Which Candidate to Vote For?

Originally posted at: http://barryphelps.posterous.com/which-candidate-to-vote-for

What an unenviable choice for the voters of Earls Court on Thursday.  Let's look at the candidates.  The Conservative, Malcolm Spalding, who stood in May as an Independent, had a Damascus like conversion to the Conservative cause and joined the party two days before he was selected as its candidate.  We are not talking student politics here.  We are talking about a grown, late middle aged man, who seems to have arrived at his new political position very late in years after a position of being an Independent only months earlier. 
This is just so unconvincing that it just screams opportunism.  This man has no convictions and political beliefs.  He will be just voting fodder for the Conservatives at the Town Hall.  A vote for Spalding is just like voting for an automaton, his vote will be up for grabs for whatever the leadership wants in the same manner it appears his political convictions as an Independent were traded in months later when the opportunity of getting the Conservative candidacy came along.  And we must remember that Spalding, alone among all the candidates of the main parties, has failed, along with his fellow sitting Conservative Councillors in Earls Court, to condemn the disgusting emails sexualising young underage boys sent by the pervert Barry Phelps.  The blog hopes that Conservative voters in Earls Court will think about this fact before voting for Spalding, as it was not asking much of somebody to condemn Phelps' actions, which most decent people would find totally abhorrent and unacceptable.  To not vote for Spalding would send a strong message to the Conservatives that they had better select candidates with a moral backbone and political convictions, who can speak out on important issues rather than remain silent.

And what of Linda Wade.  Despite the carpet bombing of leaflets and the bussing in of activists and notables such as Simon Hughes, when you take away the sound and fury you are left with nothing different to what the Conservatives are offering.  In fact a vote for Linda Wade, the Liberal Democrat candidate, just like in the general election, is a vote that will be delivered up to the Conservatives.  The Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives are coalition partners in the government.  The Liberal Democrat party will be committed to supporting the policies of their government.  They cannot have it both ways and suggest that they are different to the Conservatives locally when the Town Hall will be implementing important policies affecting the people of Earls Court which are the result of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition government.  On issues of social housing and security of tenure, on housing benefit cuts, and many other issues of cuts in services to the residents of Earls Court, Linda Wade will be in the voting lobbies with the Conservatives.  But most importantly, this blog has pointed out that Linda Wade on the litmus test of whether the rhetoric of change really meant something, refused to call for the resignations of her friend Jennifer Ware, and Sophia Lambert, the Chairperson, of the Standards Committee on the matter of Ware's failure to publicly declare an interest at a hearing involving her friend Phelps, and Lambert's decision to keep Ware on the Committee despite knowing of Ware's friendship with Phelps.  It is difficult to avoid the suspicion that this refusal to call for their resignations is because of Wade's friendship with Jennifer Ware who is also her political colleague in the Liberal Democrat Party.  Linda Wade is too compromised by her friendship with Ware, and her social connections with Spalding in the socially narrow membership of the Earls Court Society to be considered as a candidate who is fresh and will bring about change.  Indeed how could Wade be considered fresh when she has been trying to become a Councillor in Earls Court for years. The blog urges the voters in Earls Court not to vote for the Liberal Democrat candidate either, as this will not bring about change any more than if you voted for Spalding.

Which brings us to the Labour candidate, Joel Bishop.  The blog knows little about Joel Bishop personally, other than the refreshing fact that he appears not to come from the narrow pool of the Earls Court Society, as with Spalding and Wade.  He has condemned Barry Phelps.  The Labour Party has appeared to not have conducted much of a campaign in Earls Court.  The blog has not seen a single leaflet.  Presumably the Labour Party is focussing on the Cremorne by election.  Their website informs us that he is campaigning against the housing benefit cuts that will in effect force vulnerable low income indivduals and families to move out of the area and out of the borough.  This blog considers this an important issue in the by election and one that the other candidates naturally do not wish to highlight.  The blog is urging voters in Earls Court to consider voting for the Labour candidate for the following reasons, and they are all in spite of the fact that Labour has really been invisible in this election.  As Labour is unlikely to win this by election, it can perform an important function of being a recepticle for a protest vote against Spalding and Wade.  Being one of the main parties your protest vote will count more if it goes to Joel Bishop than one of the independent candidates.  Moreover, one of the independent candidates, Elizabeth Arbuthnot, is the favoured choice of the extraordinary and illiterate pro-Phelps leaflet distributed by local residents groups in the by election.  This reason alone would suffice for not voting for her.  A vote for the Labour candidate would be a positive vote in the sense that a signal can be sent to the Town Hall that the voters of Earls Court are fed up with the sleaze characterised by Phelps, and want a fresh start and real change, including a more representative Standards Committee at the Town Hall in which independent members are selected from a wider social group than at present.  Also, particularly for those Labour voters that might be considering voting tactically for the Liberal Democrat, it is important to consider that a vote for Labour would register concern for what the government is doing concerning cuts in important social services that will affect vulnerable and poor people in Earls Court, as well as cuts in housing benefit which threaten some families with homelessness.  Where the Liberal Democrats are now in coalition with the Conservatives and are responsible for these policies, it is impossible to tactically vote for Linda Wade as she would support policies that are totally opposed to the political beliefs of most Labour voters.

The blog therefore believes that residents in Earls Court should vote for Labour in the by election on Thursday.  A strong showing by the Labour candidate is the best way to send a strong message to the Town Hall that people want real change.  As Spalding and Wade will not provide that change, only more of the same, there is not much to choose between them, and if on Friday we find either of them is elected, the cabal at the Town Hall under Cockell's leadership can feel secure in running things as they have done.  And of course, Jennifer Ware and Sophia Lambert will still be on the Standards Committee. Print this post