Jury Team is the new political organisation that is letting anyone put themselves forward for selection as a European Parliament candidate on their behalf and is letting the public vote on who should actually stand.
Its launch got extensive mainstream media coverage, including from the BBC, Mail, Telegraph, Sky, Guardian and Sunday Times. Moreover, almost all of the coverage was very friendly, e.g. not pointing out the myriad of similar ventures in the past which have failed nor asking why their website goes out of its way to encourage anonymous donations.
With that favourable background and now only 20 days to go until the close of poll for their candidate selection process, it seems fair to judge Jury Team on how it is doing so far.
And the picture is one of a party that has flopped. Because the latest figures from their website shows that in three quarters of the European Parliament electoral regions the number of number of people who have applied to be a candidate is the same (2 regions) or less (7 regions) than the number of seats up for election. In one region, there is not even a single name put forward. Letting the public choose your candidates doesn’t add up to much if there aren’t enough on offer to provide an actual choice.
Moreover, the number of votes cast in total to select the candidates has been tiny. In only four regions have more than 150 votes been cast in total by the public, with the total under 50 in three regions (and zero in a fourth where there are no candidates on offer).
Far from being a major step forward in involving the public, the number of votes cast across a whole region in most cases is smaller than the number of votes often cast in the selection of a candidate for just one Parliamentary constituency by one of the mainstream parties. Similar, the numbers of supporters on Facebook or people looking at their films on YouTube are extremely small.
Even on Twitter, although the number of followers is superficially more respectable (but still under 1,000), it is only half the number of people who Jury Team are following on Twitter. Following double the number of people who are following you is normally a sure sign of a Twitter account that is trying very hard to get noticed (becuase if you follow someone on Twitter, they will often follow you back), but failing.
Overall, it’s looking rather like a flop so far.
Here are the full figures, taken from the Jury Team website and other websites on Saturday 4th April:
Facebook: 144 supporters
YouTube: 3 subscribers, 142 channel views
Twitter: 735
East of England
Number of seats for election: 7
Number of Jury Team candidates: 5
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 245
East Midlands
Number of seats for election: 5
Number of Jury Team candidates: 5
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 76
London
Number of seats for election: 8
Number of Jury Team candidates: 11
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 333
Northern Ireland
Number of seats for election: 3
Number of Jury Team candidates: 0
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: n/a
North East
Number of seats for election: 3
Number of Jury Team candidates: 3
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 74
North West
Number of seats for election: 8
Number of Jury Team candidates: 4
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 142
Scotland
Number of seats for election: 6
Number of Jury Team candidates: 3
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 30
South East
Number of seats for election: 10
Number of Jury Team candidates: 22
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 434
South West
Number of seats for election: 6
Number of Jury Team candidates: 8
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 266
Wales
Number of seats for election: 4
Number of Jury Team candidates: 3
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 10
West Midlands
Number of seats for election: 6
Number of Jury Team candidates: 2
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 33
Yorkshire & The Humber
Number of seats for election: 6
Number of Jury Team candidates: 2
Total number of votes cast for Jury Team candidates: 19
Note: the Jury Team website says, “72 MEPs will be elected from 12 regions. The Jury Team intends to put forward 70 candidates for the UK”. It is not clear which two seats they are not planning to contest.
20 Comments
Mark, you seem to have put the break before the close of the italics, so that the main LDV page is now italicised from this article onwards. It’s… interesting!
It does that. I’ve fixed it.
“Moreover, the number of votes cast in total to select the candidates has been tiny. In only four regions have more than 150 votes been cast in total by the public, with the total under 50 in three regions (and zero in a fourth where there are no candidates on offer).”
It sounds as though it would be very easy for extremists to infiltrate this organisation – if they thought it worth the effort.
My understanding is that they have not done their candidate acquisition campaign yet. So either they are leaving it a bit late, or you are kicking them a bit too soon.
