A few weeks ago we announced that our MP (Sally-Ann Hart, MP for Hastings and Rye) had failed to be re-adopted by her local party as the Conservative parliamentary candidate for next year’s general election.
Existing Conservative MPs are required to put themselves up for re-adoption if they are intending to stand at the next election. Usually this is something of a formality but on this occasion the selection council, led by chairman John Rankin had a tied vote which, under the rules meant that Mrs Hart was not re-adopted
Whilst the local Conservative party are remaining tight-lipped about exactly what went on, Rye News understands that this outcome caused significant dissent within the ranks, such that two weeks later Mr Rankin resigned, to be replaced by new chairman Rob Lee. Whether he jumped or, perhaps as a result of the subsequent revolt, was pushed is not clear, nor has it been stated whether any other council members followed their chairman’s example to fall on their swords.
Encouraged by the outcry from party members, Mrs Hart appealed to the local membership, as she was entitled to do, and having received a resounding vote in her favour, was subsequently formally reselected.
Speaking later, she said: “I am delighted and relieved to have received such resounding support from the wider local party membership. I look forward to going into the next election with a great unified local team supporting me.”
This would seem to be the better move by Hastings and Rye Conservatives. Events in the corridors of power at Westminster over the last few years will not make it easy for many Tory MPs at the next election, and to parachute a new candidate into our constituency at this stage would seem unlikely to help, particularly with the Labour Party already attempting to make their mark with their own new candidate Helena Dollimore.
Rye is by no means a safe seat for the Tories. Sally-Ann Hart’s predecessor and former home secretary, Amber Rudd, won her last election in 2017 by just 346 votes and while Mrs Hart increased this to 4,043 in 2019, this is far from a secure majority. At the last election the Greens stood their candidate down in favour of the Liberal Democrats, but they may decide not to do so next time. If one adds into the mix not only the sometimes-wacky independents but also the probability of a Reform Party (re-incarnation of the Brexit Party) candidate who could take votes from an element of the electorate dissatisfied with both the main parties, we could be looking at a fierce fight in 2025 with no certain outcome for any of the candidates.
Image Credits: Chris Lawson .
I am confused by Rye News’ position on political opinion. On 16th March were we told by John Minter: ‘Please note that between now and the election, party political statements, other than as mentioned above, submitted either as articles or comments, may well be restricted. There is only so much party politics that those not standing for election can take!’
Yet here we have a political opinion piece, posted as a news item, stating ‘This would seem to be the better move by Hastings and Rye Conservatives’ and allowing Sally-Ann Hart to make a political statement. So what’s it to be? Local authorities are in the ‘pre-election period’, previously known as purdah, which quite rightly restricts them from doing or saying certain things so as to not bias the upcoming election. This ‘pre-election period’ need not apply to Rye News. Clarification would be welcome. I would hope it’s not a case of John Minter cherry picking the articles and comments that align with his own opinion, but it looks that way.
I think it might be you that’s confused Dominic ? I don’t read anything that expresses John’s personal political views in this article. He comments on the Conservative’s best move in the context of what might be best for them, not him. He goes on to point out there is a tough fight ahead for the next election so I see no bias
I’m not sure it really matters. Any sane person can see what little has been done by our current MP to help either locally or nationally. We have a crisis with an ever increasing need for the local food bank, pollution being pumped into the sea destroying our tourism and fishing, and services crying out for investment.
Yes Dominic, it is predictable that you would think that, but then you are (or were?) a candidate for an opposing party , the Greens, a fact you carefully refrain from mentioning. Can I suggest you read Paul Camic’s comment which puts the case even better than I could.
I have no issue with the article being news outside of the pre-election period. Of course the good people of Rye and surrounding area need to know who the next Conservative parliamentary candidate will be. The point that you, Simon Parsons, Ian and Paul Camic are missing is the timing of the announcement, which is no coincidence. The local Conservative party want the electorate to know that there is now, In Sally-Ann Hart’s words, a ‘great unified local team’, and Rye News has uncritically published that during the pre-election period. As John Tolhurst correctly points out, the general elections are still two years off, so the article can and should have been held off until after the 4th May.
