Lots of excitement among Labour quarters after Labour Ed Miliband announcement that the next Labour candidate for Mayor of London will be selected via a Primary – a vote in which registered party members and non-members who register as supporters will be able to cast a vote.
Primaries are the ‘in thing’ and they might well have a role in opening up the selection of Parliamentary candidates where a party wants to increase its vote by selecting a candidate with broad appeal.
If you’ve consistently been second or third in a ‘safe’ seat and want to leapfrog your opponents, it makes sense to offer local voters a say in the selection of the eventual candidate in the hope that this translates into enough votes come polling day to win the seat.
But I fail to see the benefits of Primaries in selecting a candidate for Mayor of London where the need to secure more than 50% of the vote means parties already need to pick candidates who appeal beyond the narrow party base.
Will Londoners who’ve not already joined the party want to sign up as a supporter so they can hear half a dozen would-be runners argue among themselves about who has the purer take on its ideology?
We’ve already had one Primary to select a Mayoral candidate – a mere 20,019 voted to select a Conservative candidate in 2007, hardly a ringing endorsement of the concept as was the lack of outcry when Labour or the Tories failed to hold one in 2012.
But what if I’m wrong and the public do take the idea of Primaries to their heart? What if tens of thousands of Londoners flock to the public meetings and register to vote?
In that case the most likely – and presumably unintended – impact of a Primary is that some of those talked up as potential runners will be driven from the race, unable to capture the imaginations of a wider, selector base.
Some, such as Sadiq Khan, who talk up the impact of a Primary are likely to be among the first victims while a familiar, moderate face such as Tessa Jowell could lead-frog the so-called front runners.
More widely, could a party membership end up with a candidate they don’t support or want? And if so, how would that candidate rally the troops and ensure they hit the streets?
Jono says
Would a primary not have selected Ken?
In any case, I think it depends on what the primary actually does – if it is effectively a choice between a selection of platforms, it probably makes a difference, if it is just a choice of figurehead for an already fixed platform then it probably doesn’t make much difference.
If you look at the votes from last time, it was effectively a two horse race – maybe the personalities involved made it slightly unusual, but 2008 looks much the same. If the Tories are never going to offer a platform that I will vote for, then the only chance I will have of influencing the direction of a platform I will support (given that I am not a Labour member) is an open primary.
Damian Hockney says
At a time of general disaffection with the old parties, the idea of primaries in the UK has always struck some as having the possibility to cause serious mischief. In the manner of groups taking control of constituency organisations where membership has fallen to derisory levels (by just signing up 100 members or so), a primary could indeed see a determined (and successful) mischievous effort to install “the worst choice” candidate. Just look at the turnout you show above when Boris Johnson was chosen. Not even half the electorate of one London constituency made “the choice”. At the very least, the process appears to lack legitimacy and the lesson is that it could easily be subverted.
If you look at primaries in the USA, for example, they are given massive and sustained media coverage, the level of tv advertising IN JUST ONE STATE for primaries is higher than even the whole allowable spend in the London Mayor election itself. Like it or not, this is what brings out the voters – they see the process mentioned night after night (and at crucial times hour after hour) in tv advertising and they become aware of who is involved and, even if sketchily, the issues involved. A primary in the UK by contrast the unknowns will never have the ability to be known at all during a largely hidden election process other than to the few – just ask the public who was involved in the Tory primary to select London Mayor six years ago. In fact, asking them at the time yielded only “Boris” as an answer. Media coverage will be, as usual, superficial, grudging and lacking in any real content, as if to actively try and put people off politics. It will focus on any “celebs” involved (ie someone who’s on telly already or vaguely known to the public, like Boris) and try to stop the other (privately and disparagingly called “civilians” by the broadcasters) from appearing. I was involved in a scrutiny process of the French presidential elections and, through gritted teeth, I have to admit that (with a couple of reservations) the UK has a lot to learn from the French system in terms of media coverage, rules and presentation of politics and issues. To succeed, democracy needs oxygen: in France the UK-style ban on political advertising is countered by generous ‘time allowance equality’ rules for all candidates and processes which are rigorously imposed – in the UK, with rules restricting candidates from campaigning and advertising, and media determined to ignore or belittle most candidates, a primary process cannot work. 20,019 voting out of an electorate of 5 million should really concentrate the minds of Labour organisers in advance of this likely shambles.
Paul B says
Can it be worse than the current system? Maybe a website with the candidates details and policies along with text voting may be attractive.
The trouble us that politicians are clones and even Mad King Boris is not quite the rebel he appears , anyone can cut a budget!
Damian Hockney says
Exactly, it will surely be an endorsement, by less that 1% of the electorate, of a platform that is effectively already fixed and it will hand victory to the candidate who is best known nationally already (the equivalent of a Boris who is pushed into standing, or who indeed may want to stand). Anyone not specifically involved in London politics will have a clue about the other candidates. The media will only give it anything other than cursory coverage if, say, Ginger Spice, Peter Andre, Katie Price and Diane Abbott are the four contenders…