Marple Website Community Calendar
Archive => Archived Boards => Hazel Grove Elections May 2015 => Topic started by: admin on April 12, 2015, 08:51:34 AM
-
The organisers of the Hustings at Marple Methodist Church on Thursday 23rd April have confirmed that it is open to the general public and the more promotion it gets the better.
It takes place at Marple Methodist Church on Church Lane starting at 7.30pm.
They are asking "Please hand in your questions for the candidates in writing before 7.15pm at the Church on the night."
(http://www.marplebusinessforum.co.uk/images/stories/mbf-husting.jpg)
Two more possible hustings opportunities to see the candidates in action are:
Dialstone Lane Methodist Church: Sat 18th April: 10.00am Dialstone Lane Methodist Church, 161 Dialstone Lane, Offerton, Stockport SK2 7LQ
Churches Together in Marple: Thurs 23rd April: 7.30pm Marple Methodist Church, Church Lane, Stockport SK6 7AY
I've emailed the Marple Church to see if the general public are welcome to attend and will let you know the response.
-
Maybe we could suggest some questions on here. Here's mine...
It appears that FPTP will, for the second successive election, fail to deliver it's primary objective of a majority government. Worse still, judging by the comments on this site, millions of voters will be casting their votes based on who they don't want to see elected rather than who they support. Is it time to adopt a more equitable voting system?
If we could start with the Labour candidate who's party have supported electoral reform since Ramsay MacDonald was a lad but failed to deliver it despite spending 30 years in government since then. Mr Taylor - Is there a certain irony with your situation here in Hazel Grove given that Labour have been the main beneficiaries of the two-party system for the last 40-odd years?
-
Oh I like that Disgusted. +1
-
I wholeheartedly support Disgusted's question. Seriously this should be asked.
-
We, the people, were asked our opinion on this back in 2011 and we voted 68:32 against.
-
the key word in the question is "equitable" Bowden. AV was an alternative vote, not an equal one.
-
We, the people, were asked our opinion on this back in 2011 and we voted 68:32 against.
You know very well what was presented to us was not PR and the Tory backwoodsmen worked to undermine the referendum.
-
I recall the LibDems were proposing STV rather than the inferior AV prior to the 2010 election. Another one that Mr. Stunell and his crack negotiating team didn't quite pull off.
-
I would like to ask the Labour candidate how it feels being parachuted into Hazel Grove very much at the last minute as Labour very much second best candidate. The candidate who won the original selection Cllr Laura Booth left the Labour Party due to their bullying and intolerance towards the disabled. So whats it like being considered second best even by your own party is what I would like to ask the Labour candidate as I think the internal termoil they are in locally says a great deal about them.
-
Maybe we could suggest some questions on here. Here's mine...
It appears that FPTP will, for the second successive election, fail to deliver it's primary objective of a majority government. Worse still, judging by the comments on this site, millions of voters will be casting their votes based on who they don't want to see elected rather than who they support. Is it time to adopt a more equitable voting system?
This election, like all general elections is not about who forms the government. It is purely and simply about who we want to represent this constituency in the house of commons. The current system does that well. It's also worth remembering that we are not voting for parties; we are voting for individuals. That's why is is good to get the chance to have the candidates together so we can see and judge them. No other system is as good as the present one. The only improvement to be made is to ensure that constituencies are arranged along sensible boundaries. Currently, I think the constituencies are too large and most cover areas which do not really belong together. Changing this would of course mean more MPs, but I think that is a price worth paying to have MPs who represent more logical areas.
-
Good post and welcome Condate
-
I would like to ask the Labour candidate how it feels being parachuted into Hazel Grove
Unlikely he needed a parachute for Hazel Grove. The 375 bus would have been adequate. You must be thinking of a different candidate!
-
It is purely and simply about who we want to represent this constituency in the house of commons. The current system does that well.
Couldn't agree less. Thousands in this constituency will vote for Wragg or Smart rather than the candidate they would prefer but who "can't win here". That is a direct result of FPTP and single-MP constituencies.
It's also worth remembering that we are not voting for parties; we are voting for individuals. That's why is is good to get the chance to have the candidates together so we can see and judge them.
Couldn't agree more. Here's hoping it makes a difference.
-
Unlikely he needed a parachute for Hazel Grove. The 375 bus would have been adequate. You must be thinking of a different candidate!
No definitley not. Had to be parachuted in at the last minutes when Labours selected and prefered candidate announced she could stomach the party no longer
-
Well, it was a little dull wasn't it? I know it's in a church but the god related questions weren't really the issues of the day.
I think it needed to allow more banter from the floor.
I was surprised how well the ukip chap did. I disagree with him on immigration and the EU but made good points. William wragg has a good self deprecating SOH which is unusual for politics. Lisa smart was professional but lacked a sense of fun, Michael used his experience of working an audience- shame about the policies. The Green guy was a bit like the leadership, not so strong on figures.
-
As Duke says a little bit 'dull' or as one audience member said 'sterile.'
All candidates showed qualities: All were confident without being arrogant.
Lisa: a bit boring but very professional.
