WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF?

Over  200  CLPs failed to nominate Gordon Brown.Most, possibly, because they saw no point as it was a one-horse race.

Iin my area alone, Keighley, Calder Valley, Halifax, and Batley and Spen did not even rubber-stamp the  non-elected  Leader. Three of the MPs in the above constituencies  had nominated John McDonnell. Keighley CLP even persuaded their MP Ann Cryer to do so in the interests of democracy. And fair play to her, she did.
  My CLP had a  supporting nomination for John which would have gone through. We did not nominate anyone else.
 I can't speak for Halifax but all I know is that this sends a clear signal that not all CLPs are sheep or lemmings. As I  pointed out to the BBC on Radio 5 Live, the Party is trying to spin this as  a great show of unity for Gordon. No doubt some CLPs are wildly enthusiastic. Many are just sickened by this undemocratic sham.See this link...... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6712781.stm

Display: Sort:

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#1)

Excellent stuff, Susan. It's important to make our voices heard against this sham Albanian-style election!

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#2)

Next one along, Skipton and Ripon, haven't nominated either.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#3)

Dear Comrades As a young actvist with Jonesy. I ask that we leave the subject till after the deputy leadership election. I know things that happened that we are all not privy to on John McDonnells nomination. I have to be quiet for the party's sake. So please get on board and wait PS It is not the Cruddas thing!! That is why I am trying to pursuade you to vote for Cruddas!! Wiseman

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#4)

I have to re-phrase this. Just see what happens after the deputy leadership election. Wiseman

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#6)

John, I don't know if I've misunderstood, but this is referring to CLPs refusing to nominate Brown - not deputy leadership candidates!

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#7)

No I have kept quiet on something I have known for a while about certain MPS working with the establishment to block nominations for John & John. In effect to stop democracy. Wiseman Ps Our clp had a number of nos for Gordon

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#8)

Ah fair enough. Well, I can state as a fact that the Brown camp did everything they could to stop MPs nominating McDonnell. I guess that we just have to build a strong movement to counter their strong machine...

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#9)

Just letting steam off!! It is something I think we have all known, but just been reminded recently Wiseman

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#11)

Yeah, exactly! After this is all over, we'll both have to expose everything we know - it's only right that we let activists know the truth, after all!

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#10)

Although - just quickly - the Brown camp certainly didn't do anything to block nominations for Cruddas. One of Cruddas' nominees (and a prominent supporter) is Tom Watson - one of Brown's closest right-hand men who led the attempted Brownite coup against Blair last September.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#12)

Jackson's bagman (AEEU) Wiseman

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#5)

It is something to do with the internal selection procedure!!!

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#13)

Hehe stop hinting! You're getting me over excited =)
New Labour have such a hideous track record on party democracy, I can't believe some of the stuff they get up to.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#14)

Just to give you an example of what New Labour are capable of. When the vote on privatisation of the probation service was going through, the Government told Paul Farrelly that unless he voted with them, they wouldn't give any time for his Agency Workers Bill. He voted according to principle and was punished accordingly.

At the same vote, another MP was told that their political career under a Brown government depended on voting the right way. He voted with tears in his eyes, apparently - but voted with the Government.

On other votes, the Whips threaten to withdraw Government money from the MPs' constituencies. On the Iraq vote, the Government told one MP that, unless they voted with the Government, they'd sack their relative.

So, with that sort of context, you can see how the Brown cabal could stop MPs nominating a left challenger.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#15)

Of course, such bullying tactics never occurred in any previous government did they? Nooo. Not when Labour didn't have an overall majority in the 1970s, say. No, then everyone just voted the way they wanted, the Whips just sat around with their feet up drinking their beer and eating their sandwiches in the smoke-filled rooms, cheering on the rebels.

Give me a break jonesey - stop trying to spin that firm whipping is an evil conjoured by new Labour. I bet if the reverse were true: that we had a trot government forcing MPs to impose failed statist solutions to every issue under the sun you'd be applauding the Whips for forcing dissenters into the "aye" lobby. Admit it.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#16)

I don't deny that party whips have always used bullying tactics to get legislation through. But the point is, none of these issues were actually ratified by the party conference or put to a ballot of party members. They were basically dreamed up by Blair&co. who proceeded to order Labour MPs to vote in a way that goes against Labour Party principles and against the wishes of the party conference. Can't you see how much more controversial that is than, say, Harold Wilson bullying backbenchers into supporting legislation that although controversial has at least been based on policy decided democratically?

