Labour selects Watford parliamentary candidate for 2015 (From Watford Observer)

It's good to see Labour have selected a local candidate in Matt Turmaine, who is already known as a hard-working and effective local Councillor. With the national decline of the Liberal Democrats, Watford will be a major battleground between Labour and the Tories in 2015.

Despite the national picture the Lib Dems locally are still strong and well organised. So it is likely to be a tough three-way fight.
It will be interesting to see if Dorothy contests the parliamentary seat. I would expect the Lib Dems to announce their candidate later this year. Of course there is an election for Mayor in 2014 and she has to decide if that's her priority or possibly to run for both.
But unseating Mr Harrington will be hard. The local Tories may have a poor organisation but will likely compensate for that by spending lots more money than their rivals in the run-up to the 2015 election.

Mike Ribble wrote:
Despite the national picture the Lib Dems locally are still strong and well organised. So it is likely to be a tough three-way fight.
It will be interesting to see if Dorothy contests the parliamentary seat. I would expect the Lib Dems to announce their candidate later this year. Of course there is an election for Mayor in 2014 and she has to decide if that's her priority or possibly to run for both.
But unseating Mr Harrington will be hard. The local Tories may have a poor organisation but will likely compensate for that by spending lots more money than their rivals in the run-up to the 2015 election.

You can look at the Electoral Commission Finance declarations of the main parties to see how heavily the Tories are able to outspend the others. With Income in 2011 of £70,000 compared to Labours less than £25,000. Mind you at a General election in 2010 the Tories had income of £112,000. Because of their numerical advantage on the council the Liberal Democrats are able to use their Councillor allowances to also spend a lot more than Labour, with subscription income of nearly £25,000 and total Income of £36,000. Interstingly both coalition parties have falling membership with just 188 constituency residents full members of the Tory party and 205 residents members of the Liberal Democrats.

Middle class, white, male, just what Parliament needs, they're short of those.

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Middle class, white, male, just what Parliament needs, they're short of those.

Wacko Jacko: he can not help his ethnicity or his gender, really it only matters that he is the best person for the job.

scarecrow wrote:

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Middle class, white, male, just what Parliament needs, they're short of those.

Wacko Jacko: he can not help his ethnicity or his gender, really it only matters that he is the best person for the job.

Not to the PC and quota's brigade it doesn't, you have to have correct numbers of women, black, young and old, even if they are the numptiest of numptys, Watched No balls on TV today, FFS they are still in denial over the massive problems they have caused the country, god forbid they ever get back in.

scarecrow wrote:

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Middle class, white, male, just what Parliament needs, they're short of those.

Wacko Jacko: he can not help his ethnicity or his gender, really it only matters that he is the best person for the job.

Racist

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Middle class, white, male, just what Parliament needs, they're short of those.

Sorry scarecrow, I meant that for Wacky!

Wacko, you are a racist.

Why not allow the best person to do the job?

MarsLander wrote:

scarecrow wrote:

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Middle class, white, male, just what Parliament needs, they're short of those.

Wacko Jacko: he can not help his ethnicity or his gender, really it only matters that he is the best person for the job.

Racist

Mar Slander lives up to his name once again. Calling me a racist for pointing out that this appointment is yet another blow for equality (gender as well as race) is bizarre. I've nothing against white folks, but I happen to think that Parliament needs more women MPs and more ethnic minority MPs so that it begins to broadly reflect the rich gender and ethnic mix of our population. You can't seriously think that there are no women or ethnic minority potential candidates who could be every bit as good as Mr Turmaine, fine fellow though he is.

MarsLander wrote:

scarecrow wrote:

Wacko Jacko wrote:
Middle class, white, male, just what Parliament needs, they're short of those.

Wacko Jacko: he can not help his ethnicity or his gender, really it only matters that he is the best person for the job.

Racist

Mar Slander lives up to his name once again. Calling me a racist for pointing out that this appointment is yet another blow for equality (gender as well as race) is bizarre. I've nothing against white folks, but I happen to think that Parliament needs more women MPs and more ethnic minority MPs so that it begins to broadly reflect the rich gender and ethnic mix of our population. You can't seriously think that there are no women or ethnic minority potential candidates who could be every bit as good as Mr Turmaine, fine fellow though he is.

