Alex, I wasn't being snidey or anything, like I said, unless you are part of a party, you will know nothing about how they do their democracy. And if you're not in any party-you know nada, just what you are spoon fed by the parties.
My info re Lab is just my observations from some PPC's in 'never gonna win areas' and some people who I know wanted to run but had no chance depsite how long or what they'd done with the party. "You would end up with candidates seeking to nobble community groups one by one with a range of promises that may not necessarily be transparent in nature." Candidates do this now, what is the difference? I don't want to vote for someone out of only 3 people or less, or worst still what we have now, from each party! Why? Because people all selective. Nepotism happens. Buddy system etc. I've seen it. It's all this game. For example, I know a friend-now a PPC for a different area-who would've been excellent in this local area. Like truly. Lived here all his life, always being an actvist, has a PHD, is open minded, really bright etc etc but he was turned down when it came to the Hustings because the local party thought he was too old. He is 53. They felt they needed to be modern and chose a woman who had never lived in the area and was neither passionate about the area etc. Suffice to say she didn't make waves. People in the area trusted my friend, he had respect and could've brought so much to the role. Now who on earth are a bunch of members in a locally yocally party who've probably being thier for decades, have preconceived notions to tell us who they think should work for us?? The thing is don't get it confused, this local party is as small minded as they come. They simply responded in a poor way to positive discrimination. It isn't modern. The same people have been in the commitee for decades. Can you not see how flawed this system is Alex? Shouldn't the people you claim you want to serve as a local party, choose who they think should become the MP of the area? No wonder no one bothers to come out to vote. If I got given a penny for everytime someone has told me-inc friends-that they don't want either party leader to be prime minister and why were they made to vote for them, I would be a billionaire by now. People in the political machine really are so out of touch with how the normal folk think. Absolutely beggars belief. I'm still listening about the Jury Party but they are onto something... www.juryteam.org On 11/04/2010, Alexander Hilton <[email protected]> wrote: > Irene > > That's not quite fair. In the Labour Party, our best form of candidate > selection is by members. Whenever the leadership, the factions or the party > staff get involved, that's when democracy falters. > > The problem is that sets up a motive for the powerful people and factions in > the party to suppress party activism. In a constituency with eight active > branches of a local Labour Party, with lots of members motivated and > campaigning, it's very hard to use undue influence to get a parachuted > candidate selected. > > Yet in defunct local parties, where there are very few active members, the > powerful factions in the party only have a few people to approve in order to > get their man or woman in. > > And with Labour at least, selections are last remaining power nominally in > the hands of the members at all. This would make a strong case for state > funding of political parties (which I oppose) as you would be driving down > party membership. > > Open primaries are heralded as the answer to this problem but in truth > they're a red herring. A true open primary would cost each candidate > something like £40-50k to run properly. Barely any candidates could afford > this so you would have to state-finance the primaries with Royal Mail > freeposts and by having Councils conduct the elections, which would be > significantly more expensive than the general election polling day itself. > There's also the matter that 6 months or a year before actual polling day, > you would be giving all the parties a free test of their relative popularity > from seat to seat, including labour, conservative and BNP, allowing them to > adjust their strategies on the basis of a state funded megapoll. > > Not to mention the greater scope for LibDem graph making. > > Smaller primaries, where it's up to the parties to conduct the elections > raise the issue of whether it's fair to tell a party how to choose it's > candidates. Furthermore, lack of funding would mean only a small population > could be targeted in such campaigns. You would end up with candidates > seeking to nobble community groups one by one with a range of promises that > may not necessarily be transparent in nature. > > And where a selection now might involve 300 Labour members, a small, > unfunded open primary that engaged 2-3000 people would not be qualitatively > different from the current arrangements in the context of a 70,000 average > population per constituency. > > The sensible solution as I see it is to wrap up the primaries with polling > day and do them at the same time. > > How? Simple. 