Speaking at Liberal Democrat Spring Conference today, Liberal Democrat Leader and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said:

Check against delivery

This weekend is just the second time we've been together as a party again since those momentous events last May.

I've really enjoyed fielding questions, queries - yes, some criticisms too - from many of you over the last couple of days.

But it was a passing remark from one delegate that took me most by surprise.

'It's so nice to see you back' she said. 'I thought we'd lost you when you walked through that door of Number 10'.

Let me reassure you.

David Cameron hasn't kidnapped me. Although I gather some people were planning to this weekend.

My life may have changed a fair bit since the last election. But I haven't changed one bit.

We all know that we did not take the easy path last May. But we did take the right path.

Yes, being in Government with the problems we inherited is hard.

Explaining why we're having to make cuts is hard.

And being in Coalition with another party isn't always easy either.

Making compromises, settling differences, and going out to explain decisions which aren't exactly the ones we'd make on our own.

But every single day I work flat out to make sure that what we're doing is true to our values.

Because that's what I owe to the country. To the millions of people we represent.

And I owe it to you.

I never forget that it is because of you, your tireless work, that Liberal Democrats are now in Government. I never forget that we are a party of fairness, freedom, progress and reform.

We cherished those values in opposition. Now we're living by them in Government.

So yes, we've had to toughen up. But we will never lose our soul.

The slogan at this conference says: In government, on your side.

Some people have asked me: whose side, exactly?

My answer is simple.

We're on the side of the people I call Alarm Clock Britain. On the side of everyone who wants to get up and get on.

People who, unlike the wealthy, have no choice but to work hard to make ends meet.

People who are proud to support themselves but are only ever one pay cheque from their overdraft.

People who believe in self-reliance but who don't want to live in a dog-eat-dog world.

Who want everyone who can to work hard but they want children, the elderly and the vulnerable to be looked after too.

People who believe it is as wrong to opt out of tax as it is to opt out of work.

People who want the best for their children and need good local schools.

Who rely on our NHS.

Who want great public services but can't stand seeing government waste.

People who don't want politicians lecturing them on how to live.

And who are fed up with politicians taking their votes for granted.

These are the people liberals have always fought for.

Fought to get them votes, wages, jobs and welfare.

Lloyd George's People's Budget to make the wealthy pay their fair share and give a pension to all those who'd worked hard.

Keynes' plans to make our economy work for everyone and provide jobs for all.

Beveridge's radical blueprint for a welfare state to give security and dignity to every citizen

They may not have called it Alarm Clock Britain but they had the same people in mind.

The people liberals have always fought for. And we always will.

Those of you who were at the rally on Friday will remember that Ros Scott passed on to our new President, Tim Farron a copy of a book:

On Liberty by John Stuart Mill.

A reminder that we are the inheritors of a century and a half of radical liberal tradition.

We're not the heirs to Thatcher.

We're not the heirs to Blair.

We are the heirs to Mill, Lloyd George, Keynes, Beveridge, Grimond.

We are the true radicals of British politics.

That was true a hundred and fifty years ago and it is still true today.

In government, especially in difficult times, it is more important than ever to know whose side you are on.

When money is tight you have to make choices. And the only way to get them right is to know who you are making those choices for.

We are on the side of Alarm Clock Britain.

They have been failed for generations.

Failed by the tired tribalism of left and right.

Failed because both of those political traditions forget about people and place their faith in institutions.

For the left, an obsession with the state.

For the right, a worship of the market.

But as liberals, we place our faith in people.

People with power and opportunity in their hands.

Our opponents try to divide us with their outdated labels of left and right.

But we are not on the left and we are not on the right.

We have our own label: Liberal.

We are liberals and we own the freehold to the centre ground of British politics.

Our politics is the politics of the radical centre.

We are governing from the middle, for the middle.

In government. On your side.

The first order of business for this Government has of course been to tackle the budget deficit Labour left behind.

There is no hiding place.

There can be no ducking out.

But let's be honest, this is not what we're in politics for.

I didn't get into politics to balance the books.

It is what we have to do - so we can do what we want to do.

When we came into office, we were borrowing an extra £400m every single day.

£400m we were asking our children to pay back.

Everything I want for Britain -

Great schools.

World class hospitals.

A balanced economy.

Can only be built on strong foundations, and on sound public finances.

Now, some people say to me: I understand we have to stop spending so much.

I understand we have to sort out the deficit. But aren't we doing it too quickly?

In other words, why now?

Here's why:

By cutting the deficit decisively we have restored confidence in Britain.

Essential - because without confidence there can be no growth.

We have helped keep interest rates lower for longer, helping families, helping businesses.

It has meant making difficult choices.

But at least they have been our choices…

Not forced on us by the bond markets as they have been in Greece and Ireland.

And the risks of delay far outweigh the risks of swift action.

Labour's delay would certainly be costly and could be deadly.

And do you know what really annoys me about them?

They refuse to set out how they would make their own cuts.

Ed Miliband even boasted that their plans are: and I quote

"A blank sheet of paper."

They call for us to produce a Plan B.

But they haven't even got a Plan A.

Labour won't take responsibility.

They say they would cut but they won't tell us where.

They say their plan would be easier but they don't admit their plan would mean three extra years of cuts.

They want to be saying to the people in 2015: 'more cuts are needed'.

We want to say: we've done what needed to be done.

This is a question of fairness.

Above all, fairness to our children.

Racking up £400m of debt in their name every day is not right:

Our generation has a responsibility to the next.

When it comes to the deficit, the real question is not when, or if.

The real question is how.

We have protected spending on schools, on science and on health.

Found extra money for the pupil premium and apprenticeships

Given councils more financial freedom than they've ever had before

And we are increasing the amount we spend on overseas aid.

We won't turn away from the task of fixing the deficit.

But nor will we ever turn our backs on the world's poorest people.

We are not just fixing the deficit

We are laying the foundations of a stronger Britain and a fairer world.

In local government, I know the cuts are difficult.

But our councillors are showing what imagination, compassion and a bit of liberalism can do.

I cannot tell you how proud I am that not a single Liberal Democrat-led council is closing a single Sure Start children's centre.

Sheffield has had a budget cut of more than 8%

Every lost job is a loss we all feel keenly:

But the Liberal Democrat council here has kept compulsory redundancies down to 270.

And they have kept open every children's centre, library and swimming pool.

But cross the Pennines into Manchester, a council having to make almost identical savings.

You'll find a Labour council letting nearly 2,000 people go.

So don't let Labour take the moral high ground:

In councils up and down the country they're the ones making the decisions to cut services that could be protected.

Some people say Labour are making cuts for political reasons…

So they've got something to blame the coalition for in their local election campaigns.

Let me say this:

Anyone who sacks a member of staff or shuts down a public service for political purposes is a disgrace to politics and a disgrace to Britain.

So yes, we have to tackle the deficit. But we are not a cuts government.

If we get to 2015 and all we've done is pay off Labour's deficit, we will have failed.

Deficit reduction is just a fraction of the work we are undertaking.

Bit by bit, step by step

We are putting in place the cornerstones of a fairer, more liberal Britain…

The four cornerstones we put on the front of our manifesto:

a fair politics
a fair, sound economy
fair taxes
and fair chances for all our children

Maybe those changes don't make the news every night like the cuts do.

But they will be the liberal legacy of this Government.

The legacy each and every one of us will be proud to share.

Part of that legacy is proving that a new politics is not just possible -

It's better.

The old political establishment, on the left and on the right, hate what's happening to our politics.

The old left screaming betrayal every time politicians work across party lines or make a compromise.

The old right simply horrified to see Liberal Democrats in government at all.

We are showing that new politics, plural politics, coalition politics, can work for this country.

And it terrifies them.

There are enemies of reason across the political spectrum.

But there are friends of progress too - and the future of politics belongs to them.

It belongs to us.

People used to say coalition governments weren't British.

I am sure our coalition partners will forgive me for reminding them of their attempts, in the last days of the election campaign, to portray the horror show of a hung parliament.

Remember what they said? A hung parliament and coalition government would mean.

"Indecision"

"Weak government."

"A paralysed economy"

Well, it hasn't turned out like that, has it?

The Coalition Government is strong and it is radical.

The main criticism now made of the government is that we are doing too much.

That we are too ambitious.

Perhaps the new complaint about coalition governments is that coalitions are too strong.

But two parties sharing power in Westminster is just the start.

We need to share power with the people.

Let me quote you some words that inspired me many years ago:

'The old politics is dying.

The battle to decide what the new politics will be like is just beginning.

It is possible, just possible, that it will be a politics for people."

Shirley Williams wrote that three decades ago, as she and others set out to change the shape of British politics.

Shirley was an inspiration then, and is an inspiration today.

Shirley, perhaps it has taken longer than you thought, but here we are.

A new politics is beginning at last.

We must make it what you dreamt of: a politics for people.

The Coalition Government is shifting power from state to people:

Restoring civil liberties

Protecting personal freedom and privacy

Crushing the ID database

We're ending the house arrest of Labour's Control Orders

Guaranteeing freedom of the press

Undertaking the biggest devolution of financial power to Scotland since the formation of the United Kingdom

Tearing up the Whitehall rules that dictate to Town Halls how to spend local people's money

Running a successful referendum to give more power to Wales

Putting public health in the hands of local authorities.

Reforming party funding

Giving voters the right to sack corrupt MPs

Creating an elected House of Lords, finishing the job this party started a century ago

We passed the policies, conference after conference…

Now, finally, we're passing the laws.

And, of course, a referendum to change our voting system…

For the first time ever, the people of Britain choosing how to choose their MPs.

