Conservative Party Annual General Meeting?

 Time for the Conservative Party should have an Annual General Meeting to which all Party members are invited?

Party Chairman elected Sir James Cleverley responds

 I asked Sir James Cleverley MP whether the Conservative Party Chairman should be elected by the Party Members.  He responds!

Conservative Party Chairman - The Reality

 The following article was published by conservativehome.com on 1st September 2025

See my reply:

The Party cannot rebuild without a long-term Chairman

By 

Ryan Stinger

Ryan Stinger worked in CCHQ for nine years, latterly as Chief of Staff to two Chief Executive Officers and seven Party Chairman.

"Let me give you a list.

Lord Eric Pickles, Lord Feldman, Baroness Warsi, Grant Shapps, Sir Patrick McLoughlin, Sir Brandon Lewis, Sir Ben Elliot, Sir James Cleverly MP, Amanda Milling, Sir Oliver Dowden MP, Andrew Stephenson, Sir Jake Berry, Nadhim Zahawi, Greg Hands, Richard Holden MP, Richard Fuller MP, Nigel Huddleston MP, Lord Johnson and Kevin Hollinrake MP.

Since I joined the Conservative Party as a member in 2010, we have had 18 Party Chairman.

I worked at CCHQ from 2013-2024, starting my career as a Campaign Manager, before moving to CCHQ where I most recently served from 2022-2024 as Chief of Staff to two Chief Executive Officers and seven Party Chairman.

Let me just reiterate that. In two years, I worked for seven Party Chairman.

That is bonkers. If a business or charity had that much change, investors would not invest, and the Charity Commission would most certainly be raising concerns.

Being Chairman is a deeply political role, where commentators will often describe you as a media attack dog – but there is so much more to it and constant change cause chaos.

Let me share how I oversaw the process between saying goodbye to a Chairman and welcoming a new one, seven times over.

I feel bad about this one.

Under my desk were four red folders. These were updated every few months. This was a welcome pack for the new Chairman and presumably the team that would replace me. It had the latest on CCHQ, the key people from the National Convention, membership figures and AOB such as conference planning or the inevitable re-review of the membership fee.

This also included a series of recommendations on how they could engage with the Parliamentary Party who desperately needed listening to.

As well the latest Board papers and a call list which included all members of the Party Board, Officers of the National Convention, the leader of the Party in Scotland and Wales, the Chairman of Northern Ireland, top donors and our mayors Andy Street and Ben Houchen.

Why do I feel bad about this?

Well because I ensured these folders were continually up to date, even without a change. Because sadly, I assumed there would and could be a change at a moment’s notice and it would not be fair to welcome a new Chairman unprepared.

Then it was relatively simple.

When a change did come, I quietly packed up the office of the former Chairman, which I always tried to do outside of work hours or very quietly to not cause a stir in front of the rest of CCHQ. I waited for a phone call of who our next Chairman was. I was then on the phone to the lucky chosen individual and getting them into CCHQ. On arrival they would be welcomed by the CEO and myself. The team would clap them in; they give some words and then I always put them in their office and gave them a large coffee and let them catch their breath.

Whilst taking a breather, they got two draft emails to approve. One to staff, introducing themselves and reassuring the team, the other to all members of the Party. They were then given the red folder and left alone to start to get up to speed on what is going on.

Phone calls to key stakeholders were the next priority as it showed that the Chairman was listening to the Board and voluntary Party. They would then start to sit down with Directors and get briefed on what their teams were working on.

After this they were presented with a series of options for visits. Whilst Chairman need desk time, getting them out was always a massive priority. Finally, I would sit down with them and talk through the problems they had inherited. Whether a legal or a disciplinary issue which they would have to review, ensure that they were happy with how we were handling it or give instructions to change tack.

Once this was all complete. We would then work at the speed which they felt comfortable working at and on the priorities which they set.

The first 48 hours was frantic and always stressful. Always at the back of my mind was a nervousness as to whether I would still be in my job because they could have, and they would have been well within their right to replace me with ‘their person’. Thankfully (for me) this never happened.

By the time I welcomed my third Chairman, I had this process nailed. It gave them space for a breather but also got them talking to the people they needed to touch base with quickly – buying brownie points.

However, after so much change, people became cynical. The phone calls were never taken as seriously. Board members became rightly frustrated. It caused huge morale issues. Every time a new Chairman comes in, long-term issues were long grassed, or tack changed, and priorities changed. Putting people under pressure and crucially rarely allowing the organisation to move forward.

