Bluemerle

I like the idea that members of the NEC come from all over the British Isles, and no one region has a monopoly.

It is difficult for ordinary members to chose who to vote for because most do not know the candidates at all. