Perspective from a Labour Voter and insightful local blogger @LewishamLately

Brilliant!

from the article:

“The panel recognised that you had skills of engaging with your community, but felt that you failed to understand your position as an elected Labour Councillor working under a political regime with specific requirement to fulfil, something that is expected of all elected Labour Councillors.”

Poor John Coughlin, the Green Party politician otherwise known as “the opposition”. Even when he can get a word in edgeways, the chances of him having anyone to back him up are slim.

Whatever your politics it is not healthy to have a “one party state” at any level and I would have expected all except the labour party candidates to have been pushing this message if nothing else. But as I haven’t received any communications from the candidates for Perry Vale ward it seems that even they don’t care. With only 1 day left before the election the only communication I’ve received has been from the Lib Dem mayoral candidate!

It was interesting to hear all candidates recognise this as a problem at the hustings:

Damien Egan said:

“I am a localist and believe in devolving power to communities. We are going to be having a local democracy review if I am elected, to look at how the mayor and cabinet and cabinet and councillors, how we could work better and share decision making.”

It will be interesting to see how this turns out. From what I heard at the hustings I believe there had been a previous attempt to introduce some form of PR for council elections in Lewisham but it was opposed by some of the parties. I’ve probably said it before, but I think a PR system for multi-councillor wards is a sensible approach.

Whoever is the next mayor I hope to personally continue to make such suggestions, especially if there is some form of local democracy review.

I gather there was a stronger opposition in the form of Liberal Democrats until 2014. As with the national vote, I guess that the local vote suffered for their performance in the Coalition.

I can see two possible solutions to this problem.

1. As Michael suggested introduce a form of PR to local authorities.
2. Remove party affiliations completely from local authority elections and politics.

One of the problems we face is many do not believe local authority politics to be important. People often feel inclined to punish a party, usually the one in power nationally, by voting against them at local elections. Unfortunately this can have a negative outcome particularly if a local authority is already disinclined to vote right or left.

Yes there was. The only problem is that it is not in Council power to change the system to PR. I forgot who is in charge on this issue, Government or some other body that regulates the elections.

Very recently we voted on the Greens motion calling for the PR. I voted for PR as I also think that with 3 councillors for each ward some form of PR could be implemented. The debate prior the vote was not just about merits of PR but also about putting in a motion that even if passed would not come to life as it was not in the power of the people who voted for it. References were made about the previous attempts to introduce this. So there were councillors who voted against the motion on the grounds that this was the wrong place to hold this debate.

Someone forgot to mention “democratically elected”

I dont know what PR means but there should not be parties involved to fill in Councillors seats. There should be local 3 active residents from each ward. I would vote for Michael if he was give an opportunity to be elected because i know what he does, I can see his activity, his achievements. Or Maja Hilton, who cares to hear what people say and respond/help whenever she can. Why do we need to have Susan Wise or John Paschoud, who personally done nothing for me and my community, on the list of candidates. I am sure if we get candidates from the community and not party selects, we can have better local government system in the Borough.

I assume this would mean the party makeup of councillors would reflect the party distribution of votes?

Thank you Chris, but what is the point to have parties at all in Councillors seats? Paries members cares about parties interests first and how to reproduce themselves. Everyone knows that. We need truly local councillors that come from communities regardless their party veiws. We need people who put communities needs first, not party needs.

I think you’re probably right. I think all the party tribal behaviour is quite counter-productive (“vote for us to stick two fingers to Brexit” etc)

But on a purely practical basis, there are lots and lots of candidates for voters to choose between in local elections - If they were all independent, I honestly wouldn’t have the time or patience to figure out what they all stood for, and what their reputation was like.

At least if we know their party alleigance we get a general sense of their values and priorities.

And the national parties also have an interest in vetting their background too, which means we get more credible candidates.

I can see your point Chris.

What may be preferable is a form of non-partisan democracy at the local level. We use this widely across Canada and from my experience it is preferable. Though of course that doesn’t mean its the right thing for the UK.

The municipal government of the City of Toronto, Ontario (Canada) is the fifth largest government in the country, governing a population of more than 2.7 million. It consists of a nonpartisan, directly elected council. The public may have a general idea of the candidates’ political affiliations, but their parties have no official recognition or privilege in the functioning of City Council. Councilors are free to vote on each motion individually, freeing them from party discipline. Almost all Canadian Cites are nonpartisan as well as Counties And RMS.

Lovely, there is such thing there.

Having received very little (one flyer) from this election I did a bit of due diligence tonight on each of the Perry Vale ward candidates. This was a vain effort to try and find out a bit about the individual opposed to simply their political allegiance.

It is really disheartening how many of the candidates have a negligible public profile including a Twitter account.

If you’re reading this (which I doubt) I can’t vote for you if I don’t “know” you.

There was one I had considered from their professional background until I discovered their Mary Whitehouse approach to media and entertainment. Nope. Not for me either.

