Chris McLaughlin reports on mounting concerns that Labour’s parliamentary selections process is infected by a ‘creeping corruption’
WHEN Labour members gather in St Michael’s Church Hall in socially deprived south east London tomorrow afternoon (April 18) up to a third of those eligible to vote to choose the area’s next MP are unlikely to be present to hear the eight prospective candidates make their pitch for one of the party’s safest seats in the south-east of England.
But they will have a vote anyway – and it could be a decisive bloc. Demands for an inquiry into the unusually high number of postal applications in the selection of a candidate in Erith and Thamesmead are already expected to be made at the next meeting of Labour’s National Executive Committee. This follows the disclosure that more than a third of the 279 eligible voting members in the constituency to be vacated by MP John Austin have applied to vote by post rather than turn up in person at the hustings.
The focus has turned on 22-year-old Georgia Gould, daughter of Tony Blair’s former opinion poll guru and master of the focus group, Philip (now Lord) Gould.
But selection has provoked concerns that have spread wider than Erith and Thamesmead and its 11,500 majority and led to widening suspicions of high-profile, co-ordinated campaigns to “parachute” well-connected Blairite candidates into Westminster seats. The blogosphere is rife with debate about whether the campaigns are being co-ordinated by a communications agency co-run by former Labour general secretary Margaret McDonagh and whether they break party rules and laws on data protection.
Feelings are running high, with claims that internal party democracy is being undermined by wealthy resources creating an unbalanced playing field. One blogger has suggested that if the alleged activities were being undertaken by a left-wing grouping, such as Militant, the party machine would be quick to crack down on a party within a party. Another dubbed the alleged interference in postal votes as “cash for elections, an absolute bloody scandal”.
In the Yorkshire seat of Calder Valley last week, the choice of candidate to fight this highly marginal seat with a vestigial British National Party threat was sealed before members who actually turned up to hear the candidates speak and be cross-questioned had met.
There were 97 postal applications issued, of which 90 were used. Fifty seven people turned up at the meeting. The winning candidate, Stephanie Booth – the latest wife of Cherie Blair’s father Tony Booth, and effectively Cherie’s stepmother – lost on the night by 35 to 22. However, when the postal votes were added, she won by 95 to 52 votes over local mayor Susan Press.
Calder Valley branch secretary Paul Clarke is writing to the regional Labour Party demanding a full investigation following claims that supporters of Ms Booth approached party members and helped them fill in their postal voting forms, which is against party rules. Similar claims have been made against Ms Gould’s supporters in Erith and Thamesmead.
Constituency member Barbara Cooley told Tribune she was visited at home by two young people she thought were students and who announced they were “from the Labour Party”.
“They had a postal vote application form filled in with my name, address and phone number and even a reason for me not being able to vote in person. They mentioned Georgia Gould’s name. As they were leaving, they revealed they were supporters of Georgia Gould. If they had said that from the start, I could have told them I would be voting for a local candidate. I signed the form, but I will be going along in person to hear what they’ve got to say.”
A list of detailed questions emailed to Ms Gould received the following reply: “I am very sorry, but according to the Labour Party code of conduct candidates are unable to speak to the press.” In fact, the rules say nothing of the sort, merely prohibiting candidates discussing the selection procedure with the media. Tribune’s questions were about Ms Gould’s campaign tactics.
Party rules say that: “No shortlisted nominee or any person acting on behalf of the nominee should benefit from interference in the process of applications for, or the issue and return of, postal votes. Any evidence of such interference may lead to the disqualification of the nominee concerned.”
The rules also make it explicit that postal votes should be used “only by those people who are unable to attend… due to a medical condition, [unavailability of] travel arrangements… away on holiday, have work commitments or caring responsibilities. They will not be made available to those choosing to undertake other engagements.”
Retiring MP Mr Austin was so concerned about what he has been hearing that he wrote a personal impassioned letter to all constituency party members expressing concern about the high level of postal votes being gathered and urging support for one or other of two local candidates.
In the week prior to the Calder Valley selection, Ms Press came second in the contest for Keighley, a seat with a majority of 4,852 at the 2005 general election. In this case, the majority of the voting took place at the selection meeting, since there were 80 people present and 22 postal votes. It has left Ms Press worried about a creeping corruption of the selection system. “I am reluctant to criticise in case it is construed as sour grapes but the thing is, I have no problem with the losing, it’s the nature of the losing. It should not be down to money. However, I will be working hard to ensure that Steph is returned as the next Labour MP for Calder Valley.
Her concerns appear to be shared by a growing number of party members – at least two NEC members are due to raise the issue at the committee’s next meeting. Duncan Hall, a party officer in Skipton and Ripon constituency, sparked a lengthy running dialogue on the Labourhome website with a comment that included: “Perhaps it would be useful if activists list any irregularities in their CLPs parliamentary selection procedures here. I realise it is a difficult thing to dwell on; nobody wants to undermine a selected candidate and there are enough hostile news stories out there for Labour. But fairness is important, and we need to know future and current selections are played out on a level playing field. Further, if something rotten is going on, it is far better to deal with it ‘in house’ – so to speak – than for it to become an external matter (which it easily could do).”
A number of commentators on the site allude to the involvement of Margaret McDonagh and her communications company, bbm, which boasts that it “wins elections for Labour”.
Tribune emailed a further list of questions to Baroness McDonagh asking whether the company has been engaged in a professional capacity to act in the interests any candidates in Erith and Thamesmead and Calder Valley, whether cash was involved, whether it has had access to membership data and whether bbm has been involved in canvassing, advising or advocating the use of postal votes in either constituency.
No reply was received by the time Baroness McDonagh was informed we were going to press. But in a telephone conversation before receipt of the questions she said: “I would not want to get involved in talking about that.”
