General Anaesthetic Taking the edge off.

Define ‘Open’

Douglas Carswell, making a case for Phrenology

The man with a plan, Douglas Carswell’s criticism of The Boy David’s suggestion of “open” primaries is, one thinks, rather hypocritical.

Read what [Milliband] is actually saying, and he’s not backing “open” primaries at all. He wants a system of registered Labour supporting voters, and selection contests to include only them. Far from being “open”, that system is in fact the precise opposite – a “closed primary”.

Yep, agreed. There is nothing open about a system that is limited to card carrying Labour party members, of which there are less than 170,000 across the entire country. [Actually, I'm surprised that the number is that high.]

But just last week Carswell was triumphant about the Tories own implementation of “open” primaries.

Totnes rules! You cannot sabotage an open primary…the Conservative party decided who was on the short-list – and they’d not put anyone on it they’d not be happy to have as a candidate.

That is, a system even more closed than Milliband’s, where only authorised party chumps get on the short-list.

So both parties achieve the same thing. 1. Maintain the status quo as best they can. 2. Do something that has the appearance of change (change you can believe in). 3. Do it differently from the other party so you can call yourself progressive.

It’s all cock.

August 9, 2009, by Jimmy B.
Category: politics | Tagged: david milliband, democracy, douglas carswell, elections, open primaries