You can’t call for a General Election and then act surprised if it happens.
That’s why the Liberal Democrats are quietly getting on with the business of putting candidates in place with breakneck speed. Seats are using the sorts of expedited procedures normally used in by-elections to get candidates in place. These selections will expire next May if there has been no election.
Daisy Benson, indefatigable campaigner and commentator, has been selected for the key seat of Yeovil, which was held until 2015 by David Laws with a majority of 13,000.
Delighted to have been chosen by Lib Dem members in Yeovil to be their parliamentary spokes. What a privilege! pic.twitter.com/fJuhjFMokF
— Daisy Benson (@_DaisyBenson) 16 July 2016
This is a very exciting appointment. One of Daisy’s massive strengths is the way she has thrown herself into finding, welcoming and engaging new members of the Liberal Democrats. She was pivotal in establishing the Lib Dem Newbies group on Facebook as one of the best and most positive Lib Dem discussion spaces.
Also in the West Country, in Steve Webb’s former seat of Thornbury and Yate, long-standing local councillor Claire Young has been selected.
Delighted and honoured to be selected as the @LibDems Parliamentary Candidate for Thornbury and Yate https://t.co/CNpWrDDAiD
— Cllr Claire Young (@cyoungfocus) July 16, 2016
In Lynne Featherstone’s former seat of Hornsey and Wood Green, Federal Executive member Dawn Barnes has been selected. Dawn is no stranger to fighting a high profile seat as she stood against David Cameron in Witney in 2009.
Both Dawn and Daisy will waste no time in getting out on the streets. Dawn’s teams are out canvassing today in Haringey.
It’s good to see that two of our brightest talents are fighting such high profile seats. However, a big test of these selections will be whether they bring forward the most diverse slate of candidates that the party voted for in York. Early indications suggest that they may not meet that target. Reports reach us of manoeuvres by local and regional parties to avoid diversity measures. If that is the case, then the party will have to do something to deal with that sort of behaviour if there is no snap election and the process is repeated after next Summer.
Update: Sunday evening
Scottish Lib Dem councillor (and former MSP and Education Minister) Robert Brown saw my tweet about Daisy’s selection and found an interesting fact:
Apropos of nothing, the 1950 Liberal cand. for Yeovil went under the tremendous name of Leonardo da Vinci Maclaren! https://t.co/vG1ouv97Cx
— Robert Brown (@Robert4LibDems) July 17, 2016
There, that can be your something you learned for today. I just love the curiosity, common to many Lib Dems, that leads them to Wikipedia to find out about all sorts of random stuff.
* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings. You can find her on Bluesky at caronmlindsay.bsky.social
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Sparrows Can't Sing Q&A with Barbara Windsor and Murray Melvin
A bargain at 23 guineas?
20C night
Rif Winfield
expats
Peter Martin
Richard Flowers
George Thomas
76 Comments
Reports reach us of manoeuvres by local and regional parties to avoid diversity measures.
God forbid a local party want to pick the candidate they think is the the best person for the job, eh?
Very many congratulations to these talented candidates!
Ryan, the leader and federal conference has made it absolutely clear that we need to look like the people we seek to represent.
When people use phrases like “best person for the job”, they generally mean “best man for the job.” We need to get out of that mindset and accept that we have brilliant candidates who are not straight white men who are not getting a fair chance.
If MPs were actually selected as the best person for the job you would expect that half of our 8 MPs would be women. I cant remember how to calculate the odds of all 8 being men in a non gendered selection, I imageine its pretty unlikely though. The first step in dealing with any problem is to admit that you have a problem.
I I believe that none of these were AWS , showing yet agAin that talented women can get selected entirely on their own merits.
@ Ryan McAllister,
It sounds like the same resistance that David Cameron had from constituency parties when he introduced ‘A’ list candidates in an attempt to increase the number of MPs from more diverse backgrounds.
Are we to believe that some of the MPs that we have in government who were chosen by traditional means are the best that we can hope for? Please may the answer be no.
The forces of conservatism are very strong in this country.
There seem to be too many people in this party who would prefer to lose with glorious diversity than actually win more seats. Of course we should do both (win and be diverse) but that will require rather more subtlety than some gung-ho people seem capable of.
Paul Barker – but these selections are from the past. Even if things are still not perfect, I don’t believe AWS is needed.
