You can read the Guardian’s special reports on Guantanamo here.

The post Guantanamo is as unacceptable today as it was when it was set up (audio) first appeared on Ming Campbell.

During the summer Elspeth and I like to spend as much time as we can at the Edinburgh Festival and one of the remarkable features now of the Edinburgh Festival is the way in which the book festival has become so significant, and it’s true all round the country. Book festivals have become enormously important. And when Roy Hattersley and Tony Benn and Denis Healey and people come to speak the tickets for these events are sold out within a matter of minutes of booking opening. And there is a sense in which book festivals have become a substitute if you like for the political meetings. If we’d taken a room in the Assembly Rooms in Edinburgh in George Street and said we had all these politicians to speak weâ€d have got thirty people. Instead they talk to audiences of a thousand with others clambering outside.

But the person whose presence struck me more than any other as well as that was Helena Kennedy. Now some of you will know Helena Kennedy as the tame Labour Peer that Tony Blair put in to the House of Lords whoâ€s turned in to a tigress, who has defended the right to trial by jury, who has defended the systematic authoritarianism of this Government, and who was the chair of the Power Inquiry. And at half past ten on a wet Monday morning in Edinburgh it was standing room only for Helena Kennedy to come and talk about the Power Inquiry.

Now that I think reflects precisely and exactly what Paul Tyler’s been talking about, about the fact that there is this sense of frustration and discontent among the public about politics, or rather more correctly about politicians and political institutions but not about politics. People are interested in politics, people are interested in whether they have any influence any longer on Government conducted on an increasingly presidential basis. And so our experience at the Edinburgh Book Festival simply goes to confirm the importance of the subject we’re talking about.

Now all of us here are political activists and weâ€ve all become increasingly aware of this disenchantment which so many members of the public feel. And how many of us could honestly say we havenâ€t from time to time been discouraged on that famous wet Tuesday night in Dudley that Kenneth Clarke reminded everyone of a few years ago when you knock on a door and someone comes and says, oh you’re all the same, you’re only in it for what you get? And you think, my feet are soaking, I haven’t had anything to eat, I could do with a drink, and this person says I’m in it for what I can get, well, weâ€re not getting very much are we? And that apathy is often discouraging.

And of course the other sign of that disengagement is the drop in election turn out, down what to sixty two, or the election before the last down to fifty nine per cent, sixty per cent the last time. Sixty per cent of adults voted, sixty three or sixty four per cent, I think Iâ€m right, of adults in this country are on the internet. More people on the internet than actually bothered to vote in the last general election. Doesnâ€t that tell us something?

And worse of course is this generation of young people who have not voted, donâ€t feel compelled to vote and may never acquire the habit of voting, and yet, who were the people on the march against the war in Iraq? Who were the people who wanted to raise money for the victims of the Tsunami? Who are the people who are most desperately concerned about the environment? It was these same young people, keenly political, but with no confidence in political institutions and politics.

Now, those millions who marched against Iraq and those who’ve been part of the Make Poverty History campaign, I don’t know about other colleagues but in my constituency weâ€ve got a good ecumenical, all the churches, I went to talk to them the other day about Trident, they call themselves the Justice and Peace Group. But they got up at three o’clock in the morning when the G8, not this last one, the one before because it was in Gleneagles on the doorstep they didnâ€t have to get up at three o’clock in the morning, but when it was in Birmingham they got up at three o’clock in the morning, they went in a bus with their sandwiches and their thermos flasks and they went down to Birmingham and they stood outside and they clasped hands with that wonderful, wonderful circle round the G8 to say, come on itâ€s time you did something about the poorest people in the world. And these same people went to Gleneagles as well.

So there is a real sense still of people wanting to be engaged. Now people are not quite so deferential towards politicians as they have previously been and that is a very good thing too. But that gulf which Iâ€ve identified is dangerous because if you have a political system that goes in one direction and if you have the public and the people going in another then the very cohesion of society is at risk.

