MEP newsletter arrives!
>> 14 August, 2007
I arrived home last night to receive an annual report from my Lib Dem MEP.
So am I rejoicing? Well, actually no.
The MEP selection process is in a "phoney war" period. Nominations have closed. I think it is wrong for any incumbent to be able to take advantage of their position in this way at this time - the same applied to emails during the GLA selection.
To compound it, the publisher of the leaflet is shown as being the regional party.
Now don't misinterpret this, I know that it is within the rules, but I believe that incumbency gives enough of an advantage.
After the GLA selections and the Euro selections I hope that the people that run these things will sit down with a blank sheet of paper and draw up new rules on the following basis:
1. They are fair, from the time that the advertisement appears in Lib Dem News. So if an incumbent is allowed to write to members after that date, so should non incumbents.
2. They are simple.
3. They encourage campaigning by not being over-restrictive.
9 comments:
I agree with you Duncan that there is a serious need to level the playing field.
I've had a similar experience in the South East region where I recently had a mailing from one of the two MEPs. It's a shame I can't say how I would vote if I'm still voting in the South East but that's another problem with the rules.
Trying to campaign under the current, even slightly revised rules, is difficult.
The rules are such that it assumes the campaign doesn't start until 28 Aug, so things like MEP mailings have gone out in the last 2-3 weeks. Yet they never seem to keep in regular contact during the rest of the year...
It also assumes that your campaign team appears out of nowhere on the 28th (although they could be in place from prior to application and "shortlisting").
My experience from the 2004 Euro Selections is that incumbancy is such a factor that it doesn't matter either way. On the one hand, we shouldn't worry about the advantage that an extra MEP mailing is going to give them, as they will almost certainly win anyway. On the other hand, it is a bit sad that our MEPs are so insecure about their position that they feel the need to rock the boat in this way.
Is it within the rules though?
The rules state that any normal party business is permitted provided it is not calculated to influence the selection.
I would suggest that a report done at this time was calculated to influence the selection by virtue of it's timing unless it was established that a mailing in August was the usual time for these to be done.
Candidates are advised (in the rules) to consult with the Returning Officer in doubtful cases. It would be worth inquiring whether this was done. If the RO gave such permission the candidate would be in the clear (as I read it) - however you could argue that the ROs granting of permission was in itself perverse and invalidated the whole process.
I'm making a complaint about similar actions in Yorkshire.
I didn’t think Sarah Ludford was able to stand again as she is a Member of the Lords and new legislation meant you are unable to be a member of two legislative bodies?
The party is allowing people to go forward for selection who would be disqualified by virtue of membership of the HOuse of Lords.
The theory is the law could have changed by the time of the elections - which are not for another 18 months or so
Personally I think relying on Labour to "come good" on Lords reform is highly optimistic and could be a huge distraction if the party doesn't decide the situation well in advance of the actual elections.
Hi guys
I received my MEP's annual report today. It's not the first - I get one every year whether there is a (s)election or not; and I've had newsletters from this MEP as well.
I'm not so naive as to think the fact that MEP candidates are up for selection shortly is unrelated to our sitting MEPs wanting to get their reports out sooner rather than later. But if they did not campaign they could be charged with lazy or complacent incumbency.
There may well be problems with the rules. Having won PPC selections both against and as an incumbent I think that while there are natural advantages to incumbency under any system, simply because of profile and contacts, it's not fair to attack incumbents for doing their stuff within the rules.
Bridget Fox
My understanding is that MEPs are allowed to continue to send out publicity as long as they can show that they have done so in the past.
This is designed to allow activity which is routine but not allow lots of extra publicity by those who haven't communicated regularly.
It is a difficult balance to get right. From the perspective of the selection contest we need a period in which a sitting MEP can't get an unfair advantage. At the same time we don't want our sitting MEPs to have a long period where they are not allowed to communicate which can have negative knock on effects for the party in other ways.
Bridget and Neil,
"it's not fair to attack incumbents for doing their stuff within the rules" and "we don't want our sitting MEPs to have a long period where they are not allowed to communicate"
Firstly, I am not attacking incumbents. I am saying the rules need changing. Those few weeks between when the advert appears and when the annual report deadline is are important. In that period members have had the advert in Lib Dem News and more importantly had a mailing that tells them the process has started. Mailings to members after this date are in my view wrong, even if they are within the rules.
Post a Comment