3-member STV > > Each party puts forward its shortlist of three candidates, chosen by their > members, in seat three times the size of current seats. > > The voters number the candidates in order of preference and the 3 seats are > divided proportionately according to this system. > > That leaves voters with three MPs instead of one, so they can directly > compare their performance between elections. Also, the voters get to choose > whether 1, 2, 3 or no candidates from a given party represent then, > effectively enabling the possibility of new, strong candidates beating > incumbent candidates, even from the same party. > > So there would be no more safe seats left in Britain instead of the 380-400 > we have now. > > That might make MPs pay more attention to their voters > > all the best > > Alex Hilton > Labour candidate for Chelsea & Fulham > 07794 771 113 > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Irene Rukerebuka < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Exactly @ Ian. Though I was there and felt after what happened with >> the Bill it was all lip service but still, I think this is why Abdul & >> Francis ideas, however different are needed. >> >> Each party has its own system which is sheilded from the public. >> >> That isn't democracy. >> >> On 11/04/2010, Abdul Hai <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I stand corrected on the Liberal Democrats conference. Thanks for the >> > information. >> > >> > >> > >> > Support solar power in the developing world. >> > http://www.everyclick.com/solaraid >> > http://www.solar-aid.org/ >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > From: Ian Eiloart <[email protected]> >> > To: "mySociety public, general purpose discussion list" >> > <[email protected]> >> > Sent: Sun, 11 April, 2010 15:22:39 >> > Subject: Re: [mySociety:public] Conservative Primaries >> > >> > >> > On 10 Apr 2010, at 20:04, Abdul Hai wrote: >> > >> >> The trouble is that parties have now become professional fighting >> missions >> >> and are organised from the centre with people at the local level having >> >> not much of a say and even when they do in Conservative Primaries >> >> sometimes the local party tries to overturn the result remember the >> turnip >> >> taliban. Then there is the example of Tristram Hunt. >> >> >> >> The thing is that conference is not where policy is decided it is done >> by >> >> the party managers. >> > >> > I'm not sure whether you're claiming this is true about all parties, or >> just >> > the Tory party. I certainly don't think it's true of the Lib Dems, who >> > do >> > make policy at conference. For example, members persuaded the party to >> > oppose various the Digital Economy bill, which the party did. OK, >> > perhaps >> > the opposition wasn't strong enough for everybody, and certainly we >> > could >> > never have mustered the votes to kill the bill, but none of our MPs >> > voted >> > for it. >> > >> > I haven't been to a Labour or Conservative conference, but I've heard >> from >> > one "Independent" and one "Guardian" journalist that it's refreshing to >> > cover a Lib Dem conference because -unlike the others- we do make policy >> at >> > conference. >> > >> > Oh, and as a local party, we also get councillors elected. Those >> councillors >> > (I'm one) make a difference locally, but not as much as we'd like >> > because >> > much of what local councils do is tightly constrained by government. >> > Does >> > the local party control local policy? Well, kind of, because the >> councillors >> > form a large proportion of the active members! >> > >> > >> >> >> >> The local parties are really there before the invention of the media >> age. >> >> >> >> >> >> Support solar power in the developing world. >> >> http://www.everyclick.com/solaraid >> >> http://www.solar-aid.org/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: Irene Rukerebuka <[email protected]> >> >> To: "mySociety public, general purpose discussion list" >> >> <[email protected]> >> >> Sent: Sat, 10 April, 2010 17:27:42 >> >> Subject: Re: [mySociety:public] Conservative Primaries >> >> >> >> Yeah, for sure. You're right. >> >> >> >> I only joined a party like a year and a half ago. I could never get any >> >> info at all. I found I had to join a party-that I agreed with its >> vision >> >> the most-to find anything out about politics or democracy. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 10 April 2010 17:09, Abdul Hai <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Thanks Irene. >> >>> >> >>> What I was getting at was that it is easier for party members to know >> as >> >>> the party has their details and is in contact with them rather then >> what >> >>> happens in a primary for the Conservative Party where local people are >> >>> asked to attend a huskings with no other information unless they can >> find >> >>> out something from Iain Dale or something. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Support solar power in the developing world. >> >>> http://www.everyclick.com/solaraid >> >>> http://www.solar-aid.org/ >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: Irene Rukerebuka <[email protected]> >> >>> >> >>> To: "mySociety public, general purpose discussion list" >> >>> <[email protected]> >> >>> Sent: Sat, 10 April, 2010 16:37:16 >> >>> >> >>> Subject: Re: [mySociety:public] Conservative Primaries >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> I am with the Lib Dems and you're right Abdul, only members can vote. >> It >> >>> is a transparent process and we know quite a bit about the candidate >> but >> >>> that could just be my area-which actually is a poor Lib D area and >> >>> like >> >>> 98% Tory. >> >>> >> >>> The selection process starts pretty much right after the general >> election >> >>> give or take. We've been sent emails about starting up again. >> >>> >> >>> But I think it is different for all parties. I do know that with >> Labour, >> >>> speaking to some different people in various positions that it's that >> >>> they tend to already know who will stand where because there is such a >> >>> huge waiting list anyhow. >> >>> >> >>> Not sure about the Greens. Re the Jury party-independents-it is >> >>> continous. I have a friend who is looking to stand and they pretty >> >>> much >> >>> set up their own campaign and way. >> >>> >> >>> Not sure about UKIP or BNP! But could probably find out... >> >>> >> >>> I agree Francis about your concept though and like it. I do find >> >>> having >> >>> played with the online game to get the PPC details, that a phone call >> >>> would be much better to get hold of any of these details. MP's are >> >>> too >> >>> protected by their parties and shielded and all you get is lip >> >>> service. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On 10 April 2010 16:11, Francis Irving <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>>> >> >>>> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 01:28:14PM +0000, Abdul Hai wrote: >> >>>>>>> I agree with to a certain extent Francis but I think it should be >> >>>>>>> more of an information site rather than a campaigning one. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> It should be a new site and maybe you could run a test during the >> >>>>>>> next by election to get it ready for the next general election. >> >>>> >> >>>> Candidate selection can be ongoing throughout the period between >> >>>>>> General Elections. At least, I know selections were happening a >> couple >> >>>>>> of years ago. >> >>>> >> >>>>>> Anyone know, how soon after an Election do parties start to select >> >>>>>> candidates for the next election for any seats? >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>>> I am not a member of any party as once I used to work in a >> >>>>>>> politically sensitive job so I don't take part in local parties >> >>>>>>> but >> >>>>>>> I could be wrong my understanding is that with the Liberal >> Democrats >> >>>>>>> and Labour parties that it is the members who vote and they are >> >>>>>>> likely to be more knowledgeable but with the Conservatives it is >> >>>>>>> anyone who is eligible can vote. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> I was unable to attend the last primary but the information on the >> >>>>>>> candidates was lacking and the vast majority of people who >> >>>>>>> attended >> >>>>>>> were not members of the party so they had no time to gather any >> >>>>>>> information. >> >>>> >> >>>> Right! It is a very invisible, unscrutinised process. >> >>>> >> >>>>>> Francis >> >>>> >> >>>>>>> ________________________________ From: Francis Irving >> >>>> >> >>>>> <[email protected]> To: "mySociety public, general purpose >> >>>>>>> discussion list" <[email protected]> Cc: - >> >>>>>>> <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, 10 April, 2010 >> 13:07:54 >> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [mySociety:public] Conservative Primaries >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Great idea Abdul. Julian Todd has been saying similar things, and >> we >> >>>>>>> reckon something like the following would fit the bill: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> After the Election, I would like somebody (it would fit well with >> >>>>>>> YourNextMP or DemocracyClub, or could be a new project) to track >> >>>>>>> candidate selection for all parties on an ongoing basis. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> The site would feature: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> * A page for each local party, with information about how it >> selects >> >>>>>>> candidates, who is up for nomination, what stage it is at, who has >> >>>>>>> been selected, deselected etc. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> * All the data obviously structured, with history etc. Would have >> to >> >>>>>>> be user submitted data (YourNextMP style). If there are any votes, >> >>>>>>> how many people voted which way, how many attended the meeting >> >>>>>>> etc. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> * Email alerts to give you updates about parties in your >> >>>>>>> constituency, e.g. when there are public selection meetings, or >> when >> >>>>>>> it might be worth joining a party in order to influence selection. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> * A way of sharing information about people running to be PPCs. >> >>>>>>> Basically a YourNextMP type set of information on them. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> * A measure of how democratic the process is for each party >> (locally >> >>>>>>> and on average nationally). Other national party statistics >> >>>>>>> aggregated from the local party info. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> * Possibly could be a campaigning site, with a way of asking / >> >>>>>>> lobbying for open primaries, or other improvements to candidate >> >>>>>>> selection processes. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> * Possibly could be a "local party" scrutiny site - so could have >> >>>>>>> info other than about selection, such as number of local party >> >>>>>>> members, local party donations and so on. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> What Voter Power (http://www.voterpower.org.uk/) reminds us, is >> that >> >>>>>>> most people don't get a vote for their MP. The MP is preordained, >> >>>>>>> based on the process the party uses to select the candidate. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> A way of improving democracy would be to have more scrutiny of the >> >>>>>>> candidate selection process. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Francis >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:18:47PM +0000, Abdul Hai wrote: >> >>>>>>>> I have been thinking about this for sometime and I was thinking >> >>>>>>>> wouldn't be a good idea to have a site for all Conservative >> >>>>>>>> Primaries for the next election. Before people starting making >> >>>>>>>> comments I would like to say that even though I am Conservative >> >>>>>>>> supporter it would be useful for non Conservatives as the >> >>>>>>>> Primaries are open to the general public who live in the area >> >>>>>>>> even >> >>>>>>>> if they are not natural supporters. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> We had one in my local area and it would have been useful for >> >>>>>>>> people to have a site that gave information. I know a lot of >> >>>>>>>> people who went there are not Tory voters. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ Mailing list >> >>>>>>> [email protected] Archive, settings, or >> >>>>>>> unsubscribe: >> >>>>>>> >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>> _______________________________________________ Mailing list >> >>>> >> >>>>> [email protected] Archive, settings, or >> >>>>>>> unsubscribe: >> >>>>>>> >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> -- Help beat party propaganda at the next election - >> >>>> www.democracyclub.org.uk >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>>>> Mailing list [email protected] >> >>>>>> Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> >>>> >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Irene Rukerebuka >> >>> >> >>> 37 Hunters Way >> >>> Tunbridge Wells >> >>> Kent >> >>> TN2 5QF >> >>> >> >>> m: 07826255452 >> >>> >> >>> t: www.twitter.com/rantersparadise >> >>>> >> >>> w: www.hubnovation.org.uk >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Mailing list [email protected] >> >>>> Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> >>> >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Irene Rukerebuka >> >> >> >> 37 Hunters Way >> >> Tunbridge Wells >> >> Kent >> >> TN2 5QF >> >> >> >> m: 07826255452 >> >> >> >> t: www.twitter.com/rantersparadise >> >> w: www.hubnovation.org.uk >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Mailing list [email protected] >> >> Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> >> >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> > >> > -- >> > Ian Eiloart >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Mailing list [email protected] >> > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> > >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Irene Rukerebuka >> >> 37 Hunters Way >> Tunbridge Wells >> Kent >> TN2 5QF >> >> m: 07826255452 >> >> t: www.twitter.com/rantersparadise >> w: www.hubnovation.org.uk >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list [email protected] >> Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: >> https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >> > -- Irene Rukerebuka 37 Hunters Way Tunbridge Wells Kent TN2 5QF m: 07826255452 t: www.twitter.com/rantersparadise w: www.hubnovation.org.uk _______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
