Second tranche of selecting seats
CCHQ has just sent Priority List candidates the names of the twenty seats in "the second tranche (phase 1)":
- Battersea
- Brigg and Goole
- Bolton North East
- Bolton West
- Burton
- Bury North
- Cleethorpes
- Corby
- Dartford
- Ealing Central and Acton
- Great Yarmouth
- Mid Norfolk
- Northampton North
- North Cornwall
- Sittingbourne and Sheppey
- South Thanet
- Stevenage
- Somerton and Frome
- Stroud
- Truro and Falmouth
The CCHQ email also states:
- The closing date for these applications is 2pm on 8th September.
- There will be further phases of selections in tranche two. The phase two (2) advertisement will be sent on the 29th September and the advert for phase two (3) will be sent on 27th October.


















Thanet South not much of a suprize with a 664 Labour majority, which should really not exist bearing in mind the current MP... Im pretty damn sure theyll have to have an open primary... I strongly doubt they have above 300 members.
Ill keep a watchout for what happens down there.
Posted by: James Maskell | August 25, 2006 at 17:51
I thought Ealing Central and Acton were in the first trench?
Posted by: Cllr. Robert-John Tasker | August 25, 2006 at 17:57
Wot No Brighton !
How are we expected to persuade people to vote for a Candidate whose own party rates as third or fourth or even fifth best ?
Posted by: Alison Anne Smith | August 25, 2006 at 18:06
Are there any safe Conservative held seats on this list? I can't see any. And will that not just lead to the same old problem that the marginal seats will all select early with some very good candidates but then leaving a much smaller pool of candidates to go for Tory held seats? I thought that was not supposed to happen this time. Where, for example, is Meon Valley? ,
Posted by: LondonTory06 | August 25, 2006 at 18:19
Truro and Falmouth should be interesting. Anyone know how the boundary changes will affect Julia Goldsworthy? I have relatives down in the old Falmouth & Camborne constituency and the controversy surrounding selecting an openly gay candidate definitely put the brakes on any decent Con campaign.
Let's hope they manage to get themselves organised this time as JG is pretty unimpressive.
Posted by: lucy74 | August 25, 2006 at 18:28
Some good winnable seats there so I don't see why A listers shouldn't be applying. Burton is next door to me so I'll watch that with interest.
Posted by: Andrew Woodman | August 25, 2006 at 18:35
"Truro and Falmouth should be interesting. Anyone know how the boundary changes will affect Julia Goldsworthy? I have relatives down in the old Falmouth & Camborne constituency and the controversy surrounding selecting an openly gay candidate definitely put the brakes on any decent Con campaign. "
I think Julia Goldsworthy will probably go for Camborne and Redutrh. She's from Camborne, not Falmouth.
Posted by: Andrea | August 25, 2006 at 19:17
"Are there any safe Conservative held seats on this list? "
Norfolk Mid is a Tory held seat (sitting MP Keith Simpson will contest the new Broadland which contains part of the old Mid Norfolk)
Posted by: Andrea | August 25, 2006 at 19:22
Brighton go Tory? Dream On!
Posted by: Matt Davis | August 25, 2006 at 19:34
"the controversy surrounding selecting an openly gay candidate definitely put the brakes on any decent Con campaign."
...they'll be selecting openly conservative candidates next, that'll scare the locals.
Posted by: Alison Anne Smith | August 25, 2006 at 19:49
"Brighton go Tory? Dream On!"
...a little less CCHQ interference and it could have happened. But as usual CCHQ "knew best" & Kemptown was lost.
Posted by: Alison Anne Smith | August 25, 2006 at 19:56
Thanks Andrea!
Posted by: lucy74 | August 25, 2006 at 20:01
The comments of James Maskell interest me, as a new resident to Ramsgate which is encompassed in the Thanet South Constituency. What is the track record of the current MP? Despite him representing a Party I have never supported, he seems to be doing a relatively good job in fighting for this corner of Kent and that from someone who lives "down there".
Posted by: Laurence.Ramsgate | August 25, 2006 at 21:17
"Are there any safe Conservative seats on the list?"
Not sure about that, but Sittingbourne & Sheppey is shown on the Electoral Calculus website as being a "notional" Conservative seat with a 300 odd majority.
However, before any ambitious A listers get ideas above their station it's worth pointing out that the Parliamentary Candidate at the last General Election, Gordon Henderson, (who reduced the Labour majority to 79 and is highly regarded locally) is rumoured to have already submitted his application to CCHQ!
