I have posted here before on the need to scrap the NEC by-election panel.

The embarrassing chaos that has just occurred, and seems to be continuing, in Glasgow East just backs up my earlier points from over a year ago.

All I want is honesty and democracy in our party. And if we can't have democracy (which we don't have) let's have honesty.

The party hierarchy (and I think Ray Collins has failed the membership at the first hurdle here - I assume he was actually on the panel) should stop pretending that these selections have anything to do with real membership choice. Let's just have the hierarchy of the party impose a single candidate for a by-election (especially when they rush the writ) and stop wasting everybody's time with the series of total shams that constitute practically every by-election selection over the last 20 years!

Imposing the preferred candidate directly would, at least, be honest with the party.

Now, and someone should correct me if I'm wrong, but in Glasgow East 3 candidates were shortlisted by the NEC by-election panel. Please correct me if this was the longlist. If they were shortlisted then the NEC panel believed all three were good enough, and if, as happened, one candidate (whoever he/she is) doesn't turn up for the members' selection meeting, then the selection proceeds from the remaining candidates. Obviously they wouldn't have chosen two weaker candidates to go up against a strong, favoured candidate - that would never happen, would it?

If they were not deemed good enough, they shouldn't have been on the shortlist.

By-election selections from an original shortlist of 2 have happened before, in the Birmingham Hodge Hill by-election, for example. So giving the Glasgow East members 2 members to choose from cannot be argued as being too limited a choice for members, unless the rules have changed.

What has happened has let the cat out of the bag as to the real processes and procedures at work.

That we now have the process where 'others' are allowed to enter the fray following a shortlisting and advertised members' selection meeting is laughable.

I know the press doesn't report these things well, and I may have got this all wrong. The Observer reports today that another candidate has announced that she is adding herself to the shortlist. She's not within the rules doing that, the party has just formally announced that the parliamentary selection is now open again, she's put her name forward. Was the rest of the party given this opportunity? But effectively, I strongly suspect, she is adding her name to the shortlist!

If the party hierarchy wants this new candidate, they should simply, as they can, announce her as the candidate and not put the Glasgow East members to the trouble of coming out to vote on these cold July evenings! Obviously I would object on the grounds of democracy, but not on the grounds of honesty.

The By-election and late NEC selections processes are seen and now proven by the Glasgow East nonsense to be completely lacking in integrity and, worse, are part of the processes whereby a small coterie of people at the top of our party arrange the admission of their mates and annointees to that number; it then becomes a self-fulfilling process. It's A Very Labour Coup.

More damage has been done by these processes than the damage perceived to be done by 'inappropriate' selections by CLP members under the old rules. And those allegedly inappropriate selections which brought about the By-election panel procedures in the first place were over 20 years ago, for goodness sake. We still live in a Mandelson-legacy, paranoid party.

The party has had to suffer disastrous decisions by the leadership over the last year. The loss of by-elections recently has not been the fault of the membership who still get trains to Crewe and Glasgow no matter what. And the party is worried that they might lose by-elections because of inappropriate candidate selection by party members! I think we know why the party loses by-elections these days, and it's nothing to do with candidate selection!

The membership through their CLP Contemporary Resolutions last September to conference gave a clear and unambiguous warning to the leadership that the 10p tax proposals were a serious, and (by the way) electorally disastrous mistake which the party was already getting their ears bent on. We warned of the clear and present danger. What did the hierarchy of the party to in response? Ruled them out of order! That speaks volumes for the lack of leadership in our party at the moment.

Add to that the worst political mistake of the century so far in Britain: the on-off general election of November 1st and I believe that the party right from the top is losing touch and needs to start listening very directly to its members instead.

I had thought about posting this after the by-election, but, you know what?, once it's over no-one will be bothered in the party hierarchy. They'll just be glad to put it behind them.

I think we'll win it, just; but if we don't then the lost weekend and how it occurred will need to be subject to a serious enquiry.

In any event, following the by-election I believe Ray Collins should institute an immediate review of the NEC by-election selection processes and bring proposals to Conference for a new settlement - one that actually trusts the membership.

Grim.

The Government has lost Labour popular support right,centre and left.

 The three preceding by-elections will have been a Labour lost seat, a Labour lost deposit and a Labour no-show. Now we nearly have a no-show in Glasgow East!

Labour MPs  were the bulk of those who voted to keep the present MPs stinking expenses system. And the Mail is sniffing around constituency expenses in Glasgow East. Slaeze will be a factor influencing votes.

The SNP are only beginning to look shop-worn. They are still on something of a roll. And Labour voters who do not like the SNP have the LibDems (rising if small previous vote here) and the Tories (no longer just a ghost of the past in Scotland) to go to.

So what might happen?

Labour are going to have a candidate -of some sort.

Anything may be theoretically possible, but a Labour lost deposit here must be at least 100,000 to 1 against.

Coming fourth? A nightmare, but if the NEC messes up the campaign even worse than it has done, that might happen.

Coming third? See above, but there may well be bets placed on that happening.

Coming second? From where we are now that is the least unliklely result.

Holding the seat? That will require a much smoother, far more thorough and more enthusiastic pulling out of the stops than anything the Party has managed so far in 2008.

Alan Cochrane in the Telegraph today says that Labour are about to select Margaret Curran, a former Holyrood minister as their candidate, but just imagine an alternative for a moment.  Instead of an experienced Scottish politician or a local politician with an impressive CV, the Labour Party makes the boldest possible move to avoid defeat and throws this by-election to a politician with one of the biggest media profiles in the country, a large personal following, considerable appeal to working-class voters, and no job at the moment.  Just imagine if Labour were to select Ken Livingstone.  With one bold stroke Brown would have guaranteed the by-election for Labour and ended the speculation that it will prove his death-blow.  And Livingstone would have won a historic by-election, saved the Labour party from ignominy and – perhaps, just perhaps – found his way to a seat at the Cabinet table.

I don’t think it will happen.  But can anyone tell me why it shouldn’t?

To read more of my views link to my blog, Just who the hell are we? on wordpress.com at:

http://adammcnestrie.wordpress.com/