![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cosmolinguistWhat's your name, where are you from, and which committee(s) are you standing for?
Nigel Ashton from Southport. Standing for the Federal Board.
Are you standing for the first time or restanding? If first time what new thing do you bring that nobody else could; if restanding, what about your record are you most proud of that you think should make us vote you back in?
First time in the Liberal Democrtats, but I was on the National Executive Committee of our predecessor party, the Liberal Party (1979-84). I'm not uniquely talented, but I do bring a combination of experience and openness to new ideas.
I've seen the Party repeatedly squander our best resource - our membership. If I can achieve one thing in the next three years it would be to enable all members to contribute their ideas and skills.
Are you standing for any other committees, if so which ones; and if elected to more than one how do you plan to divide your time?
No
Are you an active member of any SAOs, and if so which ones?
ALDC (Association of Liberal Democrat Councillors). I'm not involved in running ALDC, but I am an active local councillor in Southport and I attend ALDC events, especially training events. If anyone reading this is interested in standing for election to their local council I highly recommend going to one of ALDC's Kickstart weekends.
If someone asked you on the doorstep, the hustings or on TV to sum up in one or two sentences what the Lib Dems, uniquely, stand for – and then why anyone should vote for us – what are your answers?
The Liberal Democrats value all people as individuals. We want everyone to have the chance to lead a happy and fulfilled life, whatever their background or ability.
Vote for us if you want to live in a country that is open, tolerant, and outward looking.
What is your view on diversity quotas for committees? Should they be extended to cover more than just gender, scrapped totally, kept as is or something else?
I voted for the new system of quotas, somewhat reluctantly as I would much rather that we didn't need them. However, the whole culture of the Party is too male-dominated and if it takes a sledgehammer to crack that, then so be it.
How far quotas should be extended beyond gender is a question that I don't have the answer to. Clearly the Party does need to have a serious debate about this, and I am certainly open to exploring options.
Secrecy rules prevent the party knowing what committees are doing. What will you do to communicate with members; and in what circumstances is confidentiality justified?
I think the secrecy culture that has built up is pathetic and a hindrance to the proper conduct of the Party's business. Such reports as we do get are so bland as to be next to useless. I want to see a duty placed on the Chair of each committee to ensure comprehensive and timely reports of each meeting are published on the members section of the party website.
Confidentiality is justified for staffing matters involving identifiable individuals, for contractual negotiations, and for certain aspects of election planning (although a lot less than hitherto).
As the party has now backed the principle of OMOV, how will you ensure all members are represented, not just those who can afford to go to Conference?
Improve the live streaming of Conferences and other Party events. Since we now have secure online voting for Party committees, it should be possible to have a system for secure online voting in conference debates. This is obviously going to need resources allocating to it, and a degree of experimentation and trialing, but it should be possible if we keep pushing for it.
If police accreditation to attend conference was proposed again, would you support or oppose it and why?
I am opposed to police accreditation of conference attendees. When it was in place it did cause real difficulties for some members, particularly trans members. I know that there are some people who didn't go to conference because of it.
The best security for Conference is physical security. Accreditation adds nothing to that.
What is your view on electoral pacts? Should the party make them, and if so, who with?
I am against electoral pacts in principle (as opposed to post-election coalitions or 'arrangements', which obviously depend on the circumstances).
There may be individual seats where we would stand down in exceptional circumstances, such as Tatton in 1997, but these would be rare. In general, there should be a Liberal Democrat candidate in every seat in every election.
The list of all candidates who have answered can be found here.
Nigel Ashton from Southport. Standing for the Federal Board.
Are you standing for the first time or restanding? If first time what new thing do you bring that nobody else could; if restanding, what about your record are you most proud of that you think should make us vote you back in?
First time in the Liberal Democrtats, but I was on the National Executive Committee of our predecessor party, the Liberal Party (1979-84). I'm not uniquely talented, but I do bring a combination of experience and openness to new ideas.
I've seen the Party repeatedly squander our best resource - our membership. If I can achieve one thing in the next three years it would be to enable all members to contribute their ideas and skills.
Are you standing for any other committees, if so which ones; and if elected to more than one how do you plan to divide your time?
No
Are you an active member of any SAOs, and if so which ones?
ALDC (Association of Liberal Democrat Councillors). I'm not involved in running ALDC, but I am an active local councillor in Southport and I attend ALDC events, especially training events. If anyone reading this is interested in standing for election to their local council I highly recommend going to one of ALDC's Kickstart weekends.
If someone asked you on the doorstep, the hustings or on TV to sum up in one or two sentences what the Lib Dems, uniquely, stand for – and then why anyone should vote for us – what are your answers?
The Liberal Democrats value all people as individuals. We want everyone to have the chance to lead a happy and fulfilled life, whatever their background or ability.
Vote for us if you want to live in a country that is open, tolerant, and outward looking.
What is your view on diversity quotas for committees? Should they be extended to cover more than just gender, scrapped totally, kept as is or something else?
I voted for the new system of quotas, somewhat reluctantly as I would much rather that we didn't need them. However, the whole culture of the Party is too male-dominated and if it takes a sledgehammer to crack that, then so be it.
How far quotas should be extended beyond gender is a question that I don't have the answer to. Clearly the Party does need to have a serious debate about this, and I am certainly open to exploring options.
Secrecy rules prevent the party knowing what committees are doing. What will you do to communicate with members; and in what circumstances is confidentiality justified?
I think the secrecy culture that has built up is pathetic and a hindrance to the proper conduct of the Party's business. Such reports as we do get are so bland as to be next to useless. I want to see a duty placed on the Chair of each committee to ensure comprehensive and timely reports of each meeting are published on the members section of the party website.
Confidentiality is justified for staffing matters involving identifiable individuals, for contractual negotiations, and for certain aspects of election planning (although a lot less than hitherto).
As the party has now backed the principle of OMOV, how will you ensure all members are represented, not just those who can afford to go to Conference?
Improve the live streaming of Conferences and other Party events. Since we now have secure online voting for Party committees, it should be possible to have a system for secure online voting in conference debates. This is obviously going to need resources allocating to it, and a degree of experimentation and trialing, but it should be possible if we keep pushing for it.
If police accreditation to attend conference was proposed again, would you support or oppose it and why?
I am opposed to police accreditation of conference attendees. When it was in place it did cause real difficulties for some members, particularly trans members. I know that there are some people who didn't go to conference because of it.
The best security for Conference is physical security. Accreditation adds nothing to that.
What is your view on electoral pacts? Should the party make them, and if so, who with?
I am against electoral pacts in principle (as opposed to post-election coalitions or 'arrangements', which obviously depend on the circumstances).
There may be individual seats where we would stand down in exceptional circumstances, such as Tatton in 1997, but these would be rare. In general, there should be a Liberal Democrat candidate in every seat in every election.
The list of all candidates who have answered can be found here.