I must say from my own perspective, having to have the same conversations seven times, answering the same questions and briefing them on the same issues time after time became incredibly tedious. Because of so much change, the more complicated issues were rarely tied up and dealt with.

My point here is that whilst you are an attack dog. You are the Chairman in charge of the very beating heart of the Conservative Party. You cannot fix the long-term issues which face both the professional party and the grassroots without a long-term Chairman.

Going back to a single Chairman is a very sensible starting point. I hope our new Chairman, Kevin Hollinrake MP is given the time he needs to get to know the key players, understand the weaknesses of both CCHQ and the grassroots and then be allowed to develop and deliver long-term change.

If he is not allowed this time, we will end up going around the roundabout of briefings and phone calls, wasting more crucial time in rebuilding the Party and answering the toughest questions."

Reply by John Strafford

    "Ryan, what an appalling way to run an organisation! You make some very interesting points. The role of Party Chairman was created in 1911 after the Tories lost the General Election. The position was occupied by 11 Chairmen in the next 35 years. In the last 35 years we have had 32 Party Chairmen!

The role of Chairman should be responsibility for the Party organisation. It should not be the attack dog role. Running the organisation needs both short and long term policies and implementation. The attack dog role is mostly short term and immediate. The best Party Chairman was Lord Woolton who served for 9 years. He was not used as an attack dog but concentrated on organisation.

    I am afraid that whilst ever this is an appointed position things will not change. What is needed is for the Party Chairman to be elected and accountable to ordinary Party members at an Annual General Meeting of the Party to which all Party members are invited."

 

Conservative Party Chairmen - What a Farce!

 The following video clip was made at the 2022 Conservative Party Conference by the great Aleksandra Turner.

The role of Conservative Party Chairman was created in 1911.   In the first 35 years there were 11 Party Chairmen.   In the last 35 years there have been 32 Party Chairmen!   In 2022 the then Party Chairman was Jake Berry.   I optimistically said he would be gone within a year.   He went within a month! Today he is no longer a member of the Party, having joined the Reform Party in July 2025.   What a Farce!

Comments on "The Way We Were", Conservative Party Conferences

 Some Comments on "The Way We Were":

Tricia Gurnett

Thank you John, that brought back memories. I had forgotten all about how we "borrowed" conference places from other constituencies like Ebbw Vale. You are quite right, we did!

Paul Marks

John E. Strafford for many years you have campaigned for democracy within the party - only to see it decline. I am reminded of Elrond's words in J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" - about "fighting the long defeat", but God bless you Sir.

Brian David Moore

Your a good man for your beliefs on how the Party should be run Charles Heslop

Andrew Rosindell MP

Wonderful John, well done! Our traditional Party Conference for the members should be brought back. My first was in 1982. Then we could truly debate the issues and argue about policy. Time to restore that! At least last year the National Anthem at the end of the Conference was restored, having been shamefully scrapped in the early 2000s when woke ideas started to infect the Conservative Party! 

Nicholas Bennet (Former MP)

I went to my first conference in 1970 in Blackpool aged 21. Found a B&B for £12 a night. Not only was there a conference handbook but an addendum with amendments to motions. These included the names of the proposer and seconder. I first spoke at the 1972 conference again in Blackpool (conference alternated between Brighton and later Bournemouth and Blackpool). For impoverished young conservatives the trick was to find fringe meetings with the all important words 'refreshments provided'. For the 1972 conference I went with the late Derek Stone in his van and we arrived in the early hours and slept in it.

The leadership worried about the outcome of the debates and, although the platform chose the speakers, they had to allow Enoch Powell (before he defected to the UUP in 1974) to speak and in the 1990s Norman Tebbit.

Conference was the high point of the political year, hob nobbing with the great figures of the party, meeting up with friends, going for a meal in the evenings and then to the bar at the main conference hotel.

Fortunately in 1984 I had to go back to teach in the Friday so left Brighton after the debates in Thursday afternoon missing the bomb in the Grand Hotel that night.

I last attended conference in 2015. Full of lobbyists and armchair style chats on the stage at Birmingham. Not being a spotty young man on the make any more the fringe meetings and receptions with questionable warm wine no longer appeal.

