Instinctively, many corporate leaders will want to steer clear of the rancorous debates which, in the U.S., will crescendo into November’s presidential election. Hiding away, getting on with returning to profit, trying to improve the battered share price and restoring a decent dividend will preoccupy many CEOs. Some will quietly drop commitments to look out for other stakeholders and the environment, citing the pandemic as an excuse.  This would be a huge error, not least because around a third of U.K. workers surveyed don’t have confidence in their firms’ leaders’ approach to navigating the current crisis, with a global survey showing that less than a third of respondents believe CEOs are doing an outstanding job dealing with coronavirus.

When it comes to the pandemic, there have been false comparisons made with times of war.  There are those who predict that once this crisis passes we can look forward to advances similar to those that followed World War II.  The societal changes and post war consensus of the 1940s were a by-product of the shared experience of people of all backgrounds and classes fighting side by side against fascism, leading to a collective demand for greater equality thereafter. It was against this backdrop that the 1945 U.K. Labour administration was elected which went on to create our National Health Service, which is playing such an important role in saving lives today. 

There was also a determination to prevent the world being ravaged again by the division and forces that led to the war. So from 1941 U.K. Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Roosevelt led the establishment of the liberal international rule-based order which, ever since, has underpinned liberal democracy and trade across the globe, and guarded against authoritarianism and oppression. This struck a chord with President Roosevelt’s “New Deal” with the idea that nations would work on a multilateral basis to “improve labour standards, economic advancement, and social security.”

However, although we may now be fighting a war of sorts, albeit against an invisible enemy—coronavirus—we have been doing so separately in our own homes, in our own family units. Yes, our incredible key workers are putting themselves at risk to keep us safe but the great mass of our populations have had to stay indoors and abstain from doing things–they have not had to face the horror of leaving home, picking up arms and risking life and death in the same way as the war generation. Furthermore, the experience of coronavirus is not equally shared. For example, in the U.S. and the U.K. it disproportionately kills people of colour, and the people and places with the lowest incomes are the most vulnerable to job losses.  

And, far from precipitating international co-operation akin to what we saw under Roosevelt and Churchill, today we have witnessed countries going it alone, dealing with this crisis in a haphazard and uncoordinated way. The current U.S. President, Donald Trump, has even turned on the very international institution—the World Health Organisation—under whose auspices world leaders should be coming together to solve this global problem.

This is very tricky terrain for the C-suite of any company to navigate.

Many employees will return to work over the next few months hoping they still have a job, only to be told they don’t. 

The U.K.’s Office for Budget Responsibility has this morning published its latest estimate of the total cost of the government’s coronavirus policy interventions: a whopping £123 billion in 2020-21.

Quite rightly there are demands for a new social contract involving key workers being properly rewarded for their incredible work. 

Funding all of this will involve tax increases but who will be asked to pay for them?

Microsoft’s CEO, Satya Nadella, says we have seen the equivalent two years’ of digital progression in two months. Great for big tech but this will undoubtedly lead to household names in traditional sectors, like high street retail, going under. Upskilling and training redundant workers to adapt will be essential. We must also guard against further market concentration in the hands of the dominant players that are left standing and a reduction in competition (which is needed for a healthy functioning market). 

So we should use this moment to reform capitalism and foster a new kind of innovation economy where productive businesses, the state, and citizens work together to create wealth, reduce inequalities and ensure that globalisation works for many more people.   

In this context, there will be a lot of scrutiny of business, which has an important role to play, and will be operating alongside a bigger and more active state. But, as ever, opportunist, populist politicians will be looking to exploit this situation for their own cynical ends.

The populist Left will seek to use this moment to impose punitive and extreme measures on enterprise, and implement policies that will certainly not deliver growth or nurture an environment in which under-pressure firms can recover and get people back to work. 

On the populist Right, many of the main protagonists are currently in office. Their knee jerk decision making, based on ideology and emotion as opposed facts and evidence, and their wild policy ideas, have left them exposed as ill-equipped to meet the needs of this moment. President Trump’s suggestion that we inject ourselves with disinfectant provides a good example.

As ever, they will be looking for scapegoats with whom to park the blame for their incompetence.  Our countries do need to build more resilient domestic supply chains for strategic reasons to withstand the type of shock we have experienced. Yet these populists will demand a more drastic approach. There will be calls for deglobalisation and a degree of isolation as a means of protecting citizens, when this crisis has illustrated the importance of co-ordination and collaboration. 

The result—a perfect storm for companies during a pandemic induced global downturn: demands for more red tape, much more regulation, and punitive business taxation at the behest of the populist Left; and, calls for disproportionate restrictions on immigration, more protectionism, and nationalism, at the behest of the populist Right. Both will impede business and trade.

Business needs to see off this threat by acting to ensure that in a post coronavirus world a regulated, social market economy delivers the goods for more people. Everyone must play their part so CEOs need to become more vocal and activist in addressing environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns, not less. They are in a good position to do so. Were it not for their firms’ technologies, enabling us to remain connected to our nearest and dearest, the experience of lockdown would have been a whole lot worse. If companies seize the moment and are in the vanguard of building back a better and fairer economy, those who stand in the way of enterprise will be deprived of the oxygen they need to whip up fear, anger and anti-business sentiment.

This campaign has been a team effort. We have been blessed to have a superb staff and awesome local party. I am incredibly proud of what we have achieved and cannot thank all our wonderful Lib Dem members and volunteers enough for their tremendous efforts. We almost trebled our share of the vote and threaded the liberal, progressive, internationalist values which are at the core of what this constituency is all about through the entire campaign. We set out to climb Everest but, alas, although we were not far from the summit, we did not quite reach it – this was in spite of the remarkable campaign of the Westminster and City of London Lib Dems, not because of it. From the bottom of my heart, thank you!

Just over a year ago I decided to leave one of the two main parties – the Labour Party – in our undemocratic First-Past-The-Post system because I felt it no longer represented my social democratic, liberal values. Like so many, I felt the Official Opposition and the Government had failed to perform their constitutional duties competently, too often they were making decisions in their own interests and had gone to the extremes – I could not remain a part of that. I thought it would be a cop out to walk out of politics at that stage and leave the field without trying to fix a broken system with other MPs of a like mind for the sake of the country and our communities. I still maintain that it was better to try and fail to do that, than to stay put and defend the indefensible.

However, we must respect the choice the people have made today, both to re-elect Boris Johnson and the Conservatives into government, and for Labour to continue as the Official Opposition. I wish them the very best – it is in all our interests that they live up to the trust invested in them today. In particular, congratulations to Nickie Aiken, the new Member of Parliament for the Cities of London and Westminster.

For the liberal, internationalist, pro-European, progressive, centre-ground of British politics, the Liberal Democrats still have a vital role to play, despite the disappointing results of this general election. We will live to fight another day and learn from what has happened these last few months. I will do what I can, albeit outside of the House of Commons, to contribute to that. I said I had re-joined the party this year for the long term – I meant it.

Finally, it has been the privilege of my life to serve in parliament these last ten years for the constituency I was born into, Streatham. Since I was first elected, I spoke in the House of Commons on behalf of my constituents around 1000 times, I held weekly surgeries, and helped over 18,000 constituents with their issues. It was also a huge privilege to do a number of senior roles as a Shadow Cabinet member of both Labour and the Liberal Democrats. I am hugely grateful for the opportunity to serve and hope that I have been able to improve the lives of as many people as possible – the whole reason I stood for election in the first place ten years ago.

Thank you for inviting me to speak here today.

Before I start, I want to get one thing out of the way…

People keep asking for my political predictions.

What’s going to happen with Brexit? Will there be a deal?  Will there be a snap General Election?

I predicted that Labour would win the 2015 General Election…

I predicted that the UK would vote to Remain in the European Union…

And I predicted that Hilary Clinton would beat Donald Trump…

So, I’m following my wife’s advice, and I’ve stopped making political predictions.

‘I don’t know’ is the answer but I think we will have an answer by this time next year.  That’s all I will say.

I don’t blame you for asking.

Before coming into politics, I worked as an employment lawyer here in the Cities of London and Westminster, where I am the Liberal Democrat candidate at the next general election.  Almost all my clients were based in this constituency.  Most traded internationally, particularly into EU markets. 

So, I do understand just how frustrating not knowing what our trading relationships will be are for business.  And I appreciate that decisions on whether to spend, hire and invest cannot be made in isolation of from all the political volatility.

The Liberal Democrats are winning and will be decisive, when the next election comes.

What I can say is that it will be a truly extraordinary election, with some unprecedented results, and a very high level of tactical voting.  And the Lib Dems are on course to play the most decisive role in any general election in my lifetime.

It is not a question of whether we can win more support – we are already winning.

This year, in the European Elections in May, we beat Labour and the Conservatives in a national election for the first time in 100 years, scoring 20.3% to their combined 23.2% of the vote.

In the local elections in England which occurred shortly beforehand we gained over 700 councillors whilst the Tories lost 1,300 and Labour lost control of 6 councils.

In spite of our strong Remain stance, in June we overturned a Tory majority of 8,000 in a seat that voted to Leave the EU and won the Brecon and Radnorshire by-election.

Following the defections of 8 MPs, we now have 19 MPs in Parliament.

And 50,000 new members have joined our party in the last year taking our membership to over 127,000, our biggest ever.

Usually after Local and European Elections, third parties’ polling goes down.  But our polling position has stabilised at around the twenty percent level, with us beating Labour into second place in several surveys.

People tell us they are fed up with our broken two party political system with two parties at its heart who are part of the problem.  They are deeply divided and have failed to provide the clear direction the country needs.  And they have been so preoccupied dealing with their own internal problems that they cannot perform their jobs competently. 

Fundamental change is needed and our success this year tell us the public like what we are offering, with Jo Swinson being a complete breath of fresh air compared to Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn.  She does the work, is on top of the detail, reads her brief, actually cares and is of a new generation.

So we say, bring on a General Election – but we must make sure a No Deal Brexit is off the table first.  We cannot carry on with the current uncertainty, a government that has no majority and a legislature incapable of properly functioning. 

That is why we published our Bill for an election yesterday which not only protects against No Deal, but also prevents the Prime Minister ramming through his flawed Withdrawal Agreement without proper scrutiny, and it fixes the date of the election as 9 December 2019 into law so that it cannot be changed by a premier who has a habit of lying and breaking the rules.

Where next on Brexit

We know business wants to end this uncertainty too.  I can understand why some want to simply waive through and make do with the PM’s Brexit proposals.

But let us be clear: Boris Johnson’s Brexit proposals only offer more uncertainty.  They will not “get Brexit done”.

If the Withdrawal Agreement is finalised, we would enter an implementation period shortly after which would expire in December next year.  We have no idea what our trading relationship with the EU will be after that point.  The type of Canada style free trade agreement the Prime Minister envisages negotiating will take several years to settle and can’t be concluded in this timeframe.

If Brexit takes place, it will also increase the risk of the splitting up of the United Kingdom, with the SNP agitating for another Scottish independence referendum and instability in Northern Ireland.

And if Brexit takes place, should the current PM still be in office and not get the kind of trade deal he seeks by the end of next year from the EU, he is more than happy to gamble the country’s futures on starting 2021 without one.

Meanwhile, the Labour Party’s position is all over the place.

Labour’s leadership are split, with some wanting a People’s Vote, and others wanting to renegotiate a Labour Brexit deal, or a jobs-first-Brexit – a contradiction in terms.

It is still unclear, even if Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell managed to negotiate a Labour jobs-first Brexit, whether they would campaign for or against their own deal. They cannot even agree amongst themselves on whether to support having an election.

We, on the other hand are clear – we want to Stop Brexit and Remain in the European Union.  It is the only way to quickly end this uncertainty and restore confidence back into the economy.

We aim to achieve this by way of a democratic vote of the British people, either through a People’s Vote or at a General Election.  Our preference has always been a People’s Vote but with a significant minority of Labour MPs and around half of the ex-Tory rebels in the House of Commons refusing to back it, it is clear we do not have the numbers for one which is why a General Election and a new parliament now offers the most likely way we can achieve this aim.

Until there is a democratic vote, there will be no resolution to the impasse, and we cannot hope to move on, address the real issues facing our country and heal the divisions.

Brexit is already harming the economy.  We have already witnessed a fall in the value of Sterling, higher inflation, and low or negative GDP growth – and we haven’t even left yet.

The Government’s own analysis concluded that in the next 15-years, any form of Brexit will damage our economy.  Relative to Remaining in the EU it is estimated that the kind of free trade agreement envisaged by the PM will lead to GDP and real wages being 6.7% and 6.4% lower in the long term.

Our plan for the future

So what are our plans?  The Lib Dem plan for our economy aims to tackle the causes of Brexit by investing in Britain’s future.

