The Lib Dem leadership should listen to our MPs

Peter Black blogged this morning about the reaction to Charlie Maynard call for the Liberal Democrats to elect a new leader:

The reaction has been predictable, with the leadership recruiting the usual suspects to go public in support of Ed Davey. Their social media posts are all suspiciously similar., and also slightly ridiculous, but ... what is really interesting is how few of them have gone public in this way.

The politics.co.uk website lists just 17 out of 72 prepared to pin their support of Davey to a public mast. The rest appear to be keeping their powder dry.

There are currently 71 Lib Dem MPs, and the 17 has gone up to 18, but this is still a significant point. There are few signs that "the vast majority of our MPs ... are furious at this distraction" as some of those 18 claim.

The feeling that the Lib Dem leadership has "lost the dressing room" is widespread at Westminster. As someone said on Bluesky yesterday, wise supporters of Ed Davey continuing as leader will listen to our MPs to understand why this has happened and what can be done to put it right.

So far there have been few signs of this happening.

Charlie Maynard resigns from Lib Dem front bench and calls for no confidence vote in Ed Davey

Embed from Getty Images

So the gossip about disaffection with the party leadership at Westminster was accurate.

Earlier this afternoon, the Financial Times broke the story that Charlie Maynard, Liberal Democrat MP for Witney. has resigned as the party's shadow chief secretary to the Treasury and asked other Lib Dem MPs to join him in a vote no confidence in Ed Davey's leadership/

The FT website can be hard to access, but Traders Union now has the story too.

While Traders Union concentrates on the party's poll ratings, the FT, I think rightly, sees more significance in our continuing inability to gain press or public attention in a crowded field.

It is some MPs' frustration at this, along with the current leadership's top-down style, that I believe has brought us to where we are today.

Thames Water tries to force Lib Dem MP to pay ruinous legal costs

The supreme court this week rejected Thames Water’s arguments that Charlie Maynard, the Liberal Democrat MP for Witney, should pay its legal costs after representing the interests of the British public in court.

The Guardian reports:

Maynard was granted unusual permission to represent the public interest in a court battle over an investor bailout for Thames Water. The bailout was approved, but Maynard appealed, arguing that the company, which serves 16 million customers in London and south-east England, should be taken into temporary government control. 

Thames Water’s barristers argued that he should be made personally liable for its expensive legal fees to "deter" future appeals to the supreme court.

It would be interesting to know what the supreme court and parliament think of this argument.

Maynard, says the Guardian, described Thames Water's actions as "retaliation" for pushing for government control of the crisis-hit utility

"I find it completely extraordinary,” he said. "What is the largest water company in the country doing trying to run an MP off the road, and saying they want to deter me and others from taking such actions?

"What is the government doing letting a bunch of people run the largest water utility in the country and behave this way?"

A good question. Labour's refusal to life a finger against Thames Water is starting to invite discreditable explanations.