Of course, he does have a number of disadvantages... he is a white, middle class, anglo saxon, hetersexual, able bodied male who actually has a proper job!
Mind you, on the plus side, I do know for a fact (because I received every leaflet he put out - lots of them!) that all his election literature in 2005 included pictures of him without a tie. That should go down well with Dave and his open necked fan club!
Posted by: Chrissie | August 25, 2006 at 21:19
What, no West Yorkshire marginals?
If anywhere needs candidates in place now, its West Yorks!!!
Good to see Brigg and Goole and Cleethorpes on, two good northern seats that could be won with hte right amount of work.
Posted by: Drew | August 25, 2006 at 21:52
There's a real mix here.
According to Anthony Wells' analysis of seats post boundary changes, there is everything from notionally Conservative seats like Sittingbourne and Sheppey (Labour no 4 target) and South Thanet - go Julie Rook! - (Labour No 17 target) - to Bolton North East which is 112 of Conservative targets and probably un-winnable for us.
Thanks to CH though, all non- A list candidates with any local connections can now start badgering assoc chairs to get CCHQ to invite them to apply.
Posted by: John Moss | August 25, 2006 at 21:53
Yes Drew - West Yorkshire doesn't seem to be in the thoughts of CCHQ. Here in Colne Valley we would like to have someone in place as soon as possible.
Posted by: John Travis | August 25, 2006 at 23:03
Alison, what did CCHQ do to disrupt the campaign in Kemptown?
Posted by: Tim Aker | August 25, 2006 at 23:52
Ladyman dislikes Grammar schools. Such is that dislike that he went to a prize giving ceremony at Dane Court Grammar school in Broadstairs and slagged off the selective system in front of the pupils and their parents. He is seen to be more interested in his ministerial work than his constituency. You can see this from the lack of mentions in the local papers. The only mentions he gets is in his periodic articles which are typical Labourspeak.
Ladyman has the nickname of "Mr Invisible". He is a loyal to the core Blairite and never rebels.
Posted by: James Maskell | August 26, 2006 at 06:39
re: comment from Chrissie on Gordon Henderson, (who reduced the Labour majority to 79 and is highly regarded locally) is rumoured to have already submitted his application to CCHQ!
I thought GH had not been readmitted to the candidates’ list, never mind the priority list. If he had and had been wanted by the local CA, surely he would have been fast-tracked?
Posted by: Mastiff | August 26, 2006 at 09:40
"Alison, what did CCHQ do to disrupt the campaign in Kemptown?"
You can ask that but I can't possibly comment ! suffice to say they weren't terribly helpful.
Posted by: Alison Anne Smith | August 26, 2006 at 10:43
James, South Thanet almost certainly still has more than 300 members.
Posted by: Richard ROBINSON | August 26, 2006 at 11:18
Love to apply for some of these seats but as a non-insider white male, I'm not on the A List, so I can't.
Posted by: David Strauss | August 26, 2006 at 11:26
"James, South Thanet almost certainly still has more than 300 members."
According to their Statement of Accounts, they had 349 members in 2004. The Statement of Accounts for the 2005 year doesn't give the membership data though.
Posted by: Andrea | August 26, 2006 at 13:11
Well, John T, Rob Butler is now our constituency chair, so expect the activity level to start rising sharpish on the political level. Get him to start nagging CCHG!! He has already nagged me to apply for the local NHS trust committee effort, as if I didnt have enough on!
Posted by: Annabel Herriott | August 26, 2006 at 15:03
the controversy surrounding selecting an openly gay candidate definitely put the brakes on any decent Con campaign. - Lucy74.
Of course, he does have a number of disadvantages... he is a white, middle class, anglo saxon, hetersexual, able bodied male who actually has a proper job! - Chrissie.
More sly little anti-gay slurs. Gay Tories don't make good candidates? Or only if they remain in the closet (which seems to be Lucy's belief) - like those two loveable LibDems Hughes and Oaten? Or are they fit only for metropolitan areas (like the South Downs, presumably)? Or are we to believe, as "Chrissie" appears to, that there has been a decision made to promote gay people over the heads of the heterosexual (vast) majority?
I don't know what's worse; that people still think like that, or the sad little code they use to express themselves. I tell you what I'm really sick of: coming here to have a natter about politics, and reading unpleasant inferences about homosexuality again.
Posted by: Graeme Archer | August 26, 2006 at 17:12
Graeme Archer. I think Lucy was just referring to what happened in Falmouth last time and how it didn't certainly help the tories there.