Michael: an audience player, but a good one and passionate too.
Darren: Made some good points, has a strong physical presence.
William: Witty and interesting.
Graham: Short on detail but strong on sincerity.
Congratulations to all candidates, a good overall performance.
Arrived undecided and left the same way.
-
The hustings was a little dull and I find myself actually agreeing with Duke mainly on his appraisal. Michael Taylor did show the most vigour and showed himself as an excellent speaker. (Liked the policies too!) The dominance of church groups meant an older audience profile so issues, as questions were handed in at the door, such as youth unemployment and related topics didn't get a mention as my son pointed out. In all, it was an excellent opportunity to get a flavour of the candidates.
-
No definitley not. Had to be parachuted in at the last minutes when Labours selected and prefered candidate announced she could stomach the party no longer
Misleading terminology there, wheels.
Wikipedia : "A parachute candidate, also known as a “carpetbagger” in the United States, is a pejorative term for an election candidate who does not live in and has little connection to the area he or she is running to represent. "
After all, it's not like he's lived in Putney for ten years until recently, is it ? ;)
-
I didn't think it dull at all. It was very interesting and there were a lot of good questions and revealing answers.
-
Here are some photos from the Methodist Church Hustings taken by Arthur. There's a few more on the Virtual Tour too:
http://visitmarple.co.uk/photos/thumbnails.php?album=lastup&cat=-36
(https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/11161358_826028820817873_397256758551185858_n.jpg?oh=8bcce2ef957e2765a11e09ab29203f90&oe=55D76D4A)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/10492478_826029024151186_8867682860109279267_n.jpg?oh=49cbcf2f16bdf08e32a3cff951e47f6a&oe=55D06D22&__gda__=1436678059_6d137206b55d89ae7558e05c869db843)
(https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/11178375_826029064151182_4909315409278449422_n.jpg?oh=143969f2ae60ede7ba1e03522afb00cd&oe=559DC57F)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xtf1/v/t1.0-9/10995999_826029094151179_8684506181290430546_n.jpg?oh=b5749ceae3ecb4db33de8fe3434b3b32&oe=55D810A7&__gda__=1440314108_fe59e0449b3ec1d84b5ef6769afb86e1)
(https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/11058716_826029110817844_945768705957825543_n.jpg?oh=2e6fde5bfd9341dd9245df0ade0ec332&oe=55D66A19)
(https://scontent-lhr.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xft1/v/t1.0-9/11150152_826029074151181_9204972554308652478_n.jpg?oh=91c77837fbd53c423384255cdf6cc474&oe=55D77DF8)
-
I didn't think it dull at all. It was very interesting and there were a lot of good questions and revealing answers.
It was worth attending. Both the hustings I attended had some strange questions which I'm sure aren't on the majorities' lips. We were taken back to 1967 with a debate on abortion which got some pretty strange responses from all except Lisa Smart. I was at the dialstone lane hustings and the biggest debate was around nuclear disarmament! Weirdly, I was the only one who clapped the ukip suggestion that having a nuclear deterrent has been a good thing - people are not of the real world sometimes.
-
You're right Duke, they are not.
Did attending the hustings better inform your opinion about the candidates?
I just thought that most of them seemed able and sincere in their own way. One thing though that puzzles me about the Liberal Democrats, it is more about the party than the candidate, for as I say Lisa seems sincere and able. Why though, select her in the first place? She is obviously not local no matter how many leaflets say that she is. Whereas all the other candidates obviously are. As I have said previously 'local' doesn't matter that much to me but it obviously does to many. So, why put your candidacy at a disadvantage in the first place, why not just select somebody that is local. It seems to me that they have scored a massive own goal!
Does anybody understand their apparent illogic?
-
Both the hustings I attended had some strange questions which I'm sure aren't on the majorities' lips. We were taken back to 1967 with a debate on abortion which got some pretty strange responses from all except Lisa Smart.
For a great many people, issues such as abortion are very much the major issues in this and every election. It's one of the reasons I could never vote for a Lib Dem candidate (with one or two historical exceptions who were anti-abortion). The main parties don't seem to realise what the main issues really are for a huge number of people.
-
And yet, strangely, the issue you focus on never makes the top ten issues mentioned by people when they are polled?
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3542/EconomistIpsos-MORI-March-2015-Issues-Index.aspx
-
But Simone Stunell was never local he lived in Chester previous to being selected and was a councillor there. I might argue that I would rather have a none local candidate than one who has never got off their backside and moved around a fair bit.
-
And yet, strangely, the issue you focus on never makes the top ten issues mentioned by people when they are polled?
O Tempora! O Mores!
-
Thank you for raising the tone, Condate. I've always thought that we don't have enough Latin on this forum!
-
You're right Duke, they are not.
Did attending the hustings better inform your opinion about the candidates?
I just thought that most of them seemed able and sincere in their own way. One thing though that puzzles me about the Liberal Democrats, it is more about the party than the candidate, for as I say Lisa seems sincere and able. Why though, select her in the first place? She is obviously not local no matter how many leaflets say that she is. Whereas all the other candidates obviously are. As I have said previously 'local' doesn't matter that much to me but it obviously does to many. So, why put your candidacy at a disadvantage in the first place, why not just select somebody that is local. It seems to me that they have scored a massive own goal!
