|
|
Post by jimboo2017 on May 11, 2018 10:25:52 GMT
Then at less than 4’ tall I should clearly be the front-runner (and would also break another glass ceiling by becoming the first Labour MP called Tim/Timothy/or if you have a death wish, Timmy! This therefore means that Labour have had more Tristrams than Tims. Lot of Scottish Labour Tims have joined the SNP and the Williams are moving to the Tories |
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823 
|
Post by timmullen1 on May 11, 2018 10:29:56 GMT
Looks like it’s in the Borough but in Beckenham constituency by the postcode, although it could be large enough to overspill into LW&P. The Park isn't in Beckenham (and none of Lewisham borough is in Beckenham constituency). The west part is in Lewisham West and Penge (Bellingham ward), the east part in Lewisham East (Downham ward), the limit being Thameslink. Okay, I’m nowhere near London, but the planning application for the redevelopment is on Lewisham LBC’s planning portal inviting comments addressed to that council, and the postcode on the address on said application when typed into the “Find My MP” on the Parliament website says the MP is Bob Stewart, Beckenham. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 11, 2018 10:38:38 GMT
I have never accepted the need for gender parity for its own sake , and on principle refuse to support a gender-vetted candidate. I live in the key marginal of Norwich North which did select from such a shortlist. As a result I will spoil my Ballot Paper at the General Election. There's the rub, many think having a PLP vaguely representative of the actual British population brings more tangible benefits than just "looking better". On the same basis I would refuse to support a candidate selected from an All Black Shortlist - an All Disabled Shortlist - an All Gay Shortlist - an All Transexual Shortlist - or indeed an All Paedophile Shortlist. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on May 11, 2018 10:48:13 GMT
Well, that is your stance which is shared by quite a few others. However, many will disagree.
I will simply restrict my observations to saying that back in the days of overwhelmingly de facto "all male shortlists", the "best" candidate was far from always chosen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 11, 2018 10:51:49 GMT
There's the rub, many think having a PLP vaguely representative of the actual British population brings more tangible benefits than just "looking better". On the same basis I would refuse to support a candidate selected from an All Black Shortlist - an All Disabled Shortlist - an All Gay Shortlist - an All Transexual Shortlist - or indeed an All Paedophile Shortlist. The problem was that without positive action the overwhelming outcome of selections went to a very similar category of people and I'm not in the least convinced that they were the best possible people. |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,732
|
Post by Chris from Brum on May 11, 2018 10:54:38 GMT
Why have you edited my post before quoting it? Uh? A very small, discreet spelling correction (one "t" at the end of profit). Is this really an issue? Seriously? |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on May 11, 2018 10:55:51 GMT
Why have you edited my post before quoting it? Uh? A very small, discreet spelling correction (one "t" at the end of profit). Is this really an issue? Seriously? It has a significance in the context of this constituency which you obviously missed. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 11, 2018 10:57:31 GMT
Well, that is your stance which is shared by quite a few others. However, many will disagree. I will simply restrict my observations to saying that back in the days of overwhelmingly de facto "all male shortlists", the "best" candidate was far from always chosen. I have always had the impression that the demand for All Women Shortlists was generated internally - from within the activist base. I have never had the sense - at anytime since this began to be imposed on us in the mid-1990s - that there was a great yearning from the wider electorate to have more women MPs as a matter of principle. To date , I have persuaded three other people to abstain here in Norwich North at the next election - and hope to build on that. |
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,732
|
Post by Chris from Brum on May 11, 2018 10:57:58 GMT
Uh? A very small, discreet spelling correction (one "t" at the end of profit). Is this really an issue? Seriously? It has a significance in the context of this constituency which you obviously missed. Ah, then my mistake, and apologies. Perhaps a capital "P" would have dropped a hint to the ignorant. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 11, 2018 11:03:20 GMT
Well, that is your stance which is shared by quite a few others. However, many will disagree. I will simply restrict my observations to saying that back in the days of overwhelmingly de facto "all male shortlists", the "best" candidate was far from always chosen. I have always had the impression that the demand for All Women Shortlists was generated internally - from within the activist basis. I have never had the sense - at anytime since this began to be imposed on us in the mid-1990s - that there was a great yearning from the wider electorate to have more women MPs as a matter of principle. To date , I have persuaded three other people to abstain here in Norwich North at the next election - and hope to build on that. All campaigns which highlight issues of discrimination come from activists, particularly when there is widespread prejudice or just indifference in the population. If we waited for "wider yearning" vwry few of the welcome social changes would have happened. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 11, 2018 11:07:59 GMT
