Why ConservativeHome is publishing the A-List

On the GoldList blog this morning, ConservativeHome publishes the names of some of the men and women who have been accepted on to the party's priority list of parliamentary candidates.  The Conservative Party wants to keep the list secret.  ConservativeHome believes that the party membership deserves to see who its flagship candidates are.  These candidates, and the A-list top-ups to follow, are the people who will form a third to a half of the Conservative parliamentary party if we are successful in winning power after the next General Election.  Conservative members - kept in the dark about so many aspects of how their party is run, funded and staffed - have a right to inspect this list and assess its quality and true diversity.  Does it, for example, include the kind of northern Britons who can help us win in Lancashire and Yorkshire?  The same people who tried to disenfranchise rank-and-file members in last year's leadership election are still showing insufficient respect for members.

So what should we make of the list as it currently stands?

I don't know many of the names that appear on the list but some I know to be of exceptional quality.  Karen Bradley, Fiona Bruce, Margot James, Julia Manning, Hannah Parker and Philippa Stroud, for example, are women who are as conservative as they are compassionate - as media-friendly as they are serious and principled.

I am personally delighted to see Howard Flight on the list.  He was treated very harshly by Michael Howard last year and should still be the Conservative MP for Arundel and South Downs today (although Nick Herbert couldn't have been a better replacement).

I would also highlight Nicholas Boles, George Freeman and Mel Stride.  These are the kind of serious thinkers that a future Tory government will need to flourish.

But if the A-list has strengths the process that has led to its formation has had significant downsides.  Many candidates have testified to the uneven nature and rigour of the interview process they faced.  Some candidates learnt if they were on the list - or excluded from it - from a face-to-face meeting with Francis Maude or a telephone call from Theresa May.  Others were tipped off by their MPs.  Others had to wait for the letters to arrive yesterday.  There has not been equal treatment.

Some of the decisions have baffled me and readers of Iain Dale's blog were clearly disappointed at his 'you may get on in the next round' letter.   I received a steady stream of phone calls yesterday about different friends and contacts being 'on' or 'off'.  The news that surprised me most was CCHQ's decision not to put Dominic Schofield on the list.  Not yet anyway - all candidates have been told that they might be promoted to the A-list later in the year.  Dominic achieved a 6.7% swing from Labour to the Tories in Battersea, at the last General Election.  He reduced the Labour majority to just 163.  I campaigned a little there myself with Dominic and he was an exceptional vote-winner.  The 2005 campaign and its heavy core vote message was not designed for the average Battersea voter and Dominic's result was all the more impressive in that light.

People with no track record of working for the party may deserve to be on the A-list if they are exceptional prospects for the future.  I can understand that although their loyalty should probably have been tested over a couple of years.  What I cannot understand, however, is why proven vote-winners, who have stuck with the party over the last difficult decade, are dropped in favour of people who have not achieved at the ballot box.  A little more transparency from CCHQ on the criteria they have used would be helpful.

Sam Coates, Deputy Editor, and I will be looking at this comments thread very carefully and deleting comments that are gratuitously offensive to individual personalities and we will ban the IP addresses of their authors.

Comments

[James Maskel]

As Ive said before, I think this system is sexual discrimination in practice. If this Party wants to prove its a non-discriminatory Party, then it should allow open competition on every seat in the country, regardless of sex, class, political beliefs or the colour of their skin.

CCHQ has told these people "you are the cream of the crop" and put them on a pedestal. Its only fair that we should know who these people are. We may even learn from them about why they are so good. ConservativeHome has done the right thing in publishing the names.

This system is so bad I cant even consider coming back to the Party.

Tim, good talk on Channel4. Well said.

[Ranting Guttersnipe]

Tim - could the Goldlist possibly be changed over to interviewing the candidates who have made the A list so far?

[Chad]

I agree, well done Tim and Sam. In the past six months 'moderniser' Maude has sought to strip the right to vote for leader from members, has introduced positive discrimination and then wants to hide the results from members!

This is not modernisation, it is centralisation.

*Central control of leadership selection by attempting to strip members of right to vote.
*Centrally imposed candidate lists.
*State funding of political parties.

Despite the welcome but deceptive small government words, the policies and proposals clearly show that Cameron's change agenda is focussed on the shift from small to big government.

[RobC]

Am I correct in thinking that the local Consituencies of target seats should recruit a candidate from the priority list?

Will all by-elections between now and the general elaction be considered 'target'? Often there are big swings away from governments in the by-elections.

[James Maskel]

As I understand it, those in key marginals (no strict definition on it but its gotta be close for the Conservatives) have the opportunity to pick a candidate from this A-List. The condition is that they cannot pick their own local candidate unless "exceptional circumstances".

I would imagine in the case of by-elecitons, a priority list candidate will be used to cut down on selection time.

[Robert Halfon]

Dominic Schofield also slashed Labour's Basildon majority by half in 2001. He is a seasoned campaigner and a good, compassionate and decent man. He also has a wide variety of non political experience, being a highly respected headhunter and a fluent Russian speaker.

I hope very much he is on the A list in the next round. We need people like Dominic.

[David Pugh's Gran]

Im sure anyone who was active in Conservative Future whilst she was Chairman will view Hannah Parker's selection with, erm..... interest.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

The Party has never published the names on the candidates list, why start now? Nobody ever had a problem before. However, since this is a Cameron policy it must be the devil's work.

[James Maskel]

Because the Party has made the A-List a public issue, an example to the public that the Party had truly changed. Its only fair he be willing to explain to us why these people are the very best.

Would we believe that the Party had changed in terms of candidate selection if not one name came out? The only way we can judge whether the Party is truly more representative of Britain as it is today (something Cameron said, not me) is to allow us to see who is the representative people of Britain and why they were chosen. This is accountability. Has Cameron stuck to his word? Thats what we want to know.

[Editor]

One of the differences Henry is that members of the A List have a much higher chance of becoming MPs than the average member of the former candidates' list.

I would also add that I think the old list should have been published, too. What's wrong with greater transparency? The party should be proud of its A-list candidates.

[hayek's grandad]

Does anyone know what the private/state educated ratio is of the candidates so far?

[Ted]

Now it's happened I find myself much more in the anti A List camp than in the pro. Probably because of the high quality of candidates not in first tranche.

I think my main objection is the limitation of choice - I would have preferred one candidates list not an A list and Other list. A complete re-selection of candidates with increased emphasis on women & minorities might have been necessary and would have hurt some deselected but this version really does say "we prefer these few to the rest of you", the second tranche will have a stigma of second choice.

I don't know the qualities of the A list candidates and am not willing to get into any campaign saying why is X selected instead of Y but from postings I get the impression the process was incoherent and badly managed in people terms and despite our great local election results & poll ratings will consequentially hit our activist base hard.

I believe we do need to have a broader candidate base and that a degree of central direction to achieve this is necessary but that process must be open, understood and we should be proud of its results. Hiding the candidates gives the wrong message, it shows fear of the party by the leadership.

[Donal Blaney]

Those of us who are uneasy with the concept of an A-List need to get used to the fact that it is here to stay. If favoured candidates are not in the first wave, it is up to them (and their supporters) to ensure they raise their profiles positively in support of/in promoting the conservative cause and in broadening the appeal of conservatism to the electorate.

And if favoured candidates are on the A-List, it is up to them and their supporters to ensure they get the plum seats in the first round of selections.

Maybe CH will tip us all off when seats announce they are making selections?

Little will be gained by complaining about the A-List in the meantime.

[James Burdett]

I think the party can be proud of its A-list candidates (largely). Many of them are extremely credible candidates, however it must be galling to all the many activists who have been working for many years in adverse political weather to watch a swathe of new candidates being added to this list who have only been in the party a few months. I think that we should see how this 'elite' performs in the next few weeks and months as ambassadors for the party.

[Donal Blaney]

I know of one member of the A-List who says he was told personally by Cameron three months ago that he would definitely be on the A-List. The process for selecting the members of the A-List was certainly suspect and some of the people on it clearly have little track record in supporting or working for the Party. However, as James Burdett says, they will be held up to even higher scrutiny by activists now. If they fail to work hard enough or become embroiled in scandals, they will be culled even more quickly than birds with bird flu.

[Lord Haw Haw]

yawn

[Chad]

Those of us who are uneasy with the concept of an A-List need to get used to the fact that it is here to stay.

Donal,
TrueBlue noted the same on the europe issue, ie that the party's agenda is now set at the top and those down below are expected to just accept it or 'sod off'.

I'm sure political parties are meant to represent the aggregate views of their members, rather than imposing a set of views.

No wonder people are turning away from the big political parties. We don't want a political elite dictating what policy will or won't be, we want them to represent our views.

[Sean Fear]

Good advice, Donal. There are certainly some very good people on this list, and we should do all we can to ensure they progress further.

Those who are not very good - well, we're not obliged to select them. And at the same time, we want to alert good candidates who've been excluded from the list about available seats which they may have a connection to.

I think it is quite right that the names should be published.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

The A list is there to do a job, if it doesn't do that then of course that makes it meaningless. I think that it is a bonus for candidate selection. Positive discrimination is a dodgy topic, but this is a political party we're talking about, not a University or a public body.