John Strafford Replies to Nicholas Bennet

Nicholas I also missed the bomb in 1984. I left the bar of the Grand Hotel at 11pm on the Thursday evening to drive home as I had a meeting the following day!

Ben Patterson (Former MEP)

There used to be real debates then. And most of those attending were Conservative Party members - a large number of them YCs - rather than representatives of lobbies, think-tanks, commercial organisations and the press.

Caroline Strafford

My first Conference I attended as Chairman of Chelsea Young Conservatives and was held in Blackpool. Captain Litchfield was our MP and he took all Chelsea attendees to lunch! I was called to speak at one session - I think because my name was Caroline and it was about pirate radio! One evening we had the Mayor's reception, another the CPC lecture, and on another evening the Conference Ball. I can only tell you that the Conference Hall was always packed out for debates and the Agents were busy trying to "fix" for Central Office the one motion to be chosen at Conference by the members. I can remember staying in a bed and breakfast establishment on the sea front and and you had to ask for a bath plug!

Andrew Kennedy

John, I have always been a huge admirer of your courage and steadfast determination in support of democracy and the rights of members and associations. I first heard you speak at the debate for the party to the organise in Ulster - I think it was 1989. In my 40 years of attending Conference, it remains one of the most powerful and effective speeches I have ever heard, including those delivered by Ministers and Secretaries of State. I do hope I will see you both in Manchester.

The Way We Were! Conservative Party Conferences

 Do you remember what Conservative Party Conferences were like?                                      A Trip down memory lane.

View Here!

Here We Go - More manipulation of the Conservative Selection process!

 Here We Go - More manipulation!

Daily Telegraph report 16 Aug 25 re selection of Conservative Parliamentary Candidates:

The source said: “We want to be in a position where people are brought in for the right reason. The plan is that previous MPs who lost their seats will be required to go through a selection process so that we’ve encouraged everyone who wants to come back to express interest and put their applications in.”

Who determines "the Right reason" and what is it?

“The reason is that there will be many ex-MPs who say, ‘Yes, I want to stand, but I don’t want to stand in my old constituency, I want to stand in a different one’. In which case they can apply and go through the selection process but they won’t automatically get a free run,” a party source familiar with the changes said.

“There is also an issue around certain well-known people wanting to come back who have never been through the current process for selection and validation of candidates because it started after they were originally selected,” they added.

How many times does it need to be said "CCHQ role is to do due diligence.   Full stop.   It should be up to the ordinary members of the Party who to select as their MP.    It should be up to the Constituency Associations when to start the selection process.   It should be up to the Associations who they invite for interview!

The Candidates Committee only has one MP on it (Bernard Jenkins) so who are these know all experts who know what is required of a Member of Parliament when they have had no experience of the job?   Previous MPs know what the job entails so why should the elite in CCHQ stop them from putting their names forward to Constituency Associations?

 

Reform Party changes its Rules! Good or Bad?

 

REFORM PARTY ISSUES NEW RULES

Last year the Reform Party introduced a Constitution which was passed by the members of the Party in General Meeting.   The Constitution was 17 pages in length.   Since then the Party Board, on which a majority of the members are appointed by Nigel Farage issued the Rules for the election of Party Board members (just three of them, so they do not form a majority) and the Rules for Branches/Constituency Associations, (22 pages long) without going back to the members for their approval!   Thus the Dictatorship of Nigel Farage and Zia Yusuk who control the Party continues.   This is not the way a democratic political Party works!   Members have no say on policy and organisation is effectively controlled by the Leader who has a majority of his appointments on the Party Board.   Eventually the members will realise this and start to walk away from the Party.   In May 2025 the Party claimed to have over 230,000 members.  According to the Rules for the election of the Party Board this is now 227,000.

The Reform Party are repeating the error which the Conservative Party has made, (the Original Conservative Constitution was 55 pages long, today it is over 150 pages long) creating a vast bureaucratic organisation controlled by the elite.

Not all is bad in the changes which have been introduced by Reform:

Rules for the election of the Party Board

First of all congratulations, the three members of the Party Board are to be elected directly by the ordinary Party members in a nationwide ballot.   This is in stark contrast to the Conservative Party which has no members directly elected to their Party Board by ordinary Party members.

The bad news is that under the rules each candidate must

 1.1.3.  pay a £100 non-refundable application fee and,

 1.1.4. like anyone standing for election for the Party, pass the vetting process.