I have always had the impression that the demand for All Women Shortlists was generated internally - from within the activist basis. I have never had the sense - at anytime since this began to be imposed on us in the mid-1990s - that there was a great yearning from the wider electorate to have more women MPs as a matter of principle. To date , I have persuaded three other people to abstain here in Norwich North at the next election - and hope to build on that. All campaigns which highlight issues of discrimination come from activists, particularly when there is widespread prejudice or just indifference in the population. If we waited for "wider yearning" vwry few of the welcome social changes would have happened. I don't accept that the case for discrimination was ever proved. In reality, there were various lifestyle factors which meant that fewer women wished to offer themselves as candidates.Moreover, many women consistently voted for the selection of male candidates. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on May 11, 2018 11:26:26 GMT
Obviously there are no circumstances where i would vote Labour, but if the Conservatives pulled an all-woman or all non-white shortlist in my constituency I certainly wouldn't vote for them (the latter is worse because they are defined not by what they are as in 'a woman' but in terms of what they are not, ie 'a white person'. Why should a white man who has lived all his life in (say) Downham and supported Labour all that time vote for a candidate who has been selected on the basis that he is not a white man. He would be mad to do so having been told by the Labour party that he is not fit to represent his home constituency purely because of his ethnicity (which happens to be the largest ethnic group in the constituency).
I hardly think non-white ethnic groups are under-represented in the House of Commons these days anyway
|
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 11, 2018 11:27:08 GMT
All campaigns which highlight issues of discrimination come from activists, particularly when there is widespread prejudice or just indifference in the population. If we waited for "wider yearning" vwry few of the welcome social changes would have happened. I don't accept that the case for discrimination was ever proved. In reality, there were various lifestyle factors which meant that fewer women wished to offer themselves as candidates.Moreover, many women consistently voted for the selection of male candidates. You could use the same argument for absolutely any group discriminated against. Of course the factors preventing women stepping forward as candidates also needed changing. I would hope that eventually separate lists won't be needed but having a House of Commons overwhelmingly dominated by white men needed to change. AWS did help to enable this. |
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on May 11, 2018 11:38:33 GMT
I don't accept that the case for discrimination was ever proved. In reality, there were various lifestyle factors which meant that fewer women wished to offer themselves as candidates.Moreover, many women consistently voted for the selection of male candidates. You could use the same argument for absolutely any group discriminated against. Of course the factors preventing women stepping forward as candidates also needed changing. I would hope that eventually separate lists won't be needed but having a House of Commons overwhelmingly dominated by white men needed to change. AWS did help to enable this. I generally agree Mike, however maybe the time has now come to look again, particularly given that I think most CLP’s are now willing to at least give women, and maybe BAME, candidate due consideration. Given that open shortlists have a version of the NFL’s “Rooney Rule” (presumably not named after Wayne) which states that every shortlist and interview for a coaching position has to include at least one minority candidate, to which we add gender balance, perhaps AWS’ could be used more sparingly. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 11, 2018 11:48:42 GMT
You could use the same argument for absolutely any group discriminated against. Of course the factors preventing women stepping forward as candidates also needed changing. I would hope that eventually separate lists won't be needed but having a House of Commons overwhelmingly dominated by white men needed to change. AWS did help to enable this. I generally agree Mike, however maybe the time has now come to look again, particularly given that I think most CLP’s are now willing to at least give women, and maybe BAME, candidate due consideration. Given that open shortlists have a version of the NFL’s “Rooney Rule” (presumably not named after Wayne) which states that every shortlist and interview for a coaching position has to include at least one minority candidate, to which we add gender balance, perhaps AWS’ could be used more sparingly. I wouldnt disagree that it shouldn't be seen as set in stone. I think the changes in how the selections are carried out have helped greatly. You used to get Spad's and think tank researchers based in Lindon effectively given as much time as they need to work a safe seat and often with active support from a sitting MP. That's how some very mediocre candidates of both genders got selected. It made it much harder for people with normal jobs and caring responsibilities to have any chance as their lives just didn't allow them to do that sort of thing. Women were particularly affected though of course some women who shared those characteristics benefited too |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 11, 2018 11:55:42 GMT
I don't accept that the case for discrimination was ever proved. In reality, there were various lifestyle factors which meant that fewer women wished to offer themselves as candidates.Moreover, many women consistently voted for the selection of male candidates. You could use the same argument for absolutely any group discriminated against. Of course the factors preventing women stepping forward as candidates also needed changing. I would hope that eventually separate lists won't be needed but having a House of Commons overwhelmingly dominated by white men needed to change. AWS did help to enable this. As I have said, I remain far from convinced that there has been serious discrimination. Under no circumstances is further open discrimination a reasonable response to any perceived problem.By the early to id-1990s there were already significantly more women Labour MPs than back in the 1950s and 1960s so any arguments to justify positive discrimination were weaker than had been the case a generation or so earlier. Why he focus on gender? When are we to address other factors related to personal identity such as - colour - race - disability - sexual orientation - sexual perversion? |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 11, 2018 11:57:23 GMT
You could use the same argument for absolutely any group discriminated against. Of course the factors preventing women stepping forward as candidates also needed changing. I would hope that eventually separate lists won't be needed but having a House of Commons overwhelmingly dominated by white men needed to change. AWS did help to enable this. As I have said, I remain far from convinced that there has been serious discrimination. Under no circumstances is further open discrimination a reasonable response to any perceived problem.By the early to mid-1990s there were already significantly more women Labour MPs than back in the 1950s and 1960s so any arguments to justify positive discrimination were weaker than had been the case a generation or so earlier. Why the focus on gender? When are we to address other factors related to personal identity such as - colour - race - disability - sexual orientation - sexual perversion? |
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on May 11, 2018 12:37:43 GMT
As I have said, I remain far from convinced that there has been serious discrimination. Under no circumstances is further open discrimination a reasonable response to any perceived problem.By the early to mid-1990s there were already significantly more women Labour MPs than back in the 1950s and 1960s so any arguments to justify positive discrimination were weaker than had been the case a generation or so earlier. Why the focus on gender? When are we to address other factors related to personal identity such as - colour - race - disability - sexual orientation - sexual perversion? All I would say that I was on the CLP Executive that ran the Stoke South selection in 1990/91 when Jack Ashley had announced his retirement, and if Regional Office had not insisted (presumably with the NEC’s backing), that we shortlisted at least one woman (turned out to be Angela Eagle) the vast majority of the elderly, white, male membership would have had a shortlist of two white male candidates. We even had to delay the Hustings meeting while one Branch pursued a fruitless formal complaint against Angela’s inclusion on the shortlist purely on the basis of her gender. Equally I’d say that in the couple of City Council elections held since we moved to an all-out electoral system we have only had as high a number of women candidates because they’ve outnumbered men in applications. |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on May 11, 2018 14:32:15 GMT
Why was gender prioritised?
Women make up just over half the population.
You may want to check to see how many MP's were female, and then consider why the party thought that the status quo couldn't continue
I think its actually enabled a wider range of considerations, as it has highlighted the need to have a more diverse parliamentary party.
|
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 11, 2018 14:34:51 GMT
All I would say that I was on the CLP Executive that ran the Stoke South selection in 1990/91 when Jack Ashley had announced his retirement, and if Regional Office had not insisted (presumably with the NEC’s backing), that we shortlisted at least one woman (turned out to be Angela Eagle) the vast majority of the elderly, white, male membership would have had a shortlist of two white male candidates. We even had to delay the Hustings meeting while one Branch pursued a fruitless formal complaint against Angela’s inclusion on the shortlist purely on the basis of her gender. Equally I’d say that in the couple of City Council elections held since we moved to an all-out electoral system we have only had as high a number of women candidates because they’ve outnumbered men in applications. I recall attending various selection meetings in the mid-1980s when candidates were selected who were to fight the 1987 election. Several senior CLP people - all male - all openly declared that 'they would like to have a woman candidate'. Frankly it seemed quite 'in vogue ' - and rather patronising to women. Here in Norwich North a male candidate was selected following the sudden calling of the election last year. He was given little chance of defeating Chloe Smith to win the seat yet cut her majority from 4500 to just 507. He has been denied the chance to have another crack at her next time - and I think that was wrong - and unfair. |
|
