howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
10 February 2011
12:0892160#1
according to the express they have decided to opt for an all women person candidate short list for the next general election.
not even gwyn with his 13 years commons experience can get on it.
making themselves a laughing stock on this one.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
10 February 2011
13:3292163#2
That'll be our Sue, then!
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
10 February 2011
15:4992170#3
not likely, as vic has pointed out susan is busy enough in her role of stand in/vice/deputy chair lady person.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
10 February 2011
16:3392177#4
Sue Jones, I meant. Keep up, Howard!
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
11 February 2011
07:3192246#5
And Sue N. isn't a Labour person anyway.
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
11 February 2011
10:3092271#6
not much difference between the parties nowadays. i can remember when the yellows were left wing radicals.
Sue Nicholas- Location: river
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 6,025
11 February 2011
11:0892279#7
I can also remember those days Howard.Peter to some people i am our Sue .
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
11 February 2011
17:2192328#8
Sorry Sue, I made the mistake of assuming that our readers would infer from the context to which Sue I was referring. Apologies, I did not wish to imply that you were going to do a Vic!
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
15 February 2011
13:5692728#9
hello
keith is back lol.
so lets get some comments on this stupid move by the national labour party.
WHY HAVE THEY DECIDED THIS???
Labour like all political parties wants to see more women involved in politics and it is fact that within all political parties there are those that see women as inferior, something i don't share.
so this positive discrimination is labours answer to this.
I'm afraid labour has got this one wrong.
im all for encouraging in this case, women, to get involved in politics and support this at every turn.
but this women only shortlist is one that realy does little to promote women it will in fact have the opposite affect.
many local labour women and women in general want to get involved in politics by there own abilities and not being imposed on people.
You could end up having a fantastic male candidate supported by local membership but instead someone with neither the abilty, nor support being parachuted in .
Of course the national labour party tried to give guidlines like this at KCC elections which at that time i fought against and i will again do so.
Ofcourse at that time these were only guidlines and it was the counties labour party that was pushing women only shortlists funny though the seats those pushing the women only shortlists were not down to be women only shortlists!!!!!
so they were guidlines, i fought against them and will again, and labour lost one of its best councillors(reghansell)supported by all 3 parties at county hall
because labour pushed women only shortlists in his seat, woman was put forward reg unable to stand and she lost!!!!!!!!
So to the future, if labour realy sticks by a decision to have a women only shortlist in Dover for the parliamrentary election, then for the first time in my life i wont be voting!!!!! thats a big decision for me, but i hope the labour party will see sense by then.
we do need clarification if this is a guidline or an instruction by the national party.
for me if women only shortlists are used to select the labour candidate then they will have lost my vote.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
15 February 2011
14:0292730#10
welcome back keith, excellent post.
i find these women only shortlists as patronising and insulting to women, when will the hierarchy see this.
their potential voters will be put off by being offered a candidate that might not be first choice.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
15 February 2011
14:5392740#11
I agree 100% Keith.
No parachuted lady would stand a chance against Charlie next time round. And it's highly unlikely the current senior local Labour figures would put Sue on the ticket.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
15 February 2011
16:5092754#12
There are a number of local labour people who would give charlie a run for his money.
but this is not about who the candidate may be
but more about stopping people from having the chance to stand.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
15 February 2011
16:5392755#13
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
15 February 2011
17:0292757#14
jan h
since being away a number of posters iu have met up with were saying the political imput is being missed since my computer went to he docs.
it's all a matter of opinion.
politics involves your every day life. at every level.
the blues
(and blues who post but pretend not to suupport the blues) have had it there own way for some time.
most of the time iv just given the alternative view.
but you will see today im also very much unbiased in my posting, very much want a labour govt, but that said will speak out when labour gets its wrong
ie; choice of mayor
women only short list
etc etc
anyway heres to all posters having a nice day
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
15 February 2011
17:2792762#15
As I understand it,The Chairman and Secretary of the Dover and District Labour Party were asked about the Shortlist and they responded that they didn't want a all Women shortlist.This story was not broken locally as far as we know so it must have come Labour South East.
Like Keith I disagree with it,because it limits the quality of the candidate and surely the best person for the job is the best person for the job no matter what sex they are!
Before people start putting 2 and 2 together and making 3 I have not heard of one person in the frame male or female although I have heard there is a young man from Eastry who is very good,and my name is not down for the Labour vacancy at Goverment or Mayoral level,if of course I was elected.If I was Vic it would be down for everything by now!
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
15 February 2011
17:3692764#16
hi john
your probably right that will have come from the national labour party and regional labour party have decided to push it.
on the local labour party, it's to be seen how much bottle they have if and when women only shortlists come in.
certainly even though only a guidline the regional party pushed this one in KCC elections sadly the local party didnt have the bottle to take on this issue and labour lost one of it's best councillors, a big big mistake, and the replacement was never going to touch the seat it was lost before the election campaign even started it was just by how many she would lose by.
here we are again and hopefully the national and local labour party will learn from past errors, but sadly i suspect they won't.
should labour go for women only shortlists i won't be voting for the first time ever
and will encourage others to do the same
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
15 February 2011
18:0692775#17
There is also an unhealthy development with political parties that all these PA's from Westminster are getting foistered upon local communities to stand as candidates. This was an aspect of the recent Andrew Neil programme on Posh Boys running the country. Labour are now beginning to do what the Tories have done for a while. So oul bench thumping politicians like Dennis Skinner and Michael Foot would never get through. Everything is pre-selected pre vetted sanitised and pasteurised.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
15 February 2011
18:1192776#18
there is paulb a dilema for all parties how to get more people involved in politics, this is the wrong way.
i did send in writing to the local party over a year ago my concerns,,,,,,,,,,,
still waiting for a reply
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
15 February 2011
18:4992782#19
elections are won and lost on the television nowadays, a good haircut, well tailored whistle and a smile paid for at a private dentist run roughshod over policy, passion and honesty.
tony blair was the first of this breed, polished, professional, used sound bites to perfection. the blues put michael howard up against him!!
now the blues have david cameron who is a consummate user of the media to get his message across.
at the last election, mr brown looked positively out dated compared to our "fitted kitchen" salesman who resides at no.10.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#20
As we are only 3 years (maximum) from the next general election (May 2015) I was wondering if the reds have come up with a candidate yet.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