Does anybody understand their apparent illogic?
Was graham Reid a postman not had any leaflets through door for him so I don't know .my votes gone anyway .posted Monday
-
Wheels, that was almost twenty years ago. The electorate has become more interested in locality than it once was.
I personally support you argument about local/non local. However, I know a lot that don't and even you, I'm sure would admit that not being local is a vote loser.
My point is why would they put themselves at such a disadvantage from the offset? Especially when the incumbent is standing down and all the other candidates are local. Why didn't they just select a real local candidate in the first place. It can't have been that difficult to do.
-
Simone the members not the organisation select and clearly LS impressed at the hustings more than any local candidates. But like you for me its not an issue in fact my slight preference is for someone who has lived in many different communities.
-
Stockport Express highlighted the hypocrisy of the Tory campaign when it was pointed out that most of their other candidates in Greater Manchester weren't local to their intended seats.
Surely local council elections are where this is most important.
-
For a great many people, issues such as abortion are very much the major issues in this and every election. It's one of the reasons I could never vote for a Lib Dem candidate (with one or two historical exceptions who were anti-abortion). The main parties don't seem to realise what the main issues really are for a huge number of people.
Way at was interesting was the response to the abortion question in that all except Lisa, clearly disregarded / disagreed with their party line. Wragg was close but Michael was almost weirdly evangelical anti-abortion with the Green guy not far behind, neither party iirc have any intention of restrictioning access to abortion.
Personally I think it's a daft idea to force girls to have children when they are not emotionally, economically, intellectually cultuvated or have an adequate relationship/Family back up to bring up children successfully. There may be an argument to reducing the cut off limit though.
Both Lisa and William missed an opportunity to remind the audience that they have greatly improved the adoption process where it's no longer the daunting protracted process it once was.
-
Stockport Express highlighted the hypocrisy of the Tory campaign when it was pointed out that most of their other candidates in Greater Manchester weren't local to their intended seats.
Surely local council elections are where this is most important.
Because Stockport express is Always straight down the middle an unbiased
-
Michael was almost weirdly evangelical anti-abortion
Because he's a committed Catholic and has regularly stated he would vote along with his moral view rather than than on the party line on this issue, should there ever be any opportunity to do so.
-
Because he's a committed Catholic and has regularly stated he would vote along with his moral view rather than than on the party line on this issue, should there ever be any opportunity to do so.
One of the most important aspects of the hustings was to find out where the candidates differed from the party line. Obviously, as a Catholic, I agree with Michael Taylor on abortion and I would have hoped for the same line from the others (as I disagree with Labour policies in other areas sufficiently to make it unlikely I could vote for any of their candidates). It's events like this that really allow voters to find out what the candidates as individuals believe. Incidentally, since I've made it clear before that I regard abortion as a major election issue, I should point out it wasn't me who put that question forward at the hustings, although I did put the question quoting Gilbert & Sullivan!
-
As far as I am aware there is no party policy from any of the major parties on abortion.
There is a current law which offers a maximum termination time and some MP'S are in favour of altering it whereas other are not. There is though no political whipping involved in such debates and thus far any voting has been seen as an individual conscience vote.
-
Because he's a committed Catholic and has regularly stated he would vote along with his moral view rather than than on the party line on this issue, should there ever be any opportunity to do so.
To be honest, I've never got the idea that your own thoughts were dictated by an argument over an imaginary friend, i certainly don't want my government dictated by such mumbo jumbo.
-
To be honest, I've never got the idea that your own thoughts were dictated by an argument over an imaginary friend, i certainly don't want my government dictated by such mumbo jumbo.
I'm with you there, @Duke Fame. Personally, I'd like to see a complete separation of church and state including and end to the 26 unelected bishops in the House of Lords. I'd be very happy to see a completely secular government.
-
Personally, I'd like to see a complete separation of church and state including and end to the 26 unelected bishops in the House of Lords. I'd be very happy to see a completely secular government.
I'll sing Hallelujah to that. ;) And while we're at it, let's scrap the House of Lords as well.
-
I'll sing Hallelujah to that. ;) And while we're at it, let's scrap the House of Lords as well.
Whilst it's logical to scrap the HOL, it does seem to work pretty well.
-
The church, 12 billion pounds in hedge funds and they still ask for donations on a Sunday morning.
-
I'll sing Hallelujah to that. ;) And while we're at it, let's scrap the House of Lords as well.
Ah yes, House of Lords reform. Another one of the policies the LibDems thought they had agreement on in 2010 but which have been watered down, or in this case reneged on, in the intervening years.
-
Yes. It's what happens when you have a weak prime minister with no control over his backbenchers.
-
Dave isn't weak now though Dave, there has been a transformation and he's all 'pumped up' and ready to go.
-
Yes, it's an astonishing transformation, from the seven-stone weakling who has sand kicked in his face on the beach to this: http://www.charlesatlas.com/ :)