So I guess I may not vote you too if I get to “know” you.

Yes, I thought this too. It’s amazing how so many candidates - people looking to be locally engaged - don’t jump on social media. It’s free of charge, it reaches thousands, and it builds an awareness of what matters to local people.

The candidates are mad not to - although perhaps the complacency / hopelessness of this election makes engagement a waste of time for candidates on both sides of the political spectrum.

Having said that, credit to @Liam_Gilgar for making the best effort here so far

Does anyone know who’s likely to come second to Labour? If we normally voted Labour but wanted to avoid this 1 party state who should we vote for?

I don’t recall seeing communications from anyone except a rather dreary Labour leaflet put through my door.
It is almost like everyone has given up trying.

Last elections Conservatives came second but the difference was huge. Over 36,000 Labour, over 8,000 Conservatives. Vote for anyone but Labour really.

Last elections
https://www.lewisham.gov.uk/mayorandcouncil/elections/results/elections-2014/Pages/default.aspx

From Wikipedia, here is the how the parties fared with number of Councillors over many years.

image837×608 11.6 KB

This was posted elsewhere _ Illford Council I believe but shows the lack of effort. Not a dig here at a particular party - just indicative of the lack of effort being put it…

Not saying it necessarily was, but that leaflet would be an ideal prank for competing party to pull on the Conservatives…

Yes I suddenly got that thought myself after posting…
It seems not many were handed out but it seems it was genuine…

While rare, I think there have been other instances where local politicians have printed or sent standardized communications without customising for their area.

Conservative group leader Paul Canal told the Ilford Recorder: “They completed the template but, when it was sent to the printer, they didn’t send the right file.

“When they are packaged up, you only see the back of the leaflets, you don’t see the front, and so a number were handed out.”

Ha ha. I’ve a friend who used to work in a printer. He said these type of blunders were common. Any good printer will send back a proof based on artwork even if a simple PDF. The client then must approve the proof before going to print. The friend sometimes picked up on glaring mistakes and followed with an “are you sure” but this isn’t always possible.

Scary, the Conservatives seem to be trying hard to lose at every turn.

Thanks @kat.standlake.point
Unfortunately my name is not on the ballot paper today. What I will say that all the Councillors (and I got to know quite a few Labour ones) are supposed to be of independent mind. We will represent the best interests of our wards and Borough. As Labour members we will have quite a few similarities and our values will be on the similar spectrum. Our disagreements may not always be public as we all recognise that we are ultimately trying to reach the same goals.

Cllrs you mention in Perry Vale Ward I hold in high esteem for the work they have done so far, be it in scrutiny meetings, planning or even helping newer Cllrs to learn the ways of how to achieve something.

I don’t know - I think they’re choosing to devote energy to boroughs where they stand a chance. Thought this was quite fun (and cute):

image1125×1147 1.04 MB

Not sure which borough this was

Indeed there are quite a few gaffes this year it seems…

Policy goes here: a Tory leaflet template and other election gaffes

I refer to the flyers and things like fox hunting in the general election. There just doesnt seem to be any joined up thinking.

Gotta love the Guardian though. Labour it seems never make mistakes at election time it seems.

We have had leaflets from the Greens, Lib Dems and Conservatives as well as Labour - although the volume of leaflets from Labour was pretty high!

There were two Lib Dem campaigners outside the station yesterday - two of the three council candidates I think.

There was a lady wearing an oversized red rosette standing at the entrance to the St Saviour church polling station this morning staring people in the eye as they entered.

I’m sure she was standing exactly outside the legal boundary so wasn’t committing an offence. But still…

Enough to put anyone off voting for them…

Gotta like the homeopathic bit right at the end of the article concerning the Labour graph error…

Just to say that what ever your flavour - get out and vote.

Indeed. I wish we were obliged to vote.

I couldn’t agree more. Although I found a twitter account for one of the Lib Dem candidates for Perry Vale whose name I recognised (he stood for the Lib Dems in the last Mayoral Election) it has a link to Bromley Lib Dems website even though according to the list of candidates he lives in Perry Vale ward!

I found the results from the last local elections on the Lewisham council website:

image752×457 64.4 KB

image711×415 138 KB

image714×421 77.1 KB

I didn’t really understand the point of her standing there. She was very smiley to me and looked friendly but I’m not sure what she is supposed to achieve sitting out there.

It’s subtle. The psychological effect of being “observed” is proven to change people’s behaviour.

I see, interesting read . But also I don’t, maybe I’m immune in this context. I can’t see how I would change my mind whilst at the polling booth. I know before I leave the house who I’m going to vote for. I don’t remember ever changing my mind on the journey or in the booth. Also if you dislike that particular party doesn’t it simply reinforce your annoyance with them? Maybe it works most on ambivalent people.

Trying to think about it deeply (too much time on my hands) I think the only “effect” they could have on me is making me feel guilty for not voting, had that been my choice.