I live in a very marginal seat, I just want the very best person to come along and boot out the sitting Lib Dem. If these people end up as minor celebrities then that's also a good thing. Iain Dale appears more than capable of looking after himself, I enjoy his blog and I think he'd make a great candidate. I would just ask that we ignore the Chaddettes who just want to rubbish the Cameron leadership like they have since day one.

Local constituencies can still choose the person they want, they just have to do it off a much shorter list. There has always been discrimination, not always in a "fair" or open manner, but then this is politics. There is no fair.

[Chad]

I would just ask that we ignore the Chaddettes who just want to rubbish the Cameron leadership like they have since day one.

That's right Henry, very true. Well, except for the fact that I voted for Cameron, mailed MP's to get them to stitch allegiance, etc etc.

Still, don't let the truth get in the way of an ill-informed rant.

[Editor]

Let's not turn this thread into another Chad/Imagine-related fight please.

[Chad]

Thanks Tim! Perhaps you could delete Henry's personal attack at you did suggest you would at the top?

[buxtehude]

Well done, Editor, for making this move in favour of transparency. Nothing shows up the unmodern nature of Maude and Cameron as their desire to micro-manage the process under a cloak of secrecy. 'Modern' for me means transparent, open competition. 'Modern' for Maude seems to be disguising privilege behind secrecy and posturing (ie about as old-fashioned as you can get).

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Just got my letter too.. and unfortunately its a better luck next time one.

[Chad]

The greater prize is one of the ConservativeHome awards JS, and I'm sure you'll pick one up for the excellent ToryRadio.

[James Maskell]

Things get worse...look at Iain Dales website...

[malcolm]

Very sorry to hear that Jonathan.We've never met but I've only heard good things.Don't give up 'though,the A list is unlikely to last forever.

[James Maskell]

Yeah, you are better than some of those on the A-List and the Tories have missed out on a great opportunity to have a grade A candidate in you. Their loss.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Thanks guys - makes me feel much better. I will take the time off to spend more time ..........

......with Tory Radio :o)

[Andrew Woodman]

We should consider ourselves lucky that we have this website to highlight what is going on in the corridors of CCHQ. I am personally sickened that someone like Rickett gets on the list whilst politically astute former PPCs who have trampled the streets for years keeping the party going are rejected.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

What amuses me is the suggestion (and I assume all those not on are told this) that you could soend more time getting political experience.

Lets see now, I have been an association chairman, a parliamentary candidate twice, an adviser still to a shadow junior minister. I am doing stuff with the podcasting to see if it takes off, and the day job is dealing with political legislation for a FTSE 100 company. I would have thought I would need less political experience - but then who knows.

The thing Im left feeling is that Im not sure what they are looking for - and at least in a job interview you kind of know that you can do x and y and then you can proceed. What lots of people will be thinking is, now what??

[James Maskell]

When did Rickett join the Party? I remember that he joined and the press made a thing about it because of the kiss (hes most well known for acting and faking reality?) but cant recall when he actually joined...anyone know?

[Donal Blaney]

Jonathan: your time will come. Those in charge will not be there forever and it could be a blessing in disguise not to have been on the A-List if and when it (and the people on it) are discredited...

Besides, like our esteemed Editor, I think you can achieve a lot more influence and do a lot more good for the conservative cause with Tory Radio.

[James Maskell]

See if it takes off? Youve interviewed Zac Goldsmith, Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Howard...its already taken off!

You were fobbed off with a photocopied failure letter. You go to all the effort to meet the qualifications and work your ass off for the Party for years and they say no like that. Screw them, you're better off without them.

[Chad]

JS, are you allowed to detail the interview process? How many questions were you asked? Did any seem to be pushing you to provide a pro-DC response etc?

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Thanks for the kind comments. No I think the interview process was fair - I have absolutely no complaints at all. I wouldnt want anyone to think otherwise. I also look at the list of candidates on the A list - and think there are some great great people who will be brilliant MPs. I just hope the party has a process in place to keep those who have not made it active - as they are usually the most active people in an association.

[Andrew Woodman]

I fear that the problem that Dominic Schofield, Iain Dale and Jonathan Shepperd had, was by the time the micro managers at CCO had got over 50% women, 10 ethnic minorities and Camerons white male mates on the list, there was no room left for any more white males.

P.S How many of the David Davis leadership supporters are on the list?

[Sean Fear]

"How many of the David Davis leadership supporters are on the list?"

None spring to mind, Andrew.

[Chad]

Mr Cameron accepted that some white middle class men would be disappointed not to be on the list.
However, none of the white middle class men that devised the A-list face any risk to their own positions of course.

