Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,058
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Apr 19, 2024 12:41:32 GMT
It can actually be easier for someone with no local ties to maintain an address in the constituency than someone local, who may well live on the constituency boundary or just outside the constituency.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Apr 19, 2024 13:08:16 GMT
The same critera as local elections is "anywhere within the area of the assembly you are being elected to". So, for the UK Parliament, that's anywhere in the UK. Which is wrong in my opinion. Jesus Christ, you lot don’t like change do you? 🤣 What was you all like during puberty? 🤣 No we don't. Many of us are conservatives. Then, "we was like you" : rough-edged, ill-formed and wrong about most things, whilst being earnestly certain of your own rightness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2024 13:17:55 GMT
Also - there are good examples this cycle of parties rejecting attempted parachutes. I voted in one such selection! I don't like representatives from outside the area, defined as what people feel is "local". I don't care if my district councillor lives in Dursley rather than Cam, but I do care if they live over in Stroud.
I voted for Simon Opher, a local GP, over former MEP Claire Moody, partly because the national party had attempted a very obvious stitch-up, but also because local is important to me. I don't like having an MP from a long way away (Moody was Salisbury-based, apparently), and I don't think such a candidate would have been in a good position to win. However, you cannot police that fairly or effectively, or without a ton of unintended consequences. It should be left to local party members to reject a prospective candidate if they aren't local enough, and to the electorate to reject a candidate if they feel they aren't local enough.
As it happens I like Claire Moody and would have voted for her at the GE anyway had she been selected. I care about local representation, but not at the expense of allowing this government to continue in power
|
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Apr 19, 2024 13:20:17 GMT
The same critera as local elections is "anywhere within the area of the assembly you are being elected to". So, for the UK Parliament, that's anywhere in the UK. Which is wrong in my opinion. Jesus Christ, you lot don’t like change do you? 🤣 What was you all like during puberty? 🤣 Liberals do like change, and some of us like rules and regulations, that's the great contradiction. Conservatives don't like change, and some of them want a Bonfire of rules and regulations, that's their great contradiction. Labour supporters are a llaw unto themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Apr 19, 2024 13:36:08 GMT
Also - there are good examples this cycle of parties rejecting attempted parachutes. I voted in one such selection! I don't like representatives from outside the area, defined as what people feel is "local". I don't care if my district councillor lives in Dursley rather than Cam, but I do care if they live over in Stroud. I voted for Simon Opher, a local GP, over former MEP Claire Moody, partly because the national party had attempted a very obvious stitch-up, but also because local is important to me. I don't like having an MP from a long way away (Moody was Salisbury-based, apparently), and I don't think such a candidate would have been in a good position to win. However, you cannot police that fairly or effectively, or without a ton of unintended consequences. It should be left to local party members to reject a prospective candidate if they aren't local enough, and to the electorate to reject a candidate if they feel they aren't local enough. As it happens I like Claire Moody and would have voted for her at the GE anyway had she been selected. I care about local representation, but not at the expense of allowing this government to continue in power I am truly astonished at the small-mindedness of so many of you. Localism gone mad. One could lose the whole of Britain in the state of Texas alone. Many of you show mindsets that were formed before the invention of the bicycle let alone railways. IMO the best MPs are often complete outsiders who will examine carefully and have no internal bias or givens. They will note the strengths and weaknesses much more readily and accurately. They will tend to be fairer and more universal in thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Apr 19, 2024 13:37:47 GMT
One good reason to be opposed to change is that the specific change is not a good idea.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,834 
Member is Online
|
Post by john07 on Apr 19, 2024 13:38:43 GMT
Labour supporters are a llaw unto themselves. Is llaw the Welsh for Law? |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 19, 2024 13:42:13 GMT
Anyone who wants to make an argument about requiring lengthy residence in an area in order to be elected as its representative is directed to John McCain's reply to charges of being a carpetbagger during the primary election for US Representative in Arizona in 1982.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Apr 19, 2024 13:44:22 GMT
