This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jun/02/charles-kennedy-from-bright-young-mp-to-periphal-party-figure
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Charles Kennedy: from bright young MP to peripheral party figure | Charles Kennedy: from bright young MP to peripheral party figure |
| (1 day later) | |
| Sometimes success rushes too swiftly towards the professional politician, and in retrospect Charles Kennedy might have benefited, and indeed left a more substantial political legacy as opposed to a raft of grieving admirers, had he not become an MP at the age of 23. | Sometimes success rushes too swiftly towards the professional politician, and in retrospect Charles Kennedy might have benefited, and indeed left a more substantial political legacy as opposed to a raft of grieving admirers, had he not become an MP at the age of 23. |
| Kennedy had a curious political lineage. Although his paternal grandfather had been an active, old-fashioned Highland Liberal, Kennedy started his own political life at the age of 15 in the Labour party. At the University of Glasgow he was sympathetic to the Liberals defecting to the Social Democratic party on its formation in 1981, partly because Labour seemed “less about releasing individual potential and more about levelling down”. His greatest intellectual mentor was Roy Jenkins, one of the SDP’s founders, and Kennedy fell for his talk of a radical centre that would put constitutional and political reform at the heart of politics. | Kennedy had a curious political lineage. Although his paternal grandfather had been an active, old-fashioned Highland Liberal, Kennedy started his own political life at the age of 15 in the Labour party. At the University of Glasgow he was sympathetic to the Liberals defecting to the Social Democratic party on its formation in 1981, partly because Labour seemed “less about releasing individual potential and more about levelling down”. His greatest intellectual mentor was Roy Jenkins, one of the SDP’s founders, and Kennedy fell for his talk of a radical centre that would put constitutional and political reform at the heart of politics. |
| Related: Charles Kennedy death: politicians pay tribute to former Lib Dem leader | Related: Charles Kennedy death: politicians pay tribute to former Lib Dem leader |
| It was a period of ferment in British politics, and his own surprise election as SDP MP in 1983 meant he travelled to Westminster at a time when it seemed possible the party could overtake Labour as the chief voice for social democracy in the UK. As the first SDP MP to risk supporting a merger with the Liberals, he can legitimately claim to be one of the founding fathers of the Liberal Democrats, a sometimes uneasy political alliance between two traditions in which he always stood on the social democratic wing. | It was a period of ferment in British politics, and his own surprise election as SDP MP in 1983 meant he travelled to Westminster at a time when it seemed possible the party could overtake Labour as the chief voice for social democracy in the UK. As the first SDP MP to risk supporting a merger with the Liberals, he can legitimately claim to be one of the founding fathers of the Liberal Democrats, a sometimes uneasy political alliance between two traditions in which he always stood on the social democratic wing. |
| Under Paddy Ashdown’s leadership, Kennedy held various portfolios, even if he occasionally exasperated the hyperactive Ashdown with his determined lack of application. But he helped the leader craft a coherent ideology for this fledgling party. He argued: “The key issues that provided the mood music for much of the 20th century – socialism v capitalism, public v private ownership – are now no longer debated. Today the issues are quite different: professionalism v the market, interdependence v nationalism, and community responsibility v self interest.” | Under Paddy Ashdown’s leadership, Kennedy held various portfolios, even if he occasionally exasperated the hyperactive Ashdown with his determined lack of application. But he helped the leader craft a coherent ideology for this fledgling party. He argued: “The key issues that provided the mood music for much of the 20th century – socialism v capitalism, public v private ownership – are now no longer debated. Today the issues are quite different: professionalism v the market, interdependence v nationalism, and community responsibility v self interest.” |
| When he outmanoeuvred Menzies Campbell to win the party leadership after Ashdown stood down in 1999, Kennedy took the party a little further left, partly because he could see that was the most obvious gap in politics as Tony Blair took Labour to the centre. He made a big call by proposing higher income tax to pay for education. | When he outmanoeuvred Menzies Campbell to win the party leadership after Ashdown stood down in 1999, Kennedy took the party a little further left, partly because he could see that was the most obvious gap in politics as Tony Blair took Labour to the centre. He made a big call by proposing higher income tax to pay for education. |