Let me start with where the economy is right now.

GDP growth has been under 2% in the last three years and weaker than in other G7 economies.

According to data from the Department of International Trade, the number of foreign investment projects into the UK dropped by 14% in the fiscal year ending March 2019.

Since December 2017, business investment has been falling each quarter, with the only exception being Q1 2019.

R&D investment is low – below the EU28 average of 1.9%, the OECD average of 2.3%, and lower than key competitors such as France, the US and Germany.

We have recorded a persistent trade deficit every year since 1998, with it widening from -1.3% of GDP to -1.5 of GDP in the last year.

The 2016 Brexit vote has exacerbated these underlying problems.

Jo Swinson, Ed Davey and I all understand the impact this is having on the environment you operate in, the undermining of confidence in the economy, and how this leads you to delay decisions or cancel investment plans.  And we intend to reverse it.

And we want to work with you to support enterprise, invest in the physical and digital infrastructure our economy needs, and build a balanced partnership of the public and private sectors to get the British economy moving, and ensure our economy is fit for the future.

Our record

When the Liberal Democrats were last in Government we helped provide a stable business environment – as you can see that stability fell apart soon after we left office.

Above all, we adopted an active industrial strategy and worked with business to both strengthen and modernise our economy.

We set up the Green Investment Bank – the world’s first-ever state-backed bank of its kind.  The Bank has channelled more than £15bn into green infrastructure and has funded 60% of the UK’s offshore wind generation capacity.

We established the series of ‘catapult’ innovation and technology centres to bridge the gap between R&D and industry and help ensure our most innovative ideas are commercialised and drive benefit to the UK economy.

We founded The British Business Bank. The bank is independently managed but 100% Government owned and has increased the supply of finance to smaller businesses.

We can be proud of these achievements.  However our goal is a society in which every citizen, regardless of circumstance, background or postcode, can lead a happy, prosperous and secure life. This is not the case in Britain today.

Inequalities and regional economic decline and underinvestment played a big part in creating the Brexit chaos we find ourselves in.

Anyone who thinks that the status quo is a viable business plan for the future needs a reality check.

There are different varieties of capitalism – the current model is dysfunctional and needs to be repurposed.

The kind of capitalism we need must be more inclusive and progressive, fairly distribute the proceeds of growth so all communities, regions and nations benefit from the proceeds of globalisation.  Fail to do this and the forces of the extreme and populist Left and/or Right will flourish.

This will require greater equality of opportunity, and government working together with the private sector to harness the power of enterprise and spur inclusive prosperity and growth.

The state and the market, working in partnership, both have a role – and there should be a balance between the two.

We call it a social market economy.

We will create this social market economy by investing in people, innovation and infrastructure in order to give people the tools to be competitive in our economy and ensure our country a world leader.

Ed Davey, our Shadow Chancellor, will set out our plans in detail during the election campaign but I want to highlight four pillars today and some examples of what we intend to do.

First, skills and training for a 21st century economy.

The rapidly changing nature of work means more people are changing career and need to retrain multiple times within their lives.

Even if people don’t switch career they need to be able to develop their skills to keep pace with changes in technology and working practices.

So a Lib Dem government will introduce Lifelong Learning Entitlements – individual ring-fenced funds to enable access to high-quality training schemes for adults.

A higher-skilled workforce will also boost the UK’s economic productivity, which has been lagging behind our international competitors for too long.

Again, the public and private sectors working together in a balanced partnership.

Second, we will support innovative businesses and new developing technologies, which will be the foundation of a thriving twenty-first century economy

As part of an active industrial strategy, a Lib Dem government will expand the remit of the British Business Bank to perform a more central role in the economy.

This will help tackle the shortage of equity capital for start-ups and growing firms, and providing long-term capital for medium-sized businesses developing these technologies.

A Lib Dem government will also pursue year-on-year real increases in public funding on R&D for the next 10 years, so the UK economy achieves our 3.4% GDP goal.

The flawed business rates system acts as a disincentive to investment.  We wish to replace it with a system based solely on the land value of commercial sites rather than their entire capital value, thereby stimulating investment.

Third, an economy which cares for our environment and climate.

We want to see businesses take greater responsibility for the impact they have on the environment.

That is why we want a general duty of care for the environment, to ensure that companies are avoiding behaviour in their operation and supply chains that is damaging to the environment.

This is something that more and more consumers want, and that many businesses are already doing.

So, by regulating for it, it creates a higher floor for standards,

It creates a more level playing field for businesses,

and it doesn’t penalise those who are seeking to protect the environment – but incentivises those who need to do more.

And fourthly, we will help drive regional growth.

As I mentioned earlier, our vision for the economy is one where government supports enterprise, invests in the right infrastructure, and builds a balanced partnership of the public and private sector.

A Liberal Democrat government will examine the current £270bn a year procurement budget to ensure a more decentralised and devolved approach, which will benefit regional economies.

We plan to use public sector procurement and infrastructure budgets to partner with private sector investment in order to increase regional growth in digital and physical infrastructure. This will be an important economic stimulus directed to the regions.

Achieving dynamic local economies, with vibrant, productive cities – economically connected with industrial and rural communities – requires improvements to transport.

That is why a Liberal Democrat government will be committed to the electrification of the rail network, improving stations, reopening smaller ones, restoring twin-track lines to major routes and proceeding with HS2, HS3 and Crossrail 2.

Of course, we must ensure all parts of the country have good digital connectivity.

For the avoidance of doubt: there are no mansion taxes, punitive business tax hikes, programmes to appropriate private property or policies that will lead to our key sectors and industries being walloped with new trade tariffs in our plans.  Neither Labour nor the Tories can say this.

How does our overall approach compare to the offer from the other parties?

Since 2015, this Tory government has overseen a year-on-year drop or stagnation in GDP growthfrom 2.3% in 2015 to 1.4% in 2018.

Meanwhile poverty is up with 14.3 million people living in poverty as of July 2019, that is 22% of the UK population, including 4.6 million children.

This is unacceptable for the fifth richest country in the world.

And this is before we even get to Brexit, a form of which Boris Johnson is happy to plough ahead with, despite all of the warnings of the business, academics and even the government’s own impact assessments.

Instead of listening to you these last few years, senior cabinet ministers have gone on the attack. The PM said “f**k business”, while the former Foreign Secretary said it was “completely inappropriate” for you to air your concerns on government policy. 

