I was down in London yesterday for a meeting of the LRC's National Committee and discussing Parliamentary selections. A well-intentioned comrade said to me, if you put in the work, you will get selected. I disagree rather in the light of my own experiences but this was certainly true in the case of Calder Valley's Janet Oosthuysen, who was selected after a hard contest only to be unendorsed in the light of stories which appeared in the media which the NEC judged would harm Labour's chances at the General Election. We said they were wrong.
I've blogged at length about the reasons why, so I will not repeat them again. Suffice to say my Branch lobbied the NEC and several individuals also made complaints- to no avail.
Today, the Mail On Sunday is running a quite separate story about our current PPC , Steph Booth. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the matter, it should be investigated by the NEC as a matter of urgency.
Calder Branch Labour Party has a public meeting on Thursday at the Hole In The Wall pub in Hebden Bridge on the general topic of the General Election. I hope Party members and non-Party members locally will turn up and tell us what they think.
Sunday, 20 September 2009
CAN LABOUR SURVIVE IN THE CALDER VALLEY?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
16 comments:
Susan, I'm surprised at you taking the Daily Mail's side. And I'm surprised at your rather cavalier attitude with the facts.
Here are a few things for you to consider.
The NEC has already looked into these allegations and found that Steph has no case to answer.
The school has looked into these allegations and found that she has no case to answer. Steph was cleared of any wrong doing and the boy was suspended for violent behaviour.
There is absolutely nothing to investigate.
Incidentally, you may also like to know that the Daily Mail reporter has been repeatedly asked how much money the family were paid for this story. He has refused to answer and said that is irrelevant. What are your thoughts on cheque book journalism, Susan?
Did *you* have any part in giving this very crappy little story to the hateful Mail or any other reactionary papers Susan? Even if you didn't you are now involved in spreading it in the relevant constituency area. Why?
What a horrible story it is. Piss poor journalism and basically rubbish. Some cheeky, multiply suspended kid mouthing off. And a proper investigation clearing the teacher to boot.
If ANY Labour people were involved in placing this story THAT should be investigated by the NEC in my opinion. When Janet was stood down as a candidate you were very pissed off. I can understand that. Your friend and political soulmate.
Though unlike this case there was actual a criminal matter and a conviction if I remember rightly?
Presumably you were annoyed at that case because Labour people were involved in telling tales out of school? I do hope you people have not been doing the same sort of thing yourself in this case. What it it about Labour parties in the Pennine hills and borders?
Expletive deleted nightmares.
Did you stand yourself against Steph for this candidacy? Can't remember.
Where you did stand you were basically outworked and well beaten, appearing affronted that someone had campaigned to get postal voters to back them, entirely legitimately.
It is bleeding obvious to say the least that if PVs are allowed you need to get organised and win that part of the ballot as well as the votes in the room. Obvious.
It seems to me that having a PPC who has worked delivering front line services in a very deprived area OUGHT to be a cause for celebration, not attempts at undermining the selected candidate of your own party! How ridiculous!
As a socialist and presumably a supporter of frontline public services and the workers at the chalk face and the coal face you ought to be out on the knocker constantly getting Steph Booth elected, rather than playing into the hands of some spotty Tory boy who has nothing to offer working people.
You do know that Steph isn't actually a blood relative of Cherir and Tony don't you?
Chris,
I did NOT have anything to do with this story appearing in the Mail On Sunday.
Neither , I hope, did anyone I know in the Labour Party.
Janet did NOT have a criminal conviction.The Mail On Sunday story which alleged she had had a relationship with a TORY PPC WAS complete lies and fabrication.
Perhaps, instead of mouthing off yourself, you should ask members of Calder Valley Labour Party their views on the matter. And those who have left the Party because of the way in which janet was treated and the way in which the second selection was conducted. This is not the first story to appear about Steph since she was selected.
And perhaps if you knew more about the matter you might also conclude the NEC made a grave error in not endorsing Janet.
Jim,
I am not taking the Daily Mail's side. The fact remains that this story is damaging and we were told last year by the NEC that the appearance of such stories could affect the suitability of candidates. When you sign the Parliamentary Code of Conduct, a clause states quite clearly that if anything comes to light which might embarrass the Party then candidacies can be withdrawn.
My understanding is the NEC has NOT investigated this. And, if Steph was as you say cleared of any wrongdoing, why did she lose her job??? As for chequebook journalism, obviously I have no time for it.
That's a sneaky way of answering Chris' question, Susan. Why don't you try again.
Did you not give this story to a journalist at the Yorkshire Post who then handed it on to the Mail?
Journalists can be a bit careless about their sources sometimes, Susan. And Chris is right - this SHOULD be investigated by the Labour Party.
And while we're on a big honesty push, you really should come clean about the purpose of this blog. Which is to try and smear Steph as much as possible to exact some pathetic revenge because neither you nor your mate Janet won the selection. A childish, spiteful vendetta, that's what it is and most people can see it.
Here's another question. As a journalist yourself, Susan, do you honestly think this useless tosh in today's Mail is worthy of the name?
No quote from the school, no quote from the teachers' unions and just a load of nonsense from a violent kid who sold his story to make a few quid. It is what it is. A big fat smear.
I think you'll find that Steph has a lot of support on this and you'll make yourself look very stupid if you join in the muck spreading.