Though Caron says in her comment that it’s the best ‘straight white man’ who wins, her post shows this is clearly not the case!
Anyhow, the party has been fairly intelligent about how it is imposing AWS, tending to impose them on places where a woman would be favourite for selection anyway.
Paul: It’s one in 256.
A more diverse selection of candidates ought, on a prior grounds, be more appealing to the electorate; and there’s certainly no reason to think that a de facto bias against women and BAME candidates produces a more successful electoral strategy.
I think Tony Greaves is basically right. It would be catastrophic if the party ended up with fewer seats because of the focus on AWS.
Historically the party has generally won parliamentary seats through involving the candidates in putting in a lot of hard effort in the constituency over a prolonged period of time.
I note that “long-standing local councillor Claire Young” has been selected for Thornbury and Yate so she may well fit both the long term hard effort criteria and improving the diversity of our candidates and have some chance of regaining the seat. But the party doesn’t have safe seats into which someone not already involved heavily in local LD campainging can be pitched just because they fit the AWS criteria – and have any realistic chance of winning.
Still a shame that Steve Webb is not standing again.
Nonconformistradical: Implicit in your last paragraph is that you might not think Daisy and Dawn fit the “history of involvement in local campaigning” criterion. My knowledge of Yeovil isn’t all that great, but I can certainly assure you that Dawn Barnes is no stranger to Hornsey and Wood Green.
Paul Barker,
Are you suggesting deselecting four of our eight MP’s then??
Our MP’s did not get to keep their seats because they were men, or because the Party chose them. They kept their seats because in the particular circumstances of a disastrous election they were both sufficiently popular with their voters AND lucky to hold a seat that had the right demographics.. calculating the odds of that happening is not relevant to the question..
We do have to face the fact that our most winnable seats are all ones that we held before the last election. In all those seats the defeated MP almost certainly has the best chance of winning. Parachuting in a relatively unknown candidate of any gender or background if the former MP wants to stand again would be a mistake..
To take a seat as a Liberal Democrat in a General Election requires a following wind and usually being a local councillor or established local campaigner is the best way to gain the necessary press attention. If the aim is to get more diverse candidates elected as MP’s they will still need the local track record, and we need to pay attention to that rather than just the shortlisting process
@Caron Lindsay
From your article:
“However, a big test of these selections will be whether they bring forward the most diverse slate of candidates that the party voted for in York.”
From your posting at 3.39pm:
“When people use phrases like “best person for the job”, they generally mean “best man for the job.” We need to get out of that mindset and accept that we have brilliant candidates who are not straight white men who are not getting a fair chance.”
I can confirm what Simon McGrath surmised, which is that NONE of these three seats involved AWS.
So, Caron, the (only??) three seats selected so far that were not AWS have selected three excellent women. Of course, by definition the AWS seats will all select women.
Accordingly it seems as if your worries as to whether the selections will “bring forward the most diverse slate of candidates” could be well founded, but not in the way that you probably mean.
I’m completely with Tony Greaves on this issue and this report about first rate candidates being selected in three winnable seats (where they all happen to be women even though there were no AWSs involved) only goes to demonstrate the error of those prevailed in York.
Oh, my goodness. What joy to be able to agree with Simon Shaw.
“When people use phrases like “best person for the job”, they generally mean “best man for the job.” What’s your evidence for that , Caron ?
@David Raw: It would take too long to outline the numerous examples over decades.
But we aren’t talking about ‘over the decades’
We’re talking about now
OK Iain let’s not talk about “over the decades” let’s talk about now. What would you think of an organisation that makes no, I repeat, no, provision for maternity leave for its “workers”? Well welcome to that organisation, it’s called the Liberal Democrats. There is no provision for maternity leave for candidates and since 80% of women are mothers it is hardly surprising that that lack of basic rights helps produce a shortfall of female candidates overall.
I am being repetitive about this
Sorry I meant to say that I am being repetitive about this but then so is everyone else!
I said at the time that the York initiative would be a huge mistake and I still believe that to be the case. As far as the silly comment that those who talk about wanting the best person actually mean they want a male white straight person … well… I find that offensive. I am surprised the author has not been censored by the moderators…error…. no I’m not
Perhaps the answer is not to become pregnant while you’re a candidate
The astonishing thing is that the selection of 3 impressive candidates for winnable Seats is so contraversial.