The vetting process at the moment is very extensive including, we are told, psychiatric testing, so much so that it is said that it will be simplified!

The question is: Who judges the results of the process and are they accountable to the members?

Branch/Constituency Rules

Here the position is mixed.   There are some very good detailed rules which the Conservative Party should look at and incorporate within its own Constitution.   However there are also some rules which strengthen the dictatorial control of the Party by the Party Board and ultimately Nigel Farage and Zia Yusuk!

Rules:

4.13 Branch Officers must sign an NDA (Non Disclosure Agreement) and will complete Party-approved GDPR training prior to their confirmation and prior to gaining access to any Party systems.

The wording of the NDA is not given but generally Non Disclosure Agreements are used by very powerful people to stop not so powerful people speaking out.   For transparency the wording of an NDA should be shown so members can judge whether it is reasonable.

4.15 A National or Regional Director may at their sole discretion, replace and/or remove any interim Branch Officer for any reason they consider pertinent.

Nowhere in the Party’s Constitution does it mention National or Regional Director so presumably these have been created  and appointed by the Party Board without reference to the membership so who are they accountable to?

5.7 is a strange requirement and indicates that the Party hierarchy do not trust the members!

National/Regional Directors are not elected, they are appointed, At any time they can come in to a branch and take the position of chair to control meetings.  This is control freakery at its worst!

6.18 If branches call emergency meetings to discuss a problem the National or Regional Director can cancel these meetings at any time.   Once again we see a complete lack of democracy and distrust of ordinary members.

 

ALL SPEAKERS MUST BE APPROVED. Reform don't trust their branches organising speakers, they must be approved now by HQ.   This is extraordinary.   Once again the lack of trust by the hierarchy is highlighted by this clause!

15 Waiver

15.1    The Party Chairman, Vice Chairman, National Directors, and their duly authorised appointees, may at their absolute discretion, revoke, suspend or waive any Branch Rule at any time with or without notice.

This says it all   For the avoidance of any doubt we the Party hierarchy can do what ever we please and the ordinary Party member has no recourse.   This is called dictatorship.   It isn’t democracy!

Conservative Party Democracy - Area and Region!

On Friday 1st August Stuart Andrew MP sent the following statement to every Conservative Party member: 

Building a thriving and internally democratic Party is important, to ensure that we run our own affairs robustly and transparently.

Hear hear!

 As well as your local Association or Federation we also have elected volunteers covering larger Areas and Regions, who support the work of local activists by targeting campaign support where it is most needed, putting on local conferences and other big events, sharing best practice, and helping resolve contentious matters.

 This is the time of year when the Area and Regional elections take place, and all party members are eligible to stand.

Stuart, it is all very well talking the talk but you do not walk the walk! See below

 If you are interested in standing for one of these roles, either now or in the future, why not get in touch with our senior volunteer team – just email: national.convention@conservatives.com 

 Make sure you let them know which constituency you are from. 

And what will they do about it? Promote you? Appoint you? I wonder what? I set out below the process by which Area and Regional Officers are elected:

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

At the Ward/ Branch AGM to which all Party members within the Ward/Branch are resident one or more representatives are elected to the Executive Council of their Constituency Association.

Party Constitution

6.1.3 [One or more – which number must be defined] elected representatives from each ward, The Association may list the wards in order to vary the number according to the size of the ward. if the ward is covered by a single branch, that branch may elect the representative(s) at its AGM;

 The Executive Council then elects two representatives  to its Area Council

Party Constitution:

Elections to the Area Council

48          The Executive Council of each Association or Federation shall elect the required number of members, in accordance with its Rules, to represent it on its Area Council, in addition to the Chairman of the Association or Federation (who shall be an ex-officio member of the Area Council).

Each Area Council shall comprise

28.2      Two representatives from each Constituency covered by an Association elected by the Executive Council of each Association in accordance with the Rules of the Conservative Party Associations, as contained within Schedule 7. Where the Association is subject to Schedule 7a, two representatives per constituency should be elected by the Executive Council under the same rules that pertain to the election of “Constituency Officers”.

The Area Council then elects the Area Management Executive

Party Constitution:

Area Management Executive

29          Each Area Council shall meet once a year and elect an Area Management Executive (in accordance with the provisions of Schedule 5) which shall act as a co-ordinating body between the Board and Associations with a view to enhancing the performance of Associations in each Area and co-ordinating activities and the efficient management of resources within each Area.

