Reaction to Charles Kennedy's resignation - why the Liberal Democrats are still the nice party

Ignoring our more recent crises for this first blog, I felt I just had to respond to certain sections of the media who portrayed Charles Kennedy's downfall as being the result of a cruel Brutus-esque plot which they considered unecessary as Kennedy had led us to our best election result for decades.

Nobody takes for granted our recent electoral success. That's one of the reasons why Kennedy was put under so much pressure from his colleagues. Politics is an ever-changing landscape, and a succesful party needs to stay on its toes and adapt to the changing circumstances. At the next election, there will be a rebranded Conservative party under David Cameron, and in most likelyhood a more united and optimistic Labour Party under Gordon Brown. It will hardly be enough for us to just pick up various protests votes over issues like student fees and the Iraq war. We need to set out our own alternative vision (stating our commitment to civil liberties, the environment, localism and real social justice) more clearly and that requires a strong, even passionate, leader. On more than one occasion in the past, Kennedy declared that he could rise to such a challenge. He did not.

It has become apparent that one of the reasons for this was his own personal battle with alcoholism. Combined with the pressures imposed on him by his young family, and the fact that his constituency, and home, is about as far away from Westminster as you can get, it is no wonder that he did not have the time and energy to pick up this mantle of energetic leadership.

When you consider that Kennedy's alcoholism was well-known amongst senior members of the party, and that his various absences previously explained by personal or family illness were as genuine excuses as what is written on the average extenuating circumstances form; it is a wonder that he wasn't pushed sooner. One cannot even begin to imagine the frustration caused to members such as Menzies Campbell and Vince Cable, who often had to cover for Kennedy at the last minute, despite not having been sufficiently briefed. The Independent on Sunday even reported one incident where aides considered it neccesary to lock Kennedy in his parliamentary office to prevent him turning up drunk to Prime Ministers' Questions. He was also reportedly bundled off stage by loyal MPs after a talk at the LSE last November where he failed to hide his inebriation, in order that he would not embarrass himself further when answering questions. There is no way in hell that the Liberal Democrats can claim to be the real opposition when such shenanigans are occurring. And the more incidents that occurred, the more likely that an embarrassing situation would be caught on camera and paraded over the media, thereby damaging the party brand.

So if the Liberal Democrats really were the new nasty party, they would have forced Kennedy out long ago, rather than dilley-dallied around with the issue. It seems that since last summer, many senior party figures were making less than complimentary remarks about Kennedy's leadership to the press in the hope that he would step down voluntarily. He failed to take the hint. Still no-one wanted to put the knife in. A letter calling for him to step down was prepared before Christmas, with almost half the Lib Dem front bench as signatories, but nobody wished to deliver it. It was a former aide, rather than an MP, who took action, submitting a report to ITN News on Kennedy's alcohol problem. Kennedy was informed, and took the action of admitting to his drinking habit in a televised statement, which you probably all remember. There were two elements to this speech which really got up my nose.

Firstly, Kennedy claimed that he'd kept it a secret in order to deal with it at a personal level, but since he hadn't had a drink in eight weeks (a claim denied by some at Cowley Street), he felt ready to talk about it. Bollocks. It is quite clear that he was only trying to save face in the light of the ITN report.

Secondly, he called a leadership contest and then offered his candidature. It was this that really made me lose respect for Kennedy. It was an incredibly selfish act which could have split the party. Anyone who declared their candidature would have looked like a back-stabber and failed to win support, especially given that all three front-runners; Menzies Campbell, Mark Oaten and Simon Hughes; had all previously guaranteed that they would not run against Kennedy. Indeed, it is noticeable that Vince Cable, who may have run, did not, and his name headed the signatures on the aformentioned letter which was eventually delivered to Kennedy a couple of days after this speech, prompting his overdue resignation.

Some of the signatories, including Sarah Teather and Norman Lamb, described themselves as personal friends of Kennedy's, who thought he should go for his own sake, as they didn't think he could cope with alochol, a baby, and David Cameron. I have seen people say that they will never vote Liberal Democrat again in the light of what happened to Kennedy. I cannot see the logic. The fault was not that MPs were nasty, but that they were too nice and tip-toed around forcing him out for too long, out of sentimental respect for his previous successes. For me, this just reinforces my opinion that the Liberal Democrats really are the nice party.