You want a modern representative party messrs Cameron and Maude? Stop protecting the white, middle class men who already have a seat, and let them compete with the A-list too.

It stands to reason that you will get more women in parliament if you let them compete with the whte middle class men in the safe seats you already hold.

[buxtehude]

A MODEST PROPOSAL

Constituencies are not required to choose from the 'A' List. They can request to see other candidate.

Why doesn't ConservativeHome become an additional, complimentary source for constituencies looking for good candidates?

ConservativeHome could create its own candidate's list - developing its own format and open on-site interviewing a voting process. You could then promote this list to associations in the process of choosing.

This would NOT be divisive as associations should always be on the look-out for the best available talent, and should realise that party buraucrats may easily have made a mistake or an oversight.

ConservativeHome would therefore be adding to the political process, making the Conservative Party a better and stronger team with which to take on Labour.

Who can possibly argue against the value of bottom-up democracy?

[Joe Public]

Lets hold the line and have a reality check.

We have had a good local election result - our rating in the opinion polls is rising - Labour are on the ropes and the New Labour project is on the ropes.

Joe Public wants to see the next Government in waiting - lets not disintergrate into petty fighting - any problems need to be ironed out behind closed doors and not via the media.

A lesson to be learned about the debacle of the last few years of the Major Government!

We need to earn the respect of Joe Public and we are gradually doing this. We also need to be more representative of Britian as a whole.

No more of the 'nasty' party - and onwards to the next General Election victory!!!

[James Maskell]

buztehude - but in key marginals we are only allowed to use priority list candidates, unless in exceptional circumstances. Unless you mean in normal seats...

[buxtehude]

Well, we should look at the small print. My guess is that constituencies cannot actually be dictated to. Anything that improves our fortunes should be welcomed, no?

[buxtehude]

And I agree with Joe Public: please no in-fighting. The best way to get rid of in-fighting is by promoting genuine transparency and democracy.

I mean, transparency and democracy are key values for our party, aren't they?

[torylady]

Jonathan: your time will come. Those in charge will not be there forever and it could be a blessing in disguise not to have been on the A-List if and when it (and the people on it) are discredited...
Donal Blaney, did you apply for the A-list as well? What was your interview like?

[Ted]

There is a bit of "a good day to release bad news" about the A list and CCHQ - they were planned presumably to come out after the local elections with thought that A - we did well so get the bad stuff over in glow of success or B - we did badly so respond by saying we have to change radically and get all the bad stuff out quickly.

[Chad]

Mr Cameron accepted that some white middle class men would be disappointed not to be on the list.

Also there is one obvious omission here. Cameron has highlighted that the party has skewed with mp's who are white, male and middle class.

So he has set a fixed % of ethnic minorities to offset the white imbalance.

He has set a fixed % of women to offset the male imbalance.

And he has set a fixed % to working class to... oh hold on. Nope, the party that seeks to represent "not just the rich" to repeat Cameron's words, has loudly identified 3 areas where it is imbalanced but has only sought to rectify 2.

How will that play in poorer areas?

[Donal Blaney]

No ToryLady: I did not apply for the A-List or indeed the candidates' list. I have no desire to be an MP.

[Account Deleted]

I do think that there should be more people who came from working class backgrounds on the list - look how popular Michelle from the apprentice was - I don't mean to be trite but...

I think lots of Tories from well off backgrounds don't understand how it is harder to succeed if you come from a less well off family. Having come from a moderately privileged background I could see how those above found it a lot easier than those below to take up a 'good' position in society.

That said, we did need more women and ethnic minorities. Yet it would have been better to have less middle class people amongst them.

Maybe Cameron/Maude are consciously/unconsciously aiming for a new liberal coalition - which includes diversity but not the traditional working class/aspirational lower middle class. These people are the very people Davis wanted to build a new coalition with and are more likely to respond to his views... hence they have been left out in the cold.

On the plus side, having met Katy Lindsay, from the Goldlist, she will make an excellent Tory MP...

[Chad]

Well said 1AM. I wonder what % of the A-list define themselves as working class?

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"I am personally delighted to see Howard Flight on the list."

I'm not.

The selection of Howard Flight is incongruous with the other reported selections and leads me to conclude that it is little more than a token gesture designed to appease disgruntled Conservatives worried that priority list candidates have been handpicked from the same social circle as the leadership.

Well I'm far from gruntled about Flight's selection but I'll end my comments here as I don't want to be deleted and banned.

