With nominations closed and the elections less than a month away, time for a quick recap on where the Lib Dems are at in the forthcoming police commissioner elections.
As ConHome has taken some pleasure in pointing out, the party is standing in 23 out of the 41 contests, little more than half. A little self-righteously, they argue: ‘This is a political party that is supposed to believe in radical change, in making the state more accountable to the citizen, and in boosting local democracy.’
In fact, it’s pretty remarkable that the party is standing in as many as half the police commissioner regions. A year ago, we reported: Liberal Democrats decide to pass up on fighting Police Commissioner elections (mostly):
The Liberal Democrat Federal Executive (FE) decided this week that the federal party will not be providing any financial backing to Liberal Democrats wishing to stand for election as Police Commissioners. The expectation is that instead the party will end up backing independent candidates, although it has been made clear that local areas can decide to field candidates if they wish to – albeit without any financial backing from the central party.
Gradually the party has swung more and more behind the idea of contesting these elections officially. Our own survey of party members indicated majority support for fielding official Lib Dem candidates. Nonetheless the conflicted view of the party towards the new posts (as can be seen by scrolling down our archive of posts on the topic) means it’s no surprise the party isn’t fielding a full slate. Next time round, though, I’d expect 100% of regions will be fielding a Lib Dem candidate.
The most complete candidate list available (that I know of) is provided by Policy Exchange’s PoliceElections.com website here. You can see a limited number of profiles of the party’s candidates on the Lib Dem website here.
* Stephen was Editor (and Co-Editor) of Liberal Democrat Voice from 2007 to 2015, and writes at The Collected Stephen Tall.
19 Comments
“Next time round…”
I admire the optimism in assuming that these position won’t be quietly wound up at some point before 2016.
So the Conservatives put up 41 candidates. So what? The Lib Dems have put up 23 candidates that can win.
Just a little bit of spin for you. However on a serious point, the number of candidates is not the issue. The Lib Dems have put up a slate of mostly very experienced candidates. Labour also have a number of credible candidates. The same I don’t think can be said of Conservatives, I can find only two candidates that I would suggest are credible or suitable for the role.
I am the Lib Dem candidate for Sussex: http://www.david4safersussex,com. Currently not listed on the Policy Exchange site, whereas two independents who are not standing are!
There has, of course, been an amount of pressure applied in places to stand, when the party’s instincts were against it. It will be remembered, Stephen, that our MPs supported the idea in Parliament, and it does not sit easily with many of them that the party has taken such a strong stance against. I believe there would have been less Lib Dem candidates had such pressure not been in existence. Other people may have more evidence on this than me.
Money talks! Or in the LibDems, its absence determines policy?
“Next time round, though, I’d expect 100% of regions will be fielding a Lib Dem candidate.”
I think there is slightly more chance of hell freezing over. These positions should be long gone (ie abolished) before the prospect of any re-election materialises.
We, in Ceredigion, decided not submit a candidate for approval for Dyfed Powys for one reason alone. The amount of money to be lodged just to stand. As a result I will be spoling my ballot by voting “None of the Above” or “Reopen Nominations” and writing to the successful candidate and asking them to consider not taking up their post and asking Westminster to repeal the law, change it to ensure that anyone can stand (by asking for the signatures of 1% of the electorate and no money) and to have the election by STV.
I agree with Sir Ian Blair.
The Liberal Democrats in Devon & Cornwall have chosen the best possible candidate to be the first ever Police and Crime Commission for the area and if you dont have elections in your area you could help us prevent the Conservative candidate getting elected.
Brian Blake is an outstanding candidate, having served for 31 years in the Police force across the region in both counties, finishing his career as a Detective Chief Inspector in Cornwall. After retiring from the Police, Brian Blake worked for 13 years for the Ministry of Defence, involving personnel vetting of military, NATO and UK Government employees working abroad. He now lives in South West Devon.
He is the only candidate to have experience of serving in the Police, and worked under former Devon and Cornwall Police Chief Constable and Teignbridge Liberal Parliamentary candidate, John Alderson, who pioneered community policing.