And of course a lot of this was the prerogative of the chattering classes, the Observer readers, those who buy the Independent and think the front pages of the Independent are wonderful, people like me and you. But, well the front page of the Independent’s not always wonderful I have to say, and Iâ€m not always entirely happy with the editorial. But then the Power Commission came along and what they decided to do was they decided not just to be independent in the sense of plucking a series of the great and the good, they ensured that the commissioners, the members, were representative of the country as a whole, and their task was to go away, go round the country, under Helena Kennedyâ€s leadership, and come back with proposals. And if you read the Power Commission it reads like a Liberal Democrat manifesto. But the advantage it has is this; it comes with independence. Because when you and I talk about proportional representation people always say ah weâ€re only interested in that because it would increase the number of Members of Parliament in the House of Commons. But they came to this with total independence.

And from the moment I read that report I was absolutely determined that we as a party would not pass up the opportunity which is offered. First because we have always argued the case for the political process being more inclusive, more responsive and more interactive. What is community politics about if itâ€s not about making politics more responsive and more inclusive?

Iâ€ve just been, thereâ€s a race that they have here, Iâ€ve just, for, for women, to raise money for the womenâ€s refuge here, just along on the, on, on the esplanade, and thatâ€s the kind of thing which to a very large extent was spawned by our notion of community politics. This is a voluntary organisation, the refuge here, it has to raise its own money, and there they were, what five, six hundred women, all running for their health and a bit of enjoyment but also in the name of this project. And thatâ€s the kind of practical inclusiveness which we have always counted on.

And of course the second reason is the agenda of the Power Commission so followed our own thinking that we would be very foolish politically to let other parties monopolise what has been our territory. People say to me often, Andrew Marr said it to me this morning, or rather last night because we recorded last night, are you worried about David Cameron coming on to your ground? Not a bit of it. I want him on my ground. Why? ‘Cause itâ€s our ground, we know it, we understand it, we staked it out. And so when people talk about constitutional change and about reconnecting the public then this is something we know about and we must not under any circumstances cede any part of that ground to any party, however well intentioned it may be.

One issue though which the commission raised which is absolutely fundamental is this; we mustnâ€t cherry pick. Because it comes as a whole, it comes as a package, it has checks and balances contained within it. You start pulling pieces out then you destroy the integrity of the whole proposal.

And third, this commission offers us the chance to develop new ways of communicating with the citizens using Twenty First Century electronic media. Now as some of you will know Iâ€m not the most qualified techie. Information (indistinct) is, technology is not my strongest suit but Iâ€m surrounded by some very bright and clever people who know a great deal about it. But although I may not understand it I sure as hell understand the need to use it, because that statistic I gave you a moment or two ago about those adults who are on the internet tells us just how important this mechanism for communication is now and is going to be.

So thatâ€s why, as Paulâ€s already said, in May I announced we were going to have a virtual conference, and itâ€s been successfully developed by Paul and Richard Allan and Martin Tod and Alex Davies, and itâ€s there, itâ€s taking place, we launched it the other day in the House of Commons. And all of them are here today and I think thereâ€s an information pack, thereâ€s information which enables you to be part of it, but also enables you to tell other people how to be part of it. And already hundreds of people, most of them new to any sort of political discussion, are taking part in this alternative conference. The closing date’s the 6th of October, we want many more people to join, and in particular we want many more young people to join as well.

Now David Steel famously said, go back to your constituencies and prepare for Government. My message is rather more prosaic. Go back to your constituencies and involve everyone in your constituency who wasnâ€t able to come to Brighton. But some actually might think that that more prosaic message may in the end have greater consequences.

This is a conference, this virtual conference, we can all attend without taking a week off work, without registration fees, without travel expenses, without inconveniencing the rest of the family. And itâ€s an opportunity for your local members to have their say in our conference, our internet conference, on how Britain should be run. Itâ€s a chance to allow every voice to be heard and that is something that I wholeheartedly welcome and for which I seek your endorsement.

The post Taking Power policy consultation (podcast) first appeared on Ming Campbell.

All questions are welcome, although we can’t at this point guarantee to answer all of them due to limitations of time.

If we can’t answer your question in the first podcast, we’ll try to answer it in a subsequent podcast.

If you have a question for Ming, just call 07747 867259 at any time. Your question will be recorded and, if selected, played in the podcast.

The post Ask Ming – podcast question hotline: 07747 867259 first appeared on Ming Campbell.

You can sign up for their podcast and listen to it on your MP3 player, or just click on the button below to listen to it now on your computer.