IIRC when it emerged that the candidate selected was gay, some members tried to deselect him. The whole thing soon turned nasty (like abusive phone calls to the candidate's mother) and it ended with the candidates surving the deselection vote and some members being expelled.
Add to that the fact that the gay assistant of the sitting Lab MP accused her to have asked him to dig the dirty in the tory candidate's life (the case ended at the Employment Tribunal which dismissed it in the end).
That whole saga probably helped the Libdems which were able to focus on their campaign and so Julia Goldsworthy won the seat from third place.
Posted by: Andrea | August 26, 2006 at 17:52
Graeme, I was appalled at the treatment of Ashley Crossley and how homophobic elements from both his own party and his opposition undermined his campaign. Apologies for any misunderstanding! :)
I was actually being critical of the local association whose handling of the entire affair was disgraceful and ruined any chance of their excellent Conservative candidate getting elected.
Posted by: lucy74 | August 27, 2006 at 13:54
And does anyone know what is happening in Rugby & Kenilworth? The seat is splitting - is it known whether Jeremy Wright will stick with the safer Conservative seat that Kenilworth is subsumed into, or whether he intends to fight Rugby at the next election?
Posted by: BorisforPM | August 27, 2006 at 17:25
I am not sure it is quite right to suggest there aren't some excellent seats here. For my money one of the best is Dartford. If my memory serves me correctly until 1997 it had a Tory majority over 10,000, has a very good Conservative council with lots going on being at the centre of the Thames Gateway.
The association did (it seems)get muddled over the logistics of the last selection, but that's in the past. Being in Kent but so close to London, and with a lab majority of just 500, it must surely be a dream for a candidate.
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | August 27, 2006 at 18:32
Hi Kent. I'm available for selection interviews but alas, because I am not an A lister I will not get the chance to apply. However, I know Kent. I have lived here for 25 years and my children attend Kent schools, I was the former regional press officer for you at the last election and I am active in my local association. However, I am not deemed suitably 'local' to apply for Dartford, Sittingbourne & Sheppey and South Thanet.
If any Assoc Chairmen would like to receive my CV and fight my corner then I'd love to hear from you and we could discuss my views and knowledge of how to fight to win. Look no further than Gravesend, fought brilliantly by Adam Holloway last time round. If you want to win next time you would should be looking at his campaign and current high ratings in the constituency. I know, because I work for him as well as having a real job outside of politics. What also makes me different? I am a female from a working class background who is backing Cameron in his efforts to change our party. Enough of the pitch, get in touch.
Posted by: Janice Small, approved candidated, non-A lister | August 28, 2006 at 17:34
Would someone - please - explain to me what the point actually is of posts like that above, and the continued emphasis on glamour and personalities, when policy is weak or completely non-existent?
It's not about us as a group, it's about the direction of the nation and the national interest. There cannot be an indefinite centralisation of prestige around people who, in some cases, haven't performed well. We are now robustly opposed to meritocracy?
BorisforPM @ 17:25 - as a Kenilworth resident, I would be extremely surprised if Jeremy Wright does not 'stick' with the safer (new) Kenilworth and Southam seat. I think this is near certain.
OTOH, the proposed boundary changes will make other seats harder to win. At present, the Labour MP for Warwick and Leamington (five miles down the road from here) has a majority of only 266, but the proposals will eliminate the rural area of the seat, making it harder to win. I have to say, *given the issues in the constituency*, the last thing it needs is an 'imposed' female candidate from outside with Oxbridge connections, etc.. If there is any way to prevent this from coming to pass, eg. an 'open' primary system, it should be utilised. Myself, if that is what it takes? ?
Posted by: Joshua Payne | August 28, 2006 at 18:26
Whilst I am an avid reader of Conservativehome.com, I have not yet felt the need to post a comment (despite some of the inaccurate informtation that has appeared about me - Chrissie take note!), however, I would like to support the plea from Janice Small that she be allowed to apply for a Kent seat.
During the 2005 General Elecetion Janice gave me a lot of help and advice during my campaign in Sittingbourne & Sheppey. She has excellent communication skills, is a hard worker, personable and, perhaps most important, is able to relate to the people that really matter - the electorate.
I met all the Kent candidates at the last Election and I can honestly say that Janice would have made a better candidate than half of them. And that is not because she is a woman!
Indeed, the absence of Janice from the "A" List says more about the limitations of the current system than it does about her!
Posted by: Gordon Henderson | August 28, 2006 at 21:56
I don't deny the thrust of what you have said (or even that this deserving individual should be a candidate), but
"...has excellent communication skills, is a hard worker, personable and, perhaps most important, is able to relate to the people..."
again, this does seem to be focusing unduly on personalities and highly subjective traits. Do you think that the rest of us are devoid of such qualities, and what effect does any of that have on any substantive issue, policy or the very real needs of constituents?