You can tell the 'No' campaign are desperate.

Making up ludicrous stories

Basically making it up as they go along.

What are they so scared of?

AV is a small change that makes a big difference.

It keeps what people like about the current system, like constituency MPs.

It simply puts people, rather than politicians, in charge.

Makes MPs work harder for your vote.

And helps end the scandal of safe seats for life.

On the Yes campaign we have the Liberal Democrats, Labour party supporters, the Green Party, UKIP, Plaid Cymru, the SNP, Friends of the Earth, Colin Firth, Eddie Izzard and Helena Bonham Carter.

On the No side of the argument are the BNP, the Communists, the Conservative Party.

John Prescott, Norman Tebbit and David Owen.

Tricky one.

It's simple.

If you want more duck houses: vote no.

If you want more democracy: vote yes.

In seven weeks, the British people can sound the last post for first past the post.

So we have seven weeks to get our message across:

If you want MPs to work harder for your vote, vote yes.

If you want politicians to listen to whole country, not just swing voters in marginal seats: vote yes.

If you want an end to jobs for life in safe seats, vote yes.

If you want a new politics, vote yes.

But it's not just a new politics we need.

We need a new economy.

The deficit is the most obvious symptom of an unbalanced, unsound, unfair economy.

An economy based on speculation and debt, rather than growth and investment.

We need an economy that works for Alarm Clock Britain, not just for the financial elite

We need an economy that works for us all.

Dealing with the deficit is just the first step to making that possible.

We have to get growth going again.

A new kind of growth.

The budget ten days from now will be a budget for growth:

For green growth.

For balanced growth.

Building the homes our children will need.

Getting young people into work.

Investing in the low carbon economy of the future.

No more dependency on the City of London and its coffers:

A flourishing future for the great cities of the North and the Midlands…

Cities which will be the engines of growth in our economy.

As they were in the past and as they will be again.

As for the banks, I agree with Mervyn King.

The Governor of the Bank of England says that it simply isn't sensible or right to have banks which are so big that if they fail we have to bail them out.

It's not good for the economy.

It's not good for taxpayers.

And it's not good for Britain.

Under the old model, a handful of financial institutions were able effectively to hold the country to ransom.

And who paid the biggest price for Labour's failure to regulate the banks properly?

Ordinary, hard-working taxpayers, that's who.

We will not let that happen again.

So we are fixing the banks.

We are going to take £10 billion more than Labour planned in taxes off them this parliament.

We're making sure they lend £10 billion to ordinary businesses this year alone.

Making them come clean about how much they pay their top people with the toughest disclosure regime in the world.

And - most importantly of all - we set up an independent Banking Commission to advise us on a sustainable future for the whole banking industry.

And we will act on what it recommends.

The banks must go back to being the servants of the economy, not the masters.

And people are fed up with a system where those on ordinary incomes have to pay taxes they can't afford.

While people at the top accumulate vast wealth no questions asked.

Forget the tired arguments of the left and right focusing solely on top-rate tax.

We need proper tax reform. Liberal tax reform.

My philosophy on tax is simple:

Less tax on aspiration, enterprise and hard work.

More tax on pollution and unearned wealth.

These are the principles which are already shaping government tax policy and will continue to do so in the years to come.

From next month, 900,000 people will stop paying income tax altogether.

Every basic rate taxpayer will pay £200 less a year in tax.

We will take real steps every year, including in the Budget in ten days time, towards our goal that nobody earning less than £10,000 pays any income tax at all.

From the front of our manifesto to the pay-packets of 23 million people.

Do you know who did that?

You did that - everyone of you in this hall.

You did it.

You designed the policy.

You voted for it at a conference like this one.

You campaigned for it.

And now it's happening.

So get out there and tell people about it.

On every doorstep and in every town.

An extra £200 in your pay packet starting next month.

By 2015, no tax on the first £10,000 you earn.

Labour think fairness means taking money off people and then making them fill out forms to get it back again.

We say no.

We say that you shouldn't pay tax until you've got enough to get by.

Work has got to pay.

So we're fixing welfare to make sure it always does - to break open the poverty trap Labour created.

As Beveridge himself said: "The State should not stifle incentive, opportunity or responsibility"

So our universal credit will send a simple, clear message:

Work pays.

Even an hour of work pays.

Do what you can, and we will help you.

There are of course some difficult welfare cuts coming.

We are building a system of welfare that is fair to recipients, and fair to the taxpayers.

A system Beveridge would be proud of.

And for pensioners, from next month our 'triple guarantee' will mean that everyone will be protected in retirement.

Never again the indignity of Labour's 75p pension rise.

Under our plans, pensioners will get £15,000 more in state pension over their retirement than under Labour.

And who did that?

You did that.

So tell every pensioner in your community, on your street, about it.

About the difference you made.

And let me also be clear.

Responsibility goes all the way up the income scale.

So we're going to make the top bankers come clean about their own pay and bonuses.

