SIR Ed Davey has suffered a high-profile defeat over election tactics at the Liberal Democrat conference on the eve of his keynote speech.
A plan by the party leadership to ditch a previous commitment to a national housing target for England was blocked in a rebellion led by the party’s Young Liberals group.
The group tabled an amendment that kept a 2021 target of 380,000 new homes per year despite warnings the Tories would put it on their leaflets in the general election.
The party hierarchy fears the target could put off Tory voters in so-called Blue Wall seats across rural southern England who don't want new housing developments.
The LibDem leadership had wanted to set a target solely for social housing of 150,000 new homes a year, housing which is more likely to be in urban areas.
READ MORE: Yousaf says buck stops with him if SNP lose by-election
But after a passionate and rowdy debate in which many younger speakers spoke of being unable to buy a home because of a lack of supply, the party membership backed the rebel amendment.
Two other rebel amendments to the leadership's housing policy paper were also approved on the penultimate day of the party’s gathering in Bournemouth.
During the debate, Janey Little, chair of the Young Liberals, said: “We as young people feel ignored and let down by those at the top of our party.
“This is not the first time we have had to plead our case.”
The party ultimately approved a motion saying: “Conference maintains its commitment to a national housing target of 380,000 new homes per year, to set a clear direction of travel and to indicate serious intent to address the housing crisis.”
Lord applause rang out as the result was declared.
The defeat was a blow to Sir Ed Davey, who is due to make his closing speech tomorrow, and already faces internal criticism for parking talk of rejoining the EU.
Former UK leader Tim Farron was booed for calling national targets “Thatcherism”.
He told delegates: “If there was a credible amendment today to build 380,000 council houses a year, I would back it.
“I reckon I can get away with being a rebel again now, I do not give a monkey’s, but amendment one does not do that.
“It is a vague and vacuous target, and we have had vague targets for years – they are not radical, they are not liberal, they are not new, they are not effective.
“Vague targets let and empower developers to build the houses that they want but never … the homes that we desperately need, especially that young people actually need.
“The authors of amendment one do not mean it, but it is pure Thatcherism.”
READ MORE: SNP MP threatens legal action against party in selection row
Mr Farron said a national target would be an “electoral gift to the Tories” including in the Mid Bedfordshire by-election caused by Tory MP Nadine Dorries quitting.
He went on: “I will take the hit to stand up against nimbyism, but I will not take an electoral hit to fight the corner of corporate investors.”
LibDrm peer Lord Stunnell called the amendment for a national target the “most right-wing I’ve seen at … conference since we sent Liz Truss to work undercover”.
He said: “Housing developers are in it for the money. Whatever the target, it won’t move the dial. They will always aim to build slightly fewer homes than people want to buy.”
He called on delegates to back the motion to instead adopt a target to build 150,000 new social homes a year, adding: “Don’t spoil it with a pointless gesture.”
MP Helen Morgan, the LibDem housing spokesperson, was also heckled for saying the party would “build 150,000 new homes for social rent every year”, leading to shouts of “where?”.
There were also boos when Ms Morgan said: “National housing targets do not work. They didn’t work a decade ago … they won’t work in the future.”
However many speakers in favour of the amendment warned that ditching the natiional target would be electorally toxic, especially among the young.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here