London Region Liberal Democrats have announced the candidates for the London Assembly top-up list for the 2012 election. The shortlist is now final and London members will now be issued with a ballot to place the candidates in order of preference.
The candidates, in alphabetical order, are:
Jeremy Ambache (M)
Steve Bradley (M)
Emily Davey (F)
Merlene Emerson (F)*
Bridget Fox (F)
Stephen Knight (M)
Ajmal Masroor (M)*
Caroline Pidgeon (F)
Marisha Ray (F)*
Nick Russell (M)
Shas Sheehan (F)*
Those marked with an asterisk are Black and Minority Ethnic for the purpose of the ethnic preference rule.
There will not be a ballot for the Mayoral candidate for the time being. Nominations for the Mayoral candidate have been postponed.
Helen Duffett is Membership Development Co-ordinator for London Region Liberal Democrats
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Six council by-elections, spread over two days
Carers remain forgotten in government's welfare overhaul
Steffan Aquarone's Commons debate on coastal communities
Getting things done - Saggar Street - an update #dundeewestend
Loving our neighbours
Getting the basics right
Stephen Nash
Margot Wilson
Suzanne Fletcher
Mick Taylor
Mary Reid
24 Comments
Given RedKens astonishing Ego its probably a good thing we are holding back on the Mayoral nomination. Kens antics in the Tower Hamlets race would have got anyone else suspended by now.
The top of the list should be mayoral candidate to help push up the list vote. But I suspect it will take another couple of elections for London Region to wake up and smell the coffee
Surprised Duwayne Brooks didn’t put himself forward for the GLA list. Also, why did Dee Doocey and Mike Tuffrey not put themselves forwards?
I agree, if Duwayne wants to prove he’s serious about running for London Mayor, he should’ve put himself forward for the GLA.
I know Dee Doocey and Mike Tuffrey are standing down because, by 2012, having done 8 and 10 years respectively on the Assembly they wish to have time to pursue other interests.
Why are the London region continuing with potential discrimination agAinst white candidates despite this being clearly rejected by the party conference?
And it is clearly illegal
The shortlisting process whittled the list down to 11 people, so Duwayne may have put himself forward, but not made it through the process.
Duwayne is not currently an approved candidate. He may have been interested or even applied but I know there were a very limited number of approval days available.
As for putting the mayoral candidate at the top (or on a given position) on the list, I know it was discussed but we have enough trouble finding people who want to be mayoral candidate without narrowing it even further to people who also want to be on the Assembly. Fighting the GLA list is a position where getting elected is extremely likely, being mayoral candidate less so. There’s a conflict there as they appeal to very different people.
Is it appropriate for shortlisting to reduce the list to the same as the number of candidates? Suppose I was a london member with a trenchant objection to candidate A being a Lib Dem candidate, I would now have no choice
I was puzzling over that one too Hywel
Actually Duncan if we want to incentivise our mayoral candidate to run a sensible, team building campaign maybe we should place them fourth on the list.
very strong list a good diverse group.
No positive action being taken to reduce the chronic under-representation of North London, I see… 😉
I like the idea of the mayoral candidate being 4th. On the issue of having the same number as the total list. It was something I suggested in feedback last time. In reality the selection is for winnable places.
Actually, 4 of the 11 are from north of the River. It’s been worse. This, as well as the feasibilty of measures to ensure other types of diversity were discussed amongst the Exec but in the end we decided to climb one mountain at a time.
Hywel, I feel your pain and can only recommend you express only the preferences as far as you can bear to and do not vote for any candidate you do not support. Of course if you knew of a genuine reason why the party shouldn’t be putting forward any particular person as a candidate then there are obviously channels. Last time the membership was presented with a shortlist of 22 applicants which was clearly far too many.
Exactly. Tactically, we ain’t going to win the mayoralty unless something significant changes. We need to boost the List and actual constituency presence significantly in order for us to be in with a chance.
Ergo, we should use the mayoral campaign and the media attention it brings to do as the Greens do, and boost their media presence and List vote. The top of the list needs to be the Mayoral candidate as we need to have continuity and a strong fight for it.
The only way we’re going to have a chance of winning in London is to have a strong record and build it up over time. That means someone from the Assembly running each time. Caroline would be the perfect Mayoral candidate as she can use it to promote the list vote and talk about the daftness of the system.
Dee and Mike standing down at once, leads a nice open field. I actually know most of those people, and I only lived in London for a little bit.
Just for the avoidance of doubt I live nowhere near London, don’t have a vote and don’t have objections to any of the candidates that I know of. My pain is therefore limited 🙂
I can – sort of – understand Duncans reasoning. However candidate selection should reside with the membership not the exec/other body. I would not be happy if a similar approach was taken with the euro candidate selections where a similar argument could apply.
“Duwayne is not currently an approved candidate. He may have been interested or even applied but I know there were a very limited number of approval days available. ”
That sounds like London region have erected a fairly significant barrier to ethnic minority candidates who might want to put themselves forward – at the same time as passing a rather complicated measure to address this
Given the exposure and status the party is potentially giving someone standing for mayor or the GLA, Westminster approval (plus a short London-specific policy exercise) seems perfectly reasonable.
I like and respect Duwayne and would have supported his candidacy for Mayor or GLA but for reasons I don’t know he is not currently a candidate. I know he will go on to do good things for the party.
Geographic problem would have been simple. Make the bottom 11 of the list all the constituency candidates. Oh, sorry, that suggestion was scoffed at when I made it to the commission which was wrapped up in the aims of individuals and not what was best for the party.
Duncan – there are 14 constituencies and 11 list places, so making “the bottom end of the list all the constituency candidates” doesn’t work
Good luck to all on the GLA list. I’m sure you’ll do a fantastic job.
As for the Mayoral fiasco, the only things more depressing than our inability to select a candidate despite sufficient applicants is the fact that local parties – including Council Groups – found out from the Evening Standard rather than from London Region.
That “an insufficient number of approved applicants” is not actually true, btw. There were three approved candidates, which is sufficient to put three names to the membership. This is jerrymandering by London Region and it is very disappointing.
@ Benjamin
A very astute comment. In particular, there are people for whom executive office is appealing but deliberative office is not. Ken Livingstone was an apalling MP (he just faded into the background and made no contribution at all) and I don’t imgine Michael Bloomberg would want to be an assembly member. Frankly, there is a role for a Mayoral candidate who does not want to be a GLA member but does want to get other GLA members elected (the position that Lembit takes).
OTOH, the danger of putting the Mayoral candidate at the top of the GLA list is that the selection becomes a mechanism for people who don’t really want to be Mayor to promote their GLA campaign. It would be a tragedy (/travesty) if the Mayoral selection were swamped with would-be GLA members seeking to secure a short-cut to the top of the list!
@Hywel: I agree too. I don’t see why London Region didn’t trust members to make a choice. I’m sure members are competent enough to select 11 names out of 16.
It’s a shame there were no candidates of an African, Caribbean or mixed background. These categories ‘represent’ a significant proportion of London. That said, it is a strong field; Marisha, Jeremy and Shas especially.