[Michael McGowan]

Clearly some high quality candidates.....but that is no thanks to the A List. A transparent open primary system would have done at least as good a job....as it did in 2004/5 when Fiona Bruce was picked for Warrington. Also some mediocre candidates and some excellent people excluded for reasons which seem arbitrary. Not a surprise given that the "modernisers" Maude and Cameron, who are basically 1930's patricians in open-necked shirts, have reverted to secretive Baldwinesque methods of running a modern political party as a club for them and their mates. Of course white middle class public school-educated males with their snouts already in the Westminster trough emerge unscathed, irrespective (and indeed often in spite of) performance to date.

Henry Whitworth seems to think that the Tories can somehow get away with the excuse that because they are a political party they can run a non-transparent and biased selection system. Labour and the Lib Dems should surely point out that if this is the reactionary way in which the Tories treat their own, surely the rest of the population can expect to be treated even worse? There is a also a strong whiff of hypocrisy here given the Tories' past criticisms of Labour for doing secret deals in smoke-filled rooms with trade union barons.

[Yet Another Anon]

>>>>northern Britons<<<<
People from Lancashire are Lancastrians and people from Yorkshire are Yorkshiremen not Northern Britons just as Highlanders are Highlanders, Lowlanders are Lowlanders and Islanders are Islanders - something that "Southern Britons" from London and Birmingham and other such places might want to bare in mind.

[SimonNewman]

"And he has set a fixed % to working class to... oh hold on. Nope, the party that seeks to represent "not just the rich" to repeat Cameron's words, has loudly identified 3 areas where it is imbalanced but has only sought to rectify 2."

I've noticed this about Diversity policies in general, like the one where I work. For some reason deprived social class/low income per se is not considered worthy of positive discrimination, you have to be female (& preferably a single parent) or ethnic minority too. The people who are ignored are white working class males. Leaving aside the unfairness and waste of talent this entails, it seems to me that if the Conservatives are ever to make real headway in the north of England and other areas, they cannot ignore the hard-working* white working class male electorate. Don't leave them to Labour (who also ignore them) or potentially the BNP, who are only too happy to exploit their frustrations.

*In my opinion the Conservative party has little to offer people who don't want to work for a living, but that is a small minority and not one we should be pursuing.

[Peter Franklin]

Dominic Schofield is an exceptional candidate. He is a true man of the people -- and I say that as someone who is delighted by the number of women of the people who have got on the list.

And thanks, Tim, for the superb work being done by Conservative Home today. The party leadership must realise that diversity and openness are both essential.

[SimonNewman]

"And he has set a fixed % to working class to... oh hold on. Nope, the party that seeks to represent "not just the rich" to repeat Cameron's words, has loudly identified 3 areas where it is imbalanced but has only sought to rectify 2."

I've noticed this about Diversity policies in general, like the one where I work. For some reason deprived social class/low income per se is not considered worthy of positive discrimination, you have to be female (& preferably a single parent) or ethnic minority too. The people who are ignored are white working class males. Leaving aside the unfairness and waste of talent this entails, it seems to me that if the Conservatives are ever to make real headway in the north of England and other areas, they cannot ignore the hard-working* white working class male electorate. Don't leave them to Labour (who also ignore them) or potentially the BNP, who are only too happy to exploit their frustrations.

*In my opinion the Conservative party has little to offer people who don't want to work for a living, but that is a small minority and not one we should be pursuing.

[Michael McGowan]

But this is what is always arbitrary and unfair about the politically correct politics of victimhood and grievance. Only those who have "official Victim" status get looked after.

[frank aylesford]

hear hear Michael McGowan - that's the whole point. This regime represents the return of the morally feeble power hungry Establishment that failed this country so badly after the war. And it still matters because with India and China's growth we have every potential to go backwards fast without the right economic envirmonment.

But no let's not worry about this. Let's pack the parliamentary party with people who have little independence and owe Cameron absolute fealty. Power first, principles last!!

[Chad]

I'd like to see every A-list candidate asked this simple question before they know which area they are likely to represent (and change their story and accents accordingly!).

Which class are you?
a: Working class
b: Middle class
c: Upper class

Do we have any guesses for the likely percentage that say working class?

[Christina]

I know that ConHome is rather keen on Lakoff and his books on framing, etc. One of the things he writes about is party discipline, and he cites the success of Reagan's 11th commandment, 'Never speak ill of a fellow conservative'.

It may seem good for ConHome to make the A-list transparent, but it is not good party discipline. Party discipline is necessary for the Conservative Party to win the next GE.

[Jon Gale]

Maybe there isn't a fixed % of working class candidates because, well, it's easy to tell if someone is a woman or from an ethnic minority, but how do you define working class? Accent? Education? Parents jobs? House price?

Aprentice Michelle was earning £100,000 self-employed before the show, that puts her in class AB?.

It would turn into a farce. But you're only nit-picking anyway.

