Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,020
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Dec 13, 2022 3:31:06 GMT
You seem to be talking about Labour Party rules, whereas everybody else is talking about electoral law. Well as the form I have to sign has the Electoral Commission paraphernalia on it, clearly states that I am the Authorised Individual of [insert Party], by submitting the form I am confirming that the individual named on the form is legally entitled to use the registered description and logos of the Party mentioned above, and that the EC guidance states a candidate must submit “authorisation to use a party description and an emblem request form (if standing on behalf of a registered party)” in order to be validly nominated, I’m assuming it spreads beyond the Labour Party. I am also aware of candidates who have been denied the use of Party identification (non Labour) because of the lack of said form. Each party also has regional and national authorised officers though (required as back-up in case the local authorising officer is indisposed). I seem to recall that with that double Labour nomination relatively recently, it was where there was a local dispute so the local nominating officer nominated one candidate, and the supporters of the alternative candidate managed to manipulate the regional nominator to nominate theirs (via telling them that their local authorising officer was not available). |
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823 
|
Post by timmullen1 on Dec 13, 2022 4:19:11 GMT
Well as the form I have to sign has the Electoral Commission paraphernalia on it, clearly states that I am the Authorised Individual of [insert Party], by submitting the form I am confirming that the individual named on the form is legally entitled to use the registered description and logos of the Party mentioned above, and that the EC guidance states a candidate must submit “authorisation to use a party description and an emblem request form (if standing on behalf of a registered party)” in order to be validly nominated, I’m assuming it spreads beyond the Labour Party. I am also aware of candidates who have been denied the use of Party identification (non Labour) because of the lack of said form. Each party also has regional and national authorised officers though (required as back-up in case the local authorising officer is indisposed). I seem to recall that with that double Labour nomination relatively recently, it was where there was a local dispute so the local nominating officer nominated one candidate, and the supporters of the alternative candidate managed to manipulate the regional nominator to nominate theirs (via telling them that their local authorising officer was not available). Very possible; being a three Constituency area the three CLP Secretaries were usually the authorised officers, and because we tried to deliver the nomination papers en bloc we had an arrangement that North’s would always be in the Civic Centre so that if someone was short of a signature he could add his, but we were authorised by West Midlands Regional Office who in turn were acting on behalf of the national party. I only signed all South’s papers in 2019 because nobody from our officer cabal would do it, and appointed me (without telling me) as I’d not long retired as Secretary. I guess if Neil, Gareth and I hadn’t had such a good working relationship the double nomination could have occurred here. |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,098
|
Post by ilerda on Dec 13, 2022 8:20:47 GMT
You seem to be talking about the legal requirement for a party’s candidate to be authorised by a certificate from the party’s nominating officer, whereas everybody else is talking about the maximum permitted number of candidates per party per vacancy. Which, if you could be arsed to read, is what I said, but don’t worry about it. Except it isn’t. You originally said: “Possibly, like here, you’re only allowed one candidate per Party, so one had to be the Party candidate whilst the others 34 either had to register 34 separate parties or stand as Indies?” Which you followed up with two posts containing the phrase “one party per candidate per vacancy”. This is very clearly referring to what electoral law allows, particularly given the context of the original post. It might just be easier to accept that you misunderstood or made a mistake. Nobody would hold it against you. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,783
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Dec 13, 2022 10:47:32 GMT
There is no restriction at all. There's also (to my knowledge) no restriction on how many people can be delegated the power of authorisation and there have certainly been times when I've had the power delegated for a specific area overlapping on at least one other person with the power, usually because the post crosses parliamentary boundaries. The mainstream parties overnominating is usually down to poor communication about who is sorting out paper candidates for particular areas. That may be true of the Conservative Party but it most definitely is not the case in the Labour Party which, at least up to Stoke’s most recent all out elections in 2019, when I was authorised to sign for all Stoke South candidates, was as I set out. Though it has happened. In 2017 the Labour's DNO for Scarborough Borough and Labour's DNO for Malton & Thirsk Constituency both authorised candidates for the bit of SBC that is in T&M. link We tend to have the other problem, in S&W constituency we assume T&M are approving the candidates down there as the constituency, T&M assume was are as the district. |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,020
Member is Online
|
Post by Khunanup on Dec 13, 2022 11:00:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Dec 13, 2022 11:13:10 GMT
You seem to be talking about the legal requirement for a party’s candidate to be authorised by a certificate from the party’s nominating officer, whereas everybody else is talking about the maximum permitted number of candidates per party per vacancy. Which, if you could be arsed to read, is what I said, but don’t worry about it. No it isn’t. You started by writing ” Possibly, like here, you’re only allowed one candidate per Party, ” in which “Possibly” referred to Canada, and “like here” referred to the UK. In other words, you were talking about the legal restrictions on the nomination of candidates, as if you thought that there is a law which allows only one candidate per party per vacancy, even though there isn’t. Other people corrected you by pointing out that there is no such legal restriction. If the Labour Party has an internal rule about having no more candidates than vacancies, then that is a completely different thing. Obviously you are hysterically deranged and insane, but then you’re a member of the Labour Party so I suppose that explains it |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Dec 13, 2022 11:19:14 GMT
Not just win, but with a (percentage) majority about double what it was at the GE. Poilievre's Tories have been doing OK (even if not brilliantly) in the national polls, so this comes as a bit of a surprise. |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,312
|
Post by maxque on Dec 13, 2022 14:36:01 GMT
Not just win, but with a (percentage) majority about double what it was at the GE. Poilievre's Tories have been doing OK (even if not brilliantly) in the national polls, so this comes as a bit of a surprise. Widely expected here, the Conservatives had already given up a few weeks ago. The leader is trying to keep a very low profile at the moment (doesn't want to be dragged into the Inquiry into the State of Emergency about the Freedom Convoy, as his pro-trucker position isn't a popular one with electors), Mississauga is a very poor fit for him demographic-wise and Conservatives are currently dragged down in Ontario by Ford, the provincial Premier, which is now very impopular (he passed a law removing the right of strike from anybody working in a school (he repealed that law 1 week after it passed, after unions started planning a general strike in protest) and is now busy making building in the Toronto Greenbelt way easier, pretty much gutting local governments' planning power and transferring some local councils' powers to the executive mayors, which is also disliked. On unversal swing, this would give the Liberals a majority. Lib 179 +19 Con 108 -11 BQ 27 -5 NDP 22 -3 Grn 2 |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Dec 24, 2022 20:53:39 GMT
Hilariously, 12 of the 33 independents running polled more votes than John Turmel, holder of the world record for most elections lost (104). Alain Lamontagne meanwhile set a Canadian elections record by being the first candidate to poll only 1 vote in any Canadian federal election/by-election. |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Apr 3, 2023 4:49:57 GMT
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Apr 3, 2023 23:56:11 GMT
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on May 27, 2023 15:43:46 GMT
Alberta, targetList for the NDP:  |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on May 28, 2023 18:04:43 GMT
Alberta's opinionPolls:  Recently there seems to have taken place some herding, before that they differed quite a lot. Crucial will be - as allWays in Alberta - Calgary (especially its NW). On the one hand Mrs.Smith appears to be a terrible fit for that city, on the other hand the Cons. have often been underpolled. |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on May 30, 2023 0:26:03 GMT
My brain says, that most polls had UCP ahead plus traditional underpolling aso.
My stomach says, that Calgary will turn away from Mrs.Smith (interestingly the city has in federal elections been firmly on the right, but has nonetheless elected left mayors - expected would be rather the opPosite).
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on May 30, 2023 2:31:42 GMT
Just 300 votes cast, but UCP appears as fairly strong.
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on May 30, 2023 3:53:56 GMT
Don't fear, that You have missed anything: The Elec.Commission of Canada's wealthiest province has not been able to count/tabulate much more than 100.000 votes.
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,846
|
Post by Georg Ebner on May 30, 2023 4:09:17 GMT
The very little available data has UCP at those ~55% received last time (albeit we are having no idea, how the turnOut changed). NDP is advancing from 33% to 44% by squeezing out the Alb.P. and the Liberals.
|
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on May 30, 2023 5:11:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on May 30, 2023 5:45:28 GMT
A reasonably comfortable UCP win. The NDP's startling win in 2015 depended on an almost evenly split conservative camp. With a united conservative party (bearing that name to emphasise it) they must struggle. They look to have polled comfortably above their 2015 performance, achieved a strong swing and knocked down a few senior UCP figures. But they've lost.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on May 30, 2023 12:27:40 GMT
Looks like a 49-38 final score - though apparently a fairly small swing to the NDP might have meant a "wrong winner" result.
|
|