Or maybe the answer is to run a modern political party that accommodates a perfectly normal thing like having children like all employers have to do.
Oh my word, Floating Voter, I think Helen Lewis’s law applies. The comments on any article that has anything even vaguely to do with feminism absolutely justify feminism.
@nonconformistradical: Daisy and Dawn’s Facebook feeds are crammed full of photos of them out campaigning in Yeovil and Hornsey.
I may have misunderstood what you were saying, so I wonder if you could clarify. Are you saying that a) female candidates don’t work as hard and/or b) candidates selected by AWS don’t work as hard or c) that candidates selected by AWS are somehow “pitched into the seat because they fit the criteria”? If you are saying any of these things, perhaps you could provide some evidence.
Caron – perhaps you could also provide some evidence for your opening statement ” generally when people say the best person for the job they mean best man”
Ruth Bright
“let’s talk about now. What would you think of an organisation that makes no, I repeat, no, provision for maternity leave for its “workers”? Well welcome to that organisation, it’s called the Liberal Democrats. There is no provision for maternity leave for candidates and since 80% of women are mothers it is hardly surprising that that lack of basic rights helps produce a shortfall of female candidates overall.”
I quite agree, but I think that makes the opposite case to what you think it does.
You have (rightly) raised this over and over, others have pointed out other “small” individual changes that would be helpful. But what happened? Nothing on the practice side but lots of wasted effort implementing the pointless AWS, claiming it would result in some big bang “culture change” hmm.
The individual problem fixing is boring but gets stuff done (LibDens used to get that) and serious effort from the top will have an impact, if actually done, AWS is pointless at best.
@Liberal Neil
“Or maybe the answer is to run a modern political party that accommodates a perfectly normal thing like having children like all employers have to do.”
Yes, employers have to provide maternity cover – often through taking on a temporary employee – for the period of maternity leave.
Could I ask what you (and Ruth Bright) are suggesting in terms of PPCs?
This comments thread is a parody of itself.
We have fantastic candidates selected in a number of seats up and down the country, and in Dawn, Daisy, Claire, and – for instance – Layla Moran in OxWAb, we have candidates I’d happily wear out successive pairs of shoes for. If supporters spent more time doing that and less time demanding evidence of sexism from people (with no apparent sense of self-awareness, or, indeed, irony) then we’d be streets ahead of where we are now.
@Caron Lindsay
“nonconformistradical: Daisy and Dawn’s Facebook feeds are crammed full of photos of them out campaigning in Yeovil and Hornsey.
I may have misunderstood what you were saying, so I wonder if you could clarify. Are you saying that a) female candidates don’t work as hard and/or b) candidates selected by AWS don’t work as hard or c) that candidates selected by AWS are somehow “pitched into the seat because they fit the criteria”? If you are saying any of these things, perhaps you could provide some evidence.”
I thought nonconformistradical was merely making the point that there will logically be occasions where AWS means that someone other than the “best” candidate may be chosen for a particular seat. That could conceivably mean that at the next GE a seat is not won that would have otherwise been won.
Ironically, because there was no AWS in any of these three seats, then there can be no doubt that the “best” candidate won in each case.
@Simon Shaw – yes – I’d suggest that the Local Party makes arrangements to cover for the PPC while they take maternity (or paternity) leave from the role.
Caron
“Oh my word, Floating Voter, I think Helen Lewis’s law applies. The comments on any article that has anything even vaguely to do with feminism absolutely justify feminism.”
This was a discussion about the advocacy of women rights? I thought it was Avon gratulations to three strong candidates selected on their merits.
I’m amazed at the ability of the AWS crowd to make good candidates sound like token placements!
Floating voter – as a special treat for you I thought I would let you know that as a PPC I did plan my family around general elections! My son was born ten years ago tomorrow with a full four years to go until the next general election.
Psi – I fully accept that you have always been very supportive on the structural barriers to participation by women.
@Liberal Neil
“Simon Shaw – yes – I’d suggest that the Local Party makes arrangements to cover for the PPC while they take maternity (or paternity) leave from the role.”
As a matter of interest, would that include maternity/paternity leave during a GE Campaign? Personally I’d be very disappointed if a Local Party didn’t make appropriate arrangements away from a GE.
