howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
john
are you saying that the majority of the local party were for the all woman short list?
if so then you are all totally out of touch with your core support.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
john
i have no idea what your last post meant,
certainly if voicing my opinion strongly(and believe right up to the general election it will be) on an imposed candidate then yep im a trouble maker
but this had taken a lot of soul searching, advice, talking to people inside and outside of the party, and not everyone agrees with me(nor would i expect them to)
but my voice will be heard
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
Howard No it was put on us by H.Q. as I understand it,locally the Labour Party objected but to increse the amout of women in Parliament then certain seats were selected.As I said I would have preferred an open list and still believe Clair would have done well and probably got the vacancy.
Keith you are right 80% of local members voted for Clair,and having known her for a year I have no problems in supporting her.and as I said in my opinion better her than Charlie!
The problem is Keith you think everyone should think like you or they are wrong!I said I dont agree with All any shortlists,but Clair is good!
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
sorry to say this john but the local reds are totally out of touch with the electorate, hence the last general election and local election results.
telling their intended voters who they must vote for is not on, add to this the arrogant disregard shown to us by the town council can only mean a long spell in the wilderness.
charlie must be quietly chuckling into his bollinger.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
JOHN;
Have i at any point stated you should not give your view? in fact you are the only one from the local labour party brave enough to do so.
now to get to a few facts(cant let porkies go by without comment)
1; The outgoing MP was against W.O.S. until he was no longer in position but there
you go
2; the N.E,C. made a decision to have more women and dover could of made
strong objections, inbstead it rolled over now thats fine but it needs to be clear
3; Some members did object locally both men and women but we are where
we are, to say the local party objected i feel is an injust statement
4' The national party made it clear to me in a letter its the E.C. that make the
decisions (not ed) so i did ask them in that case could they inform ed if enough
people across the country form the same view ed might not get to number 10
a he may not be aware of the compliance officers letter
5; whether or not claire is a suitable candidate, and would have won in an open
selection we will never know, and its a poor argument to suggest she would
have, whilst it may be the case, it wasn't put to the test.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 41.Howard..JHG # 14 told the`truth` but it is a case of the Labour Party ( Whip )
getting them `all` in line.
When subjected to the Women Only List many senior members campaigned against the
`process`,they even went to the County and London Labour group to change their
decision but they soon one by one ``Changed``their minds.
Every Political Party is the same,no one steps out of line unless they have strong
principles.
Sadly that is why those that do will spoil their ballot papers,but sadly it will be a mere
ripple on the pond.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Women Only short lists are a tad out of date now for sure..it needs to change. So hopefully those on high, and I suspect womens champion Harriet Harmon may have been behind all this...well they need to listen.
We all remember the Blair Babes and the great push to get women into parliament and that was good then but is somewhat dated around the edges now.
Clair isnt an 'imposed candidate' as stated above but an imposed sex of candidate. There were other women on the short list and Clair Hawkins won through and beat off the opposition. An imposed candidate would be someone bussed in that we were told to have with no choice option. The nation has seen quite a few of those. There is a subtle difference there but an important one I think. I say 'we' there but Im not a member of the Labour Party just to make that clear.
I dont know why Keefy didnt make his protest earlier. Why wait til the candidate is all up and running and beginning to make ground. The time to object was when the all women short list plan was announced.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Paul # 47.. Agree but you are in need of some background information.
Keith and I have campaigned from day one,within and outside the Labour Party
against Women Only Lists and P.F.I.
On Women Only Lists our campaign stepped up when the `system` was targeted on
me at County not only by the National Labour Party Policy but by certain individuals in
the local Labour Party where the `system` was first targeted on their Wards but they
tried to divert the `system` on to Bill Newman and Keith`s Ward.
Bill and Keith fought them off.
The local Labour Party `individuals`then targeted my Ward and were successful.
Their is some poetic justice,however,these `individuals`had ambitions to be in Clair`s
position today but are now suffering from their own very unpleasant actions.
Unfortunately Clair is caught in the middle of all this,hopefully she will survive.
Obviosly we need to confirm that Gordon Cowan ``was not``involved with this
treachery.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
reg
i spoke to gordon at the flag ceremony the other week and he said he was opposed to "all women" short lists but he would still do all he could to help clair get elected.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Thanks Howard.That is typical of Gordon and I know he will campaign hard for Clair
but he must have been devastated that he was not permitted to stand for selection.
I know from way back he had hopes he would one day be our MP.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
indeed reg after gwyn finally lost to champagne charlie i thought that gordon would have been the natural choice of candidate, a street fighter of the old school but still with charisma to appeal to the voters.
Guest 663- Registered: 20 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,136
I did not personally agree with the all woman lists, but we are where we are, and Clair was the best choice she's local and also had some experience away from here, so time will tell if she can take Charlie to the wire.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
This letter/comment will,hopefully,be in the Dover Mercury from Keith..
My comments/fight against the conservatives continues with passion this remains
unaltered,
Having spent 25 years or more in the labour party when the issue of women only
shortlists first raised its ugly head i opposed it both at national/regional/local levels
when it was imposed in the county elections.
I have continued to take the same line in a consistent manner.
The view held by some members that the present imposed candidate would have won
under any selection system we will never know as this was never an option.
My decision is not to opt out of the democratic process, but to spoil my ballot paper
which is quite different.
I'm a great believer in wanting more women and all to be involved in/stand for,
positions within the party, but openly discriminate to stop people standing is one that i
do feel very strongly about, as do many women members if they
were to be questioned closely enough, this is realy about if you don't support this
undemocratic process (which i have been consistent in my opposition to it) then in
principle you should consider spoiling your ballot paper, with a protest message.
There are a number of women within the party that oppose women only shortlists,
but the local party and national party appear to approve of this undemocratic process.
I would have been happy had claire stood in an open selection and won the right to be
the labour candidate, and i would have voted/campaigned for her.
I'm afraid i cannot support imposed candidates/not selected through choice, and no
males able to stand.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
yes howard;
a follow up article in one of the 2 local rags
the other local rag chose not to run the story
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
sorry to hear that keith i think ms bailes needs to be severely chastised, i have put my name down for it.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
howard,can i come and watch please.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
dont want to know about your fantasies howard/brian lol
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
had quite a few e mails on this subject, ticketmaster will be handling the booking arrangements.
that should put our minds at rest.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
in your dreams kieth.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
brian
replied to your post 56
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS