Newington's Lizzy Roberts looks at what Vince Cable's leadership means for the Liberal Democrats.

Vince Cable is now the leader of the Liberal Democrats. The veteran politician will benefit from the name recognition his predecessor lacked, but if his manifesto is anything to go by, Lib Dem policy will go the way of his leadership election result – unchallenged and unnoticed.

With both Labour and the Conservatives as polarised as they are, you would expect the centrist party to happily fill the vacuum. However, despite this fertile ground, the party looking to speak to the majority of voters has failed to produce widespread public appeal.

To understand why, lessons can be drawn from across the channel. Unlike the Lib Dems, Emmanuel Macron’s En Marche! movement revitalised the centrist vote. While the divergence of French politics amplified Macron’s message, his success was a result of understanding why voters were unhappy with the centre in the first place, and providing fresh rhetoric, and anti-establishment reform.

The same cannot be said for Vince Cable’s manifesto. In interviews following his appointment to leader, Cable acknowledged that the Lib Dem’s anti-Brexit, centrist vision had not “cut through” but suggested that, in time, the party’s position will be vindicated. This may be true (only time will tell), but the rest of the manifesto does not contain the eye-catching change that will keep the party relevant and in the spotlight.

In his manifesto, Cable sets out that he supports innovation in education and training to help tackle the challenges of low productivity and automation. He points to the industrial strategy as a starting point but doesn’t go further to present new and innovative ideas. Cable also says he’ll champion public services and mental health and do more to break up monopoly power. Both Labour and the Conservatives have pretty much the same rhetoric, and beyond the obvious differentiator of the Lib Dem’s Brexit referendum offer and a vague nod to reform of the political system, there’s little to differentiate the party.

Alongside the lack of new content, Vince Cable’s unchallenged election poses further problems for the Lib Dems. His ambition and ideas remain underdeveloped because they have not been put through the competitive rigour of proper leadership challenge and debate. If Theresa May’s default rise to Conservative Party leader is anything to go by, this does not bode well for leader performance.

It is of course early days, and Vince Cable may build on his manifesto if new ideas are agreed post-Lib Dem Conference in the autumn. It may even be that the Lib Dems are waiting for Brexit vindication to present truly fresh leadership and perhaps a new face (see Jo Swinson MP).  If Vince Cable wants the Lib Dems to occupy the current void in British politics, he needs to be innovative and work hard to sit up and get noticed. In the meantime an uninspired centre is bad for democracy and bad for progressive, pragmatic and business friendly policies.