Subscribe to our feed
Follow us on twitter
Listen to the podcast
Andrew Robinson
John Barron
Philip HuntFinding Candidates and Targets
20th September 2009 19:41 | by Eric Priezkalns
About once a week somebody will ask a question about which parliamentary seats the party should fight at the general election. Raising funds is vital to determining how many seats we can fight, but there is every likelihood that we will need to focus our energies on particular seats instead of trying to fight too many and losing a lot of deposits. That makes it absolutely vital that we make the best choice of which seats to fight. However, for a party concerned with information politics, we lack some of the information we would like. We can speculate about where we might get the most votes, but without polling data, it will be a guess. For example, university towns often get cited as likely targets. On the other hand, most PPUK members are too old to be students, and if the membership is representative of our voters we must have plenty of support off campus as well as on.
Some suggest a different kind of strategy. We could compete with certain kinds of high profile MPs. For example, we could run against unpopular MPs who abused their expenses. Another suggestion is to focus on marginals. In a close race, the switch of votes to PPUK could change the result and hence magnify the press attention for the party. It will also make the other parties take our issues seriously, which is a key goal.
There is one thing we know without needing to speculate or hypothesize about strategy - where our members are. This is important, as fighting elections cannot be done through national media coverage and internet campaigning alone. We need volunteers out on the streets, supporting our candidate. As you might expect, we have most supporters in the biggest towns. Looking a little more deeply, we can see clusters of members in slightly smaller towns, giving us a better concentration of potentially active campaigners. York, Cambridge, St. Albans and Leicester all have relatively high numbers of PPUK members, suggesting we should prioritize them in the search for target seats. Looking a little bigger, PPUK also has relative dense pockets of support in Edinburgh and Leeds. As you would expect, there are many members in London, so we can take advantage of the density of the population and aim to fight several seats in the capital. Between now and election day, the most important thing is to develop the teams on the ground, and if it looks like there is a fabulous group of supporters in the constituency of Ross, Skye and Lochaber or in Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire, then that would be a very good reason to run candidates there.
The other thing currently unknown is the quality and location of our best prospective candidates. But we can all work to solve that problem. We are not a party of careerist politicians like Labour or the Conservatives, who parachute in favoured candidates into their safest seats, irrespective of the fact that their candidate has hardly any connection with the people they are supposed to represent. Even the Greens have gone down that route, by handing their most winnable seat to their party leader. Unlike other parties with established hierarchies, PPUK needs popular and charismatic individuals to step forward, and not wait to be approached. Individuals with the skills, passion and commitment to convey the importance of pirate politics to a sometimes sceptical world cannot afford to wait for the party to find them or wait for a process to officially pick candidates, as we will only know where to fight based on the data we have. Likely candidates need to make themselves known and to come to the fore now, and to do so by building the local teams of supporters. Think of it like this: who would make the better candidate out of an individual who persuades a dozen friends to form a constituency party and start active campaigning, or somebody who hopes that fellow pirates will get the ball rolling in their region? We do not have a selection process yet, but I believe a good selection process would recognize the efforts made to launch and build local teams of supporters who will be the ones doing the legwork come election day. It is not long until the next general election, so let us all take the initiative and build a party that can pose a real challenge on election day!
15 comments
Should we be looking to contest several seats on the capital, or should we be looking to contest only a couple, and get all London pirates to get behind these campaigns? This would then free up funds to get candidates into other areas. You can help a candidate with their campaign even of you don't live in that constituency. I live 30 miles from Edinburgh, but would offer help to an Edinburgh candidate, and I would encourage all pirates to help out their nearest candidate if their own constituency is not being contested.
We don't want to spread our weight too thin. Given that no-one will be prepared to travel any further than the nearest metropolis, I say one candidate in each of Leeds, London and Edinburgh. We don't have the cash to contest many seats, and actually make an impact. It costs £250 deposit to contest just one seat. Realistically we aren't going to get back those deposits, first election we contest.
In terms of which seats to contest, ideally, I reckon Lib Dem, 'Guardian' Labour, (and Green) seats. The 'Lib' part of Lib Dem will make them amenable to our message, and Greens are already prepared to think outside the box. Meanwhile 'Guardian' (and The Independent) Labour voters will at-least be prepared to listen to our intellectual argument. Here's the problem, there aren't many Lib Dem seats, there's no Green seats, and identifying which Labour seats are suitable is a challenge.
It's £500 a deposit.
Given that over 10% of the UK population live in London, we should definitely contest a London seat, and have all the London-based pirates converge on there to deliver leaflets and campaign.
