After much circulation by the wonders of email, and much redrafting accordingly, see here.
All candidates (of any party or, far more probably, none) must sign this:
I fight for the universal and comprehensive Welfare State. I fight for the strong statutory and other (including trade union) protection of workers, consumers, communities and the environment. I fight for fair taxation. I fight for full employment. I fight for the partnership between a strong Parliament and strong local government. I fight for co-operatives, credit unions, mutual guarantee societies, mutual building societies and similar bodies. And I fight for every household to enjoy a base of real property from which to resist both over-mighty commercial interests and an over-mighty State.
Plus at least eight of the twelve that follow, respectively statements of Old Labour monarchism, Old Labour constitutional caution, Old Labour and Old Liberal Euroscepticism, Old Labour and Old Liberal Unionism in relation to Great Britain, Old Labour Unionism in relation to Northern Ireland (including the present importance of the British State in protecting the Catholic interest there both against any Orange State at home and against the subscription to the “two nations” theory on the part of the Dublin Establishment), Radical and Old Labour ruralism, Old Labour defence of the grammar schools, Old Labour moral and social conservatism, Old Labour economic patriotism, Old Labour foreign policy realism, identification with opposition both to Stalinism and to apartheid, and identification with the better strands of Toryism.
Remember, you can dissent from up to four, although why anyone would from, say, the eleventh, I honestly cannot imagine. Others are, undoubtedly, more contentious. But we want and need a broadly based movement, to coalesce into a new party once in Parliament, just as the Conservative Party, the Liberal Party, the Labour Party and (albeit at a very accelerated pace) the SDP all emerged.
A candidate, almost certainly an Independent, in every constituency? Why ever not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You really need to do something about the spacing on that website. The letters are very close together, which makes it very difficult to read.
ReplyDeleteGreat stuff! How many do you have so far?
ReplyDeleteSo, you want Independent candidates to sign up to a common platform? If they thought that was a good idea, they wouldn't be independents. The clue is in the name.
ReplyDeleteI like the fact that you have to choose eight that you support. It's a bit like fantasy football.
ReplyDeleteWhat's in it for the Independents?
ReplyDeleteUndin, don't get me started...
ReplyDeleteLesser, we won't be doing a running total. We'll publish the complete list when ir is precisely that.
Litrat, Independents do this sort of thing all the time. If Martin Bell and Terry Waite can be planning an "anti-sleaze" list, then why not a political one? All the parties originally started like this: people got to Parliament and found others who agreed with them. These days, they can, up to a point, know in advance.
Chris K, you can sign up to all 12 if you like. I do.
Bastrimp, seats in Parliament. For themselves and for people with whom they are at least broadly in agreement. Again, this was how all the old parties started.
Undin, it's not just that the letters are close together, it's also the turgid writing style.
ReplyDeleteHow many independents stood in the last election? How many had platforms which even broadly agreed with yours?
ReplyDeleteI can't support (1) because "support for Canadian against Spanish fishermen not least because Canada and the United Kingdom shared a Head of State" is just nuts. I mean, the Canadians might have a good case in a dispute with Spanish fishermen, but sharing a Head of State with the UK is not only not a good case, it's not a case at all.
ReplyDeletePlame, you'd be happier on popbitch. Come back in 10 years' time, perhaps.
ReplyDeleteGemingc, I've no idea, and it doesn't matter in the least.
Petey, of course it is. They are our family.
Would you support a member of your family in an argument in which they were wrong?
ReplyDeleteThey weren't wrong in that case. And anyway, we are not getting dragged down that side alley. You are the type that will support any foreign interest over any British (including Commonwealth Realm) interest.
ReplyDeleteI seem to have sorted out the font, though.
I can't agree with (3) because this:
ReplyDelete"Gaitskell’s rejection of European federalism as “the end of a thousand years of history” "
is nonsense. History has shown an admirable tendency not to end, and I remain confident that it will continue to fail to do so, whether or not a European federacy comes to pass. All that would come to an end would be the strange notion that "history" somehow required that Europe never become a federation. Frankly, it would be worth doing for that reason alone.
Unlike Peter Shore and the rest of Real Labour, Petey.
ReplyDeletePlame thinks that he is well-educated and well-informed. But he has never heard of any of the 12 traditions that you list, still less of any of the individuals. So he's not that well-educated or well-informed after all.
