Morning:
6°c
Paddick was a turn-off for voters, say Lib-Dems
Paul Waugh, Deputy Political Editor29 Dec 2008
THE PUBLIC were turned off the Liberal Democrats in this year's City Hall elections because of the party's poor planning, lack of credibility and use of negative campaigning, a secret report reveals.
The Lib-Dems' own internal inquest into the lacklustre performance of mayoral candidate Brian Paddick effectively tells the party to give up hope of winning the Mayor of London race. The comprehensive report exposes a "demoralised" grass-roots base and reveals that activists were so upset with "negative campaigning" that they refused to deliver leaflets. Supporters felt the party spent too much time attacking Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone rather than promoting Lib-Dem policies.
The confidential study, obtained by the Evening Standard, found a string of criticisms of party policy, structure, preparation and tactics.
The London Liberal Democrats Electoral Commission report, based on consultation with Lib-Dem candidates, MPs, MEPs, London Asssembly members and council leaders, makes sobering reading for leader Nick Clegg as he tries to regather his troops in the capital following one of its worst electoral years on record.
Former Met chief Mr Paddick came a poor third behind Johnson and Livingstone, garnering only 236,000 first preference votes. The report hints that Mr Paddick failed to promote the party rather than himself. "The present system often appears to incentivise candidates to promote themselves above all else... Many candidates have too often come across almost as if they were independents," it says.
In a damning aside, the report states: "Elections require a discipline and command and control structure that is ideologically alien to many Liberal Democrats."
It states that "criticisms received related to all parts of the party", pointing out that limited cash resources contributed to the "adverse circumstances" that led to poor results.
"Until our local election base further expands, the nature of the cross-London mayoral contest, which favours a two-party race, makes it unlikely that a Liberal Democrat will win," it says.
The study found that the lack of ethnic-minority candidates had damaged the Lib-Dems in inner-city London.
It says its candidates were able "but they all share a uniform profile - all white, from south of the river and with local government backgrounds".
Reader views (12)
I am surprised at the lack of comment on one of Paddick's bigest faux pas. He announced he would scrap the Low Emission Zone and replace it with a 33-borough congestion charge, using the same cameras. This policy was quickly ditched within the first 24 hours of Paddick announcing it, and we never heard another peep about it during the campaign. But the fact that he could blurt out such a crazy idea on the hoof illustrated his complete lack of grasp of the subject. It didn't surprise me that the Lib Dems got their worst ever result under this man.
It would be fascinating to read the confidential report and see what (if anything) it has to say about this clanger.
- John, London, 30/12/2008 22:41
Report abuse
The fact Ken won the first Mayoral election as an independent showed that the Mayoral contest is not a simple two horse race. Although he benefited from his days as GLC Leader when people remember how he fought for vital items like better public transport and LOWER fares.
He introduced the fares fare scheme which cut most fares however Tory Bromley took court action against this on the basis that they dont have a tube. I dont seem to remeber them fighting to get mainline fares controlled by TFL so they could benefit!
And now you will return to work facing higher fares same old tories.
As for the Lib Dems well Brian Paddick would not endorse either Boris or Ken whn it came to 2nd preference votes therefore Lib-Dems who moan at Boris have only themselves to blaim as Ken would have been re-elected had Paddick endorsed him!
Anyway the Lib-Dems have lost the green credentials they once had and these have been taken up by the Green Party which has a leader that could one-day be mayor.
All the Lib-Dems are are the Conservatives who agree with European Membership and win where tories cant.
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 30/12/2008 13:42
Report abuse
It's a bit daft to suppose that mayoral elections will be more about personalities than about party politics. The mayor's powers don't extend far enough for him or her to take much meaningful action that is recognizably "of the left" or "of the right". Instead of someone with charisma like Boris or conviction like Ken, the Lib Dems put up Brian Paddick, who is probably just a bit boring and not really mayoral material. Maybe the Lib Dems thought he would swing the gay and libertarian vote but, as a gay man myself, I felt we owed much more to Ken for his brave and far-sighted support all these years, and I voted accordingly.
- Ortelius, Belsize Pk,, 29/12/2008 20:52
Report abuse
Charlie: i think Boris is very popular, is doing a great job ( even my NuLab friends admit this to me ) and is a massive improvement on tired Ken and his army of hanger- ons. Long may he continue , he is a breath of frsh air in politics.
- Michael, London, 29/12/2008 18:15
Report abuse
Cant really understand the views of Lib. Dems regarding this man as he, was or appears to be a typical Lib. Dem. type. In all aspects not much difference to any other of their politicians, candidates or supporters.
- Ed, london, 29/12/2008 17:07
Report abuse
Mr Paddick was probably known well enough to deter some from voting for him, but not well enough to pick up new voters from a wide spectrum. Following this, some of his character emerged in a slightly weird way during his recent appearance in TV's Jungle, and this will have reinforced the suspicion that he was not all he said he was. Suffice to say that some of his accounts of minor incidents appeared to differ from what the viewers had seen for themselves. Odd for an ex-policeman to come across this way, even in the unreal world of "reality" TV.
- David H, Aylesbury, England, 29/12/2008 16:56
Report abuse
Jacqueline: Boris may have won that election but he certainly isn't popular.
- Charlie, Soho, London, 29/12/2008 16:12
Report abuse
We should be happy we have Boris who is popularly elected unlike our national figureheads!
- Jacqueline, Hampstead, London, 29/12/2008 12:27
Report abuse
I agree with bob i live in sutton under the LIB DEMS they are so wasteful you drive into the area and you know its a sad neglected lib dem area.Vote anyone eles but the LIB DEMS
- Edwina, croydon UK, 29/12/2008 12:03
Report abuse
It is odd to not question the idea that failure to win in the London Mayor election could in any way be linked to a candidate promoting himself rather than the party. Isn't this really how both the former and current Mayors actually won the elections? Neither Boris Johnson nor Ken Livingstone promoted themselves as party stalwarts... In spite of wall to wall media coverage, the LibDem candidate failed to do better because he did not shine, seemed to have no ideas and was ultimately squeezed out. To do well as a third party, even with huge amounts of media coverage, there has to be a reason to vote for you - Paddick demonstrated none.
- Damian Hockney, London, UK, 29/12/2008 11:31
Report abuse
The fact is that Paddick wasn't 'a real Lib Dem' and the voters saw through that. He was only drafted in at the last minute beacause they couldn't find anyone else. Where was his committment and Party Membership to the Lib Dems. The next time they have to find someone with a long history in Lib Dem politics.
- Dhanraj, Basildon Essex, 29/12/2008 10:36
Report abuse
Anyone who has the Lib Dems running their local authority knows how much taxpayer money they squander on flights of fancy. Lord only knows what would happen if they came to power in the UK, they'd put Crash Gordon's current spending spree to shame that's for sure.
- Bob, Cheam, 29/12/2008 10:30
Report abuse
