Yet beneath the optimism, conference exposed a deeper debate about what comes next. While there was broad acceptance that Ed Davey’s leadership has delivered results, there was far less agreement about what success beyond 70 MPs should look like. National polling remains stubbornly static, the party faces increasing competition from both Reform UK and the Green Party, and questions persist over whether voters can clearly articulate what the Liberal Democrats stand for nationally.

Much of the discussion centred on whether the party has reached the limits of its current electoral model. While Liberal Democrats have become increasingly effective in rural and suburban England through targeted local campaigning, there are concerns about weaker performances in major cities and university towns, where Labour and the Greens have made significant inroads. The leadership pointed to ongoing reviews of both the North and London as evidence that the party is actively considering where future growth might come from.

There was also a noticeable effort to broaden the party’s policy offer. For years, Europe, social care and water quality have been among the party’s most recognisable issues. In Brighton, however, growth, investment, innovation, planning reform and support for business featured much more prominently. Frontbench figures repeatedly made the case for a more pro-business Liberal Democrat offer, with universities, life sciences, technology and infrastructure all presented as drivers of future economic growth.

Questions about younger voters surfaced repeatedly throughout conference. While the party’s targeted strategy has undoubtedly delivered results, some attendees questioned whether it has inadvertently focused attention on older, wealthier suburban voters at the expense of younger urban professionals and students. Conference reflected broader concerns about how the party competes for voters in areas where the Greens are increasingly seen as the principal challenger.

Europe remained an important component of the Liberal Democrat offer, but it no longer felt like the defining feature of the party’s identity. Discussions about closer European ties were framed primarily through economic growth, trade and competitiveness rather than constitutional questions. Similarly, Ed Davey’s keynote speech placed greater emphasis on liberal values, democratic institutions and opposition to populism than on Britain’s relationship with Europe.

For all the discussion about becoming a more national political force, conference suggested the party increasingly sees the disruptor parties as its principal opponents. Reform featured heavily in conversations across rural and suburban seats, while concerns about Green advances dominated many urban discussions. Labour, by contrast, barely featured. Despite the ongoing debate around parliamentary arithmetic, there was little appetite to engage publicly with questions about what role the Liberal Democrats might play in the event of a future Labour minority government.

Ultimately, Brighton highlighted a party that knows how to win elections, but is still working through a bigger strategic challenge. There was clear recognition that the Liberal Democrats need a stronger national profile and a broader policy offer. What was less evident was a settled answer to what makes the party distinctive in an increasingly fragmented political landscape. As the Liberal Democrats look towards the next election, the debate is no longer about whether their electoral model works. It is about defining the identity and purpose that takes them beyond it.