You are here: Home » Comment »

First Bob, now Alan – change this farcical legislation NOW and let these candidates stand

August 10, 2012 12:27 pm

Author:

Tags:

Share this Article

Yesterday I wrote about the case of Bob Ashford. I was angry (very angry) and upset that a good man was forced to step down from an election that he could win thanks to a minor event that happened nearly fifty years ago. Today the same thing has happened again. This is getting ridiculous now – it’s an affront to our democracy and the law needs to be changed.

I had known, of course, that it was possible other candidates would suffer the same ridiculous and farcical fate that Bob had. In fact I was aware that the Labour Party were contacting all PCCs to find out if anyone else was similarly affected. But I was still shocked to discover this morning that Alan Charles will now be stepping down as Labour’s PCC candidate for Derbyshire.

Everything I said about Bob yesterday could also be said of Alan. He is an exceptional candidate with an excpetional track record. He would have been a great candidate, and he would have added a great deal to Derbyshire police. Now, thanks to an event a lifetime ago, he can’t.

[Update: Top of the Cops suggests that Alan Charles could still be Labour's candidate.]

What kind of Kafka-esque democracy are we running here exactly? Both Bob and Alan could have run for parliament and become Prime Minister, but neither can oversee their local police force. Farce, Farce, Farce – and offensive to the voters to argue that they can’t tell the difference between 50 year old “crimes” and more serious adult criminal acts.

It’s time to stop treating the electorate like kids and change the law so that people like Bob and Alan can stand. There should be an emergency bill to be introduced on 3rd September with cross-party agreement to amend the law – in the hope that no-one else is made to sufer in this way. Had anyone been bold enough to suggest this and gather cross party support then Bob and Alan might still be candidates today.

But it’s already too late. This process has made the already much maligned PCC election into a huge joke – albeit a one with serious consequences. Laws written in haste have excluded great candidates, and all the parties seem able to do is to have the candidates stand down, rather than fight this unjust law.

Which is just a bit weak really, isn’t it?

Related posts:

  1. Alan Milburn to stand down at next election
  2. The way we nominate our leadership candidates must change
  3. Alan Keen MP dies, aged 73
  4. Tory candidates sent to learn about climate change – 8 in the morning, January 19th
  5. Alan Milburn’s appointment is a great advert for Labour
  • treborc

    We were bring up the same problems when labour brought up the CRB checks, I myself had to seek a review  because I  was  found with an air rifle when I was twelve in the woods shooting at targets , the case did not come to court, but it was held on file.

    I needed my CRB check to  work in coaching unpaid of course and it took six months to get it over turned.

    If your going to review it then review the whole area

    • Andwhynot

      Doesn’t it all smack of a police state ? A few years back when reversing from a tight space my car TOUCHED the bumper of the car behind. Clearly there was no damage so I drove away only to be stopped by a policeman 50 yards further on who arrested me for leaving the scene of an accident. The case went to court and I was advised that as technically the incident did occur I should plead guilty. The magistrate accepted my plea commented that the case was ludicrous and wanted to acquit me but the court official reminded him that on a guilty plea there was a minimum 5 point penalty and fine which he very reluctantly handed down. I was then advised that this class of crime meant that I had to have finger prints taken, photographed and DNA sample taken and this would be kept on the national criminal database. Suffice to say I have a very dim view of policing in Britain and if ever fortunate enough to be in a position to assist the police in their enquiries I will conveniently forget. We live in a police state and it is getting worse. The punishment no longer fits the crime.

      • KonradBaxter

        We do not live in a Police state. To say so is absurd.

        We do however live in a state which has vastly increased Police powers very much open to wide interpretation and abuse thanks to Labour. Far too many laws, far too much snooping, far too much overkill.

        • Dave Postles

          Please inform the current Home Secretary and Sec. of State for the Justice Ministry. 

