Why Labour will copy the Tory open primaries

Bill Brammell

So it will be big bucks that calls the tune for future candidates. Apart from the £40,000 cost of just the ballot, those with political ambitions will be building up war chests of cash to up their profiles for future contests. Democracy extended for those with the money = more showbiz.

John Page

And you could reasonably ask the local party to ensure that both sexes were represented among the primary candidates. Then the voters could have their say.

Local primary for Salford, anyone? How would the ginger chipmunk do?

SNP Tactical Voter

I reckon given that it costs £30k per constituency to hold primaries and Labour are skint, Labour will stick to the good old rotten borough approach of a handful of local members picking the next candidate.

But each to their own...

Aidan

Can they afford it?

Angela

I very much doubt they'll clutch it, They don't understand it. Good grief? Let voters have any control? How could we impose our all-women/all black/all whatever perceived disadvantaged minority, shortlists?

This open primary is totally alien to Labour thinking, they're control freaks. They won't do it unless they tightly control the ultimate candidates, which would make a nonsense of it.

To be honest, I didn't think CCHQ would do it, they like things fairly centralised, but they did, and it was genuinely open, and all kudos to them.

Seems to me a deserving woman got nominated without any of Harman's revolting legislation.

Praguetory

Very interesting, but a) the Labour Party doesn't have the money b) Nepotism isn't something Labour are ready to give up.

RobertD

Provided that the party leadership has already vetted the candidates so that whoever the people select is acceptable to HQ I guess they don't have that much to lose. It will only become real democracy when any party member in the constituency can get their name on the ballot form with or without HQ approval.

Don

It's only a matter of time before a smaller party calls foul because they do not have the funding to do this. Next thing is quick trip to the courts followed by taxpayer funding for primaries.

Silent Hunter

Why not? . . . they steal all their other policies anyway . . . why stop now?

Occasional Ostrich

Once the costs of this are multiplied out, laudable though it is, it can only increase the pressure to reduce the number of constituencies. Result!

Sally Chatterjee

I can't see Labour doing this. They are the masters of control-freakery and enjoy parachuting placemen SpAds into safe seats. They've long trampled on local parties too. Lastly their local associations are riven with factions and splits, these primaries could destroy the feeble organisational capacities they have left.

But this was only an experiment for the Conservatives. I doubt the people of Norwich North would have chosen a Tory candidate with such a blank CV. In other words, I can't see any party embracing these primaries, it means giving up too much power, patronage is a powerful force.

Robert Eve

John Page - what on earth has having candidates of both sexes got to do with open primaries?

What you need are quality candidates.

Realist

Wouldn't it be easier - and certainly more honest - just to post CCHQ press releases undited? These 'primaries' are *not* open. *Open* primaries have *open entry*. All these ballots do is let the numpties chose between whatever trio of hand-picked patsies Dave and Fat Eric lob your way.

Hawkeye

Labour will not do open primaries unless it is along the communist model where there is only one candidate.

They could not have voters delivering the wrong result, could they? Ask the Irish, they'll explain how voting works with socialism.

Penfold

How can they, when Hattie Hairperson wants women only lists. This of course takes away choice and enables the centre to impose a candidate.
NuLab with its controlling, statist and autarchic manner could never countenance open primaries.

Rhoda Klapp

Realist- Open entry implies a closed electorate ie registered voters, as in the US. Otherwise in a strong party X constituency party X could stuff party Ys candidate list and get party X voters to pick someone who was a closet party X candidate to stand in the GE for party Y, against X's own person.

Summing up, the candidate list has to be somewhat controlled by the party. Preferably locally, not from HQ.

Dan Brusca

The biggest thinkg mitigating against this idea is that it would require changes to the party rulebook and that would have to go through conference. Won't happen in time for the next election.

Ian C

This is the best idea that anyone has yet coem up with to get politics connected with the locality. It will educe the pwer of the parties while giving genuine reforming governments the strength no to be timid. It will also produce less extreme cadidates.

To this extent there is a case for state funding to get it going. It would be a waste not to at least run the experiment for the sake of £30-40,000 a pop. At a price of £2.40 per vote in Totnes it is not alot and there is no reason why the voter should not pay some of this.

Jupiter

If it costs £40,000 for each party in each seat, that's about £78M for the whole country.

Emil

Surely the Labour approach to primaries would simply follow the EU approach and keep running them over and over again until the people give the right result. Or like their public consultations they could just ignore the result if it didn't suit.