The Area Councils then elect the Regional Officers for the Region of which they are part of. 

Party Constitution:

38          The Regional Officers shall be elected in accordance with the provisions of Schedule 5, by those members of the Area Councils in the region in which they are situated.

So summing up as an ordinary Party member I

Attend my Branch/Ward AGM to elect the members of my Association Executive Council.

My Association Executive Council elect the representatives to the Area Council.

The Area Council elects the Area Management Executive.

The Area Council elects the Regional Officers

This process is known as pyramid democracy.   It was made illegal in the Trade Unions in the 1980s by the Conservative Government because it was too easily manipulated by those in power.

The Area Management Executive and Regional Officers should be elected and accountable to ordinary Party members at an Annual General Meeting to which all Party members in the Area/Region are resident!   That is Democracy!

Ps Stuart, Congratulations on your appointment as Shadow Health Secretary!

Conservative Party - will they ever learn?

 It has been announced that Kevin Hollinrake MP has been appointed the new Party Chairman, so once again we have a Party Chairman unelected and unaccountable to the members of the Party.   He is the 26th Party Chairman in the last 25 years, so can we expect the next Party Chairman to be appointed within the next year?   CCHQ needs to be completely reorganised, but don't expect it to happen!   The best and most successful Party Chairman was Lord Woolton who served as Chairman for nine years.

The Tories confirmed that sitting MP Bernard Jenkin has been made Vice Chairman of the Candidates Committee.   Another position unelected and unaccountable to Party members!   The Establishment at work!

On 21st July an invitation was made to become a Conservative Party Parliamentary Candidate.   It said

We want to build an army of candidates that can be successful.

Hear hear! 

We need to select candidates who can be champions for their local areas but who, in time, can serve in a radical, transforming government once again. 

Hear hear!

We want a new cohort of future Conservative politicians who really believe in less tax, less interference, less regulation and a government that achieves the change that our country needs. Candidates who are going to hold the civil service to account, who are willing to change things, and who are willing to make difficult decisions.

Hear hear!

We are searching for people from across the community, with a wide variety of transferable skills and experiences. We are prioritising the four Cs - communication, charisma, cleverness and conservatism.

Sounds good but who is going to judge whether someone has a variety of transferable skills?

Who is going to judge what skills they should have?

Who is going to decide who has charisma?

Who is going to decide who is clever?

Who is going to decide what is conservatism ?

These are all subjective and each person will have a different view.   That is why Parliamentary Candidates should be elected by Party members with minimum interference from CCHQ.  After all do we really believe that Clare Hambro, Bernard Jenkin and Elizabeth Gibson are the founts of all wisdom?

This is a classic Establishment stitch up of the kind that has been demonstrated to be a disaster for the last twenty years

As a Conservative politician you will have the opportunity to make a real and lasting difference to the constituents who elect you and to the future of our great country.

Hear hear!

 

Conservative Party - Hope for the future!

 

Speech to the New Forest Conservative Association 13 June 2025

Essential Changes to the Conservative Party Constitution!

The following changes to the Conservative Party Constitution are essential in order to create a democratic Party Constitution.   They were agreed overwhelmingly by the Conservative Democratic Organisation at its conference in the Bournemouth International Conference Centre in 2023 and have been approved in General Meeting by the Campaign for Conservative Democracy.   All Conservatives who wish to have a Democratic Party with a Democratic Constitution should support these measures.

 ·       The Party Constitution should be capable of being changed by a motion at an Annual General Meeting of the Party, to which all Party members are invited on the basis of One Member One Vote with a 60% majority of those voting.

• The Chairman of the Party Board, Two Deputy Chairmen, Treasurer, Chairman of the Candidates Committee and Chairman of the Conservative Policy Forum to be officers of the Party on the Party Board, elected by and accountable to Party Members·
• Constituency Associations should have the right to determine who their Conservative Parliamentary Candidate is, with minimum interference by CCHQ.   This includes both selecting and deselecting candidates and selecting or deselecting their Member of Parliament.  Any member of the Party should be able to apply to be the candidate. Local candidates i.e. those resident in the Constituency, should be invited for interview by the Executive Council.   Where a Constituency Association passes a motion of no confidence in their MP in a General Meeting the Association they should be able to immediately start the process of selecting a new Parliamentary Candidate.
• The Party Conference should be controlled by a subcommittee of the Party Board consisting of a majority of voluntary members of the Party and should have motions for debate and votes taken on those motions, with some motions selected by the members
• The Rules for the Election of the Party Leader to be incorporated within the main body of the Constitution.

