Andy wrote:
> Living in the UK, I'm somewhat envious of the "primaries" happening in
> the US. I think this is a great idea, and it's thrown up plenty of
> interesting debates.
> How could we bring some of the benefits of this approach to the
> parliamentary system used in the UK? I've had a little think about
> this and come up with the idea of "standardised" leadership elections.
> Firstly , the parties MPs would choose a candidate. Secondly, the
> parties other elected officials, such as councillors, assembly members
> and MEPs would get a choice, and lastly the "rank and file" party
> activists. This would produce three able candidates, of which the
> general public would have the chance to vote on. An additional
> advantage of such an arrangement would be the leadership hopefuls
> would have to pitch their case to voters of other parties. Should the
> party concerned have no MPs, then their leader could be appointed to
> parliament as a non-voting member. Would the commons not benefit from
> a speaker for the Greens or UKIP, who have no MPs but considerable
> public support.
We already have primaries as part of the Conservative selection process, it
is up to the individual association to choose the process of Primary, but
the deck is firmly stacked in its favour from the Party.
We had a primary in my constituency it was an amazing success, we had a
packed hall, full of people who wouldnt normally take part in politics. It
was an amazing and invigorating process.
Gaz
|