Let’s all remember local elections in May, and of course everyone trying to gain brownie points, let’s concentrate on what the budding candidates have to offer Rye in the next 4 years, as for a new mp,that’s another 2 years away, to then be considered.
Seems like a news story to me, Dominic. John describes events, brings in all the possible political parties, provides data about two previous elections, and allows a quote from a no doubt relieved and confident Ms Hart. I am personally not a fan of our MP but this seems a balanced piece of reporting.
In response to Dominic, it is absolutely correct that Sally-Ann Hart’s re-adoption as parliamentary candidate is mentioned. This is news and Rye needs to know, hence the need to publish this information in Rye News. John Minter was relaying facts, simple as that!
Simon, John is expressing a view, he express’s a view that Independent candidates are sometimes wacky! As someone WHO IS an Independent, having been a Conservative for 15 Years, let down by The Local Leadership in more ways than one, it is “now” more important that we work together, and listen to our communities. That is far more important to have an open mind on issues. Our younger people and families are fed up being let down, with national issues, having outcomes on local communities.
Fair, if minor, point Ian. You can’t get much more wacky than current Tory policies!
Hmm! to the above. It ha s appeared that Rye news does have a political slant. Of course it is news that Sally Ann Hart has been readopted but I agree with Dominic there are unnecessary assumptions and almost opinions in the delivery of the article.
Some predictions show that Labour have a 95% chance of winning Hastings and Rye at the next election. Can this be right?
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/seatdetails.py?seat=Hastings%20and%20Rye
Electoral Calculus is extremely reliable and well-regarded. Regularly quoted by broadsheets and broadcasters alike.
While this is a legitimate news story, the penultimate paragraph does contain a little ambiguity, with the sentence “This would seem to be the better move by Hastings and Rye Conservatives” possibly being read as support for Ms Hart. However, while the next sentence clarifies the writer’s meaning, some might take issue with the argument that a new Tory candidate would be less electable than Hart, whose time as MP has not been without controversy. A new Tory parliamentary candidate would only be “parachuted in” if s/he was from outside the constituency. In relation to the upcoming local election, Rye News’ (John Minter’s) declaration on 16 March that it could restrict ‘party political statements’ in articles and comments, save for the candidates’ own statements, was heavy-handed and, in my view, undemocratic. Who decides what is ‘party political’? Readers must have the right to comment, so long as the comments are free of bad language, abuse and potential libel. The comments are often the most interesting part of Rye News!
Is this the same Sally-Anne Hart that kept quiet about Partygate and only resigned when nearly every other MP had defected? I am a Tory voter, but I wouldn’t vote for her. I find her disingenuous.
To give Dominic his due, I think this is about perceptions. John’s absolutely entitled to his opinion. I suppose the issue is, the totality of John’s output (rather than this piece in isolation) makes it possible to guess what his perspective may be on the world, and that in turn colours perception of his articles on Rye News. It wouldn’t necessarily be commented on if he hadn’t made a point of demanding balance before! But I’d much rather have John’s input than not have it.
I think, overall, there’s a pretty good range of opinion on Rye News, but it does occur to me that the full range of conservative opinion is perhaps less represented on RN than some perceive… Some might be grateful for that(!), but it’s an interesting thought nonetheless. And to a degree, it’s probably about the same set of social and political factors that engendered UKIP and created Brexit. If people in general don’t feel their opinions are acceptable or valid, they leave the political forum and they go their own way. So, for instance, I enjoy disagreeing with John M and John T (who I’ve missed on here) but I’m glad of their points of view, and I’d much rather they expressed them than did not. That’s pluralism.
it’s pretty academical whether Hart is selected or not as whoever stands for the Tories won’t be an MP come the next election. Never has a government made such a hash of power or been more ineffectual in the history of the Conservative party.
