Why FCC is still considering the Accreditation issue.

I am against Accreditation at conference and I have said as much very publicly.

Last night FCC considered the 'accreditation at conference' issue, in the light of the many submissions made to the committee in response to the request for views made on Lib Dem Voice, and I know they also heard views on the day from activists such as Zoe O'Connell and Sarah Brown (who tweeted about it). As various members of FCC have revealed, the opening of conference registration has been postponed while this issue is addressed.

Fair play to FCC member Jeremy Hargreaves, who tweeted in response to some of my queries after the meeting. Here are his comments, in 'latest first' order (look up my twitter feed at @richardmorrisuk to see my tweets).

So there we have it. The main concerns of FCC are insurance and venue acceptance.

I have asked Jeremy to encourage publishing full disclosure of these concerns at LDV so we can at least know the whys and wherefores of these issues. I believe the insurance issue was addressed in the debate at Birmingham and I would be interested to hear why the Brighton Conference folk think accreditation may be necessary (couldn't be because Sussex Police told them so, I suppose...?)

Anyway, I look forward to hearing the full explanations.

I think full frank and open information exchange is the way forward on this issue - if only to give FCC the ammunition they need to prevent this illiberal process of accreditation for conference continuing for another year.

Update

Caron has an excellent update post on her blog revealing full details of the FCC debate, the options looked at and the hero 5 members of FCC who voted for further disucussion. they have my grateful thanks

Arnie Gibbons

Jeremy Hargreaves

Justine McGuinness

Geoff Payne

Lucy Care

Sarah Brown has also blogged an excellent update on her website of her experience of the FCC session