But we have some here attacking the A-list for over-promoting 'victims' and discrimating against white middle class males, and some attacking the A-list for being too white middle class, some have praised some candidates, some have attacked other choices for not being proven.

Which probably means it's about right.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"I'd like to see every A-list candidate asked this simple question before they know which area they are likely to represent (and change their story and accents accordingly!).

Which class are you?
a: Working class
b: Middle class
c: Upper class

Do we have any guesses for the likely percentage that say working class?"

Why Chad? No preference, no prejudice? Surely class is irrelevant?

[Graeme Archer]

Every time this community whines on about how you can't get anywhere in the party unless you're a one-legged black lesbian with "victim" tattooed onto your forehead, I get more supportive of a leadership that is designing candidate selection to meet specific electoral targets. (And please, don't do that dreary weblog thing of saying "actually I didn't say exactly that/I think you'll find it's YOU who are complaining/etc etc ad nauseam"). That's what the leadership is for. This is how large organisations work: they identify and fast-track talent. They select-up certain types to fill identified gaps. It's not a conspiracy theory part funded by the Marxists at the Guardian to end the hegemony of the white Oxbridge male. And while I'm ranting, I really don't get an increase of knowledge from reading yet another posting about why Maude should stand down to make way for blah blah blah.

There will always be more qualified candidates than there are spaces to be filled, and I feel very sorry for the good guys out there who haven't made it onto this first list. But if your qualities shine through even through just your writings here then I am sure you will get to where you deserve: a spot on the A list and a seat in Westminster (hint: this means you Jonathan).

[Chad]

Why Chad? No preference, no prejudice? Surely class is irrelevant?

No Daniel, if you look at the site you'll see that No Preference, No Prejudice applies to sex, sexuality, race, religion and age, not wealth, for the very simple reason that we have a duty to help the poorest and that involves preference.

I'm being 100% consistent. We need to offer specific policies to help the most poor and vulnerable.

[Chad]

Maybe there isn't a fixed % of working class candidates because, well, it's easy to tell if someone is a woman or from an ethnic minority, but how do you define working class? Accent? Education? Parents jobs? House price?

Jon, you've missed the point. It is not me nitpicking, I am simply repeating Cameron's own words, where he identifies his current MP's as being too white, too male and too middle class.

Seeing as Cameron himself has gone out of his way to remark on these three imbalances within the party, it seems strange that he has only sought to address two of them with the A-List.

[D.Rant]

So how exactly du u get on this A list

Work for the Conservative party for years giving up free time. No

A knowledge of politics No

Being a local councillor No

A bit part in Coronation Street and being famous for a gay kiss Yes

Nice to know that anyone who has done the first 3 has been wasting their time!

[Michael McGowan]

Calm down. Graeme, there's no need to shout just because some of us don't regard Cameron and the old dinosaur, Maude, as the Second Coming. No problem with fast-tracking talent (that's why I believe in grammar schools, which Dave doesn't). Big problem with fast-tracking mediocrity. Even bigger problem with leaving mediocrity in place to haul up the drawbridge and feather its own nest.

[Chad]

Well said Michael! As I have said before, Cameron is more than happy to support educational privilege based on wealth, but does not support education privilege based on talent.

Only the latter is available to poor families. Cameron is not a champion of the poor.

[SimonNewman]

"Maybe there isn't a fixed % of working class candidates because, well, it's easy to tell if someone is a woman or from an ethnic minority, but how do you define working class? Accent? Education? Parents jobs? House price?"

Well, I think the solution is not to have quotas, and just pick the best people, while making every effort to find candidates who might traditionally not have thought of applying - I have a Northern Irish accent, and I know I was initially a bit nervous when I joined the Conservatives, having not had great memories of my University Conservative association - I was delighted to find how welcoming the Wandsworth Conservatives are.

While there may be more 'qualified' candidates than places, the fact remains that some people are better than others. Quotas do two things:

1. Less qualified candidates are appointed. Where positive discrimination is strong, as in Labour's 1997 all-woman shortlists, you get people noticeably inferior in quality to those selected purely on merit. In fact because those selected on merit are a narrower cut off the top, the disparity is exaggerated. It's noticeable how many 'Blair Babes' have not proved competent in office.

2. Competent candidates from the favoured group, who could have succeeded purely on merit, are tarnished by association. Not every Blair Babe is incompetent, but being a member of the favoured group automatically engenders suspicion which they have to work hard to overcome. Could Margaret Thatcher have become Prime Minister if she had been elected from an all-woman shortlist? I suspect not - her authority would forever have been undermined.

Positive Discrimination thus can work to actively hinder the goals it explicitly seeks. I can't see a future woman or minority Prime Minister, no matter how competent, emerging from a quota system.

