Q11: Open primaries

"Would you support an open primary-style election for selecting the Conservative Party’s next London mayoral candidate?"

David Cameron: “This is a very interesting idea and I would be happy to consider it.”

David Davis: “I am not convinced that the primary system will be as effective in Britain as it is in America, but I believe the Party membership should have a decisive say, just as they have done in this leadership election.“

Editor's Comment: "Regular readers of this site will know that I share the enthusiasm of Daniel Hannan MEP for open primary elections.  I think they are an excellent way of connecting the Conservative Party with new supporters.  DC is hardly committed to the idea but he's at least open-minded.  With leading party democracy campaigners such as Michael Ancram, Michael Gove, John Hayes, Theresa May and Ed Vaizey on DC's leadership team I hope that that open-mindedness will translate into something firm.  DD's answer is honest and direct but still disappointing."

Comments

[Kate Castle]

This has been compelling viewing Tim, & I've spent far too much time on here today. Pleased to say that so far my vote has been re-inforced. I agree with you on this one, the primary plan could go a long way in showing that we can be more open in our democracy than the other parties and it'd be good experience for the leadership contenders in the future to have more important hustings events around the country. I like the US model and think it would suit the Conservative Party.

[malcolm]

Why not.It's not as this is a remotely important job.If it works it could be used as a test to see whether more worthwhile positions should be elected by primaries.It might even result in the party having better candidates to choose from than Jeffrey Archer or Shagger.

[Derek]

DC gave the same answer to me in Winchester, so he gets full marks for consistency. He also indicated that it was not a priority for him. I hope that we can retain the present system which has served us so well this time.

[Derek]

Oh dear, this comment was meant to be for question 12. It has been a long day and I am beginning to suffer from question fatigue - and we have still got to go through Newsnight yet.

[Andrew]

Pro: the current elongated leadership process has been good for the party.

Con: primaries in the US have resulted in numerous problems. "Campaign wisdom" completely straitjackets the candidates, and partly as a result you end up with lengthy lists of giveaways to interest groups (often the extremist & completely unrepresentative ones)

Tricky.

[Selsdon Man]

The US primaries are truly open - any one can stand. That is not what is being suggested here. The electorate gets to choose from a party-selected shortlist.