Good News - Review of the Conservative Party Constitution!

 Julian Ellacott (Chairman of the National Convention) has written to all Party members as follows:

Conservatives

Dear John,   The Party’s Constitution, last updated in 2021, underpins the way the Party is run.   As with any credible organisation, especially one which aspires to run the country, it is a pre-requisite to be able to run our own affairs fairly, robustly and transparently.   Reviewing the Constitution is therefore important, especially following our defeat in the General Election last year. We have to learn from our past mistakes and apply those lessons to our own structure (just as we are doing in terms of our policy platform).   To that end the Party Board has instigated a thorough review of the Party’s Constitution, which will run into 2026 and involve all members and elected representatives.  A dedicated committee will coordinate this work and will consult on potential changes in various phases, each covering different topics.   At the end of it the changes will be put to a vote of the Constitutional College (in line with the terms of the current Constitution).   The members of the committee want to hear your views on which subjects within the Constitution you think need to be focused on most, as well as your views on high level principles for guiding the review. Please therefore complete this short survey.

 

We will provide regular updates on the progress of the review via the member email bulletin, but if you wish to receive more frequent updates you can also opt into this in the survey. Your local Association/Federation chairman will be involved at each stage, and will also be encouraged to discuss individual topics with local members throughout.   Thank you in advance for your participation in this important task.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Julian Ellacott  Chairman of the National Convention and Chairman of the Constitution Review Committee  This is excellent news.    First of all congratulations to Julian Ellacott for getting this important item onto the Party Agenda. I make the following initial comments: 1)    "A dedicated committee will coordinate this work and will consult on potential changes in various phases, each covering different topics." The "dedicated Committee" should include ordinary members who are not part of the vested interests mentioned in 2) below. 2) It states in the survey that the review will be implemented on 1 January 2027 We should aim to implement changes by 1 Jan 2026.

When the Constitution was created it took too long to review it, which meant that the members lost interest and the vested interests (CCHQ, Party Donors, Constituency Chairmen, Women's Organisation, 1922 Committee etc.) moved in to strengthen their positions to the detriment of ordinary Party members.

    3) The survey asks you to indicate how strongly you agree with making us a stronger campaigning force.   

Of course you have to answer "for the strongest possible", but what exactly does it mean?

    4) The survey lists a number of areas of the Constitution, and asks which three should have the highest priority?

They all should have priority but the three most important are 

a) Rules for the election of Leader

b) The Board of the Party

c) How future changes are made to the Constitution.

The most important issue is c) above

The new Party Constitution should be capable of being changed by a motion at an Annual General Meeting of the Party by Party members on the basis of One Member One vote, with a 60% majority of those voting.

In which case after the new Constitution has been agreed under the existing Constitution it should be put to a meeting of all Party members for approval, with the ability to move amendments to the Constitution at the meeting.

Battle For Monte Natale - Could the British Army fight it today?

 Speech given to the New Forest Conservative Association on 13 June 2025 questions the capability of today's British army.

Remember Margaret Thatcher

 The following speech was given to the New Forest Conservative Association on 13 June 2025 by John Strafford.   It recalls a speech made by Margaret Thatcher at the Conservative Party Conference in 1968.

Changes to the Selection of Conservative Parliamentary Candidates!

The following video is an extract from a speech given to the New Forest Conservative Association on 13 June 2025

 

What is in a name? Includes a trip down Memory Lane!

 The following speech was made to the New Forest Conservative Association on 13 June 2025:

What is in a name?   Includes a trip down Memory Lane!

Winter Fuel Allowance - A Conservative Approach

 The following speech was made at the COPOV Forum on 31 May 2025

Margaret Thatcher's speech at the 1975 Conservative Party conference!

Extracts from Margaret Thatcher's speech at the 1975 Conservative Party conference, shortly after she became the Leader of the Conservative Party.   She didn't wait four years before setting out what was needed!