Consequently many business leaders I speak to believe the government provided by the Tories since 2017 has been the worst for business they can remember. Yes, they point to Brexit but, they also point to their sheer ineptitude and incompetence.

Meanwhile, under Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell’s leadership Labour are failing to even provide proper parliamentary scrutiny to hold the Government to account.

John McDonnell has outlined his plans for renationalising key parts of the British economy.

The CBI’s own analysis shows that Labour Party’s renationalisation plans will cost £196bn.  That’s as much as the annual spend on the health and social care and education combined.

And by their own admission, if elected a Labour Government is likely to spark panic amongst major employers and businesses, leading the party to ‘war game’ for capital flight and a run on the pound.

In our words and deeds, I would argue we are now the only main party that is pro-business, enterprise and entrepreneurship.

Conclusion

So in conclusion, The Liberal Democrats can win – and we are already winning.

In the local elections.

At the European elections.

We are the only sensible pro-business choice at the next general election.

We have a record of working with business to both strengthen and modernise our economy.

I ask you today to work with us again on this.

Whereas Labour and the Tories are two competing visions of the past – our vision is one where government supports enterprise, invests in infrastructure, and builds a partnership of the public and private sector.

The Lib Dem plan for the future of the economy will tackle the causes of Brexit by investing in the Britain of tomorrow.

That is how we build a brighter future for our country.

Thank you.

France’s Emmanuel Macron had been holding out on offering the extension due to concerns that it would amount to more gridlock and indecision, and was instead pushing for a shorter extension that would have bound parliament’s hands into backing Boris Johnson’s withdrawal agreement or leaving with no deal at all.

Part of the reason for the change of heart, one EU ambassador told reporters, was the action the Liberal Democrats and SNP took at the weekend. Had we not sent a clear signal that we would use that time constructively to follow our democratic processes to break the gridlock in Westminster, it is not at all certain that we would have been offered the extension MPs requested in the Benn Act.

The Liberal Democrats are the strongest Remain party in the UK, and we have been the loudest, clearest voice in Westminster in favour of a People’s Vote on Brexit with Remain on the ballot. We have tabled 17 amendments and motions to provide for a People’s Vote in this parliament. 

However, at every turn, we have been blocked from doing so by a significant minority of Labour MPs, 19 of which even voted for Boris Johnson’s disastrous hard Brexit, and pro-Brexit Conservative MPs. Just last week we tabled an amendment to the Queen’s Speech calling for a People’s Vote, but due to Labour refusing to support it or even bother to table one itself, no such amendment was chosen by the speaker for debate.

So in a House of Commons without the numbers to pass a People’s Vote, the only option left for Remainers is to support a general election before the government’s withdrawal bill can pass. This is the conclusion both the Liberal Democrats and SNP reached when we made our proposals over the weekend. It is important to note that last week Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson met to discuss how to facilitate the passage of Johnson’s bill through parliament – they did not meet to discuss how legislation for a People’s Vote could be carried.

We are clear, though, that we cannot accept an election on the government’s terms for several reasons. The prime minister’s plan, having invoked the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, would mean that he could retrospectively change the election date until after the new Brexit deadline and there would be no way for MPs legally to stop him. It would also be on the condition that the withdrawal bill is brought back, opening the door to Labour and Conservative MPs passing the bill before the election is called. This is not acceptable, which is why we will be voting against his motion for a 12 December election tonight.

It is for these reasons that our leader Jo Swinson, with the backing of the SNP, published our plan for a December election. Despite MPs from both Labour and the Conservatives dismissing the bill as a “gimmick”, it is now being treated seriously on all sides of the House of Commons.

Our bill would achieve several things if passed this week. 

First, it would set in stone the date of the next election in law for 9 December. This would mean that Boris Johnson could not change the date to after our scheduled exit day. 

Second, the timings in the bill would mean that there would not be time for the government to bring back the withdrawal bill before parliament dissolved later this week. It would effectively halt the Brexit process until the people can have their say. 

Third, it would lock in our extension date of 31 January, and cease to have effect if for any reason this date changed to ensure we could not crash out of the European Union without a deal during a campaign.

If adopted by either of the main parties – who both claim they want an early general election – our plan would be far more certain to pass the Commons, paving the way for a an election in December where Remainers will get our chance to vote for what we have been campaigning for, to remain in the European Union. 

Some in Labour’s shadow cabinet have criticised our move over the weekend – which is rather ridiculous given the party has a live petition on its website (which you can sign here) that says: “Given that Boris Johnson has no mandate from the people, the Tories should call an immediate general election and let the public have their say.” Rather than focusing their fire on the Lib Dems, they should work out what their position on Brexit actually is – after a huge row at their conference, they refused to back remaining in the EU. What they want beyond that is anyone’s guess.

There is no such ambiguity on our side. If there is a Liberal Democrat majority government after the next election, we will revoke Article 50 and end the chaos immediately so we can focus on the real issues. And of course if there is anything short of that, we will continue to push for a People’s Vote, which a majority could be produced for with a new parliament. Either way, our plan represents the best hope Remainers have for stopping Brexit. Let’s make sure when the election starts, we are ready and waiting to campaign for our future in Europe.

When I joined the old Labour Party 22 years ago during Blair’s time, the party was about to start its first term in office. This would see the introduction of the National Minimum Wage, the establishment of devolved government in Scotland, Wales and London, the conclusion of the Good Friday Agreement, huge increases in spending on health and education, big reductions in pensioner and child poverty, and so much more.

All of this was in spite of the hard left which, at best, had a lukewarm attitude to the party’s social democratic agenda at that time – indeed they spent much of their energy campaigning against Labour during this period, often as members of other parties. Some agitated against the party from within, like Andrew Fisher, whom I remember turning up to meetings of Streatham Labour Party arguing for the party to take a more leftist direction (he was rarely seen out canvassing – more on Fisher below).

Our monthly constituency party meetings in Streatham featured a spectrum of opinions, but they were good-natured. When people disagreed, they did so in an agreeable fashion, and we usually would head to the pub for a pint after. This was the local Labour Party of around 600 members who selected me as their parliamentary candidate in March 2008. But the local party I left back in February 2019 was barely recognisable.

There were around two and half thousand members, fewer than 500 of whom had been members before the summer of 2015. At the time I left Labour, most of those who selected me seven years beforehand had resigned from the local party or had stopped attending meetings, which had become unpleasant and often shouty encounters where you were defined by whether or not you were sympathetic to Momentum and a disciple of “Jeremy”.