And we're going to make sure they pay their taxes.

We will always be just as tough on tax evasion at the top as on benefit fraud at the bottom.

Because ordinary workers in alarm clock Britain don't set up offshore trusts to avoid paying tax:

They pay their way - and that's a standard everyone should live by.

They also deserve world-class public services,

That will mean change, some of which may feel uncomfortable.

But we have to open up our public services if we want them to improve.

I know that many of you have concerns about the Government's plans for the health service.

What I need you to know is that all of us in Government are listening, and that we take those concerns seriously.

We have campaigned for years for an NHS that gives more power to professionals and to patients.

Do not believe for a moment Labour's scare-mongering about privatising the NHS.

No government of which I am part will tamper with the essential contract at the heart of the NHS: to care collectively for each other as fellow citizens.

World-class health care for all.

Publicly funded. Free.

Centred on patients, not profit. So yes to health reforms.

But no - always no - to the privatisation of health.

We want a great NHS.

And we want great schools, too.

A fair start for every child.

Under Labour, the opportunity gap widened - even as billions of pounds were invested in our public services.

That's their legacy of shame; the wasted money that could have made a difference.

We must do more, even though they left us with less.

Life chances should not be determined by background.

Prospects should never be narrowed by the postcode of the home you are born into.

Birth should never be destiny.

As liberals, we believe in an open society

Where the power to shape your own future is in your hands

Where all roads are open, to all of our children.

That is why Sarah Teather is providing free pre-school education to every two year-old from a poor backgrounds.

That is why we have introduced a pupil premium putting £2.5 billion extra into schools that take on the children most likely to fall behind.

That is why we are creating 350,000 new apprenticeships, helping people get a trade and get ahead.

And that is why we are opening up our universities to poorer students.

We are introducing a national scholarship scheme.

So that young people from any background can go to university.

It is no secret that we could not deliver our policy to abolish tuition fees.

And I know how deeply people regret that.

But though we have been divided, we can now unite, together, behind one clear mission:

To make university access fair, fair for all.

Right now, our best universities are almost monopolised by the better-off.

A pupil at a private school is fifty-five times more likely to get into Oxford or Cambridge than a pupil who qualifies for free school meals.

But what's even more scandalous is that there are still some people in these institutions who shrug their shoulders and say:

That's just the way things are.

They are wrong and they will have to change.

We are insisting that universities wanting to charge more for courses have to open their doors more, more than ever.

And let me be clear to the universities…

Open your doors or we will cut your fees back down to size.

No more blaming the system.

Fair access: fair access now. It isn't just the universities.

Many of our liberal ambitions will be opposed by powerful interests.

But we are used to it.

We have faced them throughout our party's history.

Let's face them again.

The reform-blockers in the House of Lords, clinging to their unaccountable powers

The MPs in Westminster opposing voting reform that threatens their safe seats

The political party machines, afraid to wean themselves off big money

The unions standing in the way of reforms to give patients and parents more power

The financiers in the City of London, resisting fairer regulation and transparency

All looking out for themselves, protecting their turf, trying to close the doors against change.

Well, we're not having it.

Who stands up for the interests of the people without a lobbying group?

I'll tell you who does.

We do.

And we are not going to let them down.

I do not underestimate the scale of the tasks we face.

These are testing times for the country.

Testing times for the Government.

Testing times for us as a party.

Let's be honest, after seven decades in opposition, 2010 was not the easiest time to return to Government.

But we have shown ourselves to be up to the task.

We will not shrink from our responsibilities as a party of government.

We will not flinch from taking the difficult decisions to put this country back on track.

We will not miss this opportunity to build a more liberal Britain.

I know that being in the Coalition Government means us having to take some difficult, even painful, decisions.

But clinging to the comfort blanket of opposition would not have made life more comfortable for our fellow citizens.

It would have been an abdication of responsibility.

Never, ever, doubt the value of being in Government.

Would a Government without Liberal Democrats have ended child detention?

Got an extra ten billion out of the banks?

Would it have held a referendum on the voting system?

Or put up capital gains tax?

Ordered an inquiry into torture?

Brought in a pupil premium?

Or replaced Control Orders?

Would a Government without Liberal Democrats have cut taxes for the poorest?

I don't think so.

In just a few weeks time, we'll be taking the liberal message to Scotland and Wales, and in council seats up and down the land.

When you go into this election campaign - and people are asking what difference we have made to government -

You go ahead and tell them.

Tell them that this government is getting our economy moving.

Tell them that this government is getting the banks lending.

Tell them that we are cutting income tax.

And raising the state pension.

Investing in our children.

Renewing our political system.

And restoring civil liberties.

Tell them how we are working to build a liberal Britain:

Tell them:

We are in government.

And we are on your side.

