Cllr Ian Lewis is a councllor for Wallasey Ward on Wirral council.
The Party focusses heavily on the process of approving Parliamentary candidates, yet pays little regard (beyond the CCHQ process) in the selection of those people who will ultimately be spending in excess of £100 billion this year on local services.
And, as any veteran of this process will know, there is nothing more likely to ‘cause a little local difficulty’ than the approval (or otherwise) of people who want to stand for election to their council.
Do the ‘approvals’ function properly, and you risk hurting someone’s feelings, but creating opportunities for new candidates. Do it badly and you end up keeping the incumbents happy but risk losing an election with a duff candidate.
While this process is, in some places, undertaken at group-level, with participating associations represented on a group-wide panel, more often than not, it will be at Association level where everyone knows everyone, and some minds are already made up…
In smaller associations, perhaps with fewer winnable wards, the whole process can seem a bit too matey altogether, lacking rigour and challenge. And too often, a councillor is judged by what the volunteers see – attendance at the branch coffee mornings, the Association’s supper club, and the Patron’s Club.
With all due respect to all the fundraisers who work so hard for our party – a councillor’s primary function is not to be a guaranteed bum on a seat at association events.
Do we really expect close political colleagues ‘interviewing’ each other for suitability on the ‘Approved List’ to provide this impartial assessment of a councillor’s performance, especially if their own performance as councillor or Association officer is no better, or worse, than their friend who they are assessing?
And, if they do, is the Association prepared for the fallout?
As Cllr Paul Maginnis made clear in his article on 4 November, winning and holding your council seat is hard work, especially 12 years into Conservative-led governments.
As many of us know, hard work alone is no guarantee of success, but ‘being nice’ and approving someone who is clearly not up to the job means the rest of the team has to work harder and the chance of holding or winning the seat is lessened.
So, in the absence of any mandatory assessment criteria, ‘Approvals Committees’ come up with their own, such as:
Sitting councillors seeking reapproval should also be assessed against the ‘Agreement to Stand’ made the last time they applied – to see whether they and their association have fulfilled the terms in that agreement.
And, for ‘new’ applicants who are not known to the local party, are background checks carried out – such as social media postings?
One solution could be the Area Management Executives, usually comprising people with a knowledge and understanding of the wider Party. Could they not act as the Approvals Committee for all local government elections and by-elections in their Area?
This would at least ensure a consistent standard was applied to a council-wide area – avoiding the ludicrous situation where a candidate or councillor not approved by one association, applies to stand in another and is approved.
To those who say we are all volunteers: yes we are, but councillors also receive basic allowances, and some receive generous additional ‘special responsibility’ allowances, all paid for by the taxpayer.
And, as Conservatives, we must surely not be afraid to scrutinise that aspect of spending without fear or favour to friends or colleagues. That is our ‘special responsibility’.