Has David Ward been using his loaf?

3059005398_f9fd73e8e5_oAn interesting comments thread over at Liberal Democrat Voice on the David Ward issue includes a comment from ATF, with which I entirely agree subject to the rider that it is the disproportionate and imprecise expression of his opinions which are the issue:

He is entirely free to and has the right to express his opinion as part of society, that does not mean he can say so and still be a LibDem MP. No one has stopped him saying it, they have only stopped him saying it as a party MP.

The letter from Alistair Carmichael is very well written and argued. I reproduce it in full below.

The party leadership, which at all times in dealings with David Ward has, it seems, included, importantly, Simon Hughes, has been enormously patient with David. I fully support this latest move.

It may be me, but I do find myself wondering whether David Ward has been using sufficient intellectual resources at his disposal in this long-running episode. I refer to his brain.

David Ward MP
House of Commons

17th July, 2013

Thank you for coming to see Nick, Simon and me this afternoon.

You will recall that we discussed the report of your two meetings with the group convened by Simon, which included Jewish colleagues. As Nick indicated to you, that report was a largely positive one. In particular we were all pleased to note that you appreciated the need to use language in this debate that was proportionate and precise.

It was therefore with immense disappointment that we were presented with your public comment made on 13th July on Twitter in the following terms:

“Am I wrong or are am I right? At long last the #Zionists are losing the battle – how long can the #apartheid State of #Israel last?”

We were in unanimous agreement that questioning the continued existence of the State of Israel fails the test of language that is “proportionate and precise”.

We want to be clear with you that in this process we are not concerned about your views and opinions on the policies of present or previous Israeli governments, nor the situation in the Israeli-occupied territories, nor the strength of feeling with which your views are held. As we have sought to impress upon you repeatedly, we are having to decide on whether language you chose to use in January and February, and now this month, is language which brings the party into disrepute or harms the interests of the Party.

During the meeting, we put it to you that your most recent statement – which specifically questions the continuing existence of the State of Israel – is neither proportionate nor precise. Unfortunately, we considered your explanation to be unconvincing and it did not satisfy us that you understood the importance of conducting the debate on this issue at all times and in all places in terms that are proportionate and precise.

We wish to reiterate that this is not about telling you what your views should be. Indeed, we have all visited the occupied territories and we have all experienced an instinctive and liberal reaction to the humanitarian suffering we have witnessed. You will know that Nick, Simon and I have a consistent track record of being outspoken about illegal settlement activities of Israeli governments and the threat this poses to the two-state solution for which the party has long argued.

It is also immensely frustrating for us to find ourselves constantly responding to questions about disproportionate and imprecise language from you. These interventions cause considerable offence rather than addressing questions of political substance about the plight of the Palestinian people and the right of Israel’s citizens to live a life free of violence. It is extraordinarily difficult to gain traction in that debate at an effective political level if the expression of our concerns is undermined by the way your language misrepresents the view of our party.

Whilst we understand you have your own views about this process, which has been long and complicated, we also hope you recognise that we have given you every opportunity to reconcile the expression of your views with the party’s policy on a two-state solution. Unfortunately, you have not been able to do that.

Therefore, it is with regret that I have to inform you that we have decided to suspend the Liberal Democrat whip from you. This period of suspension will be with immediate effect until 13th September inclusive. I very much regret that it has been necessary to take this action.

Yours ever,

Alistair Carmichael

Photo by David Masters


2 thoughts on “Has David Ward been using his loaf?

  1. You say it is well argued. I read no argument, I read an opinion that is based upon protecting the reputation of the party. Perhaps if there was an argument refuting Wards opinions, it might have been met with more sympathy.

    • It’s not David Ward’s opinions that are the problem. It’s the way he’s been expressing them in imprecise and diaproportionate language.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s