Really excellent to discover your blog.

I was on the LDYS executive with you back in 1998. My memory of you is of some one who was very hard working and always available to talk to, though several of our colleagues did not really seem to do much at all. For such a small organisation there seemed to be an awful lot of backbiting.

Why exactly has the youth organisation relaunched? Is it just a change of name?

Lee

Paul: I’m sorry that was your first experience. I would say that some of the conferences in recent years sound far worse than anything we ever had during my time. The reason, for example, we introduced a rule that constitutional amendments would have to go through two consecutive conferences was to discourage people from submitting constitutional amendments (some people seemed – and continue – to consider it their personal role in life to submit vast swathes of amendments every six months). We did, I admit, never envisage anyone would be mad enough to try and hold two conferences over a single weekend in order to get around that rule.

But ultimately, ALL conferences are bad first experiences because generally conferences of youth organisations are awful, cliquey, factional, petty things. I’m not aware of a single exception to that rule. My first LDYS conference – which involved Phil Jones (now Taylor – who you may have seen embroiled in the Peter Hain funding row) trying to win the election for Chair just so he could defect to the Labour Party in as high profile and as damaging a way to the party as possible – was particularly fraught. My experience then, and since, is that the “trendies” were just as guilty of making the event an unwelcoming place as those unhip souls who thought that working to agreed sets of rules and taking things seriously was important.

I can guarantee that Liberal Youth will continue to have tiresome debates at its conferences – that’s youth politics for you. The trick is not to keep trying to reform them (although I still think you only need one a year – you can have another weekend for doing other things – and a recognition of the limits of the organisation’s ability to do policy would be nice) but to provide better jumping on points. That was the thinking behind Activate, the Involve “open days” we set up and Westminster Day (to a lesser extent). It was the thinking behind the Liberal Youth launch on Tuesday.

Andy: say what you like about me, but please stop trying to perpetuate this lie that I am criticising Liberal Youth or the launch event on Tuesday. I’m not. I don’t see what is wrong with highlighting what has gone wrong in the past and urging them not to repeat those mistakes. Just because my analysis differs from yours it doesn’t make it any less valid.

The newly relaunched organisation strikes me as engaging, fun and outward-looking. Whether or not that contrasts or compares favourably with any year of LDYS is not something I can comment on. All I can say is I’ve had many positive experiences engaging with the people involved, as I hope have you.

My first LDYS conference was like a duller, more austere version of James Joyce’s schooldays. I do hope no future members have a similar experience.

Whoever the new chair is I suggest go for a drink/food with a few people tell em your ideas and see what they think. Never did me any harm, in fact I even made some pretty good friends out of it. James and Andy included, tho I’ve always thought it would be so much more fun if I armed you both with some sort of weaponary before you starting arguing.

Well, no, because, you’re quite right. That was “Bah, damn, you’re quite right.” Steady on, old bean.