Commenting, Co-chair of the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Committee on Home Affairs, Justice and Equalities, Tom Brake said:

"Today Liberal Democrats reasserted the belief that a properly funded legal aid system where access to justice is not denied to those who can't afford it is the mark of a civilised and democratic society.

"We want to ensure that the potential impacts of cuts are fully assessed before they are introduced, the legal aid budget doesn't bear costs which should fall elsewhere in the system. We want to look at making savings through reducing the prison population and investing in more restorative justice.

"We realise that the economic mess left by Labour has placed strains on all areas of public spending. Liberal Democrats are committed to fighting against the cuts to legal aid instigated by the last government."

Liberal Democrat Lawyers Association
Mover: Alistair Webster QC
Summation: To be announced

Conference notes that:

I. The party and the coalition government are committed to the promotion of civil liberties, social justice and the elimination of unnecessary and intrusive state powers brought in by previous governments.

II. Access to the courts and redress to protect and enforce human and civil rights is an essential component of those rights, as recognised by the European Convention on Human Rights.

III. Those least advantaged in society are often those who most need assistance in getting access to the courts and legal advice.

IV. A properly funded system whereby access to justice and the courts is not denied to those otherwise unable to bear the costs is a mark of a modern, civilised and democratic society.

V. Steps taken by the Labour Government in relation to cutting legal aid provision were ill-considered and inadequately trialled, as was repeatedly found by the relevant Select Committees.

While recognising the many competing claims upon public funds and the poor economic circumstances bequeathed by the Labour government, conference calls upon the government to ensure that before any further cuts are made to the Legal Aid budget or new schemes adopted:

A. Full consideration, assessments and trials are carried out as to any proposed changes or reductions before they are introduced; including: i) A full examination of how the administration of justice can become more cost effective without reducing the quality of that justice. ii) An examination of alternative methods of funding access to justice.

B. Those discussions, trials and assessments should study the impact upon:

i) The access to courts for those on low incomes.

ii) The availability and sustainability of a suitable and adequate number of appropriately qualified and experienced lawyers prepared to undertake publicly funded work.

iii) The effect of such changes upon the sustainability of legal service providers such as Citizens Advice Bureaux and the burden placed on charities with limited funds providing support facilities to those who, being unable to afford legal representation, have to represent themselves in civil and matrimonial matters.

C. A more strategic approach is adopted by public authorities towards provision, funding and delivery of legal and advice services in communities on issues such as welfare benefits, debt, housing and employment.

Conference further calls upon the government to:

1. Ensure that the legal aid budget is not made to bear costs which should fall elsewhere, by:

a) Ensuring that the costs of acquitted persons do not fall upon the legal aid funds.

b) Repealing section 41 (4) and (5) Proceeds of Crime Act, 2002 (which prevents restrained funds being used by the person restrained in his own defence).

c) Enabling the courts to use cost orders against public or private bodies which bring proceedings unsuccessfully, or unnecessarily (such as acting in breach of pre-action protocols).

2. Make the necessary savings from the budget of the Ministry of Justice by significantly reducing the prison population and investing more in community orders and penalties and constructive alternatives to criminalisation.

Amendment One

18 conference representatives
Mover: Adam Cain

At end (after line 43), add:

Furthermore Conference calls for the government to:

I) Before undertaking any further changes to Legal Aid, commission an independent study on the overall cost to public funds due to the impact on other budgets and other government departments as a consequence of any loss of access to adequate legal advice by those with housing, immigration, employment and education cases.

II) Ensure that proper consideration be given for the scope for savings to be made by improvements in Legal Services Commission decision-making and by reducing the costs of appeals by raising the quality of first decisions by public authorities.

III) Reject any changes to Legal Aid which lead to significant reductions in access to justice, a lack of sustainability of public funded legal services or false economies as a result of knock-on costs to public funds of cuts to legal aid.

Applicability: England and Wales.

Federal Executive
Mover: James Gurling
Summation: Gordon Lishman

Conference notes:

1. The Liberal Democrats decision after the 2010 General Election to join a coalition government with the Conservative Party in order to take the action needed to deal with the severe financial and economic crisis.
2. The inclusion in the Coalition Agreement of many Liberal Democrat policies from the Liberal Democrat 2010 Election Manifesto and the subsequent success by Liberal Democrat Ministers in implementing these policies.
3. The continuing strong and effective leadership of the Party's Leader and his team.
4. The importance of communicating to the public the distinctiveness of the Liberal Democrats and our contribution to the programme of the coalition Government.

Conference asserts that:

A. The Liberal Democrats will fight the next General Election in Great Britain as an independent Party without any pacts or agreements with any other party and presenting our Manifesto as the clear and distinct basis for liberal government.
B. The Liberal Democrats will fight elections as an independent Party for the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly, the European Parliament and local authorities throughout Great Britain.
C. The Liberal Democrats intend to enter the next General Election campaign with no preference for potential future coalition partners.
D. Following the next General Election, the Liberal Democrats will decide on their position in relation to government bearing in mind:

i) The will of the British people expressed at the ballot box.
ii) The Party's Manifesto.
iii) The political position and capacity to govern of other parties.
iv) Where relevant circumstances apply] the ability to reach an agreed programme of acceptable policies to ensure a stable Coalition Government.