I witnessed the outright bullying of non-Corbynista members, and came to dread giving my parliamentary report at the meetings. Heckling and pointless points of order were the order of the day. Most of the dedicated group of moderate members who stayed came to dread these meetings too – you could endure them, but rarely enjoyed any more. In the end, the hard left took over. 

The picture I paint of my local experience was far more rosy than many a tale I’ve heard in the parliamentary Labour Party. A large number of former colleagues have experienced far worse. They’re now fighting to survive the trigger ballot process currently taking place, the rules for which have been changed to smooth the deselection of MPs who are not sufficiently on board with the Corbyn project.

To see exactly what’s happened to Labour, we need only look to new findings from Mainstream, a new campaign to encourage a return to respectable and responsible politics, and to banish extremism from British politics. It commissioned YouGov to conduct research into Labour members’ views, and the findings are stark.

Just 15 per cent of today’s Labour members are proud of Britain’s history, most blame Britain and not the IRA for terrorist attacks in Northern Ireland, 69 per cent now blame Western governments instead of groups like al-Qaeda and Isis for Islamist terrorist attacks on the streets of Britain or think they are equally to blame as the groups that plan and execute them.

Less than one in four thinks Labour has a serious problem with antisemitism despite the avalanche of evidence under Corbyn’s leadership; the majority think the accusations are down to the media or Corbyn’s opponents. And in one particularly disturbing figure, 51 per cent think a Labour government should take greater control of broadcast media.

This paints a pretty disturbing picture of illiberal, authoritarian attitudes – and that’s putting it generously. It also explains why, in order to quash any dissent from St Jeremy’s views, the hard left attempted to abolish the deputy leader, Tom Watson.

The day before the failed move against Watson, Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary – in her not-so-subtle campaign to succeed Corbyn – attacked my party, the Liberal Democrats, for wanting to stop brexit. She compared us to the Taliban for saying that if we win a general election, we will revoke Article 50 and end this Brexit chaos once and for all.

In so doing, she ignored the 6 million people who signed a parliamentary petition earlier this year calling for just that – including 23,000 of her constituents and 27,000 of Corbyn’s. As my Lib Dem colleague, Tim Farron, tweeted: “if we really were like a Middle East terrorist group, don’t you think Jeremy would’ve invited us to a conference fringe meeting before now?”

It’s one thing to attack your political opponents for wanting to stop Brexit; it’s quite another to abolish your own deputy leader for wanting to do the same. The party leadership attempted to oust Watson for committing the crime of arguing that Labour should be unequivocally making the case for the UK to remain in the EU. Corbyn, a longtime Brexiteer, disagrees, and so Watson must go. All quite extraordinary.

To top it all off, Fisher, who since I was an activist with him in Streatham Labour had risen up the far left ranks to become Corbyn’s head of policy, resigned after the Watson debacle. In a memo leaked to The Sunday Times, he blamed the “lack of professionalism, competence and human decency” at the top of the party. If even a true believer such as Fisher has reached this conclusion, it speaks volumes.

The truth is it that it doesn’t have to be this way. That’s why so many people are flocking to the Liberal Democrats, the home for social democrats with liberal values, and others besides. The most visible illustration of this was last week at our conference. I bumped into numerous activists whom I’d previously seen at Labour’s gatherings who are now happy members of the Lib Dems. My friend and fellow traveller Luciana Berger needed police protection when she attended the Labour Party’s annual conference last year; there was absolutely no need for this at the Lib Dem conference in Bournemouth last week. Luciana was walking around with a big smile on her face, and all of us new joiners could not have asked for a warmer welcome.

I have huge respect and affection for those good social democratic people in the Labour Party who have chosen to stay and fight. But my judgement, of course, is that the old Labour Party is gone, and that another route for social democracy and liberalism is required. Fortunately, the Lib Dems offer just that.

Conference, it is an honour and a pleasure to be addressing you as a Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament and as your Shadow Foreign Secretary.

Now, I’ve been to a few parties and I hope I don’t sound immodest when I say my experience of joining this party underlines that it was one of the best decisions I have ever made since going into politics.  

From the bottom of my heart, thank you for making me feel so welcome.  I could not be more at home in the wonderful Liberal Democrat family.

And the decision to join was not made out of crude self interest…If self interest or climbing the greasy poll is your goal, I would not recommend following my example.  

The truth is, all the incredibly difficult decisions I have made on the journey I’ve been on this year were routed in my values and principles.  I joined this party out of conviction.

As you know, I am a Remainer and proud of it – we have spent far too long apologising for being pro-European in this country.  Because you cannot be pro-Britain and put our national interest first without seeking to put Britain at the heart of Europe. 

But, even more importantly, I am a social democrat with liberal values.  You see, to be a Remainer is not only to be an advocate of our continued membership of the European Union; it is to hold a set of liberal, internationalist values of which we Liberal Democrats are the champions and defenders in Britain.

In an attempt to smear those of us who have an internationalist outlook, Theresa May said “if you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere”.  What utter garbage. We are citizens of the world and – just you watch – at the next election you will see Liberal Democrats taking seats from the Tories in every part of the country as so many people are flocking to us, the strongest and biggest Remain party. 

Be in no doubt: this is the battle of our time and it goes far beyond Britain’s borders.

What it is to be a liberal

Our party exists to build and defend a fair, free and open society, a society in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity……That was taken straight from our constitution – as you can see, I’ve done my homework.

In essence, the society we seek to build is one where if you work hard and play by the rules, you should be free to lead a happy, prosperous and secure life free of domination of either the state or the market.  And we want to ensure future generations can do the same by preserving our planet for the long term continuity of life in all its forms.

I grew up in world in which we took these values for granted.

As a family of mixed heritage – English, Irish and Nigerian – our back story, alongside that of millions of others, stands as an example of Britain’s liberal, open, internationalist spirit.

The notion that we all share the same basic rights and should live together in peace, regardless of background is something we will always fight for.  

That different cultures should be able to develop freely and that there is diversity in modern Britain is not something simply to be tolerated – it is something we positively celebrate.

And, whatever the political complexion, we will always demand our governments respect the rule of law, with an independent judiciary able to uphold those laws, free from abuse and attack by the Executive.

This is the Britain we know and love – and Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and the peddlers of hate and division in our country better know that this is what we will fight for at the coming election.  

It is our job to make sure this country’s heart beats in a liberal and internationalist direction; not nationalist, populist authoritarianism. This is the new fault line in British politics and we know where we stand.

