Spot the difference competition
It's good to see that Grassroots Alliance member of Labour's NEC, Christine Shawcroft, is busy sending reports to members in Leyton & Wanstead and Sherwood CLPs. It may be a total coincidence that those two CLPs both have pending parliamentary selection contests.
Oddly, Christine seems confused or inconsistent about where she lives.
When writing to members in Leyton she uses headed paper with an address in nearby London E14. When writing to members in Nottinghamshire the address is given as Nottingham NG2.
Perhaps she just has two homes in anticipation of being an MP.
posted by Luke Akehurst at 11:40 am
16 Comments:
Perhaps the address is the local constituency admin office, as people don't use home addresses often these days.
12:27 pm, November 25, 2009
Unless she actually claims that she lives locally in the text of both letters, (I can't read the small-print in that picture), this is weak, sectarian, criticism. It makes good organisational sense to use a local "return-to" address.
Your attempted smear wouldn't have anything to do with the fact you're running against her for the NEC, would it?
12:43 pm, November 25, 2009
Hey Luke, nothing to do with this letter but I was wondering if you signed this petition, which was mentioned in Unite's digital mag?
http://www.unitetheunion.org/shameontwosisters
12:58 pm, November 25, 2009
Nice to be local.
6:42 pm, November 25, 2009
This made me laugh. This is not about "admin addresses" - it plain and simple spin.
Christine had a failed attempt at the Nottingham South selection.
She is the CLP sec in Nottingham South but everyone in the constituency knows she works in London, her family live in London and she only occasionally comes to Nottingahm.
She became CLP sec in Nottingham South about 4 years ago. and everyone knows this was cos her mate Alan Simpson, the current MP had tipped her the wink that he would be standing down and it was an attempt to shoehorn her into the seat. Despite support from Alan during the selection process she failed to get selected.
If she could not get Nottingham South where she was CLP sec and had the support of the MP then she is a no hoper in Sherwood as she spends no time there.
9:36 pm, November 25, 2009
I'm afraid Christine is a serial non achiever as her time on the NEC has shown. She has a nice line in being obnoxious to those with whom she disagrees - but if there are any wavering voters around having Christine opposing you is always a great help. As for putting forward constructive ideas that everyone can agree with, or trying to build any form of consensus, just forget it. Surely the left can do better - one Ann Black must be worth a hundred Christine Shawcrosses
1:05 pm, November 26, 2009
But didn't she fail to get selected because of the quite unacceptable and corrupt votes of union placemen? About time that sort of thing was stopped and the party lost that albatross round its neck
2:56 pm, November 26, 2009
Mike
unions don't get votes in Labour PPC selections. They are done by One Member One Vote.
3:06 pm, November 26, 2009
Sometimes Luke I read your blog and think to myself
'I wonder if he justs logs on as anonymous sometimes to back up his own arguements?'
8:01 pm, November 26, 2009
Luke: if you really believe that then you are very naive. Mind you, the unions aren't the only ones operating behind the scenes and whilst I haven't met Christine Shawcroft she doesn't appear to win total support from her own side of the party.
I'm suspicious of institutional funding and influence no matter where its from - I'd like to see very firm limits placed on political spending which would mean that institutional links would no longer be necessary
2:00 am, November 27, 2009
Luke is quite right, TUs don't get votes in local PPC selections - but locally affiliated TUs do send delegates (who often don't seem to find the time to attend the ordinary monthly GC, sometimes for years, but suddenly find that they do have the selection meeting date free when they check their diaries), those delegates are often lobbied by TU Gen Secs, TU Regional Officers (or their proxies) and NEC members (who certainly should know better) to vote in a particular way. Fair enough you might say, every one gets lobbied - but information is power and not every one has the info in the first place. Some people say that "favoured" candidates are given every help, membership lists (far in advance of a selection contest announcement) while those who are critical voices don't get any access at all.
Luke himself seeks advancement in the Party - perhaps the NEC is calling him (many are called few are chosen) and I'm sure that the thought never crossed Luke's mind that he is contending the same election as Christine (ie for the constituency section of the NEC)when he wrote this post.
Although possibly a complete waste of time to say so on Luke's blog, I would rather have people like Christine (someone with over 30 years of tireless commitment to our party)as a member of the PLP than the many faceless career MPs that populate the Government backbenches milking their expenses and squandering our Labour heritage.
As Luke often expresses his distain for the left can I abuse his comments box to ask any neutrals in Hackney reading this blog to mobilise around any candidate (bar him) and ensure that he fails to gain the HN&SN CLP nomination that he must obtain to get on the NEC ballot paper?
As for those Labour wannabe PPCs rushing around trying to get selected for one of the 50 or so outstanding vacancies - don't overdo it candidates will probably all be imposed (or at least a safe shortlist will be) that is if anyone to the left of Peter Mandleson stands a chance of getting a look in. If your CLP has a PPC vacancy look out for the ever popular "membership irregularites" card being pulled (under cover of Regional Officials - and tried and tested in Local Gov't selections)to refer selection to the NEC.
Enough rant, time for bed.
2:52 am, November 27, 2009
Luke Akehurst writes: "Oddly, Christine seems confused or inconsistent about where she lives." and "Perhaps she just has two homes .. "
Maybe she does have two homes, or maybe she just has one and the other is just for admin purposes. But it appears that she wrote those letters (containing at least one home address) to be read by individual CLP members and not for the general public.
You, on the other hand, have chosen to publish the addresses (and telephone number) of this woman on a publicly accessible website for all and sundry to read.
You bleat on about the sanctity of your own family home yet - one can only assume - did not seek Ms Shawcroft's permission to publish her home address(es) and phone number on your website.
Care to explain your inconsistencies?
8:04 pm, November 27, 2009
My old school fag Akehurst has long claimed that Ms. Trotsky, as she is known to Grassroots Alliance subversives in Nottingham, is a Trotskyite sleeper who should be weeded out of the Labour Party at the earliest possible opportunity and preferably hung from the nearest tree with a handy length of recycled hemp.
Keep up the good work, old chap!
8:36 pm, November 27, 2009
Actually my home address is published
a) on 8000 ballot papers every time I run for council
b) on my council declaration of interests
c) to every household in Hackney every time Labour does a leaflet here as I'm the agent
If you are in public life then where you live is a matter of legitimate public interest.
Rather different from publishing a picture of my home with a cross-hair and the words "target acquired" which is the incident I had cause to object to.
12:03 pm, November 29, 2009
What a home for admin purposes and a real home?? And this from the candidate with the logo 'public need, not private greed.' A touch hypocritical?
I suspect Ms Shawcroft actually lives in London, from the sounds of it that's where her job is, yet she is trying to give the impression to the good people of Sherwood Forest that she lives just up the road in Nottingham.
Giving recent controversies about home flipping etc, this seems to be a campaign tactic that could backfire on Ms Shawcroft surely?
7:23 pm, November 29, 2009
Is she a member at both addresses? does she pay council tax at both addresses? I think the NEC should look into this.
1:09 pm, December 12, 2009
Post a Comment
<< Home