The Liberal Party's main website is in the process of being re-vamped. I didn't realize that things were so far along, so I was pleasantly surprised to see the new look site when I dropped in just now. Here it is:

The Liberal Party Annual Assembly

What do you think of the design? The content is still being updated.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Tom Wilde:
The Liberal Party's main website is in the process of being re-vamped. I didn't realize that things were so far along, so I was pleasantly surprised to see the new look site when I dropped in just now. Here it is:

The Liberal Party Annual Assembly

What do you think of the design? The content is still being updated.

A great improvement.
[Rep]

I like the site.

I didn't know much about the liberals today until recently and I really quite like them. Particularly their views on drugs and their seeming Georgism/geolibertarianism.
[Rep]

I see Michael Meadowcroft has become a non-person and some inconvenient references to how illiberal and unfair referenda are, have been removed.

The continuity Liberal Party used to make a virtue of its bitter opposition to referenda, claiming this made them 'true Liberals' whilst the nasty Lib Dems were clearly just social democrats with their commitment to European referenda.

Originally Posted by :
In contrast to the Liberal Democrats who have called for a referendum on a common European currency - among other things - the Liberal Party opposes referenda in principle, believing that the democratic forum is the crucible of debate and decision making and that one referendum opens the door to demands for others and would dangerously undermine the democratic process.”

Originally Posted by :
“The catalogue of the Liberal Democrats’ illiberal policies and pronouncements is extensive. … the promotion of referenda, which undermine the Liberal rock of active and representative democracy, and the key Liberal doctrine of democratic consent.”
Liberals Propose …use of juries of the public for consultation on major issues, instead of referenda

Originally Posted by :
“The Liberal Party opposes the concept of referenda on principle, believing that such exercises can be manipulated to exact the desired result by careful selection of the question to be asked. Moreover referenda can undermine the decision-making responsibilities of elected representatives.” 1999

Originally Posted by :
We are opposed to the use of referenda. It is dangerous to pretend that issues can be settled by a simple questionwith a yes or no answer. Our alternative is to use a form of jury system, where representative groups of several hundred people (selected by scientific sampling methods) consider issues in depth over a period of several days and are able to question experts before giving their views. 1997 Manifesto

Originally Posted by :
We oppose referenda and any moves to mechanise voting or introduce state funding of political parties.2001 Manifesto

[Rep]

I can understand some of their objections but not the solutions of just continuing parliamentary democracy. It doesn't actually seem to make much sense. In our parliaments one must vote yes and no even if their is a little more debate.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee:
I can understand some of their objections but not the solutions of just continuing parliamentary democracy. It doesn't actually seem to make much sense. In our parliaments one must vote yes and no even if their is a little more debate.

I suppose that referenda is a worse form of democracy than a democratic forum even if yes/no must be the eventual conclusion. However, when the peoples representatives are told how they must vote by their party leader, referenda is far more democratic.
[Rep]

The website is a huge improvement on the old one.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Millennium3:
I suppose that referenda is a worse form of democracy than a democratic forum even if yes/no must be the eventual conclusion. However, when the peoples representatives are told how they must vote by their party leader, referenda is far more democratic.

It depends how representative the representatives or delegates are I suppose. I very much doubt that a few hundred representing 60 million will be anywhere near as democratic as referenda.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by BonnieDundee:
It depends how representative the representatives or delegates are I suppose. I very much doubt that a few hundred representing 60 million will be anywhere near as democratic as referenda.

That also depends on the extent to which decision are made at the lowest possible level. Certainly what you say is true if virtually every decision is made at Westminster, or now by the Council of Ministers. If parishes [and then on upward] were used as far as were practicable - a discussion forum would be more democratic.

I think the Liberal Party were being purist, but will have to compromise if they wish to have realistic policies.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Millennium3:
That also depends on the extent to which decision are made at the lowest possible level. Certainly what you say is true if virtually every decision is made at Westminster, or now by the Council of Ministers. If parishes [and then on upward] were used as far as were practicable - a discussion forum would be more democratic.

I think the Liberal Party were being purist, but will have to compromise if they wish to have realistic policies.

Oh yes I agree with that, I thought they were talking about Westminister primarily.

If gov't is more decentralised, particularly to quite local levels then it is not more democratic particularly if it is not just a local referenda. I simply think that Westminister is far too centralised to be very democratic at all and even national referenda beat that.

The ideal is consensus direct democracy with assemblies of only a few hundred people but that is perhaps not too possible at the moment.
[Rep]