Whether you agree with the idea of such a post or not, someone will be elected on 15th November to the £85,000 a year post for the next four years. Given the results last time – Con 42%, Lib Dem 36%, Lab 12%, Oth 10% it really is a two horse race between our Brian and the Conservative.
You can read a lot more about Brian Blake on his website http://brianblake4pcc.org.uk/
To help a potentially winning campaign email Brian via the website or phone 01803 411816
Thank you.
I’ve not been the greatest supporter of these Commissioners and find myself agreeing with Sir Ian Blair (and that’s not a sentence I ever wanted to write).
However, I understand that small steps should always be made towards greater reform and can recognise that the Commissioners may have a role to play in policing that’s not clear yet. I’ll vote for our candidate Afzal Anwar here in Lancashire, not least because he’s the only candidate not an existing County Councillor in an unrelated position or a UKIP extremist.
It’s surprising that having trumpeted the policy of elected Commissioners, the Conservatives have virtually ensured a low turn-out by choosing November for the elections and keeping very quiet about the process. I know we’re all going to receive a leaflet but isn’t it too little, too late?
I wonder how many unsuitable people will soon be in charge of police forces? And how can Commissioners claim a mandate when most citizens haven’t voted?
What surprises me is the LibDem opposition to PCC’s. The job is all about representing the people from the areas served, and all about people’s rights, so I expected this party to be very keen on the whole idea.
@David Rogers, your link doesn’t work. As a Sussex voter, can you tell me a bit more about yourself and your policies.
As ConHome has taken some pleasure in pointing out, the party is standing in 23 out of the 41 contests, little more than half. A little self-righteously, they argue: ‘This is a political party that is supposed to believe in radical change, in making the state more accountable to the citizen, and in boosting local democracy.’
Yes, but putting all power into the hands of one person, while a radical change, is NOT the liberal way of doing things. We believe in political pluralism, therefore it is central to our position that power should be jointly held in a council of representatives, not all held by one person. A council of people where to be elected requires just a modest number of votes opens up power to citizens in a way that a single post which is elected by an electorate of hundreds of thousands does not. See the trickery here from ConsHome – their argument only works if you start from their assumptions. Well, we can all use that silly way of arguing. Suppose I was a devout believer in the idea that standing on your head will make the economy boom. Then I could argue “Look at those Tories, they claim they want to see the economy improve, but see what hypocrites they are – they are not standing in their heads, so that just shows, they aren’t really interested in economic recovery”.
The important question is not whether we are running everywhere, but whether we can win ANYWHERE. There isn’t much credible data on this so I doubt anyone really knows, but there’s a risk that a combination of low national polling numbers and this issue being seen as ‘not very liberal’ means that we get panned. We don’t have any really big hitters out there for us. Why isn’t Paddick running somewhere?
Personally I do not believe this role should be politicised. All candidates should omit their political affiliation so that voters can vote on merit rather than on party label. We are in danger of electing a bunch of party hacks without any merit rather than electing people with the best qualifications for the job. Lets face it, we have enough of those clowns in Westminster without giving them and others of similar ilk a chance to earn big money for doing nothing of value for the electorate.
Got my official leaflet today.
1. It was in the middle of a bundle of advertising leaflets, for sofas, double-glazing, a charity, and phone deals.
So I suspect a lot of people have chucked it straight in the recycling, without knowing it was even there.
2. It says you have two votes: a first and second preference.
With no explanation of how your second vote counts, if you use it.
And the government thinks AV is good enough for these elections….?
Rod Hopkins
Personally I do not believe this role should be politicised
Yes, and I think we might have got some sympathy had we made a big public stand saying this. However, because it’s a Conservative policy it seems our leaders don’t have the guts to stand up and say why it’s a bad thing. It seems to me quite obvious that specialist single role posts like this, if they are to be directly elected (which I don’t think they should be) should be contested in the grounds of who as a person is best to take them on, not on what party political label they have.
In what way is the present system not already politicised?