Comments on: JackP for MEP?

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 00:35:44 +0000

@ John I hear excatly what you are saying but in general career politicians are a stain on society. Take the current front bench, a bunch of no talents who have never succeeded anywhere bar elections. The oposition are no better. We do need a fresh set of ideas, the fact that every 8-12 years the country switches between one set of corrupt incompitants and another; who then spend that time feathering their nests to the detriment of the rest of us.

We agree on the socialist part, as soon as I meet any socialist who wants me and my own to do as well as they and thier own I will back them 100%. As example Lord (haha) Kinnock that well known socailist who made sure his childeren got straight onto the bandwagon without any family assistance…

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 00:16:45 +0000

JP - If you want backing you have mine. I do not always agree with your politics but I believe you would stand with more honesty and integrity than the troughing bastards we have in power now. Stand on a ticket of restoring individual freedom and resposibility and I woud fancy your chances as I think we are all sick of being dictated to.

By: JackP

JackP — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 00:07:09 +0000

John, er.. Dad,
some of those questions can be answered by the Jury Team site. The party is about independents. You could get a right-winger or a left-winger. Candidates are chosen by phone vote where there are more candidates than ‘places to stand’.

Therefore the whole ‘policies’ issue is virtually irrelevant: each individual stands for what they believe in. Effectively, it’s a bunch of independents, supported by the Jury Team process. Although the out-and-out racist wouldn’t be allowed to stand, based on the JT discrimination policies. Although, as you’ll see in a few days, I would defend the right of out-and-out racists to stand, irrespective of how much I would personally disagree with them.

I have to say that I don’t believe the ‘party’ system is working. It is alienating people, as we are increasingly being represented by professional, career politicians. That doesn’t work for me. However, I think it’s also inappropriate to believe anyone standing would need to ‘take on’ any vested interests. What I would want a candidate to do would be to vote according to their beliefs — beliefs which I would expect them to have made clear beforehand. That’s all I’m asking for.

Someone has to do something. Provided Jury Team do not demand a ‘party line’ in any way, shape or form, I believe this is a good idea. Being prepared to take on the job myself is a different matter entirely, and one that I’m not sure that I actually want to do.

However, it would be fair to say that you were willing to take action, to put up with the associated shit, in order to stand for your political beliefs. Why? I presume you felt a moral obligation. Why should I then not feel the same, even if my political beliefs differ?

By: John Pickard

John Pickard — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:04:18 +0000

Sorry Jack, a PS:
On the Jury Team website it says “By joining the Jury Team, you are becoming part of a political party like no other.” Isn’t that what was said by Kilroy Silk? And the founders of the UKIP? And Arthur Scargill, forming his Socialist Labour Party…etc. What if there were more than one volunteer? What party structures are in place to organise a fair election? What if more than one person insisted on being the ‘Jury Team’ candidate? Which one would get the ‘nod’?…and why? What policies would be deemed ‘official’ and what policies ‘not official’? What if an out and out racist wanted to stand? What if the Jury team candidate was a Trotskyist in one euro-consituency and a right wing Tory in the next one? (All non-party “individuals” of course!). You just end up with a new party, with all the personality and policy clashes you get in other parties. Wouldn’t that cheese people off? Face it, politics is a messy business. There’s argument, disagreement, debate and you’re often in a minority. But that’s what we have to do.
John

By: John Pickard

John Pickard — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 21:52:54 +0000

