Compared to some, I’ve been in the Liberal Democratic Party for all of five minutes. As I’ve already said, I’m yet to be blooded in the cut and thrust of campaigning, conference and the rest of the hard work and grind that goes into making the party - indeed, all parties - work. I have been impressed by the hard work put in by Liberal Democrat activists over the years, and I remain deeply enamoured of their commitment to the party and the causes it serves and advances. 

But the party is facing difficult times - falling vote shares, losing control of councils, damaging stories in the press and the rest of it. This article springs partly from that, but also from a number of blog posts and from the recent report by the Constitution Unit into the performance of the government. I can think of no reason why the party cannot deliver the energy and commitment needed to overcome these challenges, but I do think that there needs to be a clear direction for change internally. Policy wise, we do and should continue to be democratic, open and inclusive in the way we formulate policy. 

What I propose, and I hope to at least stimulate some debate with this, are more procedural reforms to the way that the party works internally, and the way it delivers its message to the wider public. I may have totally missed the mark; I am willing to admit fault in that I lack experience of party operations and these are just first impressions. But I hope my first impressions are of use to the party moving forwards.

1. Language. I concur with those who have suggested we need to be more forthright in our language. The words right and wrong are highly charged, but we should not shy away from using them in policy debates with other parties. We must draw absolutely clear lines in the sand and, when we cross them (as with tuition fees) we must be seen to be kicking and screaming. Be clear, direct and firm in language. 
2. Funding. It was great news that we managed to raise a significant sum from private donations - more than Labour - over the last 6 months. But without short money and without the unions that back Labour, this is virtually all we have. We must not lose sight of that. The party absolutely must secure new, extremely large, sources of finance. Hopefully, a more distinct identity and other procedural reforms will help draw those in. 
3. Back Office. I hear constant talk of the dramatic thinning of Liberal Democrat office staff. I recognise that the lack of funding makes this inevitable, but we are hamstringing ourselves through this process. No party can be in government without a powerful and sizeable back office staff - we need to examine ways to ensure we have that within our means. This is the gritty reality of power - you need people to keep you on course.
4. Pre-emption. When Henry VII killed Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth, he put the body on display so all knew that the king was dead. We need to do this - to stop responding to policies after they’ve been launched, and to start publicly killing off policies and letting the world know we have done so. Preserving your identity is a two-way street - not only do you push what you like, you block what you don’t. If we can kill off a few abstinence bills or the like, good. But really, we need:
5. Focus. Constitutional reform, social mobility and climate change are key to Britain’s future success. But voters don’t rank them highly - they worry about the NHS, about schools and about crime. We need to speak first and foremost on these issues, laying out a clearly liberal and cohesive policy platform - where we agree and disagree with the Tories, what solutions we can mutually propose and what we would do if we were the majority party. 

Language, Funding, Back Office, Pre-emption and Focus. I have no doubt that this party has the capacity to deliver on reform based on these three tracks. We can raise more funding if we are more distinctive. We can use this to rebuild our policy units and corps of advisors. We can use these to hone our message. One can be more distinctive within the coalition and probably manage to have a better government for it, on balance. We should concentrate on a few departments; including at least one ‘key’ department in terms of voter interests (I’d suggest Health or the Home Office) and really plug our work there. 

We can do this. It is simply a matter of whether we will.