Anyone who thinks MPs should be selected by gender or colour is not very clever in my book.

I've never followed that weird philosophy that tells one human being they can't have the job even though they are the best by far, solely because they are the wrong race and/or gender.

Happily, I think that Wakky Bakky and I are on separate intellectual paths. Vive la difference!

BTW, the one place, whilst we still have a semblance of a self-government, that we do not need more women or people of certain races or colours is Parliament. This is a serious business (Parliament) and I do not want it run by people who have ticked the right boxes in sexuality, gender or colour. They are taking the place of the person I want to be my MP - the best person for my constituency and for the country!

Wacky would have banned them from being selected in the first place because they were not the right sexuality, colour or gender. A warped way of looking at the world.

MarsLander wrote:
Anyone who thinks MPs should be selected by gender or colour is not very clever in my book.

I've never followed that weird philosophy that tells one human being they can't have the job even though they are the best by far, solely because they are the wrong race and/or gender.

Happily, I think that Wakky Bakky and I are on separate intellectual paths. Vive la difference!

BTW, the one place, whilst we still have a semblance of a self-government, that we do not need more women or people of certain races or colours is Parliament. This is a serious business (Parliament) and I do not want it run by people who have ticked the right boxes in sexuality, gender or colour. They are taking the place of the person I want to be my MP - the best person for my constituency and for the country!

Wacky would have banned them from being selected in the first place because they were not the right sexuality, colour or gender. A warped way of looking at the world.

Your sentiments are correct, but too many barriers are put in place so people with real talent cannot get anywhere near being considered as a MP.

The criteria seems to be:
- promise the world, then U-turn when you get in
- be a slave to your party and forget your own moral compass
- hop to the tune of whatever interest group keeps you on the gravy train
(e.g. Mr Harrington and his Conservative Friends of Israel)

Paul,

you forgot the "try to empty the trough of expenses in record time".

MarsLander wrote:
Anyone who thinks MPs should be selected by gender or colour is not very clever in my book.

I've never followed that weird philosophy that tells one human being they can't have the job even though they are the best by far, solely because they are the wrong race and/or gender.

Happily, I think that Wakky Bakky and I are on separate intellectual paths. Vive la difference!

BTW, the one place, whilst we still have a semblance of a self-government, that we do not need more women or people of certain races or colours is Parliament. This is a serious business (Parliament) and I do not want it run by people who have ticked the right boxes in sexuality, gender or colour. They are taking the place of the person I want to be my MP - the best person for my constituency and for the country!

Wacky would have banned them from being selected in the first place because they were not the right sexuality, colour or gender. A warped way of looking at the world.

Interesting that Labour don't share your views about the getting the best man for the job, having recently announced women only shortlists for half of London's target seats - http://www.standard.
co.uk/news/politics/
womenonly-lists-for-
half-of-london-seats
-that-labour-has-in-
its-sights-8494601.h
tml - despite the fact that these by definition exclude minority groups as well as males.
I happen to believe that intellectual ability is nothing to do with gender or race, so having a rich mix of people of all types is a good policy to ensure you do indeed get the best candidate.

Labour and Waccy baccy do not share my views on MP selection? Quelle surprise!

Does that mean I am wrong?

Intellectual ability is not dictated by gender or colour, so why use these to select candidates?

The best person should be selected for prospective MP, regardless of race and gender. IF the majority of them turn out to be male, female, black, white or blue with cream spots it should be an indication of the gene pool that put themselves forward for selection, not some preconceived idea of who should be allowed to stand by quota.

Setting quotas for this sort of thing is stupid. I will never support quotas based on race or gender or any other accident of birth.

"Middle class, white, male, just what Parliament needs, they're short of those." - says Waccy baccy

I'm afraid that sort of comment leads to quota politics and barring perfectly good candidates. Not very clever thinking really, is it?