Five candidates have been nominated to stand in the Queen’s Park by-election for a seat on Brighton and Hove City Council.
They are
- Rüdi Dikty-Daudiyan – Liberal Democrat
- Steve Gladwin – Labour
- John Shepherd – Reform UK
- Stefan Speckesser – Conservative
- Mark Strong – Green
Polling day is on Thursday 24 September, with polling stations open from 7am to 10pm.
The by-election is the third in the two-member ward since the local elections in May 2023 and the eighth in Brighton and Hove in that time, all caused by the resignation of former Labour councillors.
The latest by-election was called after Labour councillor Milla Gauge resigned over safeguarding concerns, saying that the council was not doing enough to protect children questioning their gender identity.
After the local elections, Labour had 38 out of the 54 seats. It now has 31. The Greens had seven but now have 11, including a former Labour councillor who became an Independent before switching to the Greens.
Two councillors elected as Labour candidates at the 2023 local elections now sit as Independents – as does one former Conservative.
A hustings is due to take place at St Luke’s Church Hall on Thursday 17 September from 7pm to 8.30pm. The chance to put questions to the candidates has been organised by the non-political St Luke’s Residents’ Association.
Bella’s ‘Operation Black Vote’ is going well, I see. How much taxpayer’s money did she waste on that empty virtue signalling – £83,000?
Five candidates and, remarkably, five white men.
In a ward as wonderfully diverse as Queen’s Park, one might have hoped our political parties could have produced a field that looked a little more like the community they are seeking to represent.
Diversity, it seems, is much easier to put in a leaflet than on a ballot paper.
Four white men, and bottom right, a ferret!
Charlie! Really.
One hesitates to reduce local democracy to The Wind in the Willows, but now you mention it, I can rather see a Badger, a Mole, a Water Rat and perhaps a particularly ambitious Toad among them.
Haha very funny!
Of course we have had three lost labour candidates, the two family members, very unusual those selections, people parashooted into the ward with no real local connection, this has been a reoccurring problem, I would say cross party.
I recently did an FOI to Brighton and Hove city council asking them the birth places of the cities councillors, confirmation of every local connection. They didn’t not hold that information.
If you are homeless you cannot get on the housing register unless you have lived here for 5 of 7 years.
Maybe it’s time to have a similar policy, councillors should have lived in the ward 5 of or the last 7 years to be eligible for standing.
Dare I say this but the Tories have been the best for recruiting Brighton and Hove councillors who were born and raised. Pity there policies were bad. The city never really recovered from their cabinet and I expect the debt this labour cabinet has put through will cost this city for a generation to come.
Saying that divided parties can still win.
Daniel, a very interesting point you raise.
It does produce some rather strange circumstances. I hear, for example, the intriguing rumour that our very own council leader and deputy leader may not actually live in the wards they represent.
If true, one wonders what conclusion one is supposed to draw.
Is this an admirable act of civic benevolence – departing the tree-lined parades of their central Brighton and Hove villas each morning to represent those less fortunate elsewhere on the edges of wondrous city – or merely the happy coincidence of a conveniently vacant safe seat, coupled with a certain reluctance to live among the people one has volunteered to represent?
One should never allow a good rumour to masquerade as fact, of course. But perhaps someone better informed can enlighten me.
Lady Bracknell
Not one woman.
Quite, Sarah. Not one woman.
Five parties, five candidates, and apparently not a single one capable of finding a woman to put before the electorate.
For organisations that speak so fluently about representation, inclusion and equality, the practical results are strikingly old-fashioned.
One might almost conclude that diversity is regarded as an excellent principle – provided it does not interfere with candidate selection.
Lady Bracknell
The image of candidates tell us a sad truth the Reform has already won the argument. Labour and Greens are becoming more homogeneous and monochrome.
I’ll cover a few of points raised above here, in one post.
1 Candidate Genders – parties select their candidates in isolation. They aren’t influenced by what the others are doing. They aren’t doing deals with each other. Then they can only select from the people who put themselves forward. I too would prefer more women candidates and office holders but many are reluctant because of the on line social media abuse they will get. And they get far more abuse than male candidates and much of it isn’t about polices but about their looks, their hair and their clothes. Non mothers get abuse that they don’t have children. Mothers get abuse because they won’t be at home looking after their children. Ethnic Minority candidates and elected office holders get it even worse.
2 Living in the ward – there isn’t a legal requirement on this. The law says candidates must either live or work within the councils area. If you’ll only vote for candidates who live in the ward you are severely restricting your choices. What happens if you are normally a Tory voter but the only candidate who lives in the ward is a Green? Would you really vote Green despite their policies being the opposite of your political views? Then what happens with there is a boundary revision? Will you expect people to just move house?
3 Candidates place of birth – it’s not legally required. I’m not sure what use it is. A candidate could have been born in Brighton then moved away a year later not to return until many years later. Would you really favour that candidate more than one who had done the reverse and was born elsewhere but who moved here a year later and stayed?
ChrisC, I take your point on the abuse faced by women and minority candidates – but I cannot quite accept that we should simply shrug at a poor outcome because society has contrived to make public life unpleasant for them.
One wonders what Emmeline Pankhurst would have made of five political parties producing five male candidates and then explaining, rather apologetically, that this is simply how things are.
And on residency, I rather enjoy the question. Who better represents a neighbourhood: the ambitious politician parachuted in from elsewhere in the city – or even from beyond our borders – armed with grand ideas, press releases and an eager eye for the next photo opportunity; or someone who actually knows its streets, its problems and the people who live there?
The law may not insist upon the latter. The electorate, however, is perfectly entitled to prefer it.
Lady Bracknell
The Labour Party has never had a female leader (other than interim), so it appears to be a cultural problems within some parties still (off the top of my head – it is Labour and Reform who seem most wedded to the white middle-aged / older male Leadership model). It is a problem that can’t simply be dismissed by men within the parties as women not putting themselves forward, they do. And more could be done at a national and local level to encourage people from different backgrounds to stand.
In Labour Leadership elections I can think of, there have been multiple female candidates putting their hat in the ring, including some with bags of experience who are used to, and prepared for, the flack they would get by doing something even more high profile. The reasons they were not selected is because men were selected instead of them, time and time again.
I wonder if John Shepherd would like to take the opportunity to distance himself from the Channel 4 investigation that broke?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXut3s90rUI