[Chad]

but how do you define working class? Accent? Education? Parents jobs? House price?

You just ask.

People will have different,personal reasons for choosing, but, given the choice of 3, you are simply asking people to choose the one that they personally most identify with.

What % of the A-list do you think would most idenitify themselves with, and thus be happy to class themselves as working class?

How do you think this % will compare with the uk as a whole?

Why did Cameron bother to raise the issue of candidates class along with colour and sex if he only intended to correct the balance for colour and sex?

Why is Cameron not seeking to promote the working classes?

[Andrew Woodman]

'Why is Cameron not seeking to promote the working classes?'

Because you can't define them by image and appearance.

[malcolm]

Many wrongs do not make a right Graeme.Surely,surely if we believe in localism and I know you do Graeme, central control of candidates is not the right way to go.If Camerons victory has traught us anything it is that Conservative members are desperate to win and will swallow quite a bit to achieve that.I simply don't believe in 2006 constituency associations will pick people who they think will lose for ideological or any other reasons.It is those same constituency associations who will have the best idea as to who will win IN THAT CONSTITUENCY.I simply do not believe that the prejudiced blue rinsed brigade or whatever anyone would like to call it exists anymore.

[SimonNewman]

"It is those same constituency associations who will have the best idea as to who will win IN THAT CONSTITUENCY."

That's my feeling. They may need encouragement to look as widely as possible for the best candidates, but no one wants to lose. This kind of image manipulation via positive discrimination seems directed more at the national media, it may play well with the BBC but it's wrong in principle not to select the best candidate whatever their race, sex or class; it lessens the pool of talent in Westminster; and IMO it's unlikely to win more seats either.

[torylady]

I simply do not believe that the prejudiced blue rinsed brigade or whatever anyone would like to call it exists anymore.

You might want to have a look at Christina Spite's recent comments about women who want to be MPs. It beggars belief that anyone would actually say such and think it normal.

I've met many Blue-Rinse Brigadiers, Malcolm. They are alive and well and coming to a local constituency near you - with different hairstyles perhaps, but same old attitude.

[malcolm]

Sorry Torylady (great name btw),I do not know which constituency you are in but most constituency members I know are more interested in victory than anything else.I don't know Christina,but most of the women who post on CH are eminently sensible and have the same desire to remove this disgusting government as any of the men.

[Simon C]

Very sorry that Jonathan Sheppard didn't make the Priority List. And I share the general surprise at Dominic Schofield's ommission.

But then that puts me in good company, because I'm not in it either.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Thanks Simon - maybe we could have a "B team" club?

[Richard]

"As I understand it, those in key marginals (no strict definition on it but its gotta be close for the Conservatives) have the opportunity to pick a candidate from this A-List"

Trying this plan out on marginals is a big risk. If they don't like it we're shafted.

"ConservativeHome could create its own candidate's list - developing its own format and open on-site interviewing a voting process. You could then promote this list to associations in the process of choosing."

Goldlist plus!

"Joe Public wants to see the next Government in waiting - lets not disintergrate into petty fighting"

Maybe if the party leadership weren't foisting this upon us it wouldn't be a problem.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"I'm being 100% consistent. We need to offer specific policies to help the most poor and vulnerable."

And how exactly is the number of working-class candidates on the priority list relevant to that goal, Chad?

You don't have to be from a working-class background to understand and/or share the concerns of the poor and the vulnerable.

[malcolm]

Very sorry to hear your news Simon.You are certainly one of the sanest voices on this blog and would I'm sure be a valuable addition to the parliamentary party.As with Jonathan I hope your time may yet still come.

[Chad]

And how exactly is the number of working-class candidates on the priority list relevant to that goal, Chad?

DVA,
Why don't you try reading my posts? It was David Cameron who raised the 3 areas of imbalance in the Tory Party, clearly noting the white, male and middle class aspects.

All I have noted is that it is strange that when Cameron has carefully noted three areas of concern, he has only sought to address two of them. It just seems odd that he raised the issue of too many candidates being middle class without doing anything to try and correct it!

You don't have to be from a working-class background to understand and/or share the concerns of the poor and the vulnerable.
It's not me who started all this positive discrimination nonsense it was David Cameron.

He raised the imbalance, but feels the need to address it by including fixed ratios of non-white, non-male, but decided not to address the non-middle class part even though he raised it!

[Patsy Sergeant]

Thank you Malcolm @ 16.55 you are absolutely right, any ladies of my age that I meet (although I more often seem to mix with younger people) (and I am neither 'blue rinse' or 'silver top' being a ginger-top!), to get back to my thread - any of the ladies or indeed young people that I meet just can't wait to get this corrupt government OUT!