        • Derek

          So Konrad when does it become a police state ? You seem to acknowledge that they have too much power. They can confiscate money which you then have to prove is yours – in essence overturning the innocent until proven guilty principle. Under terrorists laws their powers to enter premises and detain citizens are extreme. When police can push a man to the ground who subsequently dies through unlawful killing and the officer is found innocent by jury; when a citizen is shot by police who then hide behind the vail of national security; I fear that when the police are not answerable it smacks of a police state as I said before – I didn’t actually say it is a police state, yet.

          • KonradBaxter

            So you are Andwhynot and DEREK?  Because the former said “We live in a police state and it is getting worse”.
             
            Yes, they do have too much power – as do some others – but they are controlled by a civilian government in a western liberal democracy and change their policing based on legislation. We still have a clear distinction between the law and the political power of the government. Cameron can’t just order the police to arrest Ed Balls.
             
            We may have some of the generalist elements and the authoritarian nature of the modern Labour party which created much of this needs to address this internally so it can push for less police powers and surveillance which is what they were in thrall to for so long.
             
            Innocent until proven guilty has never meant pre-conviction actions can’t be taken. That is why we hold people in prison before their trials, before they have been proven guilty. It is why the police monitor some people before an offense is committed.
             
            The fact that a jury – not the Police or governmment  - found the officer involved in the Tomlinson case innocent shows it is not a police state.
             
            The IPCC needs a radical change and there needs to be far more accountability but we do have some already – which is not the feature of a police state.
             
            Public and press condemnation of the police, not features of a police state.
             

          • Alan Giles

             ”The fact that a jury – not the Police or governmment  - found the
            officer involved in the Tomlinson case innocent shows it is not a police
            state.”

            But let’s not forget that part of the evidence against the officer in question – that he had several instances of misconduct against him – was kept from the jury. Even some of his own colleagues had reported him for undue violence.

            As it had a direct bearing on the matter in hand, I think this aspect of his character should have been made known to the jury – this isn’t about previous convictions, but because his previous behaviour might well have had some relevance in the case of Mr Tomlinson.

            In the case of Mr DeMenzies, the officers who pumped the bullets into him got away with it, and the officer “in charge” of that woeful operation, Clarissa Dick was promoted months after the event.

            All animals are equal but police officers appear to be more equal than the rest of us, to paraphrase George Orwell.

  • Geraint

    The elected police commissions should be abolished as soon as a new Labour government is elected anyway. Political interference in the police is not acceptable. 

    • Andwhynot

      Totally agree with you Geraint – seems to be an imported idea. Expensive, unnecessary and as useless as elected Mayors. Abolish.

      • Dave Postles

         I agree too.

        • Francis Deutsch

          Hear, hear!

    • JoeDM

      I bet you a tenner they don’t.

  • KonradBaxter

    ” Had anyone been bold enough to suggest this and gather cross party support then Bob and Alan might still be candidates today.”

    Indeed. But we often only object to legislation when it suddenly and in an unexpected fashion damages us and our interests.

    “and all the parties seem able to do is to have the candidates stand down,”

    That is all they can do.

    But, once again, this si a great opportunity for a cross party issue. Will LL make contact with ConHome and others to push for changes from the grassroots? Ill this be the Summer Campaign?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZPXYLRVP4XOIGGDJWAL6HUO7U4 David

    Without wishing to overly reference my previous comment on the other thread:
    a) Without knowing the original charge, how can we comment on the appropriate impact on his eligibility?
    b) The law was enacted after debate, and it is likely that clause was the deliberate intention of our elected Parliament: does LL believe this authority should be over-ruled because it disagrees with individual cases? If so that is a large receptacle of worms to apply a can-opener to…
    c) Why have the Labour party selection group not been on top of this from the start?

    And most importantly:

    d) What is the suggested alternative?  No offences committed by minors shall count?  No offences for which the maximum sentence would be jail/detention?  Calling for change MUST be accompanied with suggestions for improvement or we will continue to see bad laws enacted by all parties.

    • Brumanuensis

      The same standards as apply for Parliamentary disqualification, would be a start.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ZPXYLRVP4XOIGGDJWAL6HUO7U4 David

        But that’s not how it works, is it: our Parliamentarians have agreed this form of wording and as our elected officials that is the way democracy works.

