Eluned Morgan to stand down; Labour is losing the wrong MEPs
European Parliament elections are scheduled for June 2009 and the party lists for Labour have been set for some time now. It was known that Glenys Kinnock would not seek re-election, and it was announced yesterday that Eluned Morgan MEP will not be standing in the 2009 either. Gary Titley, presently leader of the European Parliamentary Labour Party, has also announced he’s not going to be a candidate again.
There are two issues that stem from Eluned’s decision. First of all she is one of the more effective, hardworking and communicative MEPs Labour has in the European Parliament. Together with the loss of Kinnock and Titley the EPLP looks even weaker than before. Plus as most of Labour’s MEPs have served at least 3 terms already how many of them have any energy in the tank to make the step up? Frankly I’m not too optimistic.
There’s also an implication for Labour in Wales – who will be the number 1 candidate on the Welsh list? Labour operates a zipper system for the lists – woman, man, woman or man, woman, man. David Vaughan was second behind Eluned on the list, while Lisa Stevens was in third position. Paul Flynn states that it will be Stevens rather than Vaughan who will take first position, yet Labour Matters reckons it’s the other way around, with Vaughan (male) followed by Stevens and Maycock (both female), followed by Veale (male). Quite frankly I know nothing about Vaughan other than he’s Labour leader on Neath Port Talbot council as he has no website to state what he stands for, and Google is not much help either.
Labour Matters
Is there anything to stop you (or your contributors) categorising Press Releases as “Press Releases”. Then you wouldnt have to tell us manually, others wouldn’t get it wrong and you would eventually get your perceived authority back.
Rgds
Matt
That I can’t answer, sadly.
OK, thanks for clearing that up – in terms of what’s official and what’s not official. But it still leaves the major question: why this outcome?
Perhaps I can help clear up a small confusion? The article you link to in Labour Matters was written by Welsh Labour. That is to say that it is a press release sent by Welsh Labour to Labour Matters for publication, and not an interpretation of events, or a blog article.
Labour Matters was always designed for this purpose, but our test articles over the summer may have caused the recent use of the site by Labour Groups etc (which is, I’m please to report, a growing list) to be seen as less than authoritative.
This would be a mistake, and in order that articles are seen in their proper light it’s important to view who the author of an article is. Those penned by us, of which there will be fewer and fewer as participation by others increases, are marked as being authored by ‘Labour Matters’. All other authors have descriptive names such as ‘Welsh Labour’, ‘London Assembly Labour’, and ‘Plymouth Labour’, to give just three examples. You can consider these to be authoritative, coming as they do from their respective Labour Group press officers; Councillors; MPs; AMs, etc.
I hope that helps.
No clue… The rules for all of this are so damned complex that – frankly – I have never understood the specifics, only the basic principles.
As for the individuals I also cannot judge – no idea whether Vaughan is a better bet than Stevens.
” Paul Flynn states that it will be Stevens rather than Vaughan who will take first position, yet Labour Matters reckons it’s the other way around, with Vaughan (male) followed by Stevens and Maycock (both female), followed by Veale (male). ”
Welsh Labour official website gives Vaughan-Stevens-Maycock-Veale as the new list.
Why is it man-woman-woman-man and not m-w-m-w?
And what happened to the male candidate (Gareth Williams) who originally was in 4th position?
Just trivial questions, I know, as number 3 and 4 don’t have chances of being elected