[geraldine]

A further couple of points about the A List:

1 - Whoever at CCHQ decreed that it would not be published is providing further evidence of the stupidification of the High Command. It can no more 'not be published' than the tide can be compelled not to come in. If any number of target constituencies can choose candidates only from the A List it must follow (pay attention you boys from Eton!) that those target constituencies must have the List in their possession, otherwise how can they choose from it?
And even if the constituencies don't get to see the List in toto (can't the software do italics?) soon enough everyone on it will apply to one or other of the target constituencies (n'est-ce pas?). presumably they will all or almost apply to the juiciest constituency.
It therefore follows inexorably that the List will leak.

2 - If there continues to exist a List of Approved Candidates (who are not on the A List) what exactly is the legal MECHANISM by which target constituencies - or any other - are to be forbidden from selecting from amongst List B ? Where in the Party Rules is this mechanism provided for and at what point did members / Associations sign up for this mechanism?

I have a memory that before the 1997 election a potential Labour Party prospective candidate who was excluded from consideration because of his not being a person of woman-ness challenged his exclusion under employment protection legislation. I can't remember the outcome but even if the Judge ruled against him then, similar challenges would be possible now and more likely to succeed on Human Rights Act grounds.

(But who knows? - the Judges make up that kind of law as they go along - hence 'Burqa bad' - High Court Judge; 'Burqa good' - Court of Appeal; 'Burqa bad, and not only Burqa bad but Court of Appeal stupid beyond belief into the bargain' - House of Lords - any odds on how the European Court, which allows Turkey to ban the headscarf in Universities but forbids the UK from denying the franchise to convicted manslaughterers in prison, will categorize the HL decision?? )

And any such challenge commenced now would probably still be grinding through the courts on General Election day. And on the Balance of Convenience test for issuing interim injunctions I would have thought that balance favoured the List B applicant seeking to challenge the Party's blatant discrimination against persons of maleness in the creation of List A.

--------------------------------------------

PS - am I alone in finding confusing the way the automatic layout draws a dotted line between the text and the name of the writer of the text ? It makes it look as though the writer of the text above the line has actually written the text below the line - extra confusing when some people make two contributions in quick succession.

[geraldine]

A real service ConservativeHome would be providing would be to publish not just the Names of the persons on List A but also their brief CVs - so we could all see whether or not our suspicion is valid that it is overstuffed with people who have never worked outside party HQ/PR or had normal difficulties in life to overcome.

[John Brownfield Pope]

There has always been a problem in the Conservative Party concerning Candidates to fight any sort of Election. It has never been an open process. Local Branches have been conservative in every sense of the word. Seeking candidates seen to be in their own image and likeness, and at sub parliamentary levels of Government any candidate is seen better than no 'Party Candidate' at all. There was a time that one entered Parliament via the route of being a local government Councillor. Lack of
previous involvement is now often seen to be an advantage. We dont want persons who are going to rock the boat the constant cry, albeit that the boat was heading for the rocks. Elsewhere it can be the Branch Chair aided by an indolent Committee that lets the Party down.

Where I live the local Party is not even able to find a Candidate willing to represent them on the District Council, and at last years County Council election seemingly had no Candidate to hand to fight the seat, as they needed to plead for representation in the Church Magazine.Let MPs serve for three sessions in Parliament, then declare their time is up.

[Bluefang]

"One of the differences Henry is that members of the A List have a much higher chance of becoming MPs than the average member of the former candidates' list. " - sez 'oo?

Green car. It took a letter in the Telegraph to point out that the total life-time energy cost of a car (which closely correlates with its overall pollution impact) is some six times greater for a hybrid than for an otherwise comparable conventional car. Where was Cameron's environmental adviser before this fatuous gesture was made? Not a good ad for glam, dilletante, non-female, non-ethnic non-working class pretenders.

Working class - by the time the punter (for the A list) becomes articulate, sufficiently educated to have some competence about the isshoos de nos jour, is he still working class?

[Alec Weir]

It's high time we stopped fussing about who is on, or not on, a list. What is more important, particularly in view of the disarray in the Labour Party is for Central office or the Board to let Associations have a list of names, from whom they can then choose, as soon as possible. If we delay as forecast, we may well find ourselves up the creek without a padddle(PPC). After all David C said some time ago that we must be ready for an early election; the present system is not helping us do that. Let's get on with it and stop the bickering!

[Hovebloke]

If good performance by Dominic Schofield at the General election is reason to be on the A List surely Nicholas's Boles very poor performance in failing to win Hove is grounds for him being left off the list. Despite spending large sums of money Boles failed to get the local Conservatives on his side due to his arrogant attitude, relied on young men drafted in from London and ignored the large local postal vote.