Download and listen to Ed and Mingâ€s podcast (MP3, 5,928kB)

The post Ming Campbell MP and Ed Davey MP discuss energy policy (podcast) first appeared on Ming Campbell.

June 8, 2006: After 100 days as Leader of the Liberal Democrats, Ming Campbell outlines his priorities for a Liberal Britain. If you would like to hear this speech, you can download it and listen to it on your MP3 player, or click on the button below.

Download and listen to Ming’s 100 day speech (MP3, 10,263kB)

In these last 100 days, I have not had much time for sledging with huskies nor for discussing suitable venues for croquet with my colleagues.

In these last 100 days, I have been getting down to work.

Bluntly, if the Liberal Democrats want to show the country that we are serious about power – we must reform our party.

Our Party has remained largely unchanged since we came together in 1988. Change is overdue, necessary and urgent.

In these last three months I have begun the task of implementing that change. Every decision taken now must advance our cause at the next general election and put us at the centre of events.

My leadership will not be judged by the short term pre-occupations of London commentators but by the long-term judgement of the British people.

I believe that given the Labour leadership – and deputy leadership – crisis, the general election could come as early as October next year.

That is why I am pleased to announce that at my invitation, Chris Rennard will chair our campaign. He is the man whom our opponents fear most. The work starts today.

I have already put in place five other key building blocks for success in that election.

First, I have appointed the strongest, youngest and most talented front bench team in the history of our party. A team which includes new talent like Nick Clegg, Julia Goldsworthy, Chris Huhne and Jo Swinson. This is a real A list not a Dinner Party list from Notting Hill

Second, Ed Davey, my choice to replace Tim Razzall as Chairman of the Campaigns and Communications Committee, is working to ensure that we run a powerful, modern national campaign. He has recently visited Canada and America. We will be applying best practice. We will utilise the unlimited potential of the internet: two thirds of Britons have the internet but only 60% of them vote. We will build up a supporters†network from the millions who vote for us. They will be consulted on policy, brought into campaigns and asked to contribute their ideas. We will connect our Party directly with those who vote for us.

Third, we can only achieve our ambitions if the Liberal Democrats become the party of diversity and equality. We cannot represent Britain unless we are more representative of Britain. At the moment a party review is taking place of what more needs to be done to achieve this. But as a signal of my intent I have today written to the Chairs of all our local parties emphasising the priority I attach to diversity in candidate selection And made it clear that diversity will be a significant factor in determining how much central support is made available to local parties.

I have asked Steve Hitchins the former leader of Islington, to draw up proposals for a diversity fund to assist women, disabled, black and ethnic minority candidates to contest winnable seats for the party. He has a proven track record of implementing programmes for diversity and will report directly to me.

Fourth, I am committed to open, transparent and broad-based funding of the party. Just as it is wrong for Labour to be in hock to an improbable alliance of trade unions and millionaires and it is wrong for Conservatives to be in hock to multi-millionaires. We Liberal Democrats must show the way by developing a broader base of donations to fund our campaigning.

Fifth, if we are to be credible then we must above all be credible on policy. We must streamline our policy-making process to make it more responsive and immediate. Our Party Conference will always be the most important voice in determining our policies. But the conference committee is already looking at ways to professionalise the party conference and to make it more accessible to members of the public.

We will set up a Liberal Democrat Communications Agency consisting of some of our many supporters in the field of communications who will assist us with their advice.

I am determined that we will be fit to meet the political challenges of this Parliament and the general election.

I was pleased when Labour was elected in 1997. We shared much with the new government. A desire for democratic reform. A commitment to social justice. A belief in the United Nations.

Liberal Democrats supported the governmentâ€s spending increases in health and education. It was necessary to correct the under-investment of the Tory years.

But Labour has failed these great public services.

Failed to ensure that the money has been well spent.

Failed to allow the professionals to get on with the job they know best.

And all the time inequality has continued to grow.

Taxation is complex, stealthy and unfair.

Government is wasteful, inefficient and authoritarian.

Labour tramples on freedom at home and ignores international law abroad.

What of the Conservatives?

Mr. Cameronâ€s words do not change the nature of his party.

Who believes that 198 Tory MPs, elected on one of the most right wing manifestos ever seen in this country have changed their values? Mr. Cameronâ€s professed ‘liberalism’ has found no echo in his party.

