4. Flamboyance factor cf Hezza's mane. The photoshoot in the Times at the weekend was good. Nice image change to old dour features. Lets work on it more relaxed polo shirts, chinos, big smile. Check out which toothpaste both Barak Obama and John McCain used we may be on to a winner.

3. Need to resign from the cabinet an brew on the backbenches for a bit, but not too long, like Hezza, ready to launch a counter attack. We advise you resign in March 2010, reason something about the manifesto but you won't clarify at the time (need to see polling after the election to ascertain just what costs us the election nudge, nudge, wink, wink). Then we can brand you as the voice of change over the summer of 2010 ready to take the leaders speech at Autumn conference.

2. Need to line up some loony to take over your parliamentary seat for after you retire. One of Ken Livingston's hoard suit fit the bill.

1. Key get another senior party figure to resign first heating the fire underneath the PM like Geoffrey Howe did for Hezza's coup. Darling wouldn't have the impact as lost all respect. Jacqui Smith we've lost our file on sadly. You're at foreign office which leaves a dilemma, we suggest Jack Straw as he's probably the most respected senior figure still with any post of some clout. We'll get unto any of his people who haven't already asked about nominating you if he'd throw himself on his sword.

Last One Out Please Visit the Palace

Remember the good old days when John Major faced a vote of confidence in the House of Commons. Well it looks like not even confidence these days is a matter for the House to hear about.

Heaven only knows who Gordon would get to whip a vote of confidence, or vote for him in one especially now that David Cairns is the first Minister to resign on the issue of his continued leadership. Although last I heard my MP Michael Connarty was still backing his man even saying he should get himself to Glenrothes, so with Miliband standing firm, although that may be yesterday's news, that's at least 3 votes for him come the conference.

Looks like it may be a case of musical chairs around the cabinet table over the next couple of days now that the first minster has vacated his chair. Just as long as the last one left in the room with Gordon remembers to call on the Queen to advise her that s/he will be forming the next government.