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#19)

The most famous incident is one between Michael Cocks bullying Jack Straw into voting for a peice of legislation.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#33)

No, for this reason: not every aspect of government policy has ever been democratically debated and approved by party conference - it couldn't possibly be unless conference met every week. Plenty of legislation was invented by "Wilson and co", "Callaghan and co" and "Attlee and co" that the party never debated or took a formal position on.

Besides, party conference determines party policy, not government policy - the election manifesto determines the government's policy: and the day you criticise the Campaign Group for voting against manifesto policy is the day the world probably ends.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#34)

Having whips is an important part of parliamentary democracy - we achieve more together than we do alone, so voting as a party is desirable (and even the most rebellious MPs vote with he government far more often than they vote against it). To use bullying tactics, threats and to abuse patronage through the whips office is unacceptable though, and it was just as unacceptable when carried out by other party leaderships as it is today.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#40)

It's not only unacceptable, it's pointless Dunc. To threaten promotion prospects leaves the leadership with a choice of the remaining spineless, thoughtless, timeservers to fill the cabinet posts.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#37)

I couldn't give a stuff about the shit policies Blair's come up with. If an MP is strongly against government policy on an issue but supports the official party policy then it seems perfectly right for them to vote according to their moral judgement.

The New Labour leadership has no genuine authority to punish MPs for breaking the whip over these issues. Sure, they can deny MPs promotion but if an MPs aspiration is to remain on the backbenches then that is hardly going to scare them that much. Why do you think MPs are never formally punished for breaking the whip? Because the party would go apeshit.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#42)

Interesting point otware. First, MPs are formally punished for breaking the whip - if the break is serious enouh (eg Clare Short or George Galloway).

But let's turn the question around - if the whips are as suppine as you say, why is the parliamentary party in general as placid as it is? The answer, I suggest, is that its wrong to regard the whips' power as solely confined to withdrawing the whip - far more subtle and powerful powers are things like:

* The loss of a chance to serve as a minister;
* Refusing to allow a member in a marginal seat time off to work their constituency
* Withdrawal of campaign support come the next general election
* Making it harder for MPs' casework issues to be resolved satisfactorily.

I'm not getting into whether these are legitimate or unfair tactics, but let's not pretend they aren't used.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#44)

"Interesting point otware. First, MPs are formally punished for breaking the whip - if the break is serious enouh (eg Clare Short or George Galloway)."

That's inaccurate. Neither were "punished" for breaking the whip. Clare Short was issued with a formal reprimand for calling for a hung Parliament (thus implicitly supporting defeats for Labour candidates); while George Galloway was expelled for "bring the Labour Party into disrepute" because of his comments on the Iraq war.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#45)

You don't regard either of those actions (reprimand and expulsion) as punishment, jonesy? I'm not sure I want to explore your views of punishment - there might be under-18s reading this...

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#47)

They weren't breaking the whip. Galloway was inciting foreign forces to 'rise up' against British forces. Had it been due to him voting against Iraq, Labour would have lost 139 MP's, and probably been forced to call a general election, and probably be decimated.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#48)

Peter, you've missed my point. They weren't punished for breaking the whip.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#23)

What I was doing, Peter, is letting people know what we're up against. It's important that the supporters of the John4Leader campaign understand the context behind the failure to get the 12.5% of the PLP needed to get on the ballot paper.

Furthermore, as Curlew points out, the Government has a habit of imposing legislation on the PLP without any consultation - indeed, many pieces of legislation are drawn up by unelected advisers with dubious political histories (e.g. Lord Levy). Meanwhile, the Government is effectively "rebelling" against Labour Party policy as decided by annual Conference - which includes renationalisation of the railways, a moratorium on PFI, an end to private sector involvement in the NHS, an end to Foundation Hospitals, direct investment in council housing, the restoration of certain trade union rights, the immediate restoration of the pensions-earnings link, a Corporate Manslaugther Bill etc.

The Government is hardly in a position to expect loyalty when it imposes legislation without genuine consultation and defies the policies of the Labour party, is it?

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#35)

Well, as I explained in the post immediately above yours, government policy is enshrined in the manifesto on which every single Labour MP was elected.

So, yes, the government should be able to expect loyalty most of the time from all MPs.

Please could you point me to the section of any manifesto since 1997 which pledged to renationalise the railways? If not, why should any MP be voting against the policies they were elected upon?

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#36)

Blair was publically advocating EEC withdrawl in 1983. He was opposed to withdrawl from the EEC privately.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#43)

And - bear with me because the next bit is a quite laughable suggestion - had Labour actually won in 1983 (!) do you think Tony Blair would have abided by his manifesto pledge had such a government ever put withdrawal to parliament? I doubt he'd have voted against, but who knows.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#46)

I find it to Stalinist to suggest that all Labour MP's have to vote the same way on a paticular policy.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#49)

So do I. That way danger lies. I can see big business moving in on Brown now. He's already saying he wants the general public to decide on policy (how that will be twisted no-one knows) and therefore cut out the need for conference?