Perhaps one of the reasons — perhaps, even, the main reason — that representation of women in the Liberal Democrats has failed to keep up with other parties, major and minor, is that every time someone suggests a practical method to approach the goal of parity, there is a pushback by entrenched interests similar to what we see above (and, I don’t doubt, below).
Hi all. I want to add my 2 penneth. I am not actually in agreement with AWS. If I could have (but didn’t as I couldn’t afford to get to that conference when it was voted on) I would have voted against it. I have since learnt more and realised that an AWS would mainly only apply when a standing MP decides to step down( correct me if I am wrong), which I guess doesn’t happen very often. The one thing that really does infuriate me though more than having/not having an AWS is when local /regional parties ignore the instructions from the top and do whatever they like. Now that to me is undemocratic. It shouldn’t be allowed to happen. What is the point of a democratic vote to bring in a policy where members have their say if, when that becomes policy local parties think they know best and chose to disregard the will of the members as a whole. They may know their local area, but if the party has decided that we have a policy then what right do local parties have to disregard that? I see that as arrogant.
@ Caron Lindsay “It would take too long to outline the numerous examples over decades”
In football terms that’s what’s called a swerve……… it’s certainly not a Cruyff turn.
Apart from de-selecting sitting MPs there is no strategy that would have produced more LD MPs at the last general election – and the evidence that no LD candidates won who were not already MPs suggests that that would not have worked either.
Caron, “These selections will expire next May if there has been no election.”
Why?
Surely we cannot be saying to candidates who are working and building up support in key seats that if there is no election by May, their selections have expired……..or are we?
Any candidate selected now will have a near impossible job winning a seat even if the work flat out from now to 2020. We cannot be saying that their selection only lasts a year. If so, that would be madness.
What if there is then an election in June or later in the year?
Good candidates once selected, must be there until the next election, whenever it is called.
If you don’t change anything – then nothing will change. The selection of three brilliant women candidates who have worked their butts off in their respective constituencies shows that the change of attitude to AWS is doing its work. However, having observed our previous efforts at diversity – it is clear we still need to go forward with AWS and others to try and get some diversity into our parliamentary party. It is embarrassing and unacceptable to do nothing to effect change when we have an all white and male representation in the House of Commons. And I have often been the poor sod who has to go out in the media to defend what is indefensible.
@Iain your “the party has been fairly intelligent about how it is imposing AWS, tending to impose them on places where a woman would be favourite for selection anyway” if true would be a pretty damning comment on the party – not only because it proves that the whole AWS fiasco was unnecessary (as do the batch of selections reported here) but because it implies the decision as to who will be chosen locally is effectively being made by some faceless non-local committee.
AWS is a stain on our party – I never thought I would see the day where we barred people from standing because of their gender – and surely since we are clearly heading for a good selection of strong female candidates in winnable seats, is best abandoned.
Great news that we have three such excellent candidates. I’ll be doing my bit to help Dawn as I live nearby.
I am embarrassed as a male that a few fellow members of my gender still think and write such nonsense about women. I support whatever is required to get more LD women (and LGBT and ethnic minority candidates) elected. I voted Caroline Pidgeon 1 and Sophie Walker 2 in the mayoral election and would like us to endorse the entirety of the Women’s Equality Party’s platform.
If you are an aspiring LD female candidate reading this, please don’t be put off by the handful of male reactionaries (and sadly the odd female reactionary). Put yourself forward, run, and win!
To be clear – no-one is saying that the selection of these candidates is controversial. People are pointing out that these selections were NOT under AWS, showing the hyperbolic comments, e.g. ‘What people mean by the best person is the best straight, white man’ is self evidently not true by the article.
These selections prove nothing about AWS, as they were not selected under that system.
Ruth Bright
“I fully accept that you have always been very supportive on the structural barriers to participation by women”
My support for any change is immaterial. I’m just stunned by the actions of those in position of power in the party, who when presented with specific issues think all problems will just disappear in some mythical change due to AWS.
Where is the effort to identify the small specific issues and rectify them? For the party that is sometimes disparagingly referred to as obsessed with potholes and dog poop this is equivalent of a national policy of “smash the military industrial complex.”