No, I would certainly not support any foreign interest over any British/Commonwealth interest - it depends on the merits of the case. Not sure what makes you think you know anything about what I think. And I don't deny that the Canadians had a good case against the Spanish fishermen - I don't know enough about that case. However, I do think that sharing a Head of State is totally irrelevant to the rights and wrongs of a trade dispute, and I find it odd that you disagree.
ReplyDeleteOh dear, overtere. Roll on the end of the school holidays.
ReplyDeleteChris, assuming that you mean that Peter Shore and the rest of Real Labour were not (and are not) the type that will support any foreign interest over any British (including Commonwealth Realm) interest, spot on.
David, the number of people who might a) stand as independents and b) agree with your platform is an important factor. You must have some idea how many of those people there are (clearly you think there are at least 650) - do you envisage having multiple independents with your backing in the same constituency? Are there perhaps 1000 people out there, ready and willing to become MPs under your banner?
ReplyDeleteI do.
ReplyDelete"However, I do think that sharing a Head of State is totally irrelevant to the rights and wrongs of a trade dispute"
ReplyDeleteYes, I'm afraid you really do both see it and phrase it like that.
I don't understand how this would help me get elected.
ReplyDeleteLet's say I sign up, and you endorse me. How many votes is that worth? I have to admit, I haven't really heard of the BPA, whereas I have heard of Martin Bell - and more to the point, so have my potential voters.
"do you envisage having multiple independents with your backing in the same constituency?"
ReplyDeleteNo. Absolutely not.
As for the rest, well, I hope it made sense to you, dear boy.
Depends if you're interested in politics, or if you're Esther Rnatzen wanting to do it as a branch of social work, bationco.
ReplyDeleteSorry David, I wish I had your gift for pithy and lucid communication.
ReplyDeleteSimply put, how many people do you think are going to sign up?
I'm interested in politics. So how many votes is your endorsement worth?
ReplyDeleteAnarboy, one in each constituency. Plus enough people to get them onto the ballot paper. But we are not a party.
ReplyDeleteBationco, that's up to you as the candidate, or your agent, to know at constituency level. Welcome to proper politics, not celebrity "sleaze-busting".
"Independents do this sort of thing all the time. If Martin Bell and Terry Waite can be planning an "anti-sleaze" list, then why not a political one?"
ReplyDeleteYes, but everyone knows who Martin Bell is, and so his backing is worth having. Similarly, "anti-sleaze" is a popular stand which, especially at the current moment, will resonate with almost voters. By contrast, you are less of a public figure, and "the tradition of Ministerial defence of the grammar schools by “Red Ellen” Wilkinson of the Jarrow Crusade, and by George Tomlinson. Of their academic defence by Sidney Webb and R H Tawney.", while worthy, doesn't have quite the same instant mass appeal.
"Almost voters"
ReplyDeleteI expect that that includes you, litrat.
They are all out today, David. Well done. Politics for people who are not interested in politics. Blair, Cameron and all that rubbish.
ReplyDelete"Where did Right-Wing Labour go?" asks Peter Hitchens in The Broken Compass and regularly on his blog. Well here it is. Mass appeal, children? You cannot imagine.
You comment regularly on his blog, and comments have appeared anonymously here that were obviously by him. You are in touch.
Less of the "right-wing", please...
ReplyDeleteThis is proof positive that the hospital did not work. Nurse!
ReplyDeleteThe BDJ Challenge.
ReplyDeleteYou have just won yourself this seat.
ReplyDeleteI will run as an independent but I can't see what reason there is to sign this. Who did you circulate this to? Who suggested drafting changes? Who are you?
ReplyDeleteI wish you well of course.
ReplyDeleteCurious though about this opting out of up to four things.
Which one, two, three or four are you lukewarm about?
Although you are quite right not to give a running total of supporters/members, it would be of interest to know if other members/supporters of BPA actually contributed to the manifesto or if it was asolo project to which you ask others to join.
But like I say I wish you well.
Our agendas are remarkably similar.
"Who did you circulate this to? Who suggested drafting changes?"
ReplyDeleteDo you agree with it, or not?
"Which one, two, three or four are you lukewarm about?"
None of them. But people can be. Some people are.
"it would be of interest to know if other members/supporters of BPA actually contributed to the manifesto or if it was asolo project to which you ask others to join"
A good number of people who have been discussing these things on the Net and elsewhere, including in correspondence with me, have been involved. It certainly wasn't a solo effort.