"Slave-Grown Bananas"

Not too young, just too stupid

The Spectator earlier added something rather juicy to the moron Labour PPC who's made a total tweeting twat of himself on Twitter.

Gordon Brown is heading to Scotland today and it is hard to see how he can avoid the story of the Labour candidate for Moray and his Tweets. Forget Stuart MacLennan’s foul language, it’s the mindset that his messages reveal that is truly shocking. Take this one from July 8th:“God this fairtrade, organic banana is shit. Can I have a slave-grown, chemically enhanced, genetically modified one please?”

If Labour leave this candidate in place, then they’ll be saying that they think talking about wanting a ‘slave-grown’ banana is acceptable.

This scandal is embarrassing for Labour. A whole slew of senior Labour figures were following MacLennan on Twitter including Sarah Brown, Ed Balls, John Prescott, the Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy and Labour’s Twitter Tsar Kerry McCarthy, although I haven’t been able to establish whether any of them were following MacLennan when the Tweets in question were made.

It most certainly is embarrassing for Twitter-obsessed Labour. And surely it'll make seriously uncomfortable reading for Brown - at least publicly. I strongly suspect this Stuart Maclennan clown is cut from the same cloth as the bullying, smearing, lying Labour leader, however. So in private, no-doubt Brown will wonder what all the fuss is about.

But that won't stop Brown dropping him like a radioactive turd if this gains any more airtime, though.

So bye bye political career before it's started then, Stuart Maclennan. Couldn't have happened to a nicer bloke. You won't be missed.

Update:
Thanks to Adam Collyer for pointing this out to me: he's gone!

That was fast, as in 'feet don't touch the ground' fast.

The next thing is for the Tories to force Brown to make a statement. I want to know if he made the decision to force the stupid boy to resign, or if he will distance himself from it all, just like he did with Draper/McBride. Slightly different case, I know, but the same kind of amoral mindset at work.

Labour's nasty true colours need to be revealed at every opportunity for all the world to see.

Isaby On Grassroots Scrutiny

I wish Jonathan Isaby had written something like this a while ago. It's the first really sensible article on the subject of grassroots Conservative frustrations about the limits placed on their role in the selection of PPCs, which has been highlighted by the recent Liz Truss affair, that's been written. As I said before, I have absolutely nothing against Miss Truss and wish her well in her fight in Norfolk, so I agree with Isaby's first sentiment. But David Cameron, among others, should read what comes after that very carefully.

I am glad that Liz Truss’s status as Conservative candidate for South West Norfolk has been confirmed and trust that this draws a line under the matter.

There is a lesson to be learnt from this whole sorry saga, however. What we have witnessed in the constituency is indicative of a wider malaise and frustration in many local parties about the way the candidate selection process has been changed to restrict the choice of local associations.

Conservative HQ allows just six candidates from a likely field of about 200 in a “safe” seat to be shortlisted for the nomination and would prefer if all six went through to a final selection meeting.

In days gone by, the process would have meant a field of 20 shortlisted candidates whittled down to three or four over a period of weeks, encompassing several interviews. This gave local parties ample opportunity to get to know the people aspiring to represent the constituency in Parliament as well as allowing would-be candidates to establish whether they had “clicked” with the association.

For constituencies selecting a candidate in a seat where an incumbent Conservative MP is standing down, a relationship is beginning that might well last for decades. It is essential that local parties do not feel short-changed when it comes to making that choice.

What is especially disturbing to many at the grass roots is the proposal that in any seat where a sitting Conservative MP announces their retirement after January 1, the association will be given a centrally-imposed shortlist of only three names from which to choose.

Such a step will only breed further dissatisfaction and frustration among the activist base and should be reconsidered.

Furthermore, every sitting Conservative MP should make their intentions clear before Christmas to avoid the scenario where the members who have loyally worked for them over the years have that restrictive shortlist foisted upon them.

There's that phrase "foisted upon them" again. It's slightly disappointing that Isaby does not mention open caucuses (though that is a separate issue, I suppose), but his main points and explanations about an ever-more centralised system of selection that runs a real risk of riding roughshod over the wishes of local associations and their membership and general supporters are powerful and, I submit, should be addressed.

Some kind of reassurance from the almighty Central Office at the very least would be nice.