Anyone who wants to make an argument about requiring lengthy residence in an area in order to be elected as its representative is directed to John McCain's reply to charges of being a carpetbagger during the primary election for US Representative in Arizona in 1982. “I wish I could have had the luxury, like you, of growing up and living and spending my entire life in a nice place like the first district of Arizona, but I was doing other things. As a matter of fact, when I think about it now, the place I lived longest in my life was Hanoi.” |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Apr 19, 2024 13:47:54 GMT
Labour supporters are a llaw unto themselves. Is llaw the Welsh for Law? hand |
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Apr 19, 2024 14:05:23 GMT
Labour supporters are a llaw unto themselves. Is llaw the Welsh for Law? Aaah, oops. I've got a Welsh language keyboard on my phone and don't always check before I post. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,926
|
Post by right on Apr 19, 2024 14:24:12 GMT
Clearly a lot of people in the country are happy to have random parachute candidates standing as their local MP, who knew? I'm happy for the voters to decide if they think that's a problem. I don't agree with more qualifications - particularly ones that can be gamed more easily by big parties than small parties or individual candidates But there is a real problem with careerist politicians, particularly in safe seats. We've seen a bit of this in South West Norfolk, but the demise of the locally connected representative is probably making it harder to get heard in Parliament. When you get some spad into a seat that will only fall under an enormous swing or long term demographic change, and their main concern is getting as high as they can up the Westminster pecking order (which may not be that high) then around half of Parliament becomes almost useless. Yes, there may be some excellent ministers and shadow ministers with safe seats who never rebel, but once you strip those four or five MPs out of it what are you left with? |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Apr 19, 2024 14:29:58 GMT
I'm happy for the voters to decide if they think that's a problem. I don't agree with more qualifications - particularly ones that can be gamed more easily by big parties than small parties or individual candidates But there is a real problem with careerist politicians, particularly in safe seats. We've seen a bit of this in South West Norfolk, but the demise of the locally connected representative is probably making it harder to get heard in Parliament. When you get some spad into a seat that will only fall under an enormous swing or long term demographic change, and their main concern is getting as high as they can up the Westminster pecking order (which may not be that high) then around half of Parliament becomes almost useless. Yes, there may be some excellent ministers and shadow ministers with safe seats who never rebel, but once you strip those four or five MPs out of it what are you left with? I don't accept that. Truss may be a poor constituency MP with little real interest in her constituency, but in the neighbouring seat you've got George Freeman. He's got equally few roots in Norfolk, but he's generally considered to be somebody with a real interest in his seat and a lot of his activity in Parliament has been shaped around lobbying for key industries locally. I'm also sceptical that we're seeing a demise of locally connected representatives. It used to be considered that a diligent MP was one who visited his seat once a month, which isn't the standard anywhere now. The Conservatives have selected a very large number of local councillors this time round and whilst Labour has selected more outsiders this time, previous intakes have been weighted towards those with strong local connections. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,926
|
Post by right on Apr 19, 2024 14:33:06 GMT
Also - there are good examples this cycle of parties rejecting attempted parachutes. I voted in one such selection! I don't like representatives from outside the area, defined as what people feel is "local". I don't care if my district councillor lives in Dursley rather than Cam, but I do care if they live over in Stroud. I voted for Simon Opher, a local GP, over former MEP Claire Moody, partly because the national party had attempted a very obvious stitch-up, but also because local is important to me. I don't like having an MP from a long way away (Moody was Salisbury-based, apparently), and I don't think such a candidate would have been in a good position to win. However, you cannot police that fairly or effectively, or without a ton of unintended consequences. It should be left to local party members to reject a prospective candidate if they aren't local enough, and to the electorate to reject a candidate if they feel they aren't local enough. As it happens I like Claire Moody and would have voted for her at the GE anyway had she been selected. I care about local representation, but not at the expense of allowing this government to continue in power I am truly astonished at