The liberal rules based international order

Because we recognise that these things cannot be achieved in isolation and that the pursuit of individual and social justice does not stop at the border, we seek to work together with other liberal democracies who share our values to overcome cross border obstacles to achieving our goals.  As Menzies Campbell said at conference back in 2005, “in an inevitably interdependent world, cooperation is not only in our interests, it is essential to survival”. And rhe best way to protect British interests, he argued, was “strong and effective multilateralism”.  He was right then and still is now.

That is why we are internationalists. That is why we are pro-European. Liberalism is needed at home to protect personal freedom and liberty; Liberalism and cooperation are also needed abroad to secure peace, promote democracy and defend human rights.

If we are elected, we will fight poverty, oppression, hunger, ignorance, disease and aggression wherever they occur and we will seek to promote the free movement of ideas, people, goods and services.  Conference, there is no constructive ambiguity on this in this party.

So we support the liberal international rule-based order established in the wake of the Second World War which has underpinned liberal democracy across the globe and guarded against authoritarianism and oppression.  The Atlantic Charter of 1941, of which the UK was a signatory, set out the framework for this order, its aims and values. 

With the memory of fascism and the threat of communism, collective security was paramount and a robust national defence married to a passionate commitment to social and global justice was the goal.

Under the Charter, all countries would have the right to self-determination. All people the right to freedom of speech, of expression, of religion, and freedom from want and fear. The rule of law would be promoted. And this struck a chord with President Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ – nations would collaborate to ‘improve labour standards, economic advancement, and social security’ for all.

It led to the international institutions which facilitate the multilateralism which is essential to maintaining this rules based order today: the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation; the IMF and the World Bank; and, of course, NATO to defend our democracies.  In fact it was in the 1940s that the Liberals were the first UK political party to vote in favour of a European Union.

The EU, once it came into being, evolved to become not only an important lynchpin of this order on the continent but it expanded this order to cover Central and Eastern Europe states too.  In government, we will seek to maximize British influence in all these institutions and play the most active possible role because, as Liberals, we put our values into action. 

There is no better an example of this than the late, great Paddy Ashdown, whose life and achievements we remember this week. 

As the first High Representative in Bosnia Paddy pulled together multilateral resources and created the political will to push ahead with political reforms. In a lesson that still rings true today, Paddy often liked to say that “if the international community is united, there is absolutely nothing we cannot do in the Balkans. If the international community is divided, there is absolutely nothing we can do in the Balkans.” 

Of course, the first thing we will do in Government is revoke Article 50 so that, once again, the British people can resume their role of providing leadership as a full and active member of the European Union.

This order is imperfect. It must do far better at reducing inequality and fostering a more inclusive global economic system. But however flawed it may be, this liberal international order has none the less created peace and prosperity.  

It helped transform states which had been aggressive autocracies – Germany and Japan – into liberal democracies.  

The trade it has opened up between countries helped ensure global competition no longer resulted in military conflict.  In turn, this has helped lift hundreds of millions out of poverty and people are more healthy than before.

Furthermore, the liberal democracies that fall within the order have, in the main, also provided better protection of the rights and civil liberties of their peoples.  

And Extreme nationalism was forced to retreat.  

Yet the advances made then are now at risk.

The decline of the liberal rules based order and the need for renewal

Today it is that liberal international order that is now in retreat.  As a result the world is becoming a more dangerous place.  Consider what has happened since Conference gathered last year.

If his attempted travel ban for muslims and scapegoating of Mexican immigrants were not enough to convince you that far Right politics has entered the White House, we have watched President Trump telling four congresswomen of colour to “go home.”  It is racism, pure and simple. What a disgrace.  

Abroad he is seeking to pull the US out of the Paris Climate agreement, he is flouting WTO rules in the pursuit of what he calls “fair trade”, and he has pulled the US out of the Iran nuclear deal.

In China, we are witnessing violent and repressive scenes in Hong Kong with the disproportionate use of force against the protests calling into question China’s commitment to upholding Hong Kong’s way of life and the “two systems, one country” model which demands the rule of law, human rights and democracy be observed.

Russia’s President Putin has claimed international “liberalism is obsolete” and at the same time made remarks which amounted to thinly veiled homophobia.  He also suggeste Trump’s racist rhetoric was justified given immigrants kill, plunder and rape with impunity.  This of course is the man who went into another country – Ukraine – and annexed part of it, Crimea.

In Kashmir, the abolition of the region’s special status by the Indian government, and the unrest and human rights abuses we have seen subsequently in the area, should be a cause of alarm around the world.

In short, across the world, nationalist populism – the pernicious mantra that nations should be homogeneous and one people is superior to another  – is making strides. Matteo Salvini and his Northern League dominate Italian politics. Viktor Orban has distorted public life in Hungary to monopolize power there. President Erdogan and President Jair Bolsonaro are undermining democracy in Turkey and Brazil respectively. 

So a giant battle is raging globally, between the pluralist, progressive creed of liberal democracy on the one hand and a desiccated authoritarianism on the other. 

Let us be clear: the Liberal Democrats are the only party that can get into office which is capable of meeting this challenge in Britain today.

Only the Liberal Democrats are capable of renewing international liberalism

You see, you cannot defend a liberal, rules based order abroad if you so openly flout the rules at home.  

Boris Johnson has facilitated the takeover of Her Majesty’s Government by the remnants of Vote Leave campaign  – an outfit  that was not only was found guilty of lying during the 2016 referendum in relation to its claims on the NHS by the Statistics Authority, but it was found guilty of cheating and breaking the law by the Electoral Commission.  

Now, as he seeks to force through a catastrophic “no deal” Brexit, the Prime Minister has shut down Parliament and is threatening to break the law if necessary.  The Tory right, who have taken over their party, like nothing more than to bang on about incarcerating more and more people who break the law, but strangely think a different approach should be adopting in relation to their law breaking.

And, as he seeks to force the UK out of the EU, he will become ever reliant on President Trump, whose political playbook he follows.  But President Trump has always been clear – it will be America not Britain First.

Beyond Brexit and cosing up to President Trump, no one seems to know what the foreign policy strategy of this government is.  What is clear is that we will not see the leadership on the world stage required from the new occupant of No 10.  He likes to think of himself as a modern Winston Churchill.  Churchill was of course the Prime Minister who signed the Atlantic Charter and played a private role founding the liberal international order – Boris Johnson has been busy kicking his relatives out of the Tory party.