Selection of Conservative Parliamentary Candidates (Episode 4)

 

Selection of Conservative Parliamentary Candidates (Episode 4)

By

John E. Strafford

The Party Review has set out 49 recommendations to improve the Selection of Parliamentary Candidates process.   Some are worthy of support, others need to be changed. The following are my comments: 

Making the Parliamentary Candidate selection fit for the future: draft recommendations from the Party Review

 Association selection stage

This section is a great improvement on the existing system and is to be commended.   Just a couple of small points, see below:

 25) The fundamental process should continue to be based on Sift Committee, Selection Council and Member Ballot stages. The whole process should not be rushed, enabling Associations to thoroughly assess applicants and involve members (3 months from opening applications to final selection should be the approximate average). 

 26) The Regional Candidate Co-ordinator should provide relevant Association, Area and Regional Chairmen with regular updates throughout the period leading up to and during selections within their respective localities. 

 27) Senior volunteers (Regional Candidate Co-ordinators and current or former Regional Off icers) must be trained and able to oversee selection meetings, so that there are no bottlenecks caused by lack of staff to oversee these meetings. 

 28) In advance of applications formally opening for a constituency, the Association should have the right to put potential applicants forwards for the approval process. 

 29) CCHQ/Leader’s Office/National Convention Officers to develop a short, engaging video setting out the responsibility which lies on the shoulders of those selecting someone for the whole constituency (who can win), the key attributes of successful candidates, illustrated by real examples, vox pops from voters as to what they value, etc, to be played at the start of Sift Committee and Selection Council meetings, and sent or shown to members prior to the Member Ballot. 

Total waste of time and money.   Members are not stupid.   This is patronising.  It is up to the members to decide what type of candidate they want.

 30) The Sift Committee stage should be changed as follows: i. The minimum sift committee size should be increased to 7, and Associations should be able to choose as many as 11 if they wish. Membership of the Sift Committee should not be restricted to members eligible to vote in the constituency – Executive Councils should be free to choose respected Party members in neighbouring constituencies, from the Area team, local PCC/elected Mayor etc if they wish. ii. Sift meetings should take place at a venue of the Association’s choice (within reason – including an online option for some or all participants). iii. Sift meetings should be chaired by the Regional Candidate Co-ordinator (or another senior volunteer appointed by them, e.g. Regional Officer or National Convention Officer), to ensure a balanced discussion. iv. The applicants’ activity records should be shared with the Sift Committee upfront, alongside their CVs. v. Sift Committees should be encouraged to put more applicants through to the Selection Council stage (between 5 and 10, plus 2 reserves), to give more choice and to give more applicants experience of the Selection Council stage. 

The Sift committee should be restricted to members eligible to vote in the constituency.   Others may be invited to attend in a non voting capacity.

 31) All Associations should be encouraged to hold campaign and/or social events, to which all shortlisted applicants be invited (without charge), to meet members before the Selection Council stage. 

 32) The Selection Council stage should be changed as follows: i. The meeting should be chaired by the Regional Candidate Co-ordinator (or another senior volunteer appointed by them, e.g. Regional Officer or National Convention Officer). ii. Selection Councils should be able to put either 3 or 4 candidates through to the Member Ballot (plus a reserve). 

 33) The Member Ballot stage should be changed as follows: i. As soon as feasible after the Selection Council (and no more than 2 weeks before the final Member Meeting) members should be notified by email of which 3-4 candidates they will choose from. ii. Require the candidates to publish a short leaflet (eg 2 sides A4), selfie video (eg 3 minutes) and social media links, emailed to all local members in advance. 5 iii. Give the final candidates a list of local qualifying members (with members given the ability to opt out in advance), and allow them to canvass members prior to the final meeting, to test campaigning ability and ensure members are engaged. (Appropriate safeguards would need to be applied to prohibit any form of “treating”, to enable members to opt out and to protect their data, and ensure as level a playing field as possible between applicants of different financial means. The Executive Council would be able to opt not to follow this but would need to have an explicit alternative plan to enable final candidates to engage with members.) iv. Pilot the use of online voting in some of the early selections (with the Associations’ consent), with the A4 flyer and video being provided to members first, followed by one or more hustings meetings, with the online voting opening thereafter. v. Consider using preference voting for the member ballot (this would be necessary for online ballots anyway, but could also be considered for in person ballots, to avoid having to hold multiple ballots). Post-selection 

 34) The Candidates Committee can permit variations to the process in the following circumstances: i. Upon request by Associations/Federations (e.g. potentially facilitating a modern equivalent to “city seats”, or other models). ii. Where an Association is in supported status, is in breach of any obligations under the Constitution, Board resolution or other regulations, or is otherwise not performing its basic functions. iii. Where the number of applicants and/or the number of members makes the default process unduly cumbersome (or if an Association wishes to opt in to a shorter process). 

