Monday, March 01, 2010

Black candidate beaten by black votes”?

Check out this post with its provocative headline regarding the outcome of the recent Leyton and Wanstead Labour Party selection for its Prospective Parliamentary Candidate. This is on the blog “Operation Black Vote”.

I will admit to being a mate of Terry Paul who came 2nd (and check out this, this and that)

No-one is really suggesting that John Cryer did not win this election fairly under Party rules and by a significant margin. He was the clear leader in all the rounds. Looking at all the figures I think he would have won in any case so well done to him and I am sure that he will make a very good MP for the CLP.

The row is about whether or not Ahmad Shahzad (Chair of BAME – see picture) who came 3rd should have “encouraged” his supporters to vote for another black candidate if he was knocked out. It would clearly appear that they were not. Which is not good if you are Chair of BAME and “Our main aim is to work towards increasing the number of black and Asian and other minority Members of Parliament and other elected bodies.

While this could be “cock up” rather than "conspiracy" (and I repeat that I think that John would have won anyway) this sort of thing needs to be sorted out asap.

8 comments:

Mike Law said...

I agree that it was most probably more of a cock up than a conspiracy.

I understand that John had the active support of a good number of Unite members and Terry was canvassing with nowhere near the same kind of support base.

John may well have won fairly under Labour Party rules (which, in my experience are interpreted by London Region in much the same way Roman Augurs interpreted auspices), but the results in Leyton and Wanstead and Birmingham Erdington seem to knock the wind out of "a future fair for all".

John Gray said...

Hi Mike

No, I don't think so? I understand that John was pretty poplar across the board.

Most members will also probably agree that there are not enough Labour MP's with trade union backgrounds.

Labour for all its faults is still a far, far more progressive Party than any of the others.

Mike Law said...

After reading Goldberg's book I'll not argue with you about how "progressive" Labour is.

John Gray said...

Hi Mike
N
o doubt you will have one of your hissy fits about me deliberately distorting your views etc but to equate Labour with the Nazi’s is just pretty sick - even for you.

Anonymous said...

John

It's a pity that you so often seem to feel a need to personalise your arguments.

Tony Benn, former chair of the Labour Party, ex Secretary of State and former father of the House warned in his publised diaries that he saw a danger that New Labour might become a kind of fascist party. If you need it I can dig out the reference.

From what I can see Mike Law was not equating Labour with Nazis, but making a perfectly valid point that the Nazis had some policies that could be described by this (largely useless and meaningless) label of 'progressive'. This is simply a matter of record if you care to check the facts, although it does depend upon defining the word 'progressive' in some meaningful way.

Don't expect your fascists to always be goose-stepping, Nazis with little moustaches and stylish uniforms...

John Gray said...

Hi anon
I know that sometimes I can be a little OTT but I hate it when I see what I believe to be hypocrisy. I also don’t like it when people break the cardinal rule of “if you don’t like it don’t dish it out”.

It’s a bit off to be honest for you to make any personal comments about anything while you hide behind anonymously.

I think that Tony (bless him) was simply wrong (big time) to make this reference. Moseley under “very old Labour” could have conceivable been its leader.

Mike’s point is completely pointless. You could trail thorough all political parties all over the world and find some sort of common cause somewhere.

As far as the BNP/Nazi in this country: it is simply night and day...them and us...

Anonymous said...

Oh dear. If you don't like anonymity why permit it?

Your black and white, night and day view of politics is somewhat limited. It doesn't really help understand why the BNP is drawing some thankfully modest support in pockets.

I am a member of the Labour Party and have always opposed fascism, including the BNP who are a pretty straightforward fascist party.

It's fair enough to reject Tony Benn's fear about New Labour, though that was definitely my fear too. There were times when I felt myself that the party under Blair was moving in a very ugly direction - stoking fears of immigration, wrapping itself in the flag and nationalism, authoritarianism, attacks on civil liberties and courting a nasty kind of populism.

I once complained to the national Labour Party that the website looked like a BNP site. Thankfully they heeded my complaint and changed it somewhat.

At least since Brown took over we seemed to have moved back from some of those most offensive aspects of policy and policy presentation.

John Gray said...

Hi Anon

No, I don't mind anon comments but I think you should realise that it makes anything you say a little suspect.

I am indeed night and day in my opposition to facism. That is not to say that anyone who votes BNP is a committed jackboot Nazi.

"British jobs for British Workers"? Not that there is anythng wrong with his comments in the context given but I see no real difference in presentation between Blair and Brown.

Interesting you think you got the Labour Party to change its website.