The Vicar? Yes. Sadly in this case, this has actually happened. But the explanations for it, and the circumstances, are not too clear. So for the benefit of Sotonians, for fairness and for democracy, we've tried to find out, directly from those involved.
We are impartial and do not support any particular candidate.
The Vicar, Dan Clark, was the organiser at the Churches Together 2024 General Election hustings event where candidates were asked questions by the public. It was held by Churches Together at St. James' Church by the Park in Shirley.
The Vicar excluded two candidates. So the public could not ask them questions. You may ask why and for what reasons? Please read on...
Green Candidate Speaks on Assisted Dying
At that hustings, the Green candidate for Southampton Test, who we understand is a Christian, when asked about assisted dying, said:
"God decides when we die.".
Readers will be pleased to know that "God" doesn't decide how Southampton Independents conducts our investigations, or how we treat candidates fairly and impartially. But we do these things anyway.
Did "God"'s representative for Churches Together decide who could be asked questions at the hustings? Read on...
Candidate Complains
Ms Barbour's rival, Maggie Fricker, is the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition Candidate for Southampton Test at the 2024 General Election. Unlike Ms Barbour, she answered our questions about the election. Ms Barbour refused to answer any questions. Despite this snub of Southampton residents, we have given her the right of reply to this article.
 |
| Maggie Fricker TUSC Candidate for Southampton Test at the 2024 General Election Photo: Used with permission M Fricker |
Shirley, the location is a coincidence (geddit?). [As Airplane's Frank Drebin said, "don't call me Shirley".].
Yet surely enough, Shirley happens to be the exact same Council ward that the Labour Candidate Satvir Kaur has represented since 2011. Maybe "God" meant it? Or it was just a coincidence?
Amongst other questions answered by Councillor Kaur at the event was assisted dying, a highly emotive and controversial topic. You've seen some of what the Green had to say on this highly emotive, complex and controversial topic. Other candidates answered two, as in the LDRS report.
Other topics were also covered by the four other candidates that were allowed to answer questions by the Reverend Clark.
Vicar Excludes Two Candidates From Hustings
But not the TUSC candidate Ms Fricker, and not the Workers Party of Great Britain candidate, Wajahat Shaukat.
Instead, she was asked to read a short statement, but not participate like the others were allowed to, on the Panel.
She protested, saying:
“As a shop steward and a working class woman, I do have some experience of middle class men not respecting my right to speak.”
Have other candidates experienced similar treatment by Churches Together and Dan Clark? Yes. Our own candidate Andrew Pope did before the 2017 General Election.
What Happened at the 2017 General Election?
When Southampton Independents stood Mr Pope as its candidate in 2017, he sat on the panel at the hustings organised by Churches Together. But not without a great deal of anxiety of exclusion by the same organiser.
 |
| Andrew Pope speaking to BBC in 2017 when a councilor on Southampton City Council Image: Southampton Independents |
Leading up to the event, Mr Pope's Election Agent had to ask and ask again, and chase, for Mr Clark to confirm that the Southampton Independents candidate would be on the Panel. The Reverend had seemed evasive over an extended period of time. Standing for Parliament is a busy and stressful time, and candidates are volunteers after all.
Doubt was
cast on this by Mr Clark over a continued period of time, who claimed that it was depending on the number of candidates and the delay in response had been because he was away. Yet Mr Pope's involvement was in doubt.
No mention was made in 2017 on the polls, like it has been recently given as the reason by Mr Clark for exclusing the two candidates the 2024 event.
Different reasons were given between 2024 and 2017. In 2017, it turned out that 5 candidates were nominated, so Mr Pope was "allowed" to take part, having been in doubt about being excluded.
The Law and Regulator
Both of the reasons given by the Reverend Clark for potential exclusion in 2017 and actual exclusion in 2024, may or may not be deemed "impartial" by the Regulator of hustings, the Electoral Commission. Since the 2017 election, the Elections Act 2022 has been passed by Parliament.
Churches Together provides guidance to those organising hustings.
Has Mr Clark followed it? Was the guidance clear or accurate? We have asked him.
At the 2017 hustings, there were five candidates. At the 2024 hustings, there were five candidates on the Panel, but two were excluded according to one poll, claimed Mr Clark.
In reality, according to the LDRS report, one could not attend, Wajahat Shaukat for the Workers Party of Great Britain, although as you will see, the reasons seem to not be clear or consistent. We have asked Mr Shaukat for comment.
The other candidate could attend (Ms Fricker) but was not allowed to sit on the Panel. So it would have only been six candidates instead of five.
Other Hustings Events in Southampton in 2024
The hustings at Oasis Academy Mayfield for Southampton Itchen candidates included all six candidates.
Yet Ms Fricker was still excluded from the 2024 Churches Together hustings. And the circumstances surrounding Mr Shaukat remain less than clear.
We have asked the Rev Clark to respond and hoped that his response would not echo the Green candidate that "God" decides who can be asked questions.
The Vicar Responds
Rev Clark told us:
"Wajahat (the Workers party candidate in this election) would have come if he had been on the panel. It was only because he wasn’t on the panel that he thought it best to arrange for someone to speak on his behalf rather than organising childcare."
So the Rev Clark has confirmed that he had excluded Mr Shaukat.
Yet the Daily Echo article, taken from a syndicated piece written by Jason Lewis of the LDRS, states that:
"The hustings at St James’ by the Park on Monday, June 24, featured a question time panel with the candidates from the five parties polling the highest – Conservative, Green, Labour, Liberal Democrat and Reform UK."
and
"Workers Party candidate Mr Shaukat was unable to attend the meeting due to childcare commitments, the vicar said."
Mr Shaukat has indicated that it was not that simple and he is composing a written response. We have also notified Mr Lewis, in case the Daily Echo piece has been modified from his original.
So which was it? Either? Or both? What was the sequence of decisions or rationale given to candidates? Was it impartial? Was the event to be non-selective, or selective? Were the reasons impartial?
The Rev Clark has tried to clarify:
“Having organised successful Southampton Test hustings events in 2017 with all 5 candidates (including 2 independents) and one in 2019 with all 6 candidates (including 1 independent), the feedback from the audience in 2019 was that having as many as 6 candidates on the panel felt too much - it led to a lot of repetition, and meant that the audience weren’t able to hear as much from those they perceived to be the ‘main candidates’. It also meant we covered fewer topic questions.
"Based on that feedback, I decided to limit the number of panellists this time to 5. I waited until after the nominations deadline had passed (so I knew for sure who was standing), then checked the polls. Because there were 7 candidates standing overall, I contacted the candidates of the 2 parties polling lowest and explained that they were welcome to bring literature for people to take, and were welcome to make a short speech in the final part of the evening to put their pitch, but would not be on the panel fielding the questions.”
We await a response from Mr Shaukat, the other candidate that was excluded from the hustings Panel, and a second response to further questions sent to the Rev Clark.
Meanwhile, our approach to covering the 2024 General Election is to be impartial and fair to all candidates, and to challenge them all as a free public service. Southampton residents value our service and we can see it in our website figures.
We offered Katherine Barbour the right of reply on her comments. Southampton Green Party's Media Officer declined to comment.
Why Southampton Independents Is Covering the 2024 General Election
Southampton
Independents recommends no particular candidate in the 2024 General
Election. We publish this information and the information about the
other candidates to help inform Southampton residents for their vote, or
for them to choose not to vote or to positively spoil their ballot by
writing "none of the above". It's your choice.
The other candidates standing in Southampton Test are listed here.
Tell us what you think by getting in touch.
No comments:
Post a Comment