If the PLP are to all vote the same way why not cut their numbers by half? That'll save the country some money don't you think?

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#50)

Even one upon which they have been elected? Would you be arguing that it was Stalinist if it was a leftwing policy that you championed, that the MP was elected on and was choosing not to honour once elected?

The answer to that may be "yes" - in which case, fair enough - but then you'll find yourself at the top of a slippery slope that begins with: if MPs should be unaccountable to anyone but their own conscience then what point political parties? And if they have no responsibility to implement policies on which they've been elected, why elect them? Where's the democratic accountability there?

I'm no fan of whipping and I'm a big fan of the looser type of political party less whipping brings (as you get in America), but it strikes me as inconsistent for the left to be arguing that it's unreasonable when at the same time you're demanding that MPs become much more accountable to the grassroots of the party with whom most are way out of line ideologically and philosophically. You can't have it both ways.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#51)

Peter, I don't recall receiving through my letter box any manifesto promising :-

Wholesale Privatisation

Invasion of Iraq

Top-up fees

Renewal of trident

etc etc. Did anyone vote on visibility of these issues? No. As an ordinary voter at the last election, I even tried to get hold of the manifesto in full - and failed.

So no they should not have to implement policies that are not fully advertised at GE time.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#52)

You couldn't get hold of a manifesto?

Jeez, I just walked into the CLP office and asked if I could have one.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#53)

I've been trying to find the manifesto, but have been unsuccessful.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#54)

It used to be on the website. It might have gone now - new era and all that.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#55)

Well first the manifesto wasn't delivered through doors - you either had to buy it or read it online. You can't have tried too hard: it was downloadable and available from all good newsagents!

Second you're quite deliberately inverting the argument: I'm making the point that where policies are clearly set out in a manifesto it is incumbent on an elected representative to enact them when the opportunity arises; you're going on about policies that weren't in the manifesto.

Incidentally, the Government hasn't implemented a policy of "wholesale privatisation" so don't know what you're on about there - but PFI, PPP and co-operation with the private sector have been well-documented Labour policies since before Labour was in office, and were definitely in the last two manifestos (sorry, haven't consigned the 1997 one to memory so can't say with certainty either way on that one). A commitment to retaining an independent nuclear deterrent most certainly has been a manifesto pledge ever since 1992.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#56)

At the last GE I wasn't a party member so didn't even know what a CLP was let alone where the office was. I'm not inverting the argument. You had said that MPs have a responsibility to act on policies that they were elected on. I did not vote for labour based on the items listed above and upon which I would never have expected a party whip - these are over and above the election manifesto.

I am sure Hitler didn't have gas chambers in his manifesto - would you have expected a whip on that if it went to a vote?

I see the right wing of the party going into denial phase at the moment - I've joined to fight for a party I want to vote for - unless there is a labour party (and the current one is NOT) then voters like me will leave in droves.

If the party continues this direction then I will leave and there will be 100s of thousands of us looking for a new socialist labour party - representing the population not the businessmen.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#57)

When a whip confronted a backbencher before the top-up fees vote, they told them not to rebel, the backbencher answered 'I'm staying loyal. I'm voting with the manifesto'.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#59)

Good for him/her. And yet here we are with a progressive funding mechanism for higher education enabling thousands more students to go to college despite his/her mythical "loyalty".

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#58)

Anyone who's resorting to Hitler analogies to stand their argument up has lost it, I'm afraid Curlew.

The fundamental principle of democratic accountability - whether or not you wish to consider it when casting your own vote - is that someone seeks election based on a set of policies: if they're seeking election on behalf of a political party then there's a national manifesto coupled to whatever local priorities the candidate may wish to pursue.

Without a platform you may as well just have a set of independents, promising entirely conflicting things, totally unaccountable for decisions taken and with no idea what you're entrusting four years' of power to them for. That's effectively the situation we had in the 18th century, before MPs began coalescing into groups of Whigs and Tories, but without anything comparable to the democratic system we have today.

In short, political parties are inevitable and essential; and for them to exist in any viable form, let alone in terms of the Western European model of very strong, rigid parties you need broad ideological coherence, a clear platform of policies and the discipline to enforce them.

