Friday, January 05, 2007

LibDem Candidates System in Meltdown?

Following THIS story a couple of days ago, the comments section was heated to say the least. When that happens a blogger normally knows he is on to something. A reader has alerted me to an editorial in a recent issue of LIBERATOR magazine. It's all about LibDem candidate selection...

The session for key seats representatives at September’s Liberal Democrat conference was proceeding uneventfully until the party’s campaigns director Paul Rainger told them that, to retain this status, a constituency must have a candidate in place by December. Angry protests followed, to the effect that constituencies would be happy to select a candidate were the English Candidates Committee to make this possible (it seems a lesser issue in Scotland and Wales).

Hardly anyone agrees on what has caused the inordinate delay in selections. It is perhaps just as well that the idea of a snap general election appears to be a figment of party fundraisers’ imagination. From the campaigns side, and from approved candidates, come complaints that the candidates committee sees the approval and selection bureaucracy as an end in itself. There are also complaints that, on top of the long-standing and tortuous complications involved, rules aimed at securing diversity have served only to ensure that no-one, of any colour or gender, has been selected for most seats. Tales abound of constituencies that have received only one application but have been barred from adopting the candidate concerned, of regions with too few returning officers having to borrow them from elsewhere in a beggar-my-neighbour process, and of too few selection committee members having completed the obligatory training because there is no-one to train them.

From the candidates committee side comes the response that conference told it to rewrite the rules and it had to wait until after the general election to do that, and that if the party wants greater diversity in its candidates the processes must be in place. Its members also dispute claims that returning officers and trainers are thin on the ground, and are confident that candidates will be in place in good time.

The Parliamentary Candidates Association, which represents approved candidates, thinks it has a solution to this impasse, but it is one likely to infuriate most party members. Its chair Gary Lawson wrote in July to Menzies Campbell to say that only 18 English PPCs had at that point been selected (a number which has since presumably risen) and that the average selection was taking 88 days. The PCA’s solution was to suggest that Campbell should “personally appoint a small central team to identify out 40 to 60 most winnable constituencies and manage the selection process in these seats”. In those seats, the normal selection process would be set aside and replaced by the method used for parliamentary by-elections, where a very short list is approved centrally for local members’ decision. The central team would ‘resolve’ any appeals, while Campbell himself would have the pleasure of writing to all party members to explain the reason for ditching the normal process.

PCA executive members “debated the pros and cons” of identifying a top tier of candidates, similar to the Tories so-called A list, but decided that “the appointment of a central team to manage selections in these winnable seats, as with by-elections, will allow both highly qualified local candidates to apply and enable shortlists to be drafted that clearly demonstrate the party’s commitment to candidate diversity”. How that might be done solely from among candidates already approved was unclear. The ‘accelerated’ process has caused rows in local parties at by-elections, where candidates with strong local support have been excluded.

The application of this process to all winnable seats would be certain to cause uproar among aggrieved applicants and their supporters, particularly if local party members were effectively presented with only one option. Even more startlingly, the PCA believes “in the longer term… there is a case for ‘headhunting’ of suitable candidates within and outside the party, e.g. among students at universities and colleges.” Yes, you read that right. The body that represents the party’s parliamentary candidates believes that people who do not belong to the party should be approached to stand as candidates for it in general elections. The PCA said it looked forward to Campbell’s comments. But, since no change has been made to the selection rules, they were presumably unfavourable. Perhaps Campbell feels that people who wish to be Lib Dem candidates should at least first take the trouble to join the party.


Makes the Conservative 'A' List dilemmas look rather pedestrian, doesn't it? Do check back later. I've just been emailed some very interesting information related to this story, which I want to share with you but it needs careful wording...

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

"headhunting of suitable candidates among students at universities and colleges.” ...

... WHAT! and jump 5 generations. If Ming remembers tomorrow he must stamp his zimmer frame down on this senility.

Anonymous said...

The pca might just as well have suggested that the whole process be handed to the campaigns department to personally appoint the candidates they favour. Isn't that what happens in byelections.

Anonymous said...

I seem to remember simon hughes suggesting something similar regarding head hunting some while ago. mind you there are plenty more non members than members to choose from.

Wrinkled Weasel said...

Arse hunting more like, if Simon Hughes has anything to do with it.

Inamicus said...

"Liberator" in whinge about party HQ and bureaucracy shock horror! It's hardly news Iain!