I’d assume the 2 seats they’re not planning to contest would come from Northern Ireland (where there are 3 seats, not 6). As NI has a sane electoral system (STV), parties only need to stand one candidate there, which would account for the 70 out of 72.
Nick: Thanks, I’ve corrected the number. Jury Team list Northern Ireland on their site as somewhere they want to stand candidates and have a note that no-one has applied yet which suggests that they weren’t planning to avoid standing there. But perhaps they’ve changed their mind and not fully updated the site?
Guido: Interesting. Their site now says it is 19 days until the polls close to select their candidates, so if they really haven’t done that yet they are then giving the public very little time to find out about and vote between those names. That would still make a bit of a mockery of the idea of widespread public involvement in choosing candidates (as does the very low number of votes cast so far).
I thought the BBC was very generous in the publicity they gave this party given that there are political parties being formed all of the time and most of them fail.
So why should this be any different?
Having been interested myself in politics for a long time I applaud the concept. It is hard to determine if the idea is a flop or a reflection of the political apathy we have at present. The real problem is attracting the right candidates who don’t have big egos and are not good at selling themselves. A bit like ch4’s “Big Brother” we all know a few good characters at home but they’ll never put their name in the hat.
Personally it shouldn’t be about individual candidates more about policy ie:free public transport, getting rid of Trident and putting a stop to experiments in mainstream education – the list goes on.
Thanks Craig for applauding the concept. I too think it is a laudable concept; so much so I put my name forward and you can see my profile in the South West region.
I take on board your comments also about policy. Yes, it is very important and I can assure you that WHEN elected I will, if you happen to be in my region, be more than happy to take up your issues in a European framework.
As for ego, well anyone willing to put themselves in the public of necessity should have some ego. However, I can assure you that having a film named after me has not changed me one little bit!
It is gratifying that people are taking the time to knock us. Maybe this will cause someone to delve just that little bit deeper, learn something about us, and then join us. Thank you.
Thanks for commenting Michael. I’d be interested to know your views on why so few people have voted in the candidate selections so far?
@ Michael, but there’s nothing to join.
There’s nothing really that links the candidates other than a desire to get elected. It’s entirely possible for Jury Team candidates to completely disagree with one another on every major issue. Therefore, unless one agrees with the 1st candidate on the list, there’s no point risking a Jury team vote. It’s only getting press interest because it’s been set up by a weathy ex-Conservative (oh, and what happened to the last party set up in such circumstances – Referendum Party, got lots of press, but not that many votes).
There are many reasons not least of which is the disillusionment of the general public over any politician. I take this seriously and I have been out an about asking questions. When they know I am going for office, their eyes glaze over. But when you get past that, it is amazing that people how fervently people feel about the debacle over the “gravy train”.
Another reason is that the UK is quite apathetic towards politics in general. They don’t believe they can change it. They think “why vote; nothing will change”. So we have to get over this inertia. You may call me naive but I really believe that the people can make a difference. And we have to do something positive soon because if we do not, then the recent riots over G20 will just be the beginning.
Thirdly, the profile of the Jury Team is not high enough. You, or others may knock this comment, but I still believe in telling the truth.
Finally, for now at least, a large majority of people cannot actually send texts. There is a thing called predictive typing which is even more virulent in its T9 form. I know about this since I spent 15 years in committees designing the GSM and 3G standard. It is great if you want to enter actual words, but stumbles when entering text like MICCLA01.
So, as I say, there are many reasons, why the numbers are lower than they should be. But there are no such things as problems; only solutions in waiting!
@Grammar Police:
There IS something to join, and that is a movement for change. You are not risking anything at all to vote. But if you don’t vote, you risk many more years of film-star politicians at the trough.
Maybe, like me, people are so cynical of anything to do with Politicians, we are waiting to see what happens. Given that the Lib-Lab-Cons MPs, with a few exceptions, are daily shown up to be a bunch of crooks who evade prosecution because they make the laws and they exempt themselves, I would be wary of burying the Jury team just yet. I’m hoping they put candidates up for Gordon Borwn and the Labour part wake in 2010, as I don’t want a Tory Blair replacing our current bunch of Zombies.