If there is a Reform UK candidate, I will vote for them
You’re being generous! It actually suggests Labour has only a 93 per cent chance of winning!
Perhaps all the lesser parties (sorry, but self-evidently they are in this constituency), if they were serious about getting a better outcome for those of us who live here, they might all offer no candidate and leave Labour a clear run? You cannot genuinely say you want to improve voters’ lives, snatch a few hundred or thousand votes, but leave a result that helps no-one. Standing and taking those votes, just shows the minor parties are in it to make a point, but no more.
Peter, yes, speaking as a member of the LibDems, we are in it to make a point. That point being, ‘democracy’. You’re talking about splitting the anti-Conservative vote and consequently letting the Conservatives back in. A prospect I’m no more enthusiastic about than you are. However, having kids, I’m focussed on the long term, not the short term. Let me put it this way, if you have to vote for a party you don’t want, to keep out of office a party you want even less, how is that democracy? I believe in positive politics, not negative politics, I want to vote for something I believe in at a General Election. Personally, that’s a change in the way we do politics in this country. We can all see where the present antagonistic two-party system is leading us – pendulum politics and polarisation. That only serves parties and it means we never address long term strategic needs effectively – education, health, economy, defence, transport, the green economy, migration… Yes, even migration, bcs that is a generational issue, like many others, and cannot be bodged with costly, ill-considered and damaging pantomime-villain solutions in the run-up to elections. What we have now, due to our archaic First Past the Post system, is endemic short-termism, and it’s failing us. The only organisation served by First Past the Post is the Conservative Party due to the geographical concentration of their vote. So if you really want to deal them a blow, vote Lib Dem, not Labour, Peter. Bcs we are the only party that will deliver wholesale political change and ensure the system isn’t rigged. At Labour conference, members actually voted in favour of PR, but Sir Kier wants winner takes all bcs it serves his party’s prospects. Long term, it doesn’t serve us. So, if you want more pre-election ballot-bait policy, more governments elected on a minority of the popular vote, more wasted votes and more dangerous political disillusion, stick with what you know… Otherwise, have a look at Proportional Representation, where your vote actually matters. Finally, if the third parties split the anti-Conservative vote at the next General Election and Mrs Hart returns with her chums for another five years of dystopia and division, don’t blame the third parties, blame the electoral system. If you want real change, you have to vote for real change.
I think the forthcoming local elections may give a clue to the feelings of local people towards the General election. The confrontational nature of the existing system, and party system do no favours for the electorate, it is all the more important that Government provides a clear strategy on the fundamental issues, health, education, transport, education. For the years to come, if the candidate/s cannot you know what to do. We have now heard that a closed prison is being used to house people, so after all procedures are carried through the issue of housing arises, so what is the forward plan? I chair our local Patient Participation group so I know the concerns of doctors.
I hear nothing about that!
Dominic is right to point out the apparent bias in John Minter’s piece. The headline could have read ‘Hastings and Rye Conservative Party split 50/50 on whether to readopt Sally Ann Hart as their candidate’.
Regarding the LibDem and Green comments, until the UK adopts a fair PR voting system, the anti-Tory vote is bound to be fragmented. Only Belarus shares our love of FPTP.
I recently had the opportunity of voting in the SNP leadership contest. A transparent STV choice 1,2 and 3, validated by membership number and post code. A civilised country!
I would have loved to have seen our MP really leading a strong fight for our swimming pool. Winning this would have made such a difference to so many in Rye and the surrounding area. I thought back to the lead Paul Macartney made in fighting for the life of our beloved local Cottage Hospital contributing so powerfully politically, financially and in leadership. We now have a much valued wonderful resource in our Memorial Hospital.
In answer to the swimming pool our M P Sally Ann Hart has secured funds from the Chancellor’s fund. It is up to Rye Town Council et Al to use it wisely and perhaps install solar panels etc to help in the future. It’s a pity this was not mentioned in ,’The News’ ……