Posted by: Joshua Payne | August 28, 2006 at 22:30
Is it true that to secure a more representative Party in Parliament that the next stage of 'our' evolution will be instructions to require all our middle (or older) aged, white male MPs to stand down in favour of 'A list' candidates? This would be a far quicker process towards the goal, of course! I suppose my thoughts do demonstrate a cynicism about current directions - encouragement yes but enforcement no. Thoughts, readers?
Posted by: Philip J Milton | August 29, 2006 at 00:01
Maude was asked if he would put himself up for re-selection under the new system. He said he would not do it unilaterally and that it was up to his Association. It was the first "Challenge the Chairman" podcast. Dont expect anyone else on the frontbench or in senior Party positions to say anything diferent.
I predict the rate will increase but not to the magic 57%. Cameron says that we shouldnt underestimate him with this. I think its the Associations he should not underestimate. Previous sexism does not justify future reversed sexism at a harder level.
Posted by: James Maskell | August 29, 2006 at 08:03
Any association can deselect their MP and, indeed, it has happened in the past. However, we do need a mix of new blood and experience: it is hardly a coincidence that so many of the A-listers have stood for seats before.
Posted by: TG | August 29, 2006 at 11:08
Still interesting how this (and the previous) list was put together.
Where are the Wirral seats for instance?
Posted by: Steve | August 29, 2006 at 12:13
Graeme Archer above - bang-on.
If anything the new candidates system discriminates *against* homosexual men, as it puts a premium on female candidates.
Maude seems to be doing nothing for gay men, quite the reverse in fact.
Posted by: ar07 | August 29, 2006 at 13:43
I rather thought former Conservative Party CEO Mark McGregor had been promised the Thanet South seat. A Listers need not apply?
Posted by: Niles Beckwith | August 29, 2006 at 16:40
I do unfortunately think he'll get the shot at Thanet South. Id prefer to see someone with less of a controversial history. Julie Rook was mentioned. If she's interested, then shes welcome to apply. Ive heard about her before through other Association members and shes well thought of.
Posted by: James Maskell | August 29, 2006 at 20:49
Does anyone know what is happening in Battersea? I think I read that Dominic Schofield who fought a great campaign last time is not going to stand here again. It must be moving in our direction surely. I helped there in 2001 so hope that they don't pick Lucinda Shersby who I was amazed to see had made it on the A list. Without wishing to comment on her in particular, it does show that having a Tory parent does help (her father was a Tory MP) it doesnt half help your prospects...
Posted by: LondonTory06 | August 29, 2006 at 23:12
I do think Truro & Falmouth will be one of the important seats in the next general election that we must win if we are to take power.
I was visiting relatives in the area over the weekend and heard on the grapevine that Ashley Crossley is considering going for Truro and Falmouth. Does anyone know if this is true, or if he is on the A list? I hope he does try again as in undermining his campaign, the local association helped lose a key seat and a very fine MP.
Even worse it means we are inflicted with Julia Goldsworthy for at least one term!
Posted by: lucy74 | August 30, 2006 at 00:14
Stevenage was in the first tranche too. I was rather hopeful that George Freeman (a priority candidate) would be selected again after his sterling effort for 2005, but the re-appearance of Stevenage in this second tranche suggests prospective candidates (including Freeman) haven't been rushing to apply.
Posted by: Daniel Vince-Archer | August 30, 2006 at 11:53
We need candidates in place NOW for ALL seats. We in Tottenham, a challenging seat, wish to select within the next 12 months - with or without CCHQ's permission. An early selection will help us overtake the LibDems to be the main challengers to Labour and, one day, dislodge David Lammy who is a Blair puppet and a hapless constituency MP.
Posted by: Justin Hinchcliffe | August 31, 2006 at 19:20
Interestingly, I've heard on the grapevine that Dominic Schofield is not applying to Battersea. If this is true it's certainly an attractive seat for someone to apply for!
Posted by: TG | September 04, 2006 at 12:47
Our friends in Northampton North will be selecting shortly.Must win this seat to form give DC an overall majority.The tempting target is Nulab lightweight (and failed ex minister), Sally Keeble.(3,960) majority) NS & NN will be working closely together to win control of the Northampton Council in 2007.We rely on getting a good partner for Northampton South.
Posted by: Michael Clarke,Chairman Northampton South | September 08, 2006 at 14:41