₦airaland Forum

eGuerrilla: I am not sure I understand the point you are making here

Following the reduction in women MPs after the 2001 general election and increased lobbying by gender equality advocates, Labour introduced the Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002, which allows parties to use positive discrimination in the selection of candidates.[3][17][19] They will remain legalized until the end of 2015, due to the "Sunset Clause".[20]

[size=16pt]In December 1995, Peter Jepson and Roger Dyas-Elliott, prevented from standing on Labour shortlists because of their gender, challenged the policy in court.[10] Supported by the Equal Opportunities Commission, they claimed that they had been illegally barred from applying to be considered to represent the party and that the policy contradicted Labour's policy of aiming to promote equality of opportunity. [13] In January 1996 an industrial tribunal found the Labour Party had broken the law, unanimously ruling that all-women shortlists were illegal under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 in preventing men from entering a profession.[6][14][15]

The 34 candidates who had already been selected by all-women shortlists were not required to seek re-selection, but all 14 unfinished all-women shortlist selections were suspended.[14] Dr Jepson and Mr Dyas-Elliott did not seek compensation for their loss.[14]][/size]

eGuerrilla: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-women_shortlists

eGuerrilla: Why do you keep on going off on new tangents with every post?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-women_shortlists

I am not going to let you get away with anymore matter-of-fact statements not backed up with incontrovertible evidence.

eGuerrilla: Why do you keep on going off on new tangents with every post?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-women_shortlists

I am not going to let you get away with anymore matter-of-fact statements not backed up with incontrovertible evidence.

eGuerrilla: Show me where the Labour party mentions a short list in its constitution - http://www.labourcounts.com/constitution.htm

HNosegbe: Read my statement again.

My joining APC is predicated on a well thought-out narrative to solve what, in my opinion, is Nigeria's biggest problem.

If they can provide that narrative, then I will join the party and seek to play my little role in bringing it to reality.

If.

1. Political Restructuring of Nigeria to a true federal system vs unitary federalism in practice.
2. Derivation principles aka resource control or if you like fiscal federalism
3. Indigineship/citizenship vs Federal character aka quota system.
4. State Police.
5. Policy on minimization of corruption.
6. Secularism vs adoption of Sharia by some states.

Gbawe: You cannot just remain consumed with cynicism. It is not good for Nigeria given that you are likely a young person. Other nations have faced similar developmental/democratic challenges and have not folded their arms to embrace the devil openly because they realise the best approach is always allied to a dedication, as much as possible, to best practices while forward/evolutionary motion continues.

The Tinubu et al you guys obsess over and deify will not live forever. It is not preposterous, if focused ultimately on idea that endure beyond personalities, to suggest it should be people like you positioning your strides to replace them and perhaps introduce the next level of change/evolution you want to see.

eGuerrilla: Do you see how the two statements I highlighted contradict each other?

Wasn't the former secretary general right after all about the peculiar selection methods used?

eGuerrilla: Do you see how the two statements I highlighted contradict each other?

Wasn't the former secretary general right after all about the peculiar selection methods used?

eGuerrilla: The problem is, they never marshal any sensible arguments to defend their entrenched positions.
Most simply feign ignorance when one suggests that the different methods used to select electoral candidates in Nigeria and beyond, have both merits and demerits, primarily because they are easily given to a state of unreason.

The McGovern–Fraser Commission report, which recommended primaries for the Democratic Party convention of 1972 was not without its critics, for instance



Have the likes of @Ola one ever considered how much the Labour party's short list contributed to the elections of three Black (British) MPs, back in 1987? Can the type of cash-n-carry primaries we operate in Nigeria ever guarantee the increasing numbers of women we see in front row politics in more advanced climes?

These are simply not the kind of questions that are ever crosses the minds of those who see the ruling party as the epitome of internal democracy. Unlike those of us who actually recognise that the selection policy of the Labour party, much like the ACN, does pose problems of its own - Union 'stitch-up is forcing out black Labour candidates': Party suspended selection for council seats in two London boroughs over claims of discrimination - this lot make no pretenses about being objective.

'Then suddenly, when it came to councillor candidate selection, all these new faces turned up. They were voting for the other candidate.

Afam4eva: Ideologies are wayyy deeper than manifestos. Ideologies are deep rooted in behaviors.

plaindealer: ^^^^^^^^ Same 2 line rubbish.

Gbawe: Even a few pages into the thread, I indicated we would see inane submissions from those who lack deep foresight, knowledge and ideas yet are driven to talk erroneously due to clannish support/dislike for leaders, entities and personalities(to include their fellow forumers) to the extent their ranting indictment of others will almost always be ignorant and sentimental waffle not verifiable using definitive/established facts.

It is patently inane for anyone to suggest that the presence or lack of Party primaries is a marker for democracy or the lack of it when, ultimately, Political party stakeholders have considerable discretion over which method to use to appoint candidate representatives.

Even methods settled upon are subject to revision and replacement if , again as is the holy grail, pertinent stakeholders are in agreement. Now, when some do not appreciate this and insist on traversing the forum in ignorance and idiocy, then it is best for you to ignore them once you have made your point clear. Fluid confirmation of I stated we can expect from small minds that are best ignored.

plaindealer: Please don't let him derail the thread with redundant and irrelevant arguments..

eGuerrilla: You are doing it again. Talking at cross-purposes.
Did you read the article written by Peter Watt (General Secretary of the Labour Party in the United Kingdom from January 2006 until he resigned in November 2007) at all?

What exactly have you proven with your wikipedia reference? That primaries held Nigeria are not dominated by money-bags?

The case of UK's Labour party leadership election is specific, as three electoral colleges, each accounting for one third of the votes, participate in this primary election: Labour members of Parliament and of the European Parliament, party members and members of affiliated organisations such as trade unions.

eGuerrilla: I think you are beginning to over-flog the issue of primaries, to be honest
If you revisit the Iyaloja thread you would recall that I demonstrated the Labour party in Britain (and Australia for that matter) do not hold primaries.