        • Brumanuensis

          I was proposing a future reform, not suggesting that my preference was the status quo.

    • Rob G

       Both the Minister and the Opposition spokesman (I think it was Vernon Coaker) explicitly acknowledged that the test for PCC would be more stringent than that for any other elected office, and that there was a sound rationale for this given that those elected would be overseeing the forces of law and order… It wasn’t an oversight, they deliberately chose not to exclude spent convictions or childhood convictions.

  • Cheryl Pidgeon

    Alan Charles is one of the finest colleagues I have ever had the privilege to work with. A magnificent friend, total team player and a fabulously, genuine  ambassador for Derbyshire and the Labour Party. Alan’s selfless dedication to our cause is immeasurable and unstinting. 
    One of the finest! You only have to be in his presence for a second to know all of the above.
    Cheryl Pidgeon

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/UIVHWRHBE3SAXD62FZDP43GNIE Dave

    As I said yesterday Mark’s anger would have been seen as far more genuine to the electorate if he had said the same when one of the Candidates in the South Wales contest (Simon Weston) found himself in the same position. But wait he was standing against Alun Michael who is one of our’s so we can forget about him.

  • David Brede

    There is a similar problem with candidates who are JP’s.

  • David Rosey29

    agree with the broad points, but these aren’t retrospective rules are they?
    isn’t there a competence issue here in allowing selection of non-qualifying candidates?

Latest

  • News Ed Miliband statement on Woolwich murder

    Ed Miliband statement on Woolwich murder

    In a statement this evening, Ed Miliband said: “This is a truly appalling murder which will shock the entire country. “All of my thoughts are with the family and friends of the victim. “The British people will be horrified by what has happened in Woolwich. They will be united in believing that this terror on our streets cannot be allowed to stand. “The Labour Party will offer the Government our complete support in establishing the facts of what happened and [...]

    Read more →
  • News Equal marriage – How every Labour MP voted at every stage of the bill

    Equal marriage – How every Labour MP voted at every stage of the bill

    By Kirstin Hay

    With much jubilation, the 3rd reading of the same-sex marriage bill passed the House of Commons last night, carried through on the weight of Labour votes, but how have individual MPs voted on this bill? In the 2nd reading of the equal marriage bill, Labour MP voting totals were: 217 – for 22 – against 14 – non-voters For the third reading 192 – for 14 – against 49 – non-voters —————————————————————- 192 Labour MPs who voted yes on 3rd reading (9 didn’t [...]

    Read more →
  • News Ed Miliband’s Google Speech – full text

    Ed Miliband’s Google Speech – full text

    Speaking at the Google Big Tent event Ed Miliband said (please note, Miliband spoke without notes, but this is the text released by the party): It is great to be here inside the Google Big Tent. My sons Daniel and Sam think I do a very boring job, so they will be excited when I tell them I appeared along with the “Killer Robots” and the “Captain of the Moonshots” at your sessions. I’d like to start by showing you [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Unions The chutzpah of Peter Mandelson – and why we need more trade unionists

    The chutzpah of Peter Mandelson – and why we need more trade unionists

    By Mark Seddon

    Lord Mandelson, or Baron Mandelson of Foy, as he should be referred to since he was packed off to the House of Lords by a small cabal, recently accused the Unite union of ‘manipulating selection procedures’ in the Labour Party. He went on to warn Ed Miliband that this ‘stores up danger for a future Labour government’. Irony has always been in as short supply as sheer chutzpah has been plentiful with old Mandy – but since his faithful disciple [...]

    Read more →
  • News Cameron says no more EU-turns – Media roundup: May 22nd, 2013

    Cameron says no more EU-turns – Media roundup: May 22nd, 2013

    Subscribers to our morning email get the best of LabourList – including the Media and blog round up – every weekday morning. If you were a subscriber you would have already received this in your inbox. You can sign up here. Cameron says no more EU-turns “After one of his most difficult weeks since becoming prime minister, David Cameron put in a polished and assured peformance on the Today programme this morning. The most notable line came on Europe, with Cameron [...]

    Read more →