by Mark Docherty
Last week Tim Farron announced his resignation as leader of
the Liberal Democrats because he was finding it difficult to balance his life
as a practising Christian with his role as party leader. His resignation came just under two years
after he was elected Nick Clegg’s successor and he contested just one election
campaign, in which the party made modest gains.
Some would argue that he took important steps in rebuilding the party
after their dismal performance in 2015, while others say that he compromised
the Lib Dems’ core values as party leader.
Nick Clegg’s party were held to account in 2015 for breaking
their promise to vote against rises in tuition fees during their time in
coalition between 2010 and 2015, leading to them winning just eight seats. The
ensuing leadership election saw Farron elected as leader with the task of
restoring them to a position in which they could have a significant influence
in Parliament. In this task, it could be argued that Farron succeeded as the
party improved its share of the seats from eight to twelve under his
stewardship. Although the Lib Dems remain only fourth largest party after the
2017 General Election, Farron has at least given them stability and steadied
their fortunes after they fell so far two years ago. On the day of Farron’s
resignation, Nick Clegg paid tribute to the stabilising role he had in his two
years in charge. Although the election
result did not show as much progress as the party would have hoped, they have taken
the first steps along the path to recovery.
However, when one considers the circumstances surrounding
the 2017 General Election it becomes hard to see how the Lib Dems increased
their total of seats by just four. The
vote was contested between an increasingly unpopular Prime Minister in Theresa
May and a leader of the opposition who was unable to control his own MPs in
Jeremy Corbyn; circumstances which would normally be seen as ideal for a ‘third
party’. Add the fact that the Lib Dems
were the only party to oppose Brexit, meaning they should have been
representing 48% of the electorate, and the election starts to look as if it
was the perfect opportunity for the Lib Dems to become at least as popular as
they were in 2010.
However, a combination of the youth vote siding with Labour
rather than the Lib Dems and Farron being at the heart of controversy
surrounding alleged homophobic views led to the Lib Dems led to the party
gaining just four seats and saw their vote share decrease from 7.9% in 2015 to
7.3%. The Lib Dem manifesto was clearly
targeting young remain voters, with a second referendum on EU membership their
main policy, but the young voters tended to side with Jeremy Corbyn’s promise
of phasing out tuition fees rather than a possible reversal of Brexit. For this reason, it is difficult to look at
Farron’s electoral performance and see anything but a failure.
The vast majority of coverage of the 2017 Election - both
positive and negative - centred on the leaders of the Conservatives and Labour
so it is telling that the only mainstream media coverage the Lib Dems received
was a wholly negative story about Tim Farron’s homophobic views. It is difficult to see how any modern day
political leader could survive having expressed such views, and certainly not
the leader of the Liberal Democrats who pride themselves on being socially
progressive. As an evangelical
Christian, Farron refused to say that homosexuality wasn’t a sin in the lead-up
to the election, which received much media attention, and he eventually said he
didn’t think it was a sin when under pressure.
This was made worse when, after research, it was discovered that Farron
had not attended the vote in Parliament to legalise same sex marriage in the UK
when he was a backbench MP. Some feel
that Farron was unsuitable for the role of party leader as his views undermined
one of the core beliefs of the Lib Dems.
Therefore, although Farron was not an electoral disaster as
leader of the Liberal Democrats, he damaged the reputation of his party and
compromised one of their core ideologies, while also failing to make as much
progress as he could have done in the 2017 Election. While it was Farron’s choice to step down as
leader in favour of his Christian values, the party are probably better off
without him at the head.
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments with names are more likely to be published.