Comments on: Lammy’s open primaries call ignores London’s real democratic deficiencies http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/lammy%e2%80%99s-call-for-open-primaries-ignores-london%e2%80%99s-real-democratic-deficiencies/20098529 London News and Opinion Fri, 03 Sep 2010 05:33:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Damian Hockney http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/lammy%e2%80%99s-call-for-open-primaries-ignores-london%e2%80%99s-real-democratic-deficiencies/20098529/comment-page-1#comment-1998 Damian Hockney Sun, 16 Aug 2009 22:58:26 +0000 http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/?p=8529#comment-1998 Another problem, of course, with this idea of primaries is the cost. Anyone who has ever tried to mailshot every voter in just one constituency knows the £20k price tag. Indeed, you cannot actually do this during an election campaign itself because to do so would bust the amount you are allowed to spend as a candidate. All you get is the state censored 'free' mailshot on tired thin paper. To stage a London primary properly would cost a party about £3 million. In any event, the whole thing is a lightweight diversion from the real problems with the London Mayor and Assembly elections, which in all probability David Lammy would find difficult to understand. The issues of oversight mentioned by Appealing of Ealing are never tackled properly, and the fact that the London Assembly now has fewer actual powers relative to the centre than it had at its outset makes it difficult for members who are elected to it. As I repeatedly told the DCLG during the process of the review of powers: "Assembly Members are not even allowed access to any of the information which is crucial to enable them to hold the Mayor to account in the most crucial areas. They can try Freedom if Information but are then frustrated for months in getting anything: if and when it comes, most of the information is not there". Can we any of us be serious about democracy if a supposed oversight body is simply denied access to all relevant information, then prevented from discussing that relevant information at Assembly Meetings if it has been passed to them from friendly outside sources? Material which can quite legally be printed in newspapers, or discussed on air? Just giving voters a list of a few approved party politicians to choose from will not re-engage them with the political process, I am afraid... Another problem, of course, with this idea of primaries is the cost. Anyone who has ever tried to mailshot every voter in just one constituency knows the £20k price tag. Indeed, you cannot actually do this during an election campaign itself because to do so would bust the amount you are allowed to spend as a candidate. All you get is the state censored ‘free’ mailshot on tired thin paper. To stage a London primary properly would cost a party about £3 million. In any event, the whole thing is a lightweight diversion from the real problems with the London Mayor and Assembly elections, which in all probability David Lammy would find difficult to understand. The issues of oversight mentioned by Appealing of Ealing are never tackled properly, and the fact that the London Assembly now has fewer actual powers relative to the centre than it had at its outset makes it difficult for members who are elected to it. As I repeatedly told the DCLG during the process of the review of powers: “Assembly Members are not even allowed access to any of the information which is crucial to enable them to hold the Mayor to account in the most crucial areas. They can try Freedom if Information but are then frustrated for months in getting anything: if and when it comes, most of the information is not there”. Can we any of us be serious about democracy if a supposed oversight body is simply denied access to all relevant information, then prevented from discussing that relevant information at Assembly Meetings if it has been passed to them from friendly outside sources? Material which can quite legally be printed in newspapers, or discussed on air? Just giving voters a list of a few approved party politicians to choose from will not re-engage them with the political process, I am afraid…

]]> By: Appealing of Ealing http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/lammy%e2%80%99s-call-for-open-primaries-ignores-london%e2%80%99s-real-democratic-deficiencies/20098529/comment-page-1#comment-1963 Appealing of Ealing Mon, 10 Aug 2009 22:22:29 +0000 http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/?p=8529#comment-1963 Lammy is an all-round lightweight – really superficial. Every time I hear him, whether at the dispatch box, or on the Today programme, or even on some silly Mastermind programme, he always seems completely out of his depth... probably because he <i>is</i>. Why anyone other than his mother would rate him, is one of life's great mysteries. As for the Assembly, it would indeed be more democratic to enhance its power, but only if the AMs would properly represent the interests and concerns of their constituents, which at present, it seems to me, they singularly fail to do, preferring instead to squabble like a bunch of old fish wives along incredibly tedious party lines. I wonder how many Londoners could even name their constituency AM, or <i>any</i> AM. Not many I suspect. Lammy is an all-round lightweight – really superficial. Every time I hear him, whether at the dispatch box, or on the Today programme, or even on some silly Mastermind programme, he always seems completely out of his depth… probably because he is. Why anyone other than his mother would rate him, is one of life’s great mysteries.

As for the Assembly, it would indeed be more democratic to enhance its power, but only if the AMs would properly represent the interests and concerns of their constituents, which at present, it seems to me, they singularly fail to do, preferring instead to squabble like a bunch of old fish wives along incredibly tedious party lines.

I wonder how many Londoners could even name their constituency AM, or any AM. Not many I suspect.

]]>