Jim Dowd - Primaries for 2015 please!

[Tim Lund]

Partly my fault, but the current Greyhound thread is in danger of becoming about the deficiencies of our MP, so maybe we can focus on what to do about him here. I think the post quoted below from Rod appalling, and makes me think it's time for anyone round here who'd like to vote Labour in 2015 to demand a better candidate.

In other words, can we have a primary here? It's something Ed Miliband has believed in since at least 2009 - Ed Miliband backs open primaries and just two days ago when he announced a primary would be held to choose Labour's next London Mayoral candidate.

So Admin - how about a poll on this, and also moving some of the posts from that thread over here? I'm going to move what I wrote anyway. I'm not going to go into why I find Jim Dowd's response to Rod so appalling here, except to say that someone who sneers at civil liberties is not safe in any democratic legislature.

If Mr Dowd isn't doing anything for us, isn't it time we voted for an effective candidate irrespective of the colour of their rosette? I really don't give a flying fig for any party to be honest, aside from Blairs first term, I can't remember any government that I thought was doing a good job.

Below is an email that Mr Dowd sent to me 5 years ago, after I wrote him an email on the subject of the Labour Party's proposals for compulsory I.D cards. I had written my M.P a polite and considered message and urged him to reconsider his position on the subject. After several emails from his office trying to establish my residency in his constituency I finally received this;

Dear Constituent,

Now that I have the full details of your address in this constituency please rest assured that I will be replying to you at your home address in the very near future. I hope that you will understand that there are many more of my constituents who have very practical problems in their daily lives to which they have asked me to apply my attention and this I shall do. Once your enquiry becomes the most important issue with which I have to deal, be certain that I will reply.

Regards

Jim Dowd MP

I never heard from him again. I don't doubt his workload but I suspect that in the last 5 years there may have been an occasion when he could have provided me with a response. I can only presume that my email never became the most important issue he had to deal with.

[Tim Lund]

What I wrote on the Greyhound thread which I'm now moving here:

It may well be that Mr Dowd is a brilliant local MP,

It's worth questioning whether being a brilliant local MP is all that brilliant. Obviously it's great to have someone acting as a sort of local ombudsman, but are such people right for choosing the country's political leader, which is formally what we have now. It might have been once, when electors had much stronger local identities, and were less well informed about national issues, but no longer. Instead, we now have strong national parties who primarily demand loyalty of MPs, and being a good local MP is something which is nice to have, but definitely not required. It might also get in the way of some things we'd like MPs to do, e.g. hold the government to account. I think Margaret Hodge is doing a fantastic job as chair of the public accounts committee, and I really would not like to see her deselected if she happens not to be such a good local MP - not saying she isn't, but it's not going to be her main focus.

There's an interesting looking headline in today's Times - but with the actual article behind the paywall

It’s unavoidable: we need a directly elected PM

The party system is crumbling. More primaries and less biddable politicians will lead to a constitutional revolution

but I know of no reason why. When I lived in Devon my local MP was Nick Harvey who was very good, engaged, had good ideas and seemed to actually get stuff done. Perhaps it's just that Mr Dowd is a poor communicator, or that the local Labour party isn't getting his message out. I know Labour has the most disciples around these parts, surely they can jump to his defence?

Some links relevant to Jim's parliamentary career:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4423152.stm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/colum ... Kevan.html

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehous ... ling-with/

We should question our local representatives and no just vote for a colour. Parties are made up of people. We need more Mo Mowlams. I'd have voted for her whatever the colour of her rosette.

But aren't rosette colours also political brands, which can stand for values? I still think they do, as it happens, even if they are all a bit tarnished. I think brands - parties when it comes to voting - are an inevitable part of human nature, and it's unrealistic to imagine they won't be there. It's no good just wanting politicians to be 'good'; there are so many competing 'goods'. The Labour Party brand, I'd say, is built round the idea of solidarity with the weaker members of society, which I think we can all sympathise with. The Conservative and Lib Dem brands are more to do with freedom - letting people do what they want with their own lives, although the Conservatives idea of freedom is a bit contingent on people wanting to do things traditional ways. Most of us should be able to sympathise with these.

[alywin]

I for one would welcome a chance to vote for someone else, because my choices seem to be narrowing almost by the day, and there's no way I can vote for Dowd. But even more, I'd like the constituencies put back to what they were a few years ago, because I really see no point in having this stupid constituency whatever it's called that we're currently in, which stretches over I think 3 different Borough boundaries and is totally counter-intuitive. All it did, as far as I was concerned, was to shift me from a Tory safe seat into a Labour safe seat, so my vote has no more chance of having an effect now than it did then.

[gerispringer]

I have lived in the constituency for ages and have never seen Jim Dowd apart from once when he was incredibly rude to me. Id love to vote for someone else.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Tim Lund]

I'm pleased to say there is at least one Lewisham Labour Councillor who agrees

[Tim Lund]

I'd like the constituencies put back to what they were a few years ago, because I really see no point in having this stupid constituency whatever it's called that we're currently in, which stretches over I think 3 different Borough boundaries and is totally counter-intuitive.

I sympathise, but don't agree. Not all the areas people naturally identify with have the same number of voters, so some awkward constituencies such as ours are the cost of equal representation across the country. If it was only a question of voting for a good local ombudsman rather than MP, it wouldn't matter. Another argument why "It’s unavoidable: we need a directly elected PM"

[Robin Orton]

Another argument why It’s unavoidable: we need a directly elected PM.

No we don't. Direct elections are only appropriate if the head of state is also the head of the Government, as in the USA or France. The Queen is our head of state; her chief adviser, that is, the head of her Government, is accountable to an elected House of Commons. That's the way we do things here.