I applaud your cynicism John. Based on the evidence, it is totally understandable. But please watch this space and put us to the test. I hope we can restore your faith.
London Jury Team candidate here, presenting your readers with her profile for their comment.
I have been disqualified by the Jury Team for allegedly contravening the rule, viz:
“I agree not to support any policies discriminating on the basis of race, colour, gender, sexual orientation, disability or religious or other belief.”
I have been tried and found guilty in the Kangaroo Court of Dillon Sharp, the Jury Team Press Officer, who has decided in his wisdom that making a bargain with the BNP is de facto proof that I support policies of discrimination prohibited by the Jury Team.
(I had said I would vote BNP if they supported me in sufficient numbers to make me the candidate with the most votes, I would say publicly that I would be voting BNP. To my delight, Bob Bailey, the BNP MEP candidate in question, acceded to my suggestion, because he liked my policies, and said he would do his best but warned me that some of his members would be “funny about doing that”.)
Anyway, read the clause again like a lawyer and you will see that “other belief” arguably includes the beliefs of the BNP, the National Front, National Socialists, White Supremacists, Al-Qaeda, etc …
I have come across BNP members who vehemently deny that they are racists.
Others are more resigned, “If supporting the BNP means people saying I am racist, then so be it.”
But there are those who are not BNP who would vote BNP and would say so publicly to the media. An Asian man from Leicestershire said precisely that on the second episode of Matthew d’Ancona’s BRITISHNESS on Radio 4.
Michael White of the Guardian said it would be a good thing if the BNP did well in the Euro elections.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/18/electoralreform-bnp-far-right
Were this Asian man and Michael White candidates for the Jury Team, would they also have been disqualified?
By the way, I absolutely support the right of racists to vote as they please. I do not agree with them, but they are entitled to their opinion.
For more on this intriguing question, please visit
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2009/04/my-disqualification-as-jury-team-london.html
Vote: Should I, Andromeda, have made a bargain with the BNP?
An interesting and admirable concept… but they’ve SO gone about it the wrong way. They should have called themselves “xNone of the Above” or “Independents”.
“Jury” as a word is rather unpopular with most ordinary people.
Most people only heard about them after it was far too late for them to get involved. Surely thousands of people would have applied for this if they’d known. I’m a news junkie and didn’t see, read or hear about this anywhere.
Quite a few of the candidates concern me, their proposers seem vague and sketchy, they don’t seem to be “real”.
The public being the vain public go for faces that please the eye, but very few have an ounce of good looks!
The winner for the North West has put forward so really odd ideas and seems pretty set on some drastic changes that might be well-intended but fail to explain the reasoning nor does he say how he will be able to enact them as an MEP.
I was very close to signing up, at last a movement that isn’t a political party, great idea and I agree with the concept, we need to get the parties out of the ballot box and vote for PEOPLE not PARTIES so the bad stay out, the good stay in and everything else can stay beyond the benches and the polling booth so all our politicians are elected on their own merits as individuals. I submit this comment feeling even more disillusioned than before I heard about the Jury Team vision and now… I won’t be voting for anyone. Big whooop. There’s more effective ways of changing the world than climbing on a political gravy train that talks a lot of sense but has no real remit, authority or desire to enact real, revolutionary political and social change.
WE as individuals, not parties or jury’s or something peculiar in between don’t need any of them to make the world a better place. We just need to look around us and fix it from the inside out in as best way we can however small.
RGT: And how much do most people know about the merits as individuals of their MPs? Are they going to bother to find out what they think about, to pluck something out of the air, gay rights? Or are most of them just going to vote for some wholesome looking “independent” who sounds suitably forthright about MPs expenses? Parties exist for a reason, there’s nothing sinister about them, it’s just a way for people to get a decent sense of who you are and how you’re likely to vote. Doesn’t mean they can’t try to evaluate you on your own merits too.