This brings me to the Opposition.  The Labour Party likes to think of itself as a champion of liberal values at home and abroad.  Clement Attlee and Ernest Bevin played pivotal roles in the founding of NATO but this is not the party of Attlee and Bevin; this is Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour.

You cannot be a champion of liberalism if you are currently subject to a formal investigation by the Equality & Human Rights Commission for institutional racism against Jewish people.  You cannot be a champion of liberalism when your leader’s supporters think it is acceptable to abuse, vilify and deselect anyone who dares to question the leader. And you cannot claim to be liberal when the political editor of the BBC needs to take a bodyguard to your conference.

And then you look at Jeremy Corbyn’’s foreign policy positions.  Acting as an apologist for a hard-right -Russian government that thinks it can poison people on British soil, lauding authoritarian regimes in Venezuela and Iran, failing to support the prescription of Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation.  Attlee and Bevin helped found NATO – Jeremy Corbyn and those around him want to abolish it. 

Of course what unites both Johnson and Corbyn is the fact that they want to leave the EU, the organisation which has been the biggest champion of liberalism in our part of the global neighbourhood.  Neither is fit to lead this country.  

Its time for a change and someone who I know can provide that leadership: Jo Swinson.

Conclusion

Under Jo’s premiership we can breathe a progressive breath of fresh air into the British foreign policy. 

Liberal Democrats are internationalists. This is at the heart of who we are as a party, it flows through everything we do. 

We believe in tearing down walls, not building them. We believe in working together through multilateral organisations, not standing alone. 

And we believe that to tackle the biggest issues facing us today, from the climate emergency to terrorism, we need to ensure that the UK is at the table, achieving consensus internationally.  

Perhaps now more than ever, UK foreign policy is yearning for clear liberal, democratic values. A Liberal Democrat government would not be tied to outdated tropes or biases, but would be clear that the UK must continue to work with allies from across the world, playing a leading role in the EU and other international institutions. 

With Jo as our Prime Minister we will revive our reputation on the world stage and get on with helping to improve the lives of those across the world. 

As Liberal Democrats we have a duty to do this, to defend the values of human rights, democracy, and equality. 

And as your Liberal Democrat Shadow Foreign Secretary I can promise you that I will stand up for a truly global Britain.

Thank you. 

At the heart of our offer to voters across the UK are our values. I am a social democrat with liberal values. To be a Remainer is not only to be an advocate of our continued membership of the European Union; it is to hold a set of liberal, internationalist values of which we Liberal Democrats are the champions and defenders of in Britain.

As the Liberal Democrat constitution says, our party exists to build and defend a fair, free and open society, a society in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity. 

The society we seek to build is one where if you work hard and play by the rules, you should be free to lead a happy, prosperous and secure life free of domination of either the state or the market. The Liberal Democrats want to ensure future generations can do the same by preserving our planet for the long term continuity of life in all its forms.

For the Liberal Democrats, it is our job to make sure this country’s heart beats in a liberal and internationalist direction; not nationalist, populist authoritarianism. This is the new fault line in British politics and we know where we stand. We recognise that these things cannot be achieved in isolation and that the pursuit of individual and social justice does not stop at the border, we seek to work together with other liberal democracies who share our values to overcome cross border obstacles to achieving our goals.

That is why we are internationalists. That is why we are pro-European. Liberalism is needed at home to protect personal freedom and liberty; liberalism and cooperation are also needed abroad to secure peace, promote democracy and defend human rights. If the Liberal Democrats are elected to government at the next election, we will fight poverty, oppression, hunger, ignorance, disease and aggression wherever they occur, and we will seek to promote the free movement of ideas, people, goods and services.

We support the liberal international rule-based order established in the wake of the Second World War which has underpinned liberal democracy across the globe and guarded against authoritarianism and oppression. The Atlantic Charter of 1941, of which the UK was a signatory, set out the framework for this order, its aims and values. Under the charter, all countries would have the right to self-determination. All people would have the right to freedom of speech, of expression, of religion, and freedom from want and fear. The rule of law was promoted.

It led to the international institutions which would facilitate the multilateralism which is essential to maintaining this rules based order today: the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation; the IMF and the World Bank; and, of course, Nato to defend our democracies. In fact, it was in the 1940s when the Liberals were the first UK political party to vote in favour of a European Union.

Of course, the first thing we will do in government is revoke Article 50 so that, once again, the British people can resume their role of providing leadership as a full and active member of the European Union.

This rules-based order is imperfect. It must do far better at reducing inequality and fostering a more inclusive global economic system. But however flawed it may be, this liberal international order has nevertheless created peace and prosperity.  

But across the world, nationalist populism is making strides. Matteo Salvini and his Northern League dominate Italian politics. Viktor Orban has distorted public life in Hungary to monopolise power there. President Erdogan and President Jair Bolsonaro are undermining democracy in Turkey and Brazil respectively. A giant battle is raging globally, between the pluralist, progressive creed of liberal democracy on the one hand and a desiccated authoritarianism on the other. 

But you cannot defend a liberal, rules based order abroad if you so openly flout the rules at home. Boris Johnson seeks to force through a catastrophic no-deal Brexit by shutting down parliament and is threatening to break the law if necessary. And, as he seeks to force the UK out of the EU, he will become ever reliant on President Trump, whose political playbook he follows. But President Trump has always been clear – it will be America, not Britain First.

Meanwhile the Labour Party likes to think of itself as a champion of liberal values at home and abroad. Clement Attlee and Ernest Bevin played pivotal roles in the founding of Nato but this is not the party of Attlee and Bevin; this is Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour. You cannot be a champion of liberalism if you are currently subject to a formal investigation by the Equality & Human Rights Commission for institutional racism against Jewish people. You cannot be a champion of liberalism when your leader’s supporters think it is acceptable to abuse, vilify and deselect anyone who dares to question the leader. And you cannot claim to be liberal when the political editor of the BBC needs to take a bodyguard to your conference.

And then you look at Jeremy Corbyn’s foreign policy positions. Acting as an apologist for a hard right Russian government that thinks it can poison people on British soil, lauding authoritarian regimes in Venezuela and Iran, failing to support the prescription of Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation. Attlee and Bevin helped found Nato – Jeremy Corbyn and those around him want to abolish it. 

What unites both Johnson and Corbyn is the fact that they want to leave the EU, the organisation which has been the biggest champion of liberalism in our part of the global neighbourhood. Neither is fit to lead this country.  

