Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
27 February 2011
16:2194463#21
In fairness to gwyn on selection, gwyn did a fair job as an MP and probably now smelt the coffee and saw it was time to move on.
As to other candidates, thats down to the individual but at the moment many realy good candidates will be excluded not through lack of abilty, but just because they are not female.
At the end of the day through the present selection system we still could end up with with a woman candidate, but it would be because the party supported that nomination. and we do have some very good male and female likely candidates locally and im sure further afield.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
27 February 2011
20:0394504#22
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
27 February 2011
22:2994529#23
i hppe that does not transpire john, there are not enough virile males to carry on your work in dover.
you are a legend in your own lunchtime.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
28 February 2011
07:5194545#24
Had this very interesting mailing in from Wendy Hansell. Many thanks Wendy always good to hear from yourself and Reg.
* * *
I left the Labour party over the handling of the 'Women Only short list's' 6 years ago. I have always voted labour.
Women will get where they want to be, regardless of men. I was elected the first Labour Woman Chairman of Dover District Council. Elected NOT by a women only list.
When the women only list came to Dover via the County Council Election it was recommended that where there was a two Cllr ward one should be a women's only list. This meant that it should be Mr Eddy and Mr Birkett's seat in Deal. But Mr Eddy didn't want this, so as he was leader of the County Labour Group and less popular locally than Mr Birkett he changed it to The Dover Rural seat held by Reg Hansell ( My husband)
A short list of candidates was made up of Jean Newman, Eileen Rowbotham and myself. At the selection meeting Jean withdrew as she only wanted to make a point. I attended but informed the selectors that I was only there to inform them of what had been going on behind the scenes and the reasons why this was not, in my opinion a good idea, and withdrew my candidacy. That left Eileen Rowbotham to walk into the seat. Had she withdrawn at that time we would not of been required to carry on with an all women list but could of returned to an open list. Needless to say she didn't and we lost what one of the local papers wrote was the best value for money Cllr we have ever had.
My main point in writing is to point out that Mr Eddy pushed and pushed for the women only list until it fell on his ward. He then fought the constituency who were against WO Lists changed the ward to save himself but pushed for W O list once it wasn't going to affect him..Now it seems that he had hopes of standing for M.P. It has come back to bite him. However in the mean time Labour has lost many of the people who worked hard to make it strong and a reputable force to be reckoned with.
People should be chosen not by race,gender,religion or disability but by what they as individuals can offer.
Wendy Hansell
PS.We suggest the Labour Party reconsider!!
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
28 February 2011
08:2194549#25
Good Letter from Wendy.
Opens a few eyes and makes sense.
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
28 February 2011
10:3494557#26
couldn't agree more, the party has to see sense if they want to retain credibility.
it seems judgng by wendy's letter that they have already lost some supporters.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
28 February 2011
10:4294558#27
I have never been able to understand how positive discrimination was and is allowed as it is still discrimination and not right.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 663- Registered: 20 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,136
28 February 2011
14:5294568#28
Good to hear from you wendy there. Maybe one stumbling block to this, like the tories we could end up with someone being bussed in as was Charlie, after all who knew him or knew anything about him anytime before that.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
28 February 2011
15:2794572#29
Wendy
thank you for your contribution, it should be added that yourself and Reg raised thousands of pounds for the local party before your departrure.
just to add to yout short imput, when Mr Eddy found out his seat was on the hit list he first changed it to Dover town being (one seat)where bill and i stood a women only shortlist.
Bill and I would not oppose each other in such circmstances.
and after a long drawn out argument with the regional/local party party then went as you say after reg's seat.
To follow on as you say, the labour party has lost some of its most hard working members, together with members who helped to raise a lot of dosh for the party.
You will recall wendy, that when the KCC elections were up at that time, the letter that came down from labour HQ was a GUIDLINE only, it was SUGGESTING ways of getting more women into all parts of local and national govt.
You will also recall wendy, the meeting locally of the executive labour party when i asked Mr Eddy where the proposal had come from and how long he knew about it.
You will recall he replied he had known for a while but was asked to keep it a secret!!!
a secret from the very people it affected???? you will recall mr Eddy had a rough ride at that time for the way he had handled not only the GUIDLINE but also attempted to protect his own seat and that of mr Birkett
total double standards.
you will recall wendy, we also suggested as a compromise to have one seat in deal and one in dover town all women shortlist, although i don't agree with any woman only shortlist, this to was rejected by the local/national party.
So what did it achieve for labour nationally/locally at the KCC election?
We lost one of the most respected labour county cllrs but not only respected by the labour party, at county hall mr hansell was respected by all 3 parties at county hall.
Labour didn't gain any credibility at any level inside or outside of the party, and it probably didnt help with its choice of its imposed candidate.
you will also recall wendy, bill reg and my constant battles at county hall with mr Eddy who was on a power trip.
You will remember my being called twice to the county labour group by mr eddy for daring to challenge him at local party meetings, which i continued to do and you will also recall at the labour executive both times they threw out the case
once not even getting as far as the meeting
Wendy, it would be easy for us now no longer in the party(and my being a labour voter from the age of being able to do so) to sit back.
But it's driven by passion wanting a credible labour party.
Putting this aside we could have said nothing and that way stop mr Eddy from having a chance to put up for these seats or that of MP
But unlike mr eddy we believe in democracy, and people being elected on ability rather than sex creed, etc.
Jan
just a small point on your view of the selection process, you are correct someone could be bussed in, but that is the case with or without a womens only shortlist, thats about labour party members having the choice to vote for all the candidates be they male/female or whatever, and of course if they are not local you have that choice to vote for an alternative.
The woman only shortlist gives you no guarentee's and no such ability
it would be the party saying this is the list of women you can vote for., and takes away the abilty for you to decide on your preferred candidate.
As i have said even in the present system you could end up with someone female and local but they would have got there with the support of the local party and it's members.
The woman only shortlist takes your right to this away.
You can see why wendy/reg and I have such concerns and no longer part of the party, its because we care passionatly about the party, but at the same time want honesty and fairness.
As wendy says, she achieved high status in the local council not because she was a woman but because of the support of male/female persons
Also it's like wendy says, it's all down to the local party, the local party bottled out last time over reg's seat, so i dont share john's confidence in this being overturned.
But the local party can come out of this smelling of roses and even encourage people like reg/wendy back into the party.
But i won't hold my breath,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
28 February 2011
17:0594595#30
It's disappointing to see the local Labour party tearing itself apart over this issue, especially after all their protestations on here about their not being controlled from the centre. Also we need a vigorous and credible opposition to keep the majority party on their toes.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
28 February 2011
17:3394598#31
Jan Tranter - in post #28 you said ""Maybe one stumbling block to this, like the tories we could end up with someone being bussed in as was Charlie, after all who knew him or knew anything about him anytime before that.""
I must correct you there.
No-one was bussed in at all.
Charlie, at the time of selection, lived in Sandwich just outside the Constituency but also with his mother-in-law living in this Constituency providing him with additional local links. He certainly could be counted as a 'local' from those factors. Also we had the choice of another local person on the shortlist (and a third if PaulW had decided to put himself forward again).
The decision on who to select was entirely a local one. No-one at all was 'parachuted in' or 'bussed in' as you put it. I was on the panel at the time of shortlisting so have first hand knowledge.
Incidentally - I was fully aware of Charlie long before he applied to Dover for selection as were others in Dover. He was and is well known for his contributions to Tory think tanks and blogging sites including ConHome.
Unregistered User
28 February 2011
17:3894599#32
I totally concur with Barry's posting as my name has been mentioned.
Watty
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
28 February 2011
18:3394605#33
quite so paul, i am not cognisant of this charlie long cove, but if barry knows him he must be sound.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#34
Very quick Howard.
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#35
according to this clair will gain power from charlie next time around though it is admitted that local goings on are not taken into consideration.
http://www.thisiskent.co.uk/Lib-Dems-face-defeat-Dover-Folkestone/story-18257819-detail/story.html#axzz2LNRwSc9YGuest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#36
This Is Kent points out Charlie's opposition to the Dover Harbour Board transfer scheme.
Is Charlie trying to hang on to something to make himself look indispensable?
The DHB bid has been rejected, and the Decision Minister didn't even say it was owing to Charlie.
As for Labour, if they can get a majority out of a 10% turnout....
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
#37
WELL IT HAS TO BE SAID
A woman or a man
The candidate will still have to defend the labour party's policy's that lost them thousands of Dover voters
You doubled the counsel tax in 13 years , and forced down working class wages with cheap EU labour
Having a woman candidate is not going to make that Bucket of s.... go away.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#38
Keith, the Tories and LibDems carried on in Labour's footsteps.
They're all the same!
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#39
keith
that averages out at about 7% a year, agree with you about how the reds forced down wages for the workers though, completely unforgivable.
however the other parties have no appetite to take action to stop things worsening.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
#40
howard
You mean counsel tax's up £700