the small-mindedness of so many of you. Localism gone mad. One could lose the whole of Britain in the state of Texas alone. Many of you show mindsets that were formed before the invention of the bicycle let alone railways. IMO the best MPs are often complete outsiders who will examine carefully and have no internal bias or givens. They will note the strengths and weaknesses much more readily and accurately. They will tend to be fairer and more universal in thinking. If we did get these independent minded paragons I'd be fine with this. There are some potential Benns, Foots, Powells and Boris's in the Commons, but they are very few. But there are also an awful lot who've done PPE at Oxford or similar, become a Spad or think tanker, fought a hopeless seat, got a job in lobbying and then a safe seat from which only an unlucky boundary review will ever dislodge them. They are on average very clever and a lot of them are actually quite nice (or good at pretending to be so) but it's actually a very narrow pool and it suppresses - although thankfully not eliminated - the warp and weave you need in Parliament. There probably will always be a place for these types, they're ambitious enough and some will get through any filter you set them. But more parochialism regarding candidates would make for a more ornery and effective Parliament. |
|
davidh
Forum Regular
Posts: 39
|
Post by davidh on Apr 19, 2024 14:45:08 GMT
Also - there are good examples this cycle of parties rejecting attempted parachutes. I voted in one such selection! I don't like representatives from outside the area, defined as what people feel is "local". I don't care if my district councillor lives in Dursley rather than Cam, but I do care if they live over in Stroud. I voted for Simon Opher, a local GP, over former MEP Claire Moody, partly because the national party had attempted a very obvious stitch-up, but also because local is important to me. I don't like having an MP from a long way away (Moody was Salisbury-based, apparently), and I don't think such a candidate would have been in a good position to win. However, you cannot police that fairly or effectively, or without a ton of unintended consequences. It should be left to local party members to reject a prospective candidate if they aren't local enough, and to the electorate to reject a candidate if they feel they aren't local enough. As it happens I like Claire Moody and would have voted for her at the GE anyway had she been selected. I care about local representation, but not at the expense of allowing this government to continue in power I am truly astonished at the small-mindedness of so many of you. Localism gone mad. One could lose the whole of Britain in the state of Texas alone. Many of you show mindsets that were formed before the invention of the bicycle let alone railways. IMO the best MPs are often complete outsiders who will examine carefully and have no internal bias or givens. They will note the strengths and weaknesses much more readily and accurately. They will tend to be fairer and more universal in thinking. Railways were invented before the bicycle. But the general point is right. How about leaving the choice with the voters? There are already enough barriers in the way of people from working class and lower (or mid) incomes from getting into parliament. The financial burdens of being a candidate are considerable and would be made far worse with restrictive residency rules. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Apr 19, 2024 15:24:58 GMT
I am truly astonished at the small-mindedness of so many of you. Localism gone mad. One could lose the whole of Britain in the state of Texas alone. Many of you show mindsets that were formed before the invention of the bicycle let alone railways. IMO the best MPs are often complete outsiders who will examine carefully and have no internal bias or givens. They will note the strengths and weaknesses much more readily and accurately. They will tend to be fairer and more universal in thinking. If we did get these independent minded paragons I'd be fine with this. There are some potential Benns, Foots, Powells and Boris's in the Commons, but they are very few. But there are also an awful lot who've done PPE at Oxford or similar, become a Spad or think tanker, fought a hopeless seat, got a job in lobbying and then a safe seat from which only an unlucky boundary review will ever dislodge them. They are on average very clever and a lot of them are actually quite nice (or good at pretending to be so) but it's actually a very narrow pool and it suppresses - although thankfully not eliminated - the warp and weave you need in Parliament. There probably will always be a place for these types, they're ambitious enough and some will get through any filter you set them. But more parochialism regarding candidates would make for a more ornery and effective Parliament. No it wouldn't. That is a starry-eyed illusion. Most of them are utter plonkers with an expertise in potholes and bus schedules. You keep to your illusions and I shall cherish mine. Ahh! All cuddly now. |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,915
|
Post by YL on Jun 7, 2024 18:10:46 GMT
|
|