Sadly, your last contribution ended in the same absurd, hysterical tone it began, and I'm not even going to bother responding to nonsense like "The Labour Party isn't the Labour Party" - that's just a retarded comment.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#60)

413 Labour MP's were elected on a manifesto pledge not to introduce top-up fees. So actually, all but around 70 MP's were rebelling.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#61)

No (and again I hate to be accurate as opposed to left-wing) they were elected on a manifesto pledge not to introduce top up fees for the duration of that parliament.

Top up fees did not commence until after the 2001 election, hence the question of loyalty to the manifesto does not arise regardless of how any Labour MP voted.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#63)

and they broke that pledge. They promised not to introduce top-up fees for the duration of that parliament. They introduced top-up fees within that parliament, so yes, the question of whether Labour MP's remained loyal to their manifesto pledges does arise.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#62)

Petercoe says :- "and with no idea what you're entrusting four years' of power to them for."

..and that's exactly what I am getting at. Your refusal to appreciate this from the point of view of a voter with no knowledge of the afrorementioned policies is saddening. There are millions out there with no access to the full manifesto. It's better to try to understand the perceptions of the voter - rather than say - 'oh it was there in the small print'.

And why do you have to finish your post with an insult? An ungrammatical one at that.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#17)

Hi Susan, In Preston we voted 10-2 for our MP to nominate John McDonnell. Unfortunately he nominated Gordon Brown. If you look on the Labour Party website Preston has gone behind Brown. This, I believe, is no enthusisatic endorsement of him. It is because those activists who wanted to see John on the ballot paper are that despondent they have had nothing to do with the the 'who's gonna be the wart on Gordon's chin' Deputy leader process. There are many people hurt still by the whole PLP nominating process. The establishment of the party is, as usual, keen to manipulate the truth to suit the man of the moment. If we all look beneath that the truth is somewhat different. Perhaps we should have been more vocal after John didn't make the ballot paper. I admire you for being that way.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#18)

I have a motion down for my next GC noting the rumours and press reports about intimidation and underhand methods employed to keep John McDonnell from standing, and calling for an independent enquiry into what happened, with the leadership election to be delayed until the enquiry reports.

Not a cat in Hells cahnce of it getting through, but I thought it was worth getting the whole thing debated.

So Wiseman - if you wanna spill the beans feel free LOL

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#20)

Fluffy said :- "a motion down for my next GC noting the rumours and press reports about intimidation and underhand methods employed to keep John McDonnell from standing"

Have you got a link for these press reports? I can't take a motion to GC based on rumour alone.

Jonesythered - if you've got anything concrete on intimidation now is the time to speak - not when it's too late.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#22)

I personally think that motions should focus on dropping the % of the PLP needed to stand when there is a vacancy - from 12.5% to 7.5% as passed by Susan's CLP.

The tactics used by the Brownites varied from MP to MP. Unfortunately, for some of those planning to nominate McDonnell, all it took was a phone call from Brown himself.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#24)

Jonesy, I can't find where i linked this from, but this was a piece in the Guardian: There were a couple of other similar pieces written - perhaps more organised folks will have links? Brownites pressured Meacher supporters not to back McDonnell David Hencke, Westminster correspondentFriday May 18, 2007 Guardian Unlimited Brownite pressure on the 21 MPs who voted for Michael Meacher scuppered John McDonnell's chances of getting onto the ballot paper for the leadership contest, Guardian Unlimited has learned. For all his official statements that Gordon Brown would welcome a contest, his campaign team worked overtime to dissuade potential supporters of McDonnell from backing the leftwing challenger. In the 24 hours after the two leftwing rivals agreed to combine their support to stand against the chancellor, the Brownites managed to deter 14 of Mr Meacher's supporters from backing Mr McDonnell. Despite the shredding of the signed papers identifying the supporters, Guardian Unlimited has obtained the names of eight of the people who switched their support at the last moment. One actually switched before it was known which of the two leftwing candidates would go on to enter the contest with Mr Brown. Some of those who switched - such as Elliot Morley, MP for Scunthorpe, and, like Mr Meacher, a former Defra minister - probably needed little persuading. But others do not appear to be natural Brown supporters. The list includes Colin Challen, the MP for Morley and Rothwell, who stood down so that Mr Brown's closest aide, Ed Balls, could get a safe Labour seat; Fabian Hamilton, MP for Leeds, North East; Ken Purchase, MP for Wolverhampton North East; Austin Mitchell, MP for Grimsby; Chris Mullin, MP for Sunderland South; Terry Rooney, MP for Bradford, North, and Andy Reed, MP for Loughborough. Sources on the Brown team confirm that their own lists had identified Mr Hamilton, Mr Mullin and Mr Purchase as Meacher supporters. But some - notably Mr Mullin and Mr Morley - had made it clear that if Mr Meacher did not stand they would opt for Mr Brown. There is much suspicion in the Brown camp that some of the MPs on Mr Meacher's list were playing a double game - helping the leftwinger when they had no intention of actually voting for him. The collapse of support for Mr McDonnell also has had a fallout for the deputy leadership campaign. McDonnell supporters believed that Jon Cruddas, the centre-left candidate for John Prescott's job, might have brought over some extra support for Mr McDonnell after Mr Cruddas had got enough nominations to get onto the ballot. This never happened. According to the Cruddas camp this was never promised but the Mcdonnell supporters are furious and, as a result, McDonnell organisers Mike Wood and David Drew, plus Kathy Clark, backed Hilary Benn at the last moment, making sure he made the ballot. Mr McDonnell was also deprived of two other possible votes from waverers. Gavin Strang, the minister dumped by Tony Blair, was persuaded personally by Mr Brown to back him. Andrew Dismore, MP for Hendon, listed by the Brownites as hostile, changed his mind after a telephone call from the Jewish Chronicle pointing out if he backed McDonnell he would be supporting a man who wanted sanctions against Israel. The MP has a substantial Jewish vote and his name is now on the Brown supporters list. As for the motions to my GC - we're doing the 7.5% one too of course.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#25)