| Doubtless it will be his decision to oppose the war in Iraq for which he will be defined as a politician. He described it as the biggest British foreign policy mistake since Suez, and told parliament in the critical debate: “The case has not yet been made for military action. The evidence has not been clearly assembled. Public opinion in this country is profoundly opposed to unilateral action by US and British forces without a UN mandate and without clear evidence of the need for war.” | Doubtless it will be his decision to oppose the war in Iraq for which he will be defined as a politician. He described it as the biggest British foreign policy mistake since Suez, and told parliament in the critical debate: “The case has not yet been made for military action. The evidence has not been clearly assembled. Public opinion in this country is profoundly opposed to unilateral action by US and British forces without a UN mandate and without clear evidence of the need for war.” |
| It was a brave move since he respected much of Blair’s domestic policy and came under pressure from the prime minister not to oppose him. Leading a political party in opposing military action by UK troops is not easy and quickly led to allegations of appeasement. Kennedy found himself as the highest ranking politician to join an anti-war march in Hyde Park, London. And he did not abandon the issue after the invasion, insisting that the continued occupation of Iraq “contributes to the insurgency and attracts those from abroad who see the opportunity to spread violent fundamentalism”. | It was a brave move since he respected much of Blair’s domestic policy and came under pressure from the prime minister not to oppose him. Leading a political party in opposing military action by UK troops is not easy and quickly led to allegations of appeasement. Kennedy found himself as the highest ranking politician to join an anti-war march in Hyde Park, London. And he did not abandon the issue after the invasion, insisting that the continued occupation of Iraq “contributes to the insurgency and attracts those from abroad who see the opportunity to spread violent fundamentalism”. |
| The former business secretary, Vince Cable, recalled in the Guardian: “He was bombarded with advice from outside and inside the party to support the Blair government; it was said, in particular, that a party leader would never be forgiven by the public for criticising a military intervention in which British service personnel were being killed in action.” | The former business secretary, Vince Cable, recalled in the Guardian: “He was bombarded with advice from outside and inside the party to support the Blair government; it was said, in particular, that a party leader would never be forgiven by the public for criticising a military intervention in which British service personnel were being killed in action.” |
| Instead his anger at the invasion and the lack of postwar planning grew. Convinced that his opposition to the invasion had been vindicated, he risked controversy by implying there had been a link between the 2005 terrorists attacks in London and British foreign policy, saying: “Those like President Bush and Tony Blair, who have sought to link Iraq with the so-called war on terror, can hardly be surprised when members of the public draw the same link when acts of terrorism occur here in the United Kingdom.” | Instead his anger at the invasion and the lack of postwar planning grew. Convinced that his opposition to the invasion had been vindicated, he risked controversy by implying there had been a link between the 2005 terrorists attacks in London and British foreign policy, saying: “Those like President Bush and Tony Blair, who have sought to link Iraq with the so-called war on terror, can hardly be surprised when members of the public draw the same link when acts of terrorism occur here in the United Kingdom.” |
| Related: Charles Kennedy stood up for British Guantánamo detainees | Letters from Louise Christian and Janet Davies | |
| His and Campbell’s stance on the war led to an electoral dividend for the Liberal Democrats, who won 62 seats in the 2005 election, almost eight times its current complement of MPs. Six million voted for his party as swaths of former Blair admirers deserted Labour. It is an extraordinary sign of how the party’s fortunes have faded that the 2005 result was seen as a disappointment. There had been fond hopes of securing 80 seats and holding the balance of power. | His and Campbell’s stance on the war led to an electoral dividend for the Liberal Democrats, who won 62 seats in the 2005 election, almost eight times its current complement of MPs. Six million voted for his party as swaths of former Blair admirers deserted Labour. It is an extraordinary sign of how the party’s fortunes have faded that the 2005 result was seen as a disappointment. There had been fond hopes of securing 80 seats and holding the balance of power. |
