Gary Sauer-Thompson summarizes the argument in "Reinventing the State: Social Liberalism in the 21st Century" which describes the British Liberal Democrats understanding of liberalism;

The social liberal argument has three steps. First, relying exclusively on unfettered market mechanisms to deliver a liberal and democratic society is doomed to failure.

Second, positive state intervention to tackle market failures is not only perfectly compatible with Liberalism, it may be actively necessary for a full understanding of individual freedom. Third, Liberal interventions in markets are different in kind from socialist interventions, being always as local as possible and as accountable as possible.

These days everyone understands the positive nature of an open market, so the cries of socialism, communism, etc fall on deaf, if not mis-understanding ears. To generations that have lived the majority of their economic life after Glasnost - including myself - those kinds of brandings carry little value and are not a political argument.

The left and right parties of modern democracies are not as different or as polarize as the political rhetoric suggests. They are both arguments within social liberalism. A supposedly far right government in the Bush Administration was quick to inject government involvement into the economy when the banks collapsed.

There are significant differences in policy that are essential for the voting population to work out and determine, but for the most part modern liberal democracies and their parties are all arguments within the boundaries of social liberalism.

More Reading on British politics

• British Politics
• Liberal Democrats
• Malapportionment in the British Electoral System
• Liberal Democrats and Social Liberalism