My tale of me - Chris Jenkinson

I’m delighted at the reaction I’ve got from party members of Liberal Youth about my campaign and what I’ll do if I’m elected as Vice-Chair (Membership Development).

I haven’t put as much time into my campaign as I’d like as I’ve been busy helping the current chair of Liberal Youth Manchester, Kate Little, run for a sabbatical position in our Students’ Union.

As a sabbatical officer myself, I know I’ve developed a huge amount as a liberal, as a campaigner and as a person, and if I’m elected I’ll be a loud champion of encouraging our members to stand for election in your Unions.

I’ve also brought liberalism into my Students’ Union and the University (through introducing online voting so more students are engaged, making decision-making more transparent, and supporting widening participation so access to higher education is based on merit, not one’s social background).

I know the reputation student politics has, and some of it is deserved. But student politics also teaches valuable skills like preparing for meetings, holding others to account, public speaking, lobbying and campaigning. I want membership development to be more than just increasing the number of members on the books.

Elaine Bagshaw, who I’m backing for Chair of Liberal Youth, visited Manchester yesterday and spent most of the day with Kate campaigning. I’m proud to support her - she has done a fantastic job as Chair since she took office and I know she will do even more if re-elected.

I’m voting for Elaine as I know she has a plan. A plan which means more branches, more campaigning, more communication, more socials, more teamwork, more policies, more activists, more members, more elected young people, and a Liberal Youth of which we can all be proud.

I hope you support her too - please join her group on Facebook.

I’m running for a national position within Liberal Youth - Vice-Chair (Membership Development). The job description is pretty self-explanatory, being responsible for supporting branches, organising training and helping branches both grow in terms of numbers but also as people.

My full manifesto is available to read. Please show your support by joining my Facebook group or become a supporter on Facebook. I’m also on Twitter, and can be contacted via email at memdev@chrisjenkinson.org.

If you’ve got any comments about my manifesto or campaign please let me know!

I thought I’d put up a photo of the house of the election agent in Withington (south Manchester) for the Labour candidate (I live in the same house). Liberal Democrats winning here!

As it turns out there will be a Labour executive propped up by the Tories in Bristol - one of the suggestions I made previously. Labour and the Tories previously combined to oppose a minority Lib Dem administration continuing in office after we lost two seats. It’s interesting that this new coalition is entirely Labour (the article tallies up the number of councillors wrongly, I blame the Labour executive edit: it’s correct now), so I imagine the Labour group will have given some concessions to the Tories.

I think this is good for both the Lib Dems and the citizens of Bristol. Firstly, the new executive has the support of a majority of councillors so it cannot be sabotaged by the opposition doing political deals - if it fails it will be due the Tories and Labour failing to work together, and given the current direction both parties are going that should not be a problem. The Liberal Democrats will be able to offer constructive criticism and will be properly able to hold the executive to account.

We should take pride in how we’ve turned Bristol around this past few years - especially the dramatic improvement in school GCSE results and the huge increase in recycling rates. Though a Labour/Tory coalition may lead back to the years of neglect before the Lib Dems took power a few years ago, it will not be from a lack of scrutiny - we’ve set the bar high and the Labour/Tory coalition will be hard-pressed to continue at the high standards Bristol’s citizens now expect.

I fail to see why LDYS needs a policy committee. Its members are volunteers doing the job in their spare time, and they don’t receive any special training - in other words they are just regular party members with a fancy title.

When committees are created they disenfranchise normal members. They take the power of things away from the people and give them to a minority of interested people (who often have an agenda). It discourages people from getting involved - they are instead encouraged to rely on others to handle their issues for them. They might not formally do this, but it is a matter of perception. If a committee is formed to handle an issue, it gives the impression that only the committee members are the appropriate people to handle the issue. It means people avoid taking ownership of LDYS’s policy by delegating: “that’s up to the policy committee to do”.

Committees do have their uses. For a volunteer group, as LDYS’s policy committee is, those advantages do not exist. A policy committee does not determine the governance of the organisation, it doesn’t manage anything, and it doesn’t really coordinate anything. The only thing a policy committee should do is research issues and report on them - and as a volunteer group of five or so people our policy committee does not exactly have the resources to do such a thing. Ad hoc working groups with funds would be appropriate. A standing policy committee with no resources is a pointless exercise in bureaucracy.

If LDYS sees part of its role as ensuring that the Liberal Democrats include the wishes of young people in their manifesto, then it must have an open and effective way to do so. It should encourage all party members to write policies of their own andto discuss them amongst all party members. LDYS members come from all walks of life and encouraging them not just to come forward with their own policies but to debate and discuss other members’ policies will be far more beneficial to the organisation. Scrap the policy committee and get members taking ownership of their suggestions.

Brown’s the next Prime Minister then. Congratulations I suppose. What’s the point of Tony Blair hanging on for another 6 weeks then? Say what you like about there not being a general election when Thatcher was booted out, but at least the Tories had a contested leadership election back in 1990, albeit one by MPs only.

The Lib Dems have always ensured that our leader was democratically elected, with one person, one vote, since 1976. The Tories’ system of MPs choosing two candidates for the party membership to vote on, and Labour’s system of allowing people extra votes depending on how many trade unions they’ve joined (the more you pay, the more influence you’ve got!), are unfair systems and anti-democracy. If you think that society only works if each person is an equal stakeholder, then the Liberal Democrats are the party to support.

