Liberal Vision

On diversity we should copy Cameron

My eye was drawn to this linked piece on Lib Dem Voice by activist Davina Kirwan. It’s a fabulously angry piece of writing about one thwarted attempt to improve the ethnic diversity of Liberal Democrat representation by requiring a BME candidate on by-election shortlists and where an MP resigns. A pretty mild quota proposal compared to all-black shortlists, but still fairly objectionable to opponents of quotas, either on principle or as a matter of a practicality in respect of what happens if no one applies.

Her irritation appears underlined by the presumption this party gets it has a diversity problem, 10% of the UK is BME, and 0% of our MEPs, MPs, MSPs, and AMs, but stubbornly refuses to do more about it. Are we “the new Conservatives” she asks?

Her problem in this instance surely is the Liberal Democrats are not Cameroonie enough. Both parties have or had a similar diversity problem going into the last election. Not just under-representation, but due to historic voting and support, much smaller pools of talents to draw from than Labour.

The Liberal Democrat solutions to this were premised around various mentoring and support schemes for talent, the Conservatives had an explicit A-list. One approach knocked politely on the door of the constituency associations and said ‘would you mind awfully looking at this lovely candidate’, the other kicked the door in and (in a voice that in my head sounds like Andy Coulson’s character in the last Thick of It) said ‘right racists, ditch the local limpet and put this genius on the estates instead and we’ll be running the country by Christmas’.

Not successfully in every circumstance, Shaun Bailey famously failed in Hammersmith, but in overall a lot better than nothing. A point Simon Woolley of Operation Black Vote also makes:

“They also realised that to make the breakthrough strong leadership would have to convince the party that change needed to happen, and where necessary they would use positive-action measures such as the A list, or persuading Tory grandees to mentor brilliant candidates. Their efforts made history.”

It probably also helped that a greater number Conservative MPs were laid low by expenses scandal exposure than Liberal Democrats, providing opportunities for parachute candidates, but there were several Liberal Democrat MPs who also had change of career plans around that time. The broader Conservative base also means more opportunities, candidates prefer to stand near where they live, and there are very few Liberal Democrat opportunities either with or near areas of high diversity. But the really motivated candidates travel.

The A-list also sent a signal Liberal Democrat alternatives have not. It something you can aim for that’s a lot more attractive and tangible than some training courses and an approving word from a sponsor.

Talent spotting to create an A-list is an inexact science, but it is not random. Simon Hughes is rather good at it, particularly amongst communities where we’re weak. But keeping the talent motivated when the route to success remains either get very lucky, or a two decades of leafleting, financial ruin, and being treated as ‘the black candidate’ rather than on your own merits as a politician has proven more difficult. And however in-exact, it would be surely be better to have an A-list that got it right 50% of the time?

It is also worth noting that there is an implicit A-list in operation anyhow. Talented outsiders do tend to beat local grafters in selections, MPs to some extent pick their successors. Nick Clegg a good example of both. It is reasonable to believe in those informal arrangements, that like picks like, and that is an implicit barrier to BME candidates. That can be offset by making the A-list explicit.

Both A-list and quota candidates can suffer being seen as there because of the system not their merit, but the former is considerably better in that regard. A quota candidate is someone who got through approval and ticked the ‘bascially sound, probably not a nutter’ boxes. An A-list candidate has recognised talent and potential.

The main issue that rankles liberals with the A-list is the implicit assumption that everyone else is on the B-list. But the truth or otherwise of that becomes rapidly apparent during selection. The A-list opens the door, it doesn’t push you through it. Some Conservative A-listers found the label a disadvantage. The sense of a candidate imposed from the centre can inspire opposition amongst localists. But if that matters to you, you don’t have to put yourself forward for the list.

I can’t see any principled objection to the A-list as a club for talent and the signals that sends, any-more than the myriad of other memberships and signals candidates use to show something desirable.

If the party did go down that route, it wouldn’t now call it an A-list, the party allergy to doing things that look a bit Tory has increased in Coalition.  It does though look from the 2010 election result like the system works, and it should at least be considered. All successful parties steal their opponents’ best ideas.