[Tim Lund]

Another argument why It’s unavoidable: we need a directly elected PM.

No we don't. Direct elections are only appropriate if the head of state is also the head of the Government, as in the USA or France. The Queen is our head of state; her chief adviser, that is, the head of her Government, is accountable to an elected House of Commons. That's the way we do things here.

The ultimate parochial, reactionary argument, on which reasoning, Magna Carta wasn't "the way we did things here", in 1215. Bring back the Normal Yoke, I hear you cry - or are you even more antediluvian than that?

[Eagle]

Alwyin
We would have lost Penge etc if the undemocratic Liberals and Labour had not voted the change down. We would also have had 50 less MP's .
But hey when it comes to wasting our money Lib and Lab at the top of the pile.

Not sure about Primaries. Trouble is that this and many other constituencies would elect a monkey if they were from the correct party.
I know we had good old John Maples as MP up to 92 but the demographics have dramatically changed since last non Labour victory of 87.

It is like The USA where you know most of the States are red or blue and nothing will change them.. About 5 to 10 possible swing states at most.

I cannot believe JD will stand again but surely what we do not want again is someone from the local political cabal at the town hall ( as was JD ).
He did not look very impressive asking a question about 3 weeks ago. Infact far from it.

[Tim Lund]

Not sure about Primaries. Trouble is that this and many other constituencies would elect a monkey if they were from the correct party.

That's the point. It gives voters with a particular idea of what is 'the correct party' the chance to choose themselves a better class of monkey.

[Eagle]

But would not all Labour Party Primary aspirants be approved by the central committee at the Town Hall or in The Catford Ram.
We would simply get people who had never had a proper job , probably members of Unite etc etc etc.

[Tim Lund]

Well, they might, and if they did, they'd be blowing their chance to make a change from the current way of doing things - sorry about that Robin. I agree that there would always be a tendency for insider groups to stitch things up, but as things stand, political parties are withering away.

[Robin Orton]

Direct elections are only appropriate if the head of state is also the head of the Government, as in the USA or France. The Queen is our head of state; her chief adviser, that is, the head of her Government, is accountable to an elected House of Commons. That's the way we do things here.

The ultimate parochial, reactionary argument, on which reasoning, Magna Carta wasn't "the way we did things here", in 1215. Bring back the Normal Yoke, I hear you cry - or are you even more antediluvian than that?

The Great Charter was a good thing, in that it was (or has traditionally been presented as) a significant milestone in the process of making the relationships between government and governed in England subject to the rule of law. Making the office of Prime Minister a directly elected one would, on the other hand, be a bad thing. This is because it would entrench the inroads of the ghastly modern cult of 'celebrity' into our political system. Instead of choosing between the policies of the different parties, like grown-ups, we would become infantilised - we would be invited to choose a Mummy or Daddy figure, on the basis of how nice we thought they were (i.e. how well they performed on telly.)

[leenewham]

Why do you think people choose the parties based on policies Robin? I think people have voted for the party they 'feel' they can trust since I can remember (the first election I remember was 1979.

If people voted on policies, they would advertise them. But ever since the 'Labour isn't working' campaign, all parties do is try to make the others unelectable with negative campaigning. Labour don't appear to have ANY policies right now. All the manifestos go out of the window once parties get elected.

People ALREADY vote based on emotion rather than rational thought, partly through fear of what the other parties might do.

[Robin Orton]

Lee, I agree that they way people vote will in practice largely be decided on the basis of which party they trust most, and indeed of their assessment of the character of the party leader. That's not unreasonable in itself. But I still think a healthy democracy is one in which people are able to choose between different policies, and I'd be suspicious of any move, such as direct election of the PM, which made it less likely that policy issues were relevant to people's choices.

I always read the main parties' manifestos before deciding how to vote in general elections, particularly now they're only a couple of mouse clicks away. I can't believe I'm alone.

You say that 'all the manifestos go out of the window once parties get elected.' I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. Obviously the current coalition means that both Tories and Lib Dems have had to jettison things they would otherwise have wanted to do. (You might have mentioned the opposite case, when the Government introduces a measure such as same sex marriage which was in the manifesto of neither party. But let's not go there.)

[Tim Lund]

The only manifesto I've ever read was from 1848

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[leenewham]

Wow, what moisteriser do you use Tim?

[Robin Orton]

The only manifesto I've ever read was from 1848

Not yet fully implemented, I think, but no doubt you're continuing with the struggle, Tim.

[Tim Lund]

La lotta continua ...

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[catfordlad]

When I first moved to Catford in 2002 from Wales I contacted Jim Dowd by email and letter about some very serious personal and local issues that I required help with.

I would wait around two - three months for a reply to any communication. I tried to contact his Constituency Office but the phone was never answered by a human and the number for his House of Commons Office is diverted to his Constituency Office. The voicemail does not allow messages to be left.

I have never met Mr Dowd in person until very recently. I was sitting in the waiting room at the Dermatology Department at King's College Hospital and noticed a large man standing at the reception desk. I heard the receptionist say have a seat Mr Dowd. I recognised him from photographs. Mr Dowd ended up sitting next to me in the waiting room. He pulled out his smartphone and appeared to be surfing the net. I'm sorry but I couldn't help myself I had to tell him who I was and moan about his failure to represent constituents etc. He came across as very aggressive and unhelpful but I felt better telling him what I thought of him.

I also made a point of saying that thanks to the boundary changes my MP is now Heidi Alexander who is very efficient. The last time I contacted Heidi's Office she fired off an email immediately to the Government Department I was having problems with. I also note that Heidi is very active on Twitter and makes a habit of engaging with constituents. I accept that Heidi is a new MP and probably very enthusiastic but this does not excuse the likes of Dowd who is rude and arrogant and should be replaced at the next election.