It's from here: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labourleadership/story/0,,2083186,00.html.

But yes, this is all true. Note that some of Meacher's "supporters" were completely fictitious - e.g. Andy Reed publicly declared he was nominating Brown on his website before the final meeting between Meacher and John.

Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#31)

Cheers Fluffy.

Interesting article on same webpage. Cash for hustings? Or pay back time?

Brown's campaign finance contributors include :-

  • Lord Paul -owner Caparo Industries
  • Lord Bharracharyya - Warwick Manufacturing Group
  • Paul Myners - Guardian Media Group Chair - Priv Equity expert - chair of Low Pay Commission - Chair of Tate
  • Lord Gavron - former Guardian Media Chair
  • Sir Sigmund Sternberg - City Financier
  • Lord Leitch - Head of New Deal Taskforce
  • Lord Gregson - former Head Defence Manufacturers Assoc

    http://politics.guardian.co.uk/labourleadership/story/0,,2091743,00.html

    Dear Mr Myners, where's your title ? :-)

  • Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#21)

    Cheer up, we must try and stop being despondent - and be even more vocal! The only reason that CLP meeting I referred to was even quorate was because our Mp was turning up and it was THREE days after the leadership was conceded. But John would definitely have got the supporting nomination ( with a few votes against) Had it been a bog-standard CLP, we might well just not have bothered turning up.....

    Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#26)

    I car'nt for the life understand why CLPs have nominated someone when their is no contest. You can only laugh.

    Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#27)

    It does seem strange. Maybe Brownite MPs have been putting pressure on the CLPs to nominate him to drum up support for Brown's leadership. Either than or there are some very very commited Brownite CLPs out there who are prepared to waste time they could be spending doing something important nominating a 'candidate' who has already won.

    Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#28)

    There does appear to have been quite a lot of pressure on CLPs to nominate - in order to 'get over' the little fact of there not being an election. And once it's been proposed at a quorate meeting, only emphatically ANTI-Brown CLPs are going to vote against the only candidate in an election, I'd have thought. So it is extraordinarily meaningless.

    Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#29)

    Regional Party officers in Yorkshire were ringing up ..for obvious reasons if you count how many CLPs in Yorkshire didn't nominate in the end. As you say, Duncan, most CLPs would have just put it through on the nod as there was no other candidate. It's hardly a ringing endorsement of Brown. But if you look on the list of those who HAVEN'T nominated it's still quite significant. Another is Manchester Blackley, where MP Graham Stringer didn't nominate Brown and there's also a big left contingent.

    Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#30)

    Had a major struggle at my GC to STOP them nominating Brown. The reason given by some sitting councillors is that "they would look stupid" or "it would look bad" if they didn't nominate.

    I just don't get it!

    Fortunately there were enough ex-councillors ('ex' due to Blair) who saw reason and voted against any nomination.

    Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#32)

    My CLP nominated Brown - there was no arm twisting, just a simple "do you want to nominate him?". No one spoke against the idea.

    Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#38)

    How sad is that...

    Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#41)

    I don't see why.

    Re: WEST YORKSHIRE BROWNED OFF? (#39)

    Well i'm away at University and had exams so not really been bothering with what's been going on with the elections or non-elections. But everytime I take a brief look at things I find it more and more laughable. Once my exams are over I'll contact my MP for an explanation as to why the CLP nonimated Mr Brown when their was no election.