The Apollo Project
Liberal Ideas for the 21st Century
Thursday, January 12, 2006
One man one vote?
by Peter

If there is one thing that is annoying me about this contest it is the phenomenon of mulitple nominations.

At least four MPs seem prepared to nominate anyone and everyone. Candidates are not exempt from this, as John Hemming reveals. I like John, but this sort of behaviour should be discouraged.

Tunbridge Wells.
posted by Peter Pigeon @ 2:08 pm  
  • At 12 January, 2006 15:24, Blogger Stephen Glenn said…

    I agree Peter. I don't think this is at all what was intended when they brought in the 10% requirement of the MPs to nominate a candidate. At this rate we could have 62 names on the ballot paper.

  • At 13 January, 2006 14:18, Anonymous Pip said…

    No, no, no. We're not the Tories. We have a democratic preferential election where the members choose the leader, and it may be that the result is that the final winner is everybody's second choice - including that of the MPs.

    It's not the job of the nomination system to cut down the list of candidates before they get to the membership, just to ensure they have a reasonable level of general (not exclusive) support.

  • At 14 January, 2006 12:53, Anonymous agingjb said…

    I can't see anything wrong as such with allowing MP to endorse more than one person for what is a shortlist. I do think the people writing the rules should have been clearer, and if they intended to allow multiple endorsement, then they should have called it that, and certainly not "nomination".

    The MP's are not the electorate in this contest, merely the pool of possible candidates. Why not 62 candidates, well why not all LibDem MPs who not formally exclude themselves by nomination day?

    (BTW, I'm not a LibDem member.)

Post a Comment
<< Home
Previous Posts

"What is Liberalism?: I should say it means the acknowledgment in practical life of the truth that men are best governed who govern themselves; that the general sense of mankind, if left alone, will make for righteousness; that artificial privileges and restraints upon freedom, so far as they are not required in the interests of the community, are hurtful; and that the laws, while, of course, they cannot equalise conditions, can at least avoid aggravating inequalities, and ought to have for their object the securing to every man the best chance he can have of a good and useful life." C-B.


The Apollo Project seeks to put together new ideas on policies and campaigning to help broaden the appeal and enhance the impact of the Liberal Democrats.

Email us
Powered by

Isnaini Dot Com