Perhaps she was using communist psychosis techniques through the art of staring? Bloody reds!

People who sit/stand outside polling stations with different rosettes are there to record how many people have voted. They will ask people for their name or voting card so that their mates on the street know you have voted and don’t come to your door to ask you to vote. Noting more.

In highly contested seats (such was Croydon Centran at the General election) both Tories and Labour had all the polling stations covered, and they did share this information. If people share who they voted for that is up to them but that is not what they are asked.

Lewisham Labour operate a well oiled machine. On voting day, at least…

Thanks, but the effort is not just on the polling day.

Ooo, probably Putin is their mentor😂

As suspected, Labour now have all 24 seats on the council.

*all 54 seats

https://twitter.com/evansbrynley/status/992440960134139909?s=21

As there’s only one party who wouldn’t benefit from PR in local elections I wonder who opposes it? !!!

Not necessarily. There are plenty of Labour supporters and councillors who are for PR. Looking out for the benefit of many is not alien to us, it is out moto #For the many.

The decision is not done at the Council level.

Therefore if anyone wants to bring the campaign to the right door, I will be supporting it as much as I will support the Labour Party at the elections. I don’t see this as contradicting myself.

Generally the major parties only think it’s a good idea when they’re losing …

Labour eyes proportional representation as party’s elections minister backs voting shake-up

We will see

I’ve got a theory about this.

PR allows fringe/single-issue parties to be better represented.

A few years ago, PR might have led to UKIP winning 12% of seats in Parliament.

Obviously Labour would have been hurt by this as many of their Northern constituencies are Brexit oriented.

However, in 2018, the single-issue Brexit vote is dead. UKIP is dead (not because they lost hearts and minds, but because they won hearts and minds, and secured their single issue objective)

The Tories are now the mainstream, both economically and constitutionally, by their carrying out the wishes of a democratic majority in leaving the EU.

In the meantime:

• the Greens have abandoned their environmental focus and become a far-left fringe party.
• the formerly centrist and economically liberal Lib Dems have swung to the Left
• the nastiest of hard-left parties, Sinn Fein, may return to their seats in Westminster (time is a healer - and they’re probably not happy with the power obtained by the DUP in the current confidence-and-supply arrangement).

So Labour is in a situation where it would benefit massively from a coalition with the leftist fringe, and it has nothing to fear from the right wing fringe, who are a spent force.

Corbyn is not a party leader. He’s always preferred to exploit the “movement” to slowly achieve his socialist aims from the grassroots upward. I think he’d be a keen figurehead of a far-left coalition which would get behind his extreme 1970’s manifesto. This would save him the bother of convincing moderates within his own party.

A Corbynite Coalition of Chaos. This is why Labour are warming up to PR.

*" the loony Greens have abandoned their environmental focus and become a far-left fringe party."

Wow, so much for balance, moderation and respect to fellow forum readers. You talk of wanting to keep things civil on the site when it is your Conservatives being attacked but happily use ‘loony’ when talking about Green Party members which surely will only offend and alienate readers.

Fair enough. Removed “loony”

That’s not at all fair. Firstly, I have criticised the Tories a number of times in the political category. They are not “my Conservatives” - I have no connection to them.

Secondly I very rarely intervened around civility in politicos moderation and in fact @armadillo is now solely in charge of moderating this category.

When I have intervened I have defended people of all parties, most often Maja (Labour) - who is sometimes the recipient of local general frustration due to her position in the council.

We aren’t going to get PR for Westminster - that referendum was lost years ago. Voters sent the clear message that they wanted strong and stable governments provided by the existing system (where two Conservative governments have been propped up by minor parties, and when they did have a majority they changed leader and called an election to lose their majority). But strong and stable is what FPTP is believed to deliver and perhaps it will again in the future.

However on the local level, PR is an obvious improvement over the existing system due to the existing multi-member constituencies. It would lead to more councils with No Overall Control, but across the country councils already work fine with NOC.

But any form of electoral reform at a local level cannot be a knee-jerk reaction to the existing situation in Lewisham, where opposition no longer exists in council. It has to be a fair and balanced system that benefits all authorities, and I don’t think it should be for the council to choose their own system.

Then there is the House of Lords which is attacked by all government supporters, regardless of political colour, for being unelected. Reform of the HoL is long overdue and I have personally always advocated a 50% elected and 50% appointed house, with a maximum term for the appointees. Whether it should move to more than 50% elected in time can be decided once we try out 50%.

I do worry about the local plans to review local democracy for a few reasons but i welcome the attempt by Damien to do something. My main concern is that devolving too much power to local communities would give too much power to the few people who turn up to local assemblies / neighbourhood forums, or to civic societies or groups like SEE3. These groups are too easily ‘captured’ by special interests or that are not representative or unaccountable, although they can be important catalysts for change.

So it will be interesting to hear what Damien and Kevin have planned in their review process and how far they might be able to take it.