@Lynne Featherstone
“… The selection of three brilliant women candidates who have worked their butts off in their respective constituencies shows that the change of attitude to AWS is doing its work. However, having observed our previous efforts at diversity – it is clear we still need to go forward with AWS and others to try and get some diversity into our parliamentary party.”
I’m not sure I follow your argument, Lynne. Are you claiming that these three excellent women were chosen in non-AWS seats because of a “change of attitude to AWS”? How does that work?
Also, you say that “it is clear we still need to go forward with AWS and others to try and get some diversity into our parliamentary party” on a thread that reports the selection of these three excellent women. That suggests that you think that women being chosen on the basis of them being manifestly “the best person for the job” (a concept I know Caron dislikes) will fail to get diversity into our parliamentary party. That seems rather negative.
“It is embarrassing and unacceptable to do nothing to effect change when we have an all white and male representation in the House of Commons.”
As someone else said on this issue a few months ago: This seems like a classic case of “Something must be done”; AWS is something; therefore we must do AWS – whether it’s a good idea or not.
Mark
“I am embarrassed as a male that a few fellow members of my gender still think and write such nonsense about women”
Come on now don’t be coy, be specific. Remember Hitchens razor.
The AWS system has been criticised by many people often for:
Distracting from addressing the actual barriers to female candidates (and be some other underrepresented groups);
Having possible adverse effects on the candidates chances themselves in the seats they stand for; and
Having possible adverse effects on the chances of women in seats where there are not AWS.
Your statement falls in line with the general behaviour of those who support AWS where there is great enthusiasm for attacking the individuals who criticise the policy but ignore their arguments. So if you are so disturbed by statements let’s hear which ones and why?
Would Simon Shaw have said the same when almost every seat was selected from an all male shortlist as it was in most of my 50 plus years in the party? I very much doubt it.
@Simon Shaw
‘As a matter of interest, would that include maternity/paternity leave during a GE Campaign?’
During the recent GLA campaign, I became aware that two of my fellow candidates (one Labour, one LibDem) had actually given birth during the campaign (if viewed as the 6 months prior to polling day). I didn’t see it adversely affecting their campaigns though.
I just wish we were discussing the political views, particular expertise they bring to our PPC team, campaigning successes, and ability to get casework done in their areas.
That is what will get them elected, and ultimately what they are standing for in the first place. I’m still ambivalent about AWS – but I think it’s a tragedy that we are discussing this, rather than the skills and vigour that our newly selected candidates will bring. Good luck to them.
David-1
“pushback by entrenched interests similar to what we see above”
Ditto to my comment to Mark, own it.
Who is the “entrenched interests” and how?
How is their criticism invalid?
If you are going to make vague accusations, expect to be asked for specifics.
Simon Shaw
“As a matter of interest, would that include maternity/paternity leave during a GE Campaign? Personally I’d be very disappointed if a Local Party didn’t make appropriate arrangements away from a GE.”
Unfortunately you will find this issue raised by Ruth and occasionally others but ignored. Whether “leave” is sufficient or whether some hybrid with other extra support (and what form that takes) does not appear to get considered by those who are apparently concerned about the lack of female MPs. These are practical problems that are answered with conceptual responses.
Only one comment.
Well done Daisy! Reading’s loss will be Yeovil’s gain.
As mentioned by Caron, we do indeed have a by-election in HARINGEY ….. and it is a WINNABLE prospect. An outstanding candidate, Karen Alexander, who lost the seat in 2014 by less than 200 votes. PLEASE come to help and make this a great start for Dawn Barnes as PPC in Lynne Featherstones old seat. The welcome will be warm ( and the weather) and time is short, polling day is Thursday week 🙂
Aaaaaargh! Boring same old arguments don’t help us to move forward. It’s exciting that three brilliant women have been chosen to represent winnable seats and it may have helped that the AWS debate focused people’s minds on the need for diversity, but it’s obvious that local members voted for them because they recognised their talents and ability to win the seats. At this rate men could well be in a minority in target seats with no need to use AWS at all! I hope that disability, race and class barriers will be overturned as well as that would truly show us to be the party that walks its talk.
@Mick Taylor
“Would Simon Shaw have said the same when almost every seat was selected from an all male shortlist as it was in most of my 50 plus years in the party? I very much doubt it.”
Sorry, Mick, but of the things I’ve said, what, exactly, are you referring to?