| The stories of Kennedy’s alcoholism had been in public circulation since 2002 and his colleagues expected him to stand down after the 2005 election. He refused to do so, leading his fellow MPs to hand information on his drinking to ITV. Even then he tried to cling on, saying he would stand for the leadership in an open contest. Only faced by a mass walkout did he resign. | The stories of Kennedy’s alcoholism had been in public circulation since 2002 and his colleagues expected him to stand down after the 2005 election. He refused to do so, leading his fellow MPs to hand information on his drinking to ITV. Even then he tried to cling on, saying he would stand for the leadership in an open contest. Only faced by a mass walkout did he resign. |
| Once he stepped aside – replaced by Campbell and then Nick Clegg – much of his political platform, in effect a party to the left of Blair, was consciously dismantled, predominantly by Clegg and his policy advisers in the CentreForum thinktank. Clegg regarded the 2005 manifesto as incoherent, statist, pro-producer and unchallenging. He replaced Kennedy’s social democracy with support for academies markets and a tougher stance on public spending. | Once he stepped aside – replaced by Campbell and then Nick Clegg – much of his political platform, in effect a party to the left of Blair, was consciously dismantled, predominantly by Clegg and his policy advisers in the CentreForum thinktank. Clegg regarded the 2005 manifesto as incoherent, statist, pro-producer and unchallenging. He replaced Kennedy’s social democracy with support for academies markets and a tougher stance on public spending. |
| Kennedy, battling with his alcoholism, became an ever more peripheral figure unable to stem the Clegg tide, although he openly opposed going into coalition with the Conservatives, spoke frequently in defence of Europea and voted against the coalition’s rise in tuition fees. Nevertheless, his personal kindness and loyalty meant he remained largely quiet even if in private he thought Clegg’s decision to embrace David Cameron so closely at the start of the coalition was a political error the party would live to regret. He has probably been proved correct and it is no surprise that the party is now likely to vote for Tim Farron as its next leader, a figure of the left closer to Kennedy’s thinking. | Kennedy, battling with his alcoholism, became an ever more peripheral figure unable to stem the Clegg tide, although he openly opposed going into coalition with the Conservatives, spoke frequently in defence of Europea and voted against the coalition’s rise in tuition fees. Nevertheless, his personal kindness and loyalty meant he remained largely quiet even if in private he thought Clegg’s decision to embrace David Cameron so closely at the start of the coalition was a political error the party would live to regret. He has probably been proved correct and it is no surprise that the party is now likely to vote for Tim Farron as its next leader, a figure of the left closer to Kennedy’s thinking. |
| Perhaps he knew that the reason for his departure as leader, and his ongoing alcohol problems, did not make a credible standard bearer to fight Clegg’s politics. The task was largely left to Cable from inside government. | Perhaps he knew that the reason for his departure as leader, and his ongoing alcohol problems, did not make a credible standard bearer to fight Clegg’s politics. The task was largely left to Cable from inside government. |
| In his last piece written for Lib Dem Voice, reflecting on his defeat in the general election, Kennedy betrayed no bitterness, just a sense of loss that he was not to represent the seat he loved so much. He insisted his love for politics was not dimmed and he looked forward to a parliament that would be about two unions: the union in the UK and the EU. He promised to be a player in both debates, but for whatever tragic reason that was not to be. | In his last piece written for Lib Dem Voice, reflecting on his defeat in the general election, Kennedy betrayed no bitterness, just a sense of loss that he was not to represent the seat he loved so much. He insisted his love for politics was not dimmed and he looked forward to a parliament that would be about two unions: the union in the UK and the EU. He promised to be a player in both debates, but for whatever tragic reason that was not to be. |