I did NOT give this story to ANY journalist. From the Yorkshire Post or anywhere else. Strange as it may seem, I am not in the possession of e-mail leaks from Cherie Blair nor in-depth knowledge of Steph's employment record.
This blog was set up in March 2007 .Its purpose was/is to promote the LRC.And, sorry to remind you of this, but it was Janet who won the selection and Steph's supporters who orchestrated a delberate campaign to get rid of her on political grounds.
If the chickens are coming home to roost then don't blame anyone else.
Least of all those whose only concern in the first place was to get the best candidate. Which was Janet.And which is why she won.
Susan, I've only just read your last post so let me give you a few more facts to challenge your rather prejudiced viewpoint.
Steph DID NOT lose her job. She left because she did not want to be subject to violence in the classroom. She went to work for a microfinance organisation setting up projects in the developing world. The NEC know all about this so your 'understanding' is wrong.
Steph has done nothing to'embarrass' the party and you know that. The journalist made it very clear that he wouldn't be interested in this story if it wasn't about someone who they could use to attack Cherie Blair.
...who orchestrated a deliberate campaign to get rid of her on political grounds....
Oh, the irony, Susan, the irony.
There's no chickens coming home to roost. Simply crass attack dogs who call themselves 'socialists' working with right wing rags to try and smear someone. There's enough evidence to support this as well.
How do you manage to run this blog with so much smoke billowing from your pants?
Jim, you seem to be the one with the inferno. There is no-one working with right-wing rags. If there is, it isn't me.
There are a lot of people who have questions to ask about this selection .I think they should be answered. Let me repeat. I have not given any story to the Mail On Sunday. Or any other publication.
Susan:
1. You are precisely specific about not being responsible for giving this to the Mail. As Jim points out that wasn't what I asked. I chose my words with some care. You evaded.
2. I also wondered WTF Labour people would be doing spreading this story in the local area - whoever first placed it or acted as a ginger group for it - when it was so discredited and from the effing Mail FGS. You didn't comment.
3. Did you write the unsigned story this morning pushing this Mail cobblers on HebWeb?
4. I don't actually give a FF what ANY Labour members may feel in detail about properly selected PPCs in their areas UNLESS there is something really extraordinary that comes up. Loving them 100% is not necessary. But a serious quotient of support in every way that it matters to prospects is a reasonable hope I feel. It is a case of accepting the selection result and straining every sinew to get them AND NOT TORIES elected in our constituencies.
5. For the avoidance of doubt an old complaint in which no fault was found and which had already been considered by TPTB is not extraordinary in these terms. It's (a) desperate and (b) carelessly helping the enemy.
6. You have no idea how much I do and do not know about Janet's case or indeed anything else. Don't presume. From what I know I would not have favoured the decision made on that one. And I don't support the show trial of the Rochdale Seven which I can understand but think is probably a mistake. I'm hoping there is some level of kissing and making up and ASAP.
7. I have no idea why an untrue story about a Tory PPC has been introduced by you. Is there something about spreading wrong Mail stories that you can not resist?
This is NOT only about winning for local MPs, where I'd expect a real ambition and commitment from the comrades. It is also about minimising Con and Lib-Con wins and averting Cons in office. Don't you get that? And no Susan, NL ain't as bad as Tories. You'd need a terribly short memory to believe that.
PS I've just read some more of your own later comments Susan. This touches exactly my point. You claim that comrades did in Janet over the incident - car-scratching wasn't it? You are spitting about it. And now by spreading this crap you are guilty of the self same behaviour you have projected on others. No idea if you are right on that or not. It doesn't matter. Two wrongs, or ten wrongs for that matter don't make a right. Can you not see what you're doing? Absolutely treacherous IMO. Are you TRYING to provide the means in your area for a TORY victory there and nationally?
Chris, I did NOT alert the Hebweb, the Hebweb has been running stuff for months and it's nothing to do with me or anyone else in the Party. I did NOT give this story to the media. I have no idea who did.
And let's be clear.We had a candidate, janet OOsthuysen, who stood the best chance of winning this highly marginal seat.She was hijacked by the right-wing.
There has been a series of question-marks over this selection since Janet was not endorsed. The questions are because it was unfair, unjust. And because we knew Janet stood the best chance of retaining this seat for Labour. That chance was thrown away the minute people started organising against her.
No-one I know has orchestrated anything, but people round here are seriously angry. They are angry because they have a right to be.
Chris Paul: "Are you TRYING to provide the means in your area for a TORY victory there and nationally?"
LOL - I can see the headlines now. "It woz Susan wot lost it!" Get some perspective.
If Labour lose anywhere or nationally then whatever Susan has (or hasn't) done will be small beans compared to the economy or Brown's incompetence or even the suspension of an ever increasing number of CLPs, since the NEC simply won't tolerate dissent. Shenanigans in one constituency between a former and current PPC and their supporters means sod all in the grand scheme of things.
Thanks, Dave. I have had several other messages of support on this which I can't actually publish.
But you are right. If Labour lose the next Election it will be because of policy.
And if the NEC, and the Government, listened a bit more to the Labour Left, things would be very different.
"it's nothing to do with me or anyone else in the Party"
How can you be so sure - presumably you know who is responsible?
Post a Comment