Our party must be the party of ideas, with policies founded on values and fashioned with rigour. Our instincts are against authoritarianism and based on the freedom of the individual. We should be unashamed in our pursuit of liberty and freedom and opportunity.

Britain needs a radical shake-up of government; a democratic revolution to restore accountability, legitimacy and representation. To restore power to local government and to give more influence to the electorate.

Let me just sketch what this means on five key domestic issues.

First, how do we create a fairer Britain not scarred with persistent and high levels of poverty?

Tax is at the heart of this.

I want to redefine our approach to tax to reflect the growing sense in many low income and middle class households that taxes are unfair, over-complicated and penalise hard work. My aim is to cut the burden of direct taxes on the low paid and Middle Britain and pay for it by raising taxes on those who pollute the environment and on the very wealthy.

Specifically I envisage a 2p cut in the national rate of income tax to 20p and lifting around two million low paid workers and one million pensioners out of income tax.

We are the one major party which takes the environment seriously and that does mean that environmental taxes will rise. We are the one major party which believes in redistribution: the very wealthy should pay more; but not in the form of 50p marginal rates on high incomes.

The 50p rate was an important symbol that we are a redistributive party. But the substance of the tax commission proposals shows that we can be both redistributive and innovative.

Our thinking is necessarily work in progress. We intend to publish the full proposals for debate in July.

But I am quite clear that we are in a new political environment in which the era of big increases in central government spending is over.

The Liberal Democrats will not propose any spending increases without identifying savings. We will move from tax and spend to save and spend. I see no reason for any increase in the overall tax burden.

Second, as a Chancellor of a great University, I know that education is the liberal way to improve the life chances of every individual.

Education and Learning provide a route out of poverty.

That is why we must aim higher.

It should be a badge of national shame that 40,000 children go to secondary school each year unable to read.

These children are invariably the poorest and the most disadvantaged.

We should investigate the possibility of targeted funding by pupil. So that schools have an incentive to accept and improve the education of the poorest in society.

We should use prominent sportsmen and women as role models to encourage children to perform well in the classroom and on the pitch.

In World Cup Year we should enlist David Beckham; and in Ashes Year Freddie Flintoff.

I know personally the power of the Olympics. In the run-up to London in 2012 it should be a priority to find ways in which Kelly Holmes can not only encourage sporting effort but learning effort as well?

Third, how do we halt environmental degradation and begin the complex task of changing individual behaviour for the future of the planet?

Climate change is the biggest challenge facing the world. The next ten years are the point of no return – what we do now affects our children and our grand children.

For me a foreign photo opportunity or a small increase in vehicle excise duty for the biggest cars is tinkering while the planet warms up. We all have to change our behaviour and government has to take the lead.

That is why we need the changes to the tax system– to provide incentives to encourage the right behaviour and to penalise the polluters.
That is why Liberal Democrats proposed in the recent Finance Bill that there should be an increase to £2,000 in vehicle excise duty for the most polluting cars.

That is why we need a decentralised system for producing and supplying Britainâ€s energy with a strong emphasis on renewables and clean-coal technology.

Let me be clear. New nuclear power is not the answer to climate change. It would come too late. It is far too expensive. And it is just too risky.

Fourth, how do we make Britain a safer country in a dangerous world?

I have recently made clear my position that crime is a liberal issue.

Those of us who care about social justice must also care about criminal justice. It is not illiberal to be prepared to defend the rule of law. There is nothing liberal about people living in an atmosphere of fear. There is nothing liberal about tolerating violence.

I will never waver in my determination to uphold civil liberties and fundamental freedoms; nor will I waver in my view that breaking the law has consequences and in appropriate cases should carry punishment.

I will never waver in my view that deterrence and detection are much more likely with locally based, neighbourhood policing with strong ties to the local community. That is why we oppose the creation of super-regional police forces.

Events of the last few weeks underline why I will continue to argue that the Home Office should be broken up.

We must never give in to terrorists. They should be pursued through international co-operation and stronger intelligence services. But, we do not need impractical policies like ID cards, but rather the use of intercept evidence, as in every other Western nation.

It also does little for public confidence to refuse a public inquiry into the events of 7/7. The Prime Minister should recognise that his acceptance of this would be an act of statesmanship.

