Saturday, 3 May 2014

European elections and the Thanet factor.

I expect I am being naïve here but for the most part I would like to have a MEP who is Thanet based and would get our deprived area some of the huge pot on EC funding in terms of grants spent locally.  

The only candidate I can find who lives in Thanet is Conservative Julie Marson, so at the moment that is the way I am considering voting, is it a one horse election?

The snag here is in the numbers down the right hand side, I am pretty sure, but not certain that the number 7 next to her name means that with the pr system the other 6 Conservative candidates with lower numbers would have to get in first. 

Here is the list of candidates from the bbc website at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27051068 so I assume that it is accurate.

South East - 10 MEPs

PartyCandidate/sParty list order
An Independence From Europe
Laurence Stassen
Joyce Nattrass
Paul Godfrey
Alan Sheath
Ken Holtom
Mark Henry
Keith Vernon
Michaelina Argy
Seana Connolly
Dorothy Sheath
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
British National Party
John Robinson
Gavin Miller
Eric Elliott
John Moore
Alwyn Deacon
Anthony Bamber
Brenda Waterhouse
Mark Jones
Jack Renshaw
Yvonne Deacon
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Christian Peoples Alliance
Norman Burnett
Suzanne Fernandes
Flora Amar
Rev Anthony
Dorothy Mugara
Kayode Shedowo
Bridget Oyekan
Nnenna St Luce
Chikka Roja
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Conservative
Dan Hannan
Nirj Deva
Richard Ashworth
Marta Andreasen
Richard Robinson
Graham Knight
Julie Marson
George Jeffrey
Rory Love
Adrian Pepper
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
English Democrats
Steve Uncles
Julia Gasper
Amanda Hopwood
Simone Clark
Steve Clegg
Milly Uncles
Mike Russell
Mike Tibby
Doreen Dye
William James
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Green Party
Keith Taylor
Alexandra Phillips
Derek Wall
Jason Kitcat
Miriam Kennet
Beverly Golden
Jonathan Essex
Jonathan Kent
Stuart Jeffrey
Ray Cunningham
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
The Harmony Party
Terry Leach
Raymond Crick
1
2
Labour Party
Anneliese Dodds
John Howarth
Emily Westley
James Swindlehurst
Farah Nazeer
James Watkins
Maggie Hughes
Christopher Clark
Karen Landles
Tracey Hill
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Liberal Democrats
Catherine Bearder
Anthony Hook
Dinti Batstone
Giles Goodall
Ian Bearder
Allison Moss
Steven Sollitt
Bruce Tennent
John Vincent
Alan Bullion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Liberty GB
Paul Weston
Enza Ferreri
Jack Buckby
1
2
3
The Peace Party
John Morris
Jim Duggan
Julie Roxburgh
Jeff Bolam
Geoff Pay
David Brown
Keith Scott
Imdad Hussain
Munim Choudhury
Charles Wilkinson
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
The Roman Party
Jean-Louis Pascual
1
Socialist Party of Great Britain
Dave Chesham
Rob Cox
Les Courtney
Sean Deagan
Max Hess
Claudia Hogg-Blake
Danny Lambert
Andy Matthews
Howard Pilott
Mike Young
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
UKIP
Nigel Farage
Janice Atkinson
Diane James
Ray Finch
Donna Edmunds
Patricia Culligan
Nigel Jones
Alan Stevens
Simon Strutt
Barry Cooper
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
YOURvoice
Julian James
Rachel Ling
Fulvia James
1
2
3
I will add to this post if I have any more ideas and would appreciate any comment suggesting ways that it could be better to vote, for people living in Thanet.

36 comments:

  1. Sadly you are right about Marson, meaning her chances are very slim. Sitting members top the list as per party rules, everyone else had to duke it out for votes for the remaining slots. That's democracy for you...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. James my take on this one is that I am very reluctant to vote UKIP as there doesn’t seem to have been much collective useful activity for Thanet from the Thanet UKIP group at KCC, nor do I think representation in an organisation the representative wishes primarily wishes to leave is likely to be the best representation. I don’t really see there would be much difference between voting Labour or Conservative in European elections as a referendum on Europe isn’t something MEPs can offer and the various political alliances that have to be made means that our parties at Europe are aligned with those way beyond my understanding.

      My take is the best I can hope for is a MEP beavering away for Thanet and letting the big political guns do what they do at European level, which once again is way beyond my understanding.

      Delete
    2. I've been following Julie Marson on Twitter for the past few weeks and I must say I'm impressed.

      Delete
  2. As James says Julie Marson has a very slim chance of being elected an MEP, I would go further and say no chance! However as the Tories have yet to select a candidate for Thanet South despite Laura Sandys announcing last November her decision to stand down the next General Election, it seems a certainty to me that Marson will be anointed as the Tory candidate in June or July of this year.

    Laurence Davies

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hello Michael, James Watkins is Thanet "born and bred", but at No 6 on the Labour list will struggle to get elected.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Seems to be 2 Bearders for libdems - problem of family members as at TDC?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seems that people can be subjected adverse comment because of their face fungus and that is acceptable. Likewise someone has a problem with family members at TDC which can only be a dig at the Scobies. Why shouldn't more than one member of a family serve on a council if so elected.

      Delete
    2. It could just as easily be a dig at the Tomlinsons.

      Delete
    3. Agreed, Peter, but either way it is not justified.

      Delete
    4. 10.41, what exactly do you see wrong with two people of the same name, and let us assume same family, standing for election? What problems do you see arising out of more than one member of the same family being TDC councillors? You might as well say that people of the same family cannot be co-directors of a company or partners in a firm.