It’s time for a change and someone who I know can provide that leadership: Jo Swinson. Under Jo’s premiership we can breathe a progressive breath of fresh air into British foreign policy, revive our reputation on the world stage, and get on with helping to improve the lives of those across the world.

Liberal Democrats are internationalists. This is at the heart of who we are as a party, it flows through everything we do. We believe in tearing down walls, not building them. We believe in working together through multilateral organisations, not standing alone. We believe that to tackle the biggest issues facing us today, from the climate emergency to terrorism, we need to ensure that the UK is at the table, achieving consensus internationally.  

Perhaps now more than ever, UK foreign policy is yearning for clear liberal, democratic values. A Liberal Democrat government would not be tied to outdated tropes or biases, but would be clear that the UK must continue to work with allies from across the world, playing a leading role in the EU and other international institutions. 

Liberal Democrats have a duty to do this, to defend the values of human rights, democracy, and equality. As the Liberal Democrat shadow foreign secretary, I will stand up for a truly global Britain.

When the bells ring throughout the parliamentary estate signalling there is a division (ie a vote) in the House of Commons, members of parliament have eight minutes to get themselves in the “Aye” or “No” division lobby before the doors shut. If you don’t make it in time, then you can’t get in to vote. I was once on the Waterloo end of Westminster Bridge when I saw I had an unread text message – I opened it only to realise it was an alert sent from the whips office three minutes beforehand informing me that a vote was happening in the Commons, meaning I had just five minutes to make it to the lobby. I sprinted from my position on the bridge and arrived literally as the doors to the Commons were being closed.

So, on Thursday last week when the bells went for a crucial vote on the Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill – which was going to make it almost impossible for any new prime minister to suspend parliament before the scheduled 31 October date for Brexit – I got up and left my Portcullis House office pretty promptly. As I was making my way from there to the chamber, a few feet ahead of me I spotted a man with blond mop of hair. He was surrounded by several close protection officers (of the BBC Bodyguard type, with wires coming out of their ears) and a number of Tory MPs, including the vice chair of the hard-right Tory European Research Group, Mark Francois, and the disgraced former defence secretary, Gavin Williamson.

The blond one gave a nod or said a few words of acknowledgement to mainly Tory MPs as he went by. A few came up to him en route, exchanging pleasantries like a toadying pupil does sucking up to the headmaster (all very cringe-worthy). Of course, the man at the centre of this entourage was Boris Johnson, who will likely become prime minister on Wednesday afternoon. His expected victory in the Tory leadership contest will be announced Tuesday morning and by Thursday evening there will be a new cabinet in place.

But other than amongst Tory ERG members, I have detected little enthusiasm for Johnson. A majority of Tory MPs agree to suffer the prospect of his leadership because he is seen as the best antidote to the Brexit Party, whom many see as a threat to their seats. But those in seats which are not Brexit Party-facing are all too aware of his capacity to repel voters. Most, even senior members of the ERG I have spoken to, are well aware of his character flaws and capacity to self-destruct. However, they are in such a rut that they believe they have no option but to gamble on this serial liar who is anything but reliable.

A person very close to Johnson tells me that the former foreign secretary (seen as the one of the worst ever) believes he can remodel the premiership and turn it into a role more akin to the chair of a PLC, leaving the unglamorous work of getting on top of the detail to a senior executive team of underlings, much as he did at City Hall as mayor of London. The problem is that you are not the chair as PM, you are very much the chief executive and must be on top of all aspects of government activity – if you are not, the House of Commons will very quickly find you out.

On the Labour side, there is nothing but gloom. The word my former Labour colleagues use most often to describe the party’s predicament to me is “grim”. The Times carries the story, “Collapse in grassroots support for Corbyn”, but if you study the small print, the headline rather overstates the case. Corbyn has lost backing from some of his own supporters, but according to the poll of Labour members conducted by YouGov there are still 56 per cent who think he is doing a good job with 43 per cent thinking he is doing a bad job. Yes, he has lost some support from 2016 when he beat Owen Smith with 62 per cent in a leadership contest, with a 6 per cent loss of support since then. That said, you wonder, given the incoherence on Brexit and the continuing scandal of racism in the party under his watch, what will it take for that 56 per cent to see the light? 

Moderate Labour MPs tell me there is very little appetite for a leadership challenge. And many of them say they are extremely nervous about the trigger ballot process which has started in their local parties that will determine whether they are reselected as the party’s candidate for the next election. In the meantime, Corbyn’s Labour peers planned to hold a vote of no confidence in him after he sacked the popular shadow Brexit minister Dianne Hayter last week for allegedly comparing him and his team to the Nazis.

This brings me to my own party, the Liberal Democrats. There has been no such rancour in our parliamentary party, which is united and focused. Our two candidates – Jo Swinson and Sir Ed Davey – have both had a great leadership contest and our entire parliamentary group would be happy for either to become prime minister. There have been differences between the two in policy and emphasis but nothing major, and the debate has been thoughtful, respectful and good natured. Thousands of members have attended the multiple hustings held around the country these last few weeks. There is no sign in any quarter of the country of the party being drunk on recent electoral and polling successes which has the party commanding support from around 20 per cent of the electorate.

On optics alone, if it is stability and credible, transformative change that you crave, it has been a great advert for the UK’s third party – the only Remain party that can actually get into government. I’m delighted Jo Swinson has become our leader. I’ve known Jo for almost a decade and worked with very closely with her on the People’s Vote campaign since we founded the movement in the spring of 2018. She represents the very best of modern Britain, has had the same ups and downs in life that many experience. She is the mum of two young boys and part of a new generation of politicians prepared to work across party lines to solve the big issues facing the UK and the world.

Unlike Johnson and Corbyn, Swinson commands 100 per cent support from every Liberal Democrat parliamentarian and leads a party with a unity of purpose, able to focus on the country’s challenges, because we are not pre-occupied with any internal party civil war. Lined up against the Tory incumbent and the Labour challenger, for those wanting change she will be the obvious choice to become prime minister at the next general election. Our goal will be to win over as many people as possible between now and whenever that election comes to make this a reality.

I will be writing in detail about what you can expect from Jo over the coming weeks but will leave you with this thought: as awful as British politics may appear, for those who dread the prospect of being forced to choose between Johnson and Corbyn, you can comfort yourself with the fact that there will be a much better alternative on the ballot paper at the next general election. So there is light at the end of the tunnel in the midst of the surreal drama that will unfold in the two main parties this week.