Fifth, how do we empower citizens who increasingly feel unable to influence the decisions of their government?

The Prime Minister promised that Labour would “clean up politics”. The sad truth is that he has failed to deliver. With fewer people voting and cynicism on the increase, I believe it is only by a full-scale democratic revolution that the tide can be turned.

The POWER inquiry demonstrates that the country is crying out for radical reform. This is a liberal cause, and this is my cause.

Whitehall and Westminster should regulate less, legislate less and tax less – power should be decentralised to cities and towns. It cannot be right that local government today in Birmingham has less power than when Joseph Chamberlain was its Mayor in the 1870s.

What we need is smaller government and an end to bloated Westminster and Whitehall. Fewer Ministers, Fewer MPs, fewer special advisers, fewer civil servants, fewer Departments, fewer quangos – electoral reform for the House of Commons and local government and at long long last an elected second chamber.

New Britain with power at the local level will strengthen accountability and put decisions about schools, hospitals, transport and policing in the hands of local people. It will help to re-connect citizens and the state. It will foster new ideas, new partnerships, and new relationships. It will allow local people to make decisions about working with public, private and voluntary sectors to improve local services.

Just as we need to provide progressive leadership at home, so we need to continue to do so abroad.

The Liberal Democrats are founded in internationalism.

Britain must play a positive role, using our influence to build a better world. As members of the G8, the Commonwealth, NATO, the EU, O.S.C.E. and the UN Security Council we are in a unique position to do so.

Britainâ€s foreign policy must be determined by balancing alliances, interests and legal obligations. Our relationship with the United States will always be fundamental. But it should become a partnership of influence, characterised by candour, honesty and mutual respect. Our interests will not always be the same. The relationship should be strong enough to accommodate honest disagreement. The relationship should not be subordinate as to appear subservient.

I was proud that our party led the arguments in Parliament and the country against the Iraq war.

Britain and the world will pay for a generation for the mistakes made in Iraq, for the failure to predict, and prepare for, the insurgency that followed; for the failure to fill the vacuum that emerged after disbanding the Iraqi security services; and for the failure to marginalise the aggressors, and enlist the unequivocal support of the majority of Iraqis.

Sooner or later we shall leave Iraq. But no matter when that may be, Iraq will have a poor chance of survival unless there is regional stability; unless there is a settlement of the Israeli/Palestinian dispute; unless there is an accommodation with Iran.

The heady talk in republican circles of a ripple of democracy through the Middle East has been quietened. The State Department is once again more influential than the Pentagon. Here at home, apart from the Prime Minister, no member of the government rushes to defend our presence in Iraq as other than a hazardous necessity. It will take new leadership rather than Bush and Blair to endure the humiliation of seeking regional co-operation but without it the dismemberment of Iraq will remain more likely than not.

Under my leadership I am challenging our party to be bolder, to be more ambitious and to be more thoughtful. Unlike the Tories we donâ€t have to abandon everything we stand for in order to reinvent ourselves. Unlike Labour, we donâ€t have to shore up a crumbling edifice.

There is a great opportunity for the Liberal Democrats. Because we are closest to the heartbeat of the British people. Because we understand that people want a government that values freedom and opportunity; challenges unfairness; attacks injustice and confronts prejudice.

And there is much work to be done since this is not yet the liberal country that people want.

It is not a liberal country when so many are failed by our education system.

It is not a liberal country when so many people in Black and ethnic minority communities feel a sense of alienation and despair.

It is not a liberal country when so many live in poverty.

It is not a liberal country when so many are unable to find decent homes.

It is not a liberal country when so many are unable to save for their retirement.

I have been fortunate in my life.

I have never lacked opportunity.

• Olympic athlete
• Practising as a Q.C.
• Chancellor of a great University
• Elected as an MP and now Liberal Democrat Party Leader.

I have never lacked opportunity.

But I want a Britain where opportunity is the birth right of EVERY child, a Britain where ambition is nurtured and aspiration encouraged.

I was asked by one of my friends today, what I want for my country.

I want what every Liberal Democrat wants: freedom, opportunity and compassion.

I want a liberal country,

I want a Britain to be proud of.

The post My Priorities for a Liberal Britain first appeared on Ming Campbell.