The Kintyre Forum

What a shame for the many hard working and competent labour councillors (and the people they serve) who have lost their seats in council elections down south due to problems at Westminster over which they have no influence. Would it not be possible to move to a fully independent non-party system where members & councillors are voted in on their individual merits, and kept in on their ability to deliver?

I've known some genuinely talented, independently minded and public-spirited people who have tried that approach, and to be honest, they have been slaughtered at the polls. Maybe their time is coming?
And, yes it is a real pity that the Labour party at street level has taken the kicking that the careerists and chameleons of the parliamentary labour party set them up for. Genuinely "labour-minded" (to borrrow an analogy) people are carrying the can for the self-serving joy-riders who view the electorate as a fox views a flock of sheep. And I don't blame Gordon Brown for that. I blame Tony Blair. He was the original.
Anyways, another interesting thought, Tom B!

Tom B wrote:Would it not be possible to move to a fully independent non-party system where members & councillors are voted in on their individual merits, and kept in on their ability to deliver?

I think it would take a few generations for MP's of all parties to be cleansed of their affiliations to one side or the other but it would be a step forward if everyone was voted in on their merit not their party status.

David Cameron says he is for the people but every time he gets a mocrophone near him he is electioneering for a General Election. His words yesterday saying that he will keep up the pressure to get Gordon Brown out does not make me think he cares two hoots about the country. He should be putting all that energy into doing his best to cooperate with the goverment in place at the moment to sort out the scandel that has affected all parties and try to get other issues sorted out as a team rather than what at the moment appears to a feeding frenzy.

The people are angry and confused and anyone who shouts for an election at the moment is only thinking of themselves, not the people or the country.

Just to add that one interviewee mentioned that maybe it is time to bring in a foreigner to run the country along the lines of the way football teams employ foreign managers, Kay Burley of sky news replied "But we already have a foreigner running the government" meaning of course a Scot. I thought reporters were supposed to be unbiased. Comments like hers don't help and would lead me to wonder if a no party system existed would it then come down preferred nationalties at Westminster.

Tom B wrote:What a shame for the many hard working and competent labour councillors (and the people they serve) who have lost their seats in council elections down south due to problems at Westminster over which they have no influence. Would it not be possible to move to a fully independent non-party system where members & councillors are voted in on their individual merits, and kept in on their ability to deliver?

I thought this was a good idea but asked two people I know (both Labour, both lost their seats) about this and they explained it would be impossible because of the financial situation. They couldn't afford a campaign if they weren't affiliated to a party. One said it cost them £17,000 just for the campaign literature to put through doors. I guess the problem is that only wealthy people would be up for election and that could be awful, only having the rich local landowners and gentry to vote for!

Government should share a common principle that encapsulates all it's functions - in serving the benefit and well being of it's citizens. Elected representatives should be picked - electronically and at random - with some departing others arriving on a monthly basis. Each should serve five years - no more no less. Every willing Citizen would register their desire to serve. A monthly type national lottery TV show - would pick the following months new entree's.

History wrote:Just to add that one interviewee mentioned that maybe it is time to bring in a foreigner to run the country along the lines of the way football teams employ foreign managers, Kay Burley of sky news replied "But we already have a foreigner running the government" meaning of course a Scot. I thought reporters were supposed to be unbiased.

Whether or not she was right to make the comments, which obviously she wasn't, Isn't that a response to a perception by some south of the border that Scotland has already decided that it wants to be independent from England? - I'm not surprised that Kay Burley has a chip on her shoulder about the issue - "we" obviously don't want "them" so the response of some folk in England is "OK, off you go then" - regular phone-ins on 5live (OK, very unscientific) highlight a growing anti-Scottish sentiment. If we're going for independence let's do it asap, otherwise lets agree to devolution as is (or with Calman enhancements) and live as part of the UK. The current situation - perceived by some in England (including the influential Sky News) as Scotland desperate to off load England at the first opportunity - is damaging to the UK, and to Scotland.

History wrote:Comments like hers don't help and would lead me to wonder if a no party system existed would it then come down preferred nationalties at Westminster.

Naively I would hope that people would vote for the best people, irrespective of nationality, race etc . Candidates would have to work much harder to be recognised, but maybe this would be a good thing as it would favour individuals who already had positive high profiles in their communities - teachers, business leaders, other folk who have worked hard for community benefit