Labour Party ordered to pay £123,000 to deselected councillor

The Law Society Gazette report on a story I had earlier missed that was in the Telegraph a couple of weeks ago about the Labour Party being ordered to pay £123,000 in compensation to a former councillor they deselected. Raghib Ahsan claimed to have been subjected to racial discrimination after being replaced by a white candidate for the Sparkhill Ward in Birmingham in 1997. Allegations that he had helped Asian families jump the queue for housing repairs in return for votes were investigated but found to be false.

The compensation was based on loss of earnings of £80,000, based on the councillor allowances he would have had (plus £43,000 for "injury to feelings".) But if he is not spending time as a councillor does this not release him to earn money through alternative work? Furthermore it was for the electorate not the Labour Party to decide if he was a councillor. He could have stood as an independent.

Political parties should be free to have who they choose as candidates. If they select or deselect on the basis of factionalism or discrimination rather than merit then the answer is not to vote for the candidate they offer.

Lincoln Conservative councillor quits after deselection

Cllr Paul Grice of Lincoln City Council has resigned the Conservative whip and will now sit as an indepnednet following his deselection as a candidate for next year's council elections. Lincoln is an important battle ground - this year Labour gained just one seat amont the third of Coiuncil seats up for election. But that meant they gained control of the council from the Conservatives. Another third of the seats are up for election next year.

In this context I can imagine the expectations on Conservative candidates to campaign with zeal are pretty high.

Cllr Grice was sent a letter saying he hasn't made the grade.

It says:

"I would like to say it was not your performance at the interview that caused the selection committee to come to this decision. You do have a full and busy life, with both work and family responsibilities, and it was considered these would not allow you to participate fully in the hard fight we will have to keep the Moorland seat.

"If it is known that the reason for you not standing this time is because of business and family commitments then this will reflect well on both you and the party. I would be grateful if you could confirm you are agreeable to this being the official line and to be used in literature if so required."

Labour on Glasgow Council "hit self destruct button"

The SNP claim that the Labour Party in Glasgow have "hit the self destruct button" over the mass deselection of around 20 Labour councillors. There is speculation that a rival Glasgow Labour party could be launched. The deselection do seem to be driven by cronyism rather than merit. The Labour MP Tom Harris has written in support of two deselected councillors - which I don't think he would have done if they were idle or incompetant.

Also the deselections appear to be pushed from London rather than Glasgow. The Labour official in London Ken Clark is the deselector in chief driving the process along.

The Herald reports that Glasgow Council leader Cllr Gordon Matheson in facing "intense criticism" for failing to defend his sitting councillors.

It adds this background:

Glasgow Labour has been in turmoil since the resignation of council leader Steven Purcell in March last year, when he admitted to having a drink problem and to taking cocaine while overseeing the city’s £2.5 billion budget.

His exit led to a divisive contest to replace him between Matheson and councillor Paul Rooney. Matheson’s win failed to unite the two men’s followers, who have waged a low-level war of attrition ever since.

Mass deselection of Labour councillors in Glasgow

The Herald reports that so far 17 of Labour's 47 councillors in Glasgow have been deselected for the elections next year. Not quite clear if there will be more to deselections to emerge but given that there will also some standing down voluntarily it is clear that most of the current Labour Group will not be Labour candidates next time.

Certainly councillors, of any party, should not take being reselected for granted. But it is by no means clear that the deselections in Glasgow have been carried out for the right reasons. Apparently someone from London called Ken Clark has been carrying out the interviews and has been "brutal."

The report adds:

The Herald understands candidates are quizzed on their political guile, local activities and asked to describe “the Nolan Principles”, which govern standards in public life.

It comes as Labour faces the biggest challenge to its grip on the council in over 30 years on the back of the SNP’s buoyant performance in May’s national election.

But names are also emerging of potential replacements, including former MSPs Frank McAveety and Bill Butler, ex-councillor Chris Kelly, James Adams, an RNIB campaigns manager who works with Anas Sarwar, Soryia Siddique, a lecturer at Cardonald College, and Aileen McKenzie, another ally of the Sarwar dynasty.

A Labour spokesman said: “We have had huge interest from party members in Glasgow, with over 100 applying to stand for the council for Labour, so competition is tougher than in previous years.

“Labour will be fielding Glasgow’s finest in May but we are taking nothing for granted.”

Popular Conservative councillor deselected

I have written before about how Conservative councillors should be deselected more often.

But I am concerned to hear about the proposed deselection of Brian Bailey, the Conservative councillor for the Gowy ward of the Cheshire West and Chester.  He has been on the council almost continuously since the early 1970s, including being the Conservative Group leader for a number of years.  Just two years ago he was the Mayor.  He has the highest vote in his ward - indeed, he has the highest vote of any councillor on the authority.

Due to a re-drawing of the boundaries, all the councillors have to re-apply for their seats for this May's election.  Brian was summoned to a special meeting and told that he would not be eligible to submit himself to be a Conservative Party candidate for the council this time.  His initial understanding of the reason was that he had not done sufficient campaigning for the Party during the year he was the Mayor of the Council.  Yet the tradition in Chester is that the Mayor is impartial, so that, whilst campaigning for one's party is not strictly forbidden, it was certainly always understood to be frowned upon.