Conference endorses the five key goals of the Federal Executive's Strategic Plan for the Party, specifically:


I. To build the Party's appeal for the 2015 General Election, ensuring and communicating the effectiveness and distinct identity of the Party both as part of an effective government and as a strong and distinctive voice inside and outside the coalition.
II. To win elections in 2011 and beyond, including the referendum on the Alternative Vote, elections to the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly, local authorities and the European Parliament.
III. To reflect more effectively the diversity of the Party and the country in our elected representatives at every level.
IV. To build further and to maintain a cohesive Party, building capacity, membership and support and communicating effectively with all members and leaders.
V. To widen and build the Liberal Democrat movement, recognising the wider support in communities and interests for liberal ideas and principles.

To assist in the party projecting a distinct and effective identity, Conference:

1. Urges all Liberal Democrats, including parliamentarians and ministers, to demonstrate to the wider public the specific contribution that we have made to the programme of the Coalition Government by identifying:

a) Those policies which derive from the Liberal Democrat's existing and emerging policy platform.
b) Those aspects of Government policy which Liberal Democrats have changed to be more consistent with our principles and beliefs
c) Those aspects of Government policy which originated from the Conservative party policy platform

2. Calls for the programme of the Coalition Government in the second half of the Parliament to include Liberal Democrat priorities drawn from our manifesto and policies, and for such a programme to be agreed by the Federal Executive and Federal Policy Committee.

3. Calls for there to be appropriate consultation through the Federal Executive and Federal Policy Committee, when significant new Government policies are proposed, which are not included in the Coalition agreement and which conflict with Liberal Democrat policy or principles.

4. Calls on the Federal Executive and the Federal Policy Committee to:

a) Review, in consultation with the Parliamentary parties, the challenges of coalition which have an impact on the independence of the party, its policy position or its freedom of political movement.
b) Report back on whether the existing constitutional provisions and other arrangements are sufficiently democratic.
c) Propose recommendations, for any constitutional amendments or other protocols which may be needed, in time for debate in September 2011.

5. Calls for the development of a radical distinctive and progressive set of Liberal Democrat policies for the next election, and such policy, although informed by the programme and record of the coalition Government, should be derived totally independently of the views of our coalition partners.

6. Requests the relevant party Committees and departments to develop ways of working that enable us to campaign effectively on a national level against all our future opponents well before the next general election.

Conference re-asserts that the UK Liberal Democrats are based firmly in the historical and global traditions of the liberal and social democratic philosophy and beliefs and commits the Party to developing a promoting the clear narrative setting out what modern liberalism is and can do.
Applicability: Federal

30 conference representatives
Mover: Prateek Buch
Summation: Naomi White

Conference notes:

A. The importance of a healthy banking system to the future of Britain's economy.
B. The regrettable failure of decades of 'light-touch' regulation that socialises risk and privatises extraordinary profits at the expense of sustainable investment and growth.
C. That Liberal Democrats have long emphasised the need to tackle disproportionate rewards for risky financial behaviour and the concentration of power in the hands of a few in the City of London.
D. That the Independent Banking Commission is likely to postulate significant reforms later this year.

Conference therefore welcomes the aims of the recent 'Project Merlin' agreement with the UK's leading banks to:

i) Increase the credit available to British businesses.
ii) Improve transparency over executive pay.
iii) Reduce the overall bonus pool.

However, Conference is concerned that:

a) The 'Merlin' reforms are insufficient.
b) The language of the 'Merlin' agreement is weak and will be hard to enforce, particularly with regards to net lending to business and transparency on bankers' remuneration, with no disclosure requirement for the highest earners not on the Board.

Conference therefore calls on Liberal Democrats in Parliament, and most importantly those in Government, to ensure that the recommendations of the Vickers Commission are carried out promptly and in full. Conference calls for:

1. Banks supported by the taxpayer to be broken up into smaller, safer entities, with effective competition restored and full disclosure of all pay packages larger than that of the Prime Minister while they remain State-owned.

2. All large-scale banks to divest their investment banking arms, with no explicit or implicit State guarantee for this activity.

3. Pay transparency to be extended to highly paid traders and other employees, not just Executives, with salary and bonuses that exceed an agreed ratio to median salary to be published alongside an explanatory justification.

4. Large financial institutions to hold greater capital reserves and to make 'living will' arrangements to act as stabilisers in the event of further market failures such as those seen during the recent financial meltdown.

5. The imminent Green Investment Bank to be a fully functional bank and not a fund, securing much-needed investment in low-carbon technology and jobs.

