Over at Lib Dem Voice right now (and repeated on the tiresome Liberal Conspiracy site) there are debates raging about which other candidate London Lib Dems ought to give their second preferences to.
The question as to who our natural allies as a party are is an old one and is never easy to answer. Let’s begin with what our opponents say.
Ask a Tory who we naturally would prefer – them or Labour – and they will tell us that we are really an annex of the Labour Party (except Vince Cable who they think really belongs on their benches – probably because they have nobody with an equal flair for economics, despite being “the party of business”). They point to our moves in the 1990s to get close to the Labour Party when in opposition.
Ask a Labour party member and they will claim one of two things (once they have told us why we ought to switch and back them instead). Either they will say that we belong with them because we both are passionately committed to communities and human rights (though Labour’s actions could be seen to suggest otherwise) or else they point to the Orange Book and scream “market liberals” at us.
And then the two of them get together, point at us and say you can’t trust us because we are neither one nor the other. There are issues we agree with Labour on and there are issues we agree with the Tories on and that means we are pragmatic, cynical masterminds – jumping on whatever bandwagon we reckon we can squeeze a few votes on.
Your dejected Liberal Democrat meanwhile shrugs his or her shoulders and ponders why, as individuals, we ought to be able to be grouped together and categorised.
It’s often said that we are a party made up of two halves but that is not really true. In my experience we coalesce around central tenets and whilst some of us veer off in different directions we have a similar starting point. It’s in our name. Almost all of us believe passionately in individual liberty and in democratic structures.
There are of course groupings of members – there are those who do believe in the free market; there are those who believe in fair trade. It is not ideologically inconsistent that both of these views exist within the party. Rather it is possible because we disagree over how best to achieve an outcome.
The argument as to whether we should feel drawn to Boris or Ken is simply pointless. We will not agree because we have different instincts. We should make our minds up as individuals and vote as individuals. By all means we should debate the matter about who we are most comfortable with, ask the question who is the most liberal or democratic and get annoyed when either side says that they are our natural second preference.
I have my preference of those two – I’m sure you have yours – though in the end my views have little to do with anything. I am not a Londoner and have no vote.
We should devote our energy instead to getting the maximum number of votes for Brian. Then the question would be who do Ken and Boris’ second preferences go to?