      Delete
    5. A private company is not a public role and few large companies are run that way

      Delete
  5. We have people elected with so few votes and at Tdc excessive family teams it reduces democracy. Why not zero family members or limited to one for public office. Doublehatters is a separate issue but compounds the point.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You obviously know nothing about democracy, otherwise you'd understand that people can choose who they vote for!

      Delete
    2. True but having Doublehatters and the same family reduces that choice doesn't it?

      One person one seat is democracy isn't it?

      Delete
    3. Think you would find it was an infringement of Human Rights to bar someone from standing because a relative already held office.

      Delete
    4. No more so than specifying over 18. Is doublehatting legal?

      Delete
    5. One person occupying two or even 3 council seats must be illegal or at least a waste of tax. Why do that?

      Delete
    6. Why, there is only one allowance per council seat. No different if one person gets three or three people get one each in cost. Understand, comprehend mi amigo?

      Delete
    7. No different from (say) someone working as a cashier and also having a cleaning job to improve their income.

      Delete
    8. Exactly. One person will get not just 3 wages but 3 votes. And their regular wage unless they are pensioners.

      Delete
    9. Anon the issue here isn’t specifically a local one, but one that relates to the way local government functions in the whole of the UK, you may not like the fact that people can stand for seats in all three of our local councils simultaneously and if elected get allowances for all the offices and responsibilities they hold, but that is the way UK democracy functions now.

      There wouldn’t, as far as I can see, be any way at council level that this situation council legally be changed, the only way you could seek to change this system would be by lobbying those at parliamentary level, who would have the power to change the way local government is structured. In this instance it would be you MP and the sectary of state for local government.

      Delete
    10. Not three, Michael, just two, parish and district are held simultaneously. County elections are at a different time, but you are right that there is nothing to stop anyone from standing at all three levels and, some might argue, it has its advantages in helping the relationship between the different tiers.

      Delete
    11. No 10:10 the excess of doublehatts and family members is specifically Thanet. While the situation can be changef at local level by the public insisting on candidates who reject such practices. It does assist the relationship between thr councils as it's the same person in the seats (!).

      Anyone explain why 3 seats but one person is ideal. Or why paying 3 wages to the same person is ideal?

      Delete
    12. The allowances are paid anyway, so no extra cost there. The system helps for those councillors at the parish level can help residents with problems at higher level responsibility by discussion with their district and county colleagues on the same council. Likewise, a councillor can be asked to represent the views of his/her parish or district council at county level if holding seats at all three. That can be very useful. As for votes, they only get one at each level so there is no disruption of the democratic principle of one man, one vote, especially as the remit differs at the levels and they are unlikely to have divisions on the same matters. For example, sea front flowers may be a town/parish matter, housing benefit a district one and road repairs at county.

      For your information also, double/treble hatters occur all round the country as well as councils having more than one family member. It is not unique to Thanet even if your little world is that narrow.

      Delete
    13. This is the silliest reply yet as the wages wouldnt be paid unless there were 3 people in 3 seats.

      The telephone allows councillors to speak to each other at zero cost.

      One person one seat is the democratic principle. Why pay for 58 councillors but have only say 30 different ones?

      No this is all about councillors topping up their wages and reducing debate.

      You havent explained the excess of family members.

      Delete
    14. didnt know councillors got wages just thought they got allowances.
      Telephone calls cost money btw
      democracy not affected as they can only vote once at each level

      BTW are you implying that councillor "A" who is married to councillor "B" colludes to both vote the same way as my understanding is they vote the party line not the marriage line

      Delete
    15. Democracy is affected as its the same person voting the same way in three seats.

      And instead of say 58 councillors the democratic choice is reduced to say 30 candidates.

      Yes to your point on family councillors again reducing choice etc. Why so many family teams?

      Delete
  6. Looks like Ian Driver has published more on his complaint

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Looks like Harvey was sacked after issuing a 13 page letter expressing concernd over macgonigal and eko. But he wad already made redundant anyway?

      Delete
    2. As they are trying to recruit a replacement he could not be redundant. Resign, yes, sacked, yes, but redundant, no. Please do try harder.

      Delete
    3. he was in a notice period with, allegedly, 8 weeks to go and hadn't been given garden leave. allegedly he was escorted from the building by security. strange times

      Delete
    4. Depends on the replacement role. Do try harder.

      Delete
    5. The post being advertised is virtually identical and if Harvey was not sacked (or resigned) he should have been offered it. A tribunal would find in his favour. Still you that needs to brush up employment law 8:09.

      Delete
    6. So its not the same role. Do try. And Harvey was already working notice with 8 weeeks to go...The payoff will be interesting. ..

      Delete
  7. More importantly... http://www.thanetgazette.co.uk/Offer-Manston-airport/story-21055568-detail/story.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sold for $2 and used for sheep grazing!

    ReplyDelete

Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive, anonymous derogatory comments about real people, comments baiting internet trolls, comments saying that an anonymous comment was made by a named real person, boring comments and spam comments, comments in CAPs will be deleted. Playground stuff like calling real people by their time stamp or surname alone, referring to groups as gangs, old duffers and so on will result in deletion. Comment that may be construed as offensive to minority groups is not allowed here either, so think before you write it, remember that the internet is a public place, that it is very difficult to be truly anonymous and that everyone who uses it leaves a trail of some sort. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts. When things are particularly difficult on the commercial spam front I may turn comment moderation on for periods.

If you feel that someone has left a comment that is offensive and directed at you personally please email me (link on the sidebar) asking to have it removed, you will need to tell which post and the date and timestamp of the offending comment. Please do not reply to the offending comment as I will assume you continuing the dialogue as meaning that you want the comments left there.