Anonymous said...

whatever their problems, I'm sure they'll be able to find someone to represent them at the mayoral elections. Unlike the Tories.*




*80's DJs unable even to get a place on Celebrity Big Brother do not count.

Anonymous said...

read a little more closely and hunt around. there is more unhappiness around than you seem to believe inamicus. maybe ming isn't the problem. maybe charles wasn't either.

Anonymous said...

yes pmd in the liberal democrats there's no shortage of candidates willing to come third.

Anonymous said...

The LDs do have some very strange standards. They put up with Oaten and give him months to decide whether he is standing again compared to the Tories who would kick him out of re-standing. But when it comes to "characters" like Suzanne lamido she has her membership rescinded whilst Tory bloggers doing similar are embraced in a broad church.

Are the LDs just more elitist and have one rule for a Lembit and another for a Suzanne?

Anonymous said...

"PCA executive members "

"Partly Continent Artzholes"

(the polite version)

Anonymous said...

Well the Limp Dumps in Pendle told the local press that they were selecting very soon and applications were being invited - see http://pendlelibdems.org.uk/news/000016.html

That was on 2nd September and since then nothing...

Anonymous said...

Just as well the PCA is largely ignored within the Liberal Democrats!

It is full of whingers.

Anonymous said...

"It is full of whingers. "

Ah, but they're Minger Whingers!

Anonymous said...

Drive them into the ground Iain. The scavengers of British politics are finished. Mind you, most of them are going over to the Tories so that's us all goosed.

Praguetory said...

You're really kicking some sand in Lib Dem faces today Iain. I said faces.

Mikey said...

When Ming's leadership of the Party is criticised due to his ineptness at PMQs or in media interviews, Lib Dems tend to defend him by saying that he is really doing a good job sorting out the organisation of the Party internally.

This situation shows that this is far from the truth. As you would expect from the LibDems.

Anonymous said...

Couldn't two birds be killed with one stone by auctioning off any 'mincing metrosexuals' who are refused by Tory 'old fart' constituency associations to the Lib Dems to meet their diversity quotas ?

Seems a great way to solve both issues

Anonymous said...

why are you getting so worried about the lib dems - are you thinking of joining them ?

Anonymous said...

Mr Hoskins

Very true your analysis. I'm sure Ming is being told all is well in the internal structures, but if he believes it he is far from correct. Have a look at the last three editions of Liberator and you'll see exactly how far from the truth it all is. I think there are a few people out there who are guilty of believing their own spin.

And most Liberal Democrats still remain unhappy about Michael Brown. Sorting it out? Sticking his head in the sand more like.

Anonymous said...

Would the New Mingers know what organisation was if it hit them in the face?

This phrase being trotted out ad nauseum by the Lib Dem gofers is remarkably like Blair's "It wasn't about WMD really" and Cameron's "Of course I've got some policies. . .er. . ."

Emperors....clothes....

Anonymous said...

Steve Hitchens is being accused of corruption and I'm told he's refusing to answer any questions on the matter.

Anonymous said...

I don't think we can throw too many stones. The fact is that all party bureaucrats as so obsessed with image that they overlook the auxillary need for genuine merit.

Add to this the way the paid officials of the parties look after their own and the chances of a human being being selected are diminished accordingly.

Clearly when we get rid of Cameron after the next general election we must do something radical. How about an open contest in each constituency where Tory party members vote on an elimination basis between those who want to be considered.

Whilst they aren't high priorities for Dave I think the number one priority is selecting a Tory and number two is selecting someone who will win.

Hardly rocket science to use the cliche of the day.

Anonymous said...

Chicken Licken said...
Steve Hitchens is being accused of corruption and I'm told he's refusing to answer any questions on the matter.

Your SH link is not working.

Hardly surprised he is not saying anything. He is still trying to bully his way and make the Islington's LibDem members vote for ex-councillor Bridget Fox AGAIN. He is insisting it will be third time lucky.

He has said it openly that he will make sure some of the money diversity fund money is pushed their way.

Dominic Mathon SH's side-kick has already offered to run her campaign and is mis-using his position on the London Region Executive to influence other members in London to support her.

Anonymous said...

Iain,

Fascinating as ever, although you're one edition of Liberator behind (December's issue has now been published). See if you can get hold of a copy to see the response from a member of the Party's English Candidates Committee - you might learn something (then again, maybe not...)