 35) Imposition of shortlists for the Member Ballot must only be in exceptional circumstances (eg by-elections or after a General Election has already been called), and must never consist of fewer than three applicants. In such situations the views of the Regional Candidate Co-ordinator, Area Chairman and Association officers should be formally sought prior to the selection of the final shortlist.

Post Selection

36) Similar to the point made earlier relating to candidates pre-selection, candidates post-selection should be mentored – for example by a former MP, to guide and advise. 

 37) The Candidate Playbook must be reviewed to ensure that it contains in one place the core information which selected candidates need to know. This should initially consist of a general resource for all candidates, and then Associations should also be asked to produce one covering local specifics, ready for a candidate to hit the ground running. 

 38) Extend the “teams” arrangement (which was popular with candidates in the 2024 General Election) whereby clusters of neighbouring constituency candidates 6 support each other with mutual aid, ideally with one candidate being in a safe set, another in a target seat and the other 2 or 3 in development seats. This provided valuable experience for the development seat candidates and the reassurance of being part of a team. Phasing of the process 

If a Candidate wishes to devote all his/her time to their own constituency this should be accepted without being penalised.

Phasing of the process

 39) The reopening of applications should occur as soon after the May 2025 elections as possible. 

 40) Setting out the phasing of constituency selections should be a priority of the Candidates Committee once it has been reconstituted, taking into account: i. The views of Associations as to when they wish to proceed, and any specific local factors (involving the Regional Candidate Co-ordinators). ii. The winnability of the seat, with (in general) more winnable seats being selected earlier (taking account of data insights from and views of the CCHQ Campaigning Team). iii. A degree of co-ordination within each region, to avoid clashes (involving the Regional Candidate Co-ordinators). iv. The wider benefits of selecting some “no hope” seats early, to ensure an ongoing local presence in such areas, developing candidates for the future and (for example) reinforcing a positive impact on local election performance. 

 41) Selection cannot begin for an Association if the Association has unfulfilled obligations – for example financial, compliance or others set out in the “Defining an Association” document (or its successor). Post-election 

 42) References on unsuccessful candidates from Association/Area/Regional Chairmen and Regional Candidate Co-ordinator, senior staff , agents and others should be sought and kept on file. Feedback on non target candidates should also be sought from those to whom they gave campaign support. 

 43) A standard process for reviewing the performance of candidates, successful or otherwise, must be developed and implemented after each General Election. 

 44) The mentoring of candidates, previously mentioned, should continue in some form, for those candidates who wish to avail themselves of it. 

 45) The Board, 1992 Committee Executive and Whips should find ways of ensuring that MPs continue to engage positively with their Associations and continue campaigning post-election (reinforced by the Candidate Contract previously mentioned). 

 46) Sitting MPs should be requested to indicate, by mid-2027, whether they intend to stand for re-adoption for the next General Election (and if so readopted, they are required sign the same Candidate Contract as mentioned above). If no such indication is received by mid 2027 the Association is permitted to initiate a standard selection process, as set out above for seats without an incumbent (in which the incumbent would be able to take part). 

There should be no Candidate Contract!

Re-list processes 

 47) Former MPs seeking re-approval should go through the process as follows: i. The approval stage is a Full Assessment in person with the addition of specific focus added on their record of past campaigning (themselves personally, not just their Association), voting in Parliament, Association relationship and other relevant factors during their time as an MP. ii. The selection stage is retained unchanged. 

 48) Applicants on the list at the point of the 2024 General Election should go through the process as follows (with priority in terms of timing given to those who fought a seat): i. The approval stage is a Re-List Assessment, with specific focus added on their record during the 2024 General Election campaign. ii. The selection stage is retained unchanged. 

 49) Any applicant who has passed an emergency (Rapid Assessment) selection process as part of a Mayoral or Parliamentary by-election selection process should reapply through the Full Assessment process to get onto the Approved List for the next General Election.

All in all there are some good points in these recommendations, in particular where they improve democratic accountability, but there is also an increase in bureaucracy, and massive opportunity to manipulate democracy.   The points highlighted should be reviewed.