In terms of picking which types of seats to challenge, if we go for a marginal the best that can happen is that no-one, except the party faithful, votes for us, seeing us as a wasted vote. The worst that can happen is that we act as a spoiler for a big party, and make a very nasty, and very powerful enemy. Thus, I think safe seats are best. People will be confident in voting for us, and we can get a good headline figure; something to brag about. We might even keep our deposits...
London seats:
-Twickenham : Incredibly safe Lib Dem seat. It's Vince Cable's seat, so we're guarenteed a name-check on TV, if nothing else. -Hornsey and Wood Green : Moderately marginal Lib Dem seat. With Labour in second, it's only right-leaning Lib Dems that mightn't feel comfortable switching (which is an issue, but I'm not so sure they're really our potential vote). There's a strongish Green vote to tap into. -Kingston and Surbiton : Safe Lib Dem seat, only problem is that the Tories are the 2nd place party; will left-leaning Lib Dem voters feel safe switching their votes? -North Southwark and Bermondsey : Safe Lib Dem seat, however, is this more down to Simon Hughes personal popularity than really libertarian tendencies in the constituency? -Richmond Park : Safe Lib Dem seat, but we still have the Tories in 2nd problem. -Sutton and Cheam : Fairly safe Lib Dem seat, but again, with the Tories in second how comfortable are left-leaning Libs going to feel?
Leeds seats:
Leeds North West : It's a Lib Dem seat, but definately marginal. Conversely, the Greens had an alright showing. Leeds West : Safe Labour seat, with a lot of potential. There's a good showing for the Lib Dems and the Greens. My only real concern with this seat is the risk of getting beaten by the BNP, and that being the headline result for the PPUK. Leeds East : Another safe Labour, with the Lib Dems in second. Unlike Leeds West, there's no BNP showing (at least, there wasn't in 2005). Somehow I just don't feel like this seat looks like it's prepared to think radically. Since 1997 only 2962 (total) votes have been cast for non-Lib,Lab,Con parties. When allowing for the fact most of those votes were for xenophobic parties, I'm not altogether sure we'll be well received.
Edinburgh seats:
Edinburgh West : Safe Lib Dem seat. This is an issue with all Scottish seats, but with 4 'big' parties contesting the seat, isn't there a risk of little parties being drowned out? Edinburgh South-West : Safe Labour seat, currently belonging to Alistair Darling. That's a definite name check on TV. Edinburgh East : Safe Labour seat, with a good showing for the Lib Dems and the Scottish Greens.
Out of this list, for London; 'Twickenham' and 'Hornsey and Wood Green' look to be our best bets. If anyone can find more comprehensive data on Labour seats, or even the Lib Dem seats, I'd be more than happy to help analyse it.
For Leeds; 'Leeds North West' looks to be the best bet.
For Edinburgh; 'Edinburgh West' or 'Edinburgh South-West' are the better options.
I live in Leeds North West, and am fully prepared to help campaign etc. We have a huge throughput of students in Headingley, but we're also home to many more ex-students, liberals and other groups sympathetic to PPUK.
I'm involved in a few community tech-oriented initiatives here in Leeds - http://leeds.hackspace.org.uk and http://openleeds.org.uk
I am also keen to promote PPUK within the universities as well. Any locals feel free to get in touch!
Hey, I live in Twickenham :-)
Yes, it's a good place, probably, especially if St Vincent's crown slips (which it well might). We also have a university campus (St Mary's)
Perhaps we should have a Twickenham Constituency meet up.
We could have it my back room. Once I have moved the remote off the sofa. :-)
I don't think we should treat these as the decided seats. My methodology for choosing seats was basic, and my data limited. This is just a first stab at the problem.
That said, I shall be very surprised if Twickenham and Leeds North-West aren't on the short-list of seats.
The post also raised another issue that I think ought to be addressed, and it's a harder one; what sort of candidate to field.
I might be biased here, but I think a student is best. To 'proper' grown-ups, it makes us look young and dynamic (which we are... but that's not the point). To students it makes us look like 'one of them' (which we are... and that is the point). It's cynical, but we might get some students simply voting for another student (although hopefully they'd be sympathetic to the party's message).
There's a clear case for countering the idea that we're a bunch of young idealists, by fielding an older candidate. But honestly, I think we need to play to our strengths.
A Twickenham Meet will happen on 12 Oct
http://www.pirateparty.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=855
There will ne
What sort of money are we talking about? How much would it take, realistically, to contest a city or surburban seat? - Deposit - Printing - Postage - Website I am assuming there are no central funds to draw upon, and each candidate will need to raise his/her own cash?
Perhaps this is the role for the central coordinator - to try and compile a campaign plan that a prospective candidate could adapt for their own constituency.