@Ian Sanderson (RM3)
“Simon Shaw: ‘As a matter of interest, would that include maternity/paternity leave during a GE Campaign?’
During the recent GLA campaign, I became aware that two of my fellow candidates (one Labour, one LibDem) had actually given birth during the campaign (if viewed as the 6 months prior to polling day). I didn’t see it adversely affecting their campaigns though.”
Quite, that’s how I’d expect it to work, as opposed to the fully fledged maternity leave that Ruth Bright appears to be calling for.
Simon, Neil et al, this is the formula I put to Arfan Bhatti for discussion:
1. PPCs should be automatically entitled to 6 months maternity leave. This leave should only be compromised in the immediate lead-up to a General Election or by-election.
2. Approved candidates who no longer wish to stand and those seeking approval should be encouraged to provide cover during a colleague’s maternity leave in order to gain or maintain campaigning experience.
3. No serving PPC should be expected to fight a re-selection during her maternity leave unless her maternity leave coincides with the immediate lead up to a General Election or by-election.
A ll women shortlists and other diversity changes might be necessary
All intelligent attitudes on policy are the current problem
We looked like getting somewhere and excellent candidates like these being elected
With the obsession of our leadership and some members re the EU , it means we are becoming the centre left version of the centre rights UKIP
Three women who are very able are going to be the political and electoral future if this attitude to the EU in this party continues
Nicola Sturgeon is one and Theresa May and Ruth Davidson are the others
Congratulations to the three brilliant candidates. It’s only a shame that so much space has been taken up by men whining and mewling that a terrible injustice and strategic mistake has been done by encouraging and selecting excellent women as candidates. Each of these three candidates is a better choice to represent us and the electorate than any of the men acting like dinosaurs on this thread.
Steve Cooke
Again names and specifics. Assertions with no evidence would qualify as “whining and mewling”
@Caron Lindsey
“Are you saying that a) female candidates don’t work as hard and/or b) candidates selected by AWS don’t work as hard or c) that candidates selected by AWS are somehow “pitched into the seat because they fit the criteria”? ”
I was not putting forward ANY of those suggestions. Simon Shaw had it about right in saying
“I thought nonconformistradical was merely making the point that there will logically be occasions where AWS means that someone other than the “best” candidate may be chosen for a particular seat. That could conceivably mean that at the next GE a seat is not won that would have otherwise been won. ”
Exactly
If in a seat designated as AWS the previous candidate was male and had worked hard and made significant progress then possibly the best situation for that particular seat is for it NOT to be AWS but to be allowed, if the local party wishes, to continue working with their previous male candidate building on work already done. In that situation they might have a better chance of winning the seat than an incoming female candidate, selected via an AWS and possibly starting from scratch in that constituency would have.
“Caron Lindsay:
“When people use phrases like “best person for the job”, they generally mean “best man for the job.”
Caron, that is a statement which I have heard before without any obvious evidence to back it. Our Party wishes to alter speed of the vehicle by playing with the speedometer and the tyres,
“We need to get out of that mindset and accept that we have brilliant candidates”
Unfortunately, we do not have many brilliant candidates at all. That is of any gender, race, ability. We have quite lot of quite good candidates who are not going to get anywhere at all unless there is a national political sea change. And at least one brilliant candidate I know of is barred from standing.
But Psi, surely Steve is right to speak of dinosaurs when someone (anonymous too of course) in this discussion says that candidates should not get pregnant! What next? The ALDC guide to freezing your eggs?
This thread is a warning that it’s not only the Labour Party who are at risk of death by infighting.
A sad reflection on the keyboard warriors of the party who come out in force to, rather than congratulate a set of optimistic and hard working women, set about lashing out at party candidate policy instead.
All you have done is convince yet more of us that AWS is necessary through your inability to support women as candidates to instead grandstand about your personal gripes. If your attitudes were more inclusive, progressive and as bent towards taking the party forwards as the efforts of these women maybe AWS would no longer be necessary.
Take your worthless negativity somewhere else and start working on taking us forwards, instead of trying to drag those who do down.
A huge congratulations to Daisy Benson, Claire Young and Dawn Barnes. That I have heard your names before your candidacy is evidence of how hard you have worked to get here! Good luck!
Tristan
I must say , those of us on here , and this thread , who did say very complimentary things about these valued candidates , but did get in a gripe about something , did not all do it on AWS !