Hello Jack,
I just happened to look at your blog for the first time in ages. I’m afraid I don’t agree with your take on political parties. They are a fact of life and in a society are an inevitable fact of life. Whether it’s in dozens or millions, people will always form associations of one kind or another to seek common goals. It’s absolutely true, as you say, that people are disillusioned with the political parties as they are now but that does not mean that parties as such have no role or place or that people wouldn’t find a role or a place for parties. What is likely to happen is that the pressure of opinion and activism (where and when it manifests itself) will change the parties.
There are other considerations, of course. Society is dominated by extremely powerful vested interests, even more powerful that the political parties. It is utopian to imagine that an individual can ‘take on’ these vested interests and succeed. You or any individual would simply run yourself into the ground, ruin your health and bankrupt yourself if you tried to stand as an individual. To have even the slightest chance of succeeding you would need to have a group of supporters, including some fund-raisers, canvassers, leafleters, and so on…in other words… a party. Get involved in one of the political parties and try to change it. If you don’t want to do that, start your own political party. But don’t imagine you can have anything other than a tiny, short term, ephemeral effect as an individual. My preferred option…take the party you’ve got (in my case Labour) and help to turn it into the party we need (a socialist party).
John

By: JackP

JackP — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:54:12 +0000

Comment received elsewhere, slightly redacted to remove other people’s details:

Whilst I understand your dilemma- knowing what I know about politics I think it would be a mistake . You would be away from home an awful lot and the kids would miss you terribly. Most MEPs I have had contact with can’t wait to get an MPs position back home because of the problems of working away. Also I think you would be very frustrated with the party politics you would encounter even in Brussels

However, I’m coming round to thinking that I may feel obliged to put my name forward if there isn’t someone else I would wholeheartedly support. I think Jury Team is a great idea, and I think it needs some candidates to select from.

There’s a big gap between “standing as a jury team prospective candidate”, “being the jury team official candidate” and “being elected as an MEP”, and I think, at the very least, Jury Team is possibly too good an idea not to show my support for.

By: mark

mark — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:45:47 +0000

give it a go - you’ve got nowt to lose (no-one thinks highly of politicians anyway, wether failed or successful). at least make some enquiries as to what the job entails.
if your main gripe is apathy then how would you feel if you let the opportunity go knowing you could have at least tried?
i don’t vote, not because i can’t be bothered but i just don’t think any of them are worth my vote as they do what they are told by their party whips, not by the electorate.
i’d vote for you.
anyone else interested in starting a vote-for-jack campaign……..?

By: Ray Turner

Ray Turner — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:30:33 +0000

I know we broadly share the dilemma, as we’ve been corresponding on the Jury Team website.

Blogging/commenting is an important role in a democracy. It doesn’t necessarily oblige you to stand yourself. We’re not in a corner really, just under a bit of pressure to define ourselves. We’re at a turning point in our political activities.

But I think the really important thing is to help get Jury Team off the ground if we ever want Westminster to be any better.

Jury Team is much more credible if they’ve got 700 people in the primaries, rather than 15. That’s what’s really driving me here, the longer term and making things better. I’m definitely not thinking about it from the point of view of what’s in it for me. The thought of what’s in it for me, potentially interviews with Paxo on Newsnight etc, commuting to Brussels/Stasbourg etc. is a bit of a nightmare actually. But don’t forget, it’s a competition/election. JuryTeam candidates might not actually win any seats in June…

So I’m in the same corner as you, but increasingly thinking that I’m going to have to bite the bullet. Particularly if I want to carry on as a Blogger. Have a bit more credibility then…

Comments of support, or otherwise, on my blog would help me make the decision.

By: Holly

Holly — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:03:33 +0000

Go for it - I tend to do this and then find reasons to regret my actions afterwards. Seriously though, if you feel you may find the job interesting, why not? Throwing your hat into the ring doesn’t necessarily mean that you will win, but if the possibility that you might win doesn’t scare the hell out of you, then I say, “Vote Pickard!”

By: paul canning

paul canning — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 01:03:41 +0000

“young and pretty”

hur, hur. I think it’s more about coming across as genuine and straight-forward - having observed some of this

“if your closet is skeleton-less….why not?”

I think it is.. ?

Alistair Campbell has good advice. Ok, it’s for Peggy Mitchell but whatever.

Basically, if you want it you have to want to win. + have a plan etc. Because of who you are and what you stand for. Otherwise don’t.