Despite some rather optimistic press releases from the Bristol Lib Dems recently about our chances of taking control of the city, we lost two seats including the executive member for social services, and already the other Lib Dem councillors have forced out the council leader, Barbara Janke. Now we’re down to 31 seats out of 70, so it’s time for some self-reflection. Can we really hold on as a minority administration? I don’t think so, and nor should we (I think Norfolk Blogger agrees). While Labour and the Tories on Bristol City Council could team up and defeat us before the elections, they can do so more effectively now. Should we allow them to scupper our flagship policies, watering down motions and then forcing us to take the hit from how unpopular those are? If we continue running minority administrations we will continue to lose council seats each year until we aren’t in charge any more, and it will be a long time until the electorate trust us again - even though the failings of the council would be engineered by the opposition.

We’re in an uncomfortable place. The Tories and Labour will obviously prefer the status quo of a weakened Lib Dem administration for them to criticise for another year. The Lib Dem group should not let that happen by refusing to run a minority administration, instead going into coalition with either the Tories or Labour or letting the Tories and Labour run a coalition of their own. This would be much better for all parties and especially the residents. The Lib Dems will be the largest party on the council with the most influence, and will not have their policies destroyed by the combined Tory/Labour group and look bad because of it. Whichever group goes into coalition will be able to demonstrate what they will do with power in Bristol, and the third group will form the opposition which would actually start constructive criticism rather than dodgy dealings with the other opposition party to make the Lib Dems look bad.

Constructive criticism rather than politicking, and a stable leadership will serve the interests of Bristol’s citizens much better than a weak minority administration.

This year’s been a much better year for the Lib Dems in Manchester than 2006, with us holding all the seats where our councillors were up for re-election, and gaining one seat in Chorlton - congratulations Paul Ankers! Lev unfortunately did not get elected in Northenden despite being a wonderful person (with the best campaign slogan). Over in Stockport, where I work, we gained one seat, consolidating our majority there. Chris Walker, another great guy, also narrowly failed to take Brinnington off Labour.

Things did not go well for the Tories as usual in Manchester with them failing to win any council seats, and ended up in third place in the City Centre behind the Lib Dems and Labour. The so-called Tory resurgence is clearly not occurring in Manchester. The Greens also failed to improve their number of councillors in Manchester, remaining to be seen as a protest vote by much of the electorate. The BNP did well in Higher Blackley coming a clear second (but still no where near winning). Respect also remained a protest vote for residents of Rusholme. I’m slightly concerned about the low turnout - down to 16% in places like the city centre. Why aren’t people voting?

Back home in Bristol things weren’t so happy with the Lib Dems losing two councillors to Labour, including one executive member’s ward, leaving the Lib Dems as the largest party but with even less of a lead. The Tories failed to make any gains in Bristol.

Apart from hearing the results from Scotland and Wales, I’m looking forward to seeing how Kate Little and Owen Griffiths do in Fylde and Bradford respectively. They’re both paper candidates, but you never know….

Congratulations to all Lib Dems elected and commiserations for those who lost their seats and who narrowly lost out on winning.

I read “How can student politics learn lessons from Lib Dem election victories?” by Alexander Kemp with interest due to our recent NUS elections and upcoming student union elections at Manchester. The success of the Jewish society and Labour Students compared to the past whitewash by Student Respect/the Islamic Society, and an apparent 20% turnout increase since last year (I don’t have the exact figures), show that it is possible to stand and indeed to win.

He is entirely true to speak about the lack of interest from Lib Dems at university. We (Lib Dems at Manchester) did not stand any candidates, nor did we send out a message letting people know the NUS elections weren’t occurring. I know that I see NUS as almost a unwitting parody of the Monty Python and the Life of Brian revolutionary groups, which coupled with a whipping of delegates ensuring they do not have independence in many votes, makes me lean more towards disaffiliation than reforming from within (and perhaps my general natural distrust of large groupings, whether unions, corporations or government). But my friends in Labour Students at Manchester have told me several times that if the Lib Dems got involved then we could help “rescue” it and make it relevant.

The trouble I see is that if turnout at student union elections is low, how can we expect them to be representative, let alone NUS which is even more distantly linked to the “average” student? Perhaps Lib Dem groups on campuses across the UK would be better served encouraging people to vote and promoting reform such as online voting or referenda, rather than spending effort on targeting the existing politicised student in order to get Lib Dem candidates elected to NUS - especially if, as the claim goes, most students vote Lib Dem in general elections.

In the past I have been pretty strongly against the NUS as a useless, irrelevant talking shop not worth participating in. It is not listened to by the government, it is in financial crisis, and the average student sees it as a group of political careerists, if they know enough about it to have an opinion at all. But with the recent elections here I see my mind changing towards getting involved and helping to make it better. Whether or not I would vote to disaffiliate Manchester from the NUS, I’m not sure.

The question is a good one. Should Lib Dems get involved in NUS and help to reform from within, or is it not worth the effort - they would be more productive making their own student unions relevant to students and encouraging participation in local politics?