I have no issue with that on here , my concern is that we do not become a single issue pressure group for the EU , a reverse UKIP !
I do think , considering the diversity policies are just that , ways of getting more women , and BAME candidates , members need to “get with the project!”
do not like lots of negativity . It is also why I do not like the doom and gloom about Brexit taken too far !
Congratulations Daisy, Claire and Dawn!
Psi – nobody has argued that introducing AWS would magically solve all the other problems. In fact it was argued for on the basis that it was only one part of the strategy.
John Barrett – this round of selections has been done under truncated rules specifically so that we are ready if there is a snap election. That’s why the appointments are time limited.
I honestly don’t know what I think about AWS – I am prepared to bow to the will of conference as I can’t make up my mind.
I am delighted we have three good candidates in what might be winnable seats. We need to stop navel gazing and campaign for them or we will miss an opportunity.
Congratulations to the three of you. I know Dawn, and think she will be an excellent candidate. I don’t know the other two, but I have no doubt it’s also true of those as well.
@Tristan Gray
“A sad reflection on the keyboard warriors of the party who come out in force to, rather than congratulate a set of optimistic and hard working women, set about lashing out at party candidate policy instead.
All you have done is convince yet more of us that AWS is necessary through your inability to support women as candidates to instead grandstand about your personal gripes. If your attitudes were more inclusive, progressive and as bent towards taking the party forwards as the efforts of these women maybe AWS would no longer be necessary.”
Oh dear! Do you actually know what you are talking about, Tristan?
For example, I hope you realise that NONE of these three women candidates were selected via AWS. So when you talk about taking the Party forward so that “maybe AWS would no longer be necessary” why do you think AWS is necessary?
Tristan Grey
Same applies. Specifics? Asked of 3 others before you, it isn’t hard, just try it.
Ruth
I notice you had no problem locating someone you had a concern with and were specific about the concern. But then you are one of the few people who is also specific about practical current barriers that need be addressed.
We are running at 4 people who have made vague complaints suggesting there are multiple people they have issues with. But somehow the all struggled to copy and paste their concerns.
As has been discussed in the past one significant barrier to female candidates was the one you faced, the support required to be in place for at least two electoral cycles.
These 4 defenders of the current approach are engaging in the tired “brand your opponent, and avoid answering” approach which is common on LDV but had reduced for a while. We have done the “keep on message it will be OK” approach. Sloppy, foggy, self congratulatory thinking is hardly going to get real issues addressed. So I’m interested in whether these people have something useful to add or just hope the Labour party will implode and that the LibDems will reap the benefit. But who knows all they have offered is vague accusations against others.
Liberal Neil
“nobody has argued that introducing AWS would magically solve all the other problems”
But many have claimed that AWS will result in a “culture change” shortly after claiming the parties problems are cultural.
“In fact it was argued for on the basis that it was only one part of the strategy.”
Well the world is littered with dead strategy papers, what matters is the actions taken and the practical steps taken. What has happened regarding the points raised during the AWS debate? In fact what about the one practical point we have on this thread, Ruth’s point about maternity leave:
-what has been considered;
-what information has been gathered about different approaches tried in different areas;
-what different models have been mapped out that could be trialled?
It is appoint that Ruth has raised repeatedly, so there has been plenty of time for people to consider it.
As was pointed out a significant barrier to getting elected is being a first time candidate, everything needs to be done to keep people in post for multiple cycles.
Hello all. Some of you may remember me from the days when I used to frequent this site. I happened to stumble across this thread and thought I had better contribute, if nothing else to increase the ration of female:male posters on here. i have the following thoughts:
1. Surely there is an HR department which can deal with maternity /paternity issues (and also Dignity and Harrassment , by the way). If not, might it be a good idea to put one in? It may save some anguish along the way.
2. The Tories have just elected the country’s second female Prime Minister. That’s Tories 2 up. They also have a plethora of women in top positions. They don’t seem to torment themselves with AWS, punk buses or anything else: how the HECK are they so gender-balanced?! Seriously, does anyone know? They are the dinosaur party! I’m perplexed, disbelieving and full of admiration, all at the same time!
3. Last but most important: Congratulations and well-done to Daisy, Claire and Dawn! I hope their selections are longer than one year.