6. Measures to tackle financial exclusion for individuals and small business, with a Basic Banking Guarantee; a public bank administered through Post Offices; a commitment from high street banks to provide fee-free ATMs within walking distance of all deprived communities; as well as reducing unfair bank, credit card and loan charges.

7. Greater support for local credit unions and mutuals.

Applicability: Federal.

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Leader and Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg said:

"I am delighted that Tim will be spearheading our campaign for a Yes to Fairer Votes.

"This referendum is an historic chance to give voters more say and is something so many British people have fought so long for.

"Tim will lead an excellent campaign and I look forward to working with him."

Commenting further, Tim Farron said:

"This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for us to change our voting system, to make our democracy fairer.

"A yes on May 5th will make MPs work harder for your vote and put an end to jobs for life in politics.

"I look forward to going out on the doorstep with my party, other parties an from all other parties and none to make this chance a reality."

Commenting, Chair of the Diversity Engagement Group, Baroness (Sal) Brinton said:

"Increasing the diversity among our elected representatives at Westminster is a priority for the Liberal Democrats in the coming electoral cycle.

"The party's backing for the creation of a Leadership Programme for outstanding candidates from under-represented groups will be a huge step towards this goal.

"I look forward to working with our Diversity team in making the Leadership Programme a great success."

Federal Executive
Mover: Jo Shaw
Summation: Baroness Falkner

Conference notes with concern that at the General Election in 2010, the party did not improve the number of women MPs, and does not have any black or minority ethnic (BAME) MPs at present. Conference also notes that in June 2010, the President and Leader asked Federal Executive to commission a Candidates Review, to be written by Sal Brinton, and following the Diversity Motion passed at Federal Conference in September 2010, the Federal Executive asked Sal Brinton to extend the scope of her review to address the issues covered in the motion, and to propose a course of action for the party to address the diversity deficit, and to improve it at the next general Election.

Conference further notes that the Party is clearly divided over the issue of compulsory short lists (all women short lists, and a percentage of BAME candidates).

Conference therefore agrees:

1. That Diversity champions should be mainstreamed throughout the party: the only way to improve the diversity of our MPs is to improve the diversity of our party itself:

a) Regions will set themselves targets for improving the diversity of approved candidates, Prospective Parliamentary Candidates (PPCs), Assessment Centre staff and Returning Officers.
b) Regions and local parties will actively encourage members and supporters from under-represented groups to become more active in the party, including standing for election.

2. The creation of a Leadership Programme for outstanding candidates from under-represented groups, which will:

a) Have a maximum number of approved candidates, with a minimum of 30 by the end of 2011, and within that, 50% of the places will be reserved for women, and 20% for those from BAME backgrounds, 10% for those with disabilities and finally ensuring that all other under-represented groups are considered within the remaining 20% of places including those who are openly 'out' Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender candidates and those from lower income backgrounds.
b) Provide advanced training and support, particularly in media, leadership and team building skills, and fundraising.
c) Provide mentoring and coaching from the moment they are approved as a candidate until after the election day.
d) Offer them opportunities to shadow a Parliamentarian.
e) Raise funds to provide practical support to PPCs from under-represented groups.

3. Selection for the Leadership Programme will be based on competencies, references and an interview with the Programme Panel, and membership of the Panel will be agreed and might include an MP, a Peer, a Federal Executive representative, a Campaigns representative and a member of the Diversity Engagement Group, with the process to be run by the Diversity Unit at Federal Party Headquarters.

4. Where candidates from the Leadership Programme apply to a priority seat at least two candidates from the Leadership Programme should be shortlisted on their short list.

5. Groups of Development Seats should get together to advertise and recruit PPCs in clusters, using the Region's targets for shortlisting (eg 50% women candidates, and a relevant local ethnic minority percentage.

6. The Federal Executive should review progress of the Leadership Programme and the other arrangements in the Candidates Review in 2013, and consider more urgent action if not sufficient candidates from under-represented groups have been selected in our priority seats.

Applicability: Federal.

Commenting, Co-Chair of the Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Committee on Home Affairs, Justice and Equality, Tom Brake said:

"Our current approach to youth justice is not working. When thirty percent of children in custody have been in the care of the local authority and a quarter of under-17s have the literacy and numeracy levels of an average seven-year old, you realise that the system is failing the most vulnerable.

"With re-offending rates as high as 80%, it is also abundantly clear that the current system fails to prevent crime and ensure young offenders are rehabilitated.

"We need to look at youth justice in the round. We will not tackle youth crime and re-offending without solutions spanning early intervention through to specialised panels able to address special educational needs, abuse or neglect or mental health issues.

"This is what Conference backed today and this is what I'll be fighting for in Parliament."

Federal Policy Committee
Mover: Tom Brake MP (Co-Chair of the Parliamentary Party Committee on Home Affairs, Justice and Equalities)
Summation: Linda Jack (Chair of the Policy Working Group)

Conference notes that although it is a minority of young people that commit crimes and acts of anti-social behaviour, those actions can lead to fear and misery in local communities.

Conference also notes that while young people are more likely than older people to be the perpetrators of crime they are disproportionately the victims of crime as well.

Conference welcomes the fact that from October 2002 to November 2010, the number of children in custody fell by a third from 3,175 to 2,045.

Conference endorses Policy Paper 99, Taking Responsibility as a statement of the party's key policies on youth justice and especially welcomes the proposals to:

1. Invest in preventing youth crime by:

a) Supporting children with misconduct problems before they reach school through Surestart services.
b) Promoting a 'whole family' approach towards offending children by engaging parents, grandparents and others to take responsibility for them through family mentoring schemes like those used in New York.
c) Encouraging Local Government, the voluntary sector and local communities to offer the opportunity for young people to engage in valuable diversionary activities.
d) Establishing systems across government to gather evidence of and to measure the long-term savings that accrue from early intervention so as to promote future investment.

2. Empowering local communities to better deal with the policing of youth crime by:

a) Encouraging Police Officers to use their discretion to deal with youth offending such as by adopting a problem-solving approach rather than unnecessarily arresting young people who admit responsibility.
b) Giving local people a direct say in crime and policing in their areas through the empowering of Police Authorities, including the right to set local policing priorities.

3. Ensure more appropriate treatment of children in the justice system by:

a) Recognising that the criminal courts are not the most effective place to deal with younger children suspected of committing criminal acts and, accordingly, raising the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales to 14.
b) Holding those under 14 who know right from wrong accountable for their criminal acts through the use of panels of specially trained people with the power to impose a range of measures, including exceptionally secure accommodation, with the aim of reducing re-offending and avoiding the imposition of a damaging lifelong criminal record.
c) Abolishing Anti-Social Behaviour Orders for young people in favour of local solutions that actually work in dealing with unacceptable conduct, such as Acceptable Behaviour Contracts; and the use of the courts or specially trained panels for serious criminal behaviour.
d) Decriminalising children in circumstances where they are best treated as victims, for example in the case of child prostitutes.
e) Protecting young people through educating them rather than by criminalising them in the context of victimless crimes, such as in the case of some consensual sexual acts between those under 16.

4. Promoting effective alternatives to custody by:

a) Reserving the use of secure accommodation for repeat offenders, those for whom previous sentences have failed and those considered a danger to themselves or others.
b) Stopping its use for technical breaches of license, which are better dealt with by the Youth Offending Team.
c) Increasing the use of Intensive Fostering as an alternative to custody.
d) Providing stringent, intensive mental health and drug and alcohol treatment to those young people who need it.
e) Extending the use of Restorative Justice programmes such as the Northern Ireland Youth Conference System, which require the offender to confront their behaviour and make reparation.
f) Extending the use of other community sentences where possible.
g) Encouraging the devolution of custody costs so as to provide a financial incentive for Local Authorities and others to invest in community-based measures to prevent further offending.

5. Putting rehabilitation at the heart of custodial provision by:

a) Ensuring that such accommodation is as small and local as is safely feasible to ensure that young people are not institutionalised and can maintain links with their family and community.
b) Banning painful 'distraction techniques' and permitting the use of physical restraint only to prevent harm or escape.
c) Requiring local authorities to be responsible for the education of children in custody to ensure that they continue to study.
d) Implementing a targeted rehabilitation programme for offenders involved in gun, knife and gang crime.
e) Improving the provision of mental health and drug and alcohol related treatment in custody.

6. Assisting those leaving custody to re-build their lives by:

a) Ensuring that they have suitable accommodation upon release by changing Housing Benefit rules to allow provision to be made beforehand and by guaranteeing them the same entitlements as those leaving care.
b) Promoting mentoring schemes that work with the offender whilst in custody but which ensure that they can be supported upon release by, for example, having them met at the gate if they choose, taken to their new accommodation and assisted in finding work.
c) Ensuring that, save for the most serious violent or sexual offences, convictions for those who were under 18 at the time are treated as 'spent' after 12 months and need not be disclosed save for reasons of public safety or for applications for jobs involving young people or vulnerable adults.

7. Adopting a new approach to 18-24 year olds by applying some of the same proposals including, for example, the measures to divert young people from the criminal justice system, a replacement of short custodial sentences with more effective community ones and, where custody is inevitable, holding them separately from older offenders and providing effective post-release support.

8. In addition, conference is concerned about the introduction of Labour's so called 'Gangbo' as a civil Order and notes the proposals for a new Criminal Behaviour Order. Whilst welcoming the coalition government's abolition of ineffective ASBOs, conference further calls on Liberal Democrats in government to ensure that the new Order is not a mere change of label, and that no Order shall be granted without the rigorous application, as the name implies, both of the criminal rules of evidence and procedure and the criminal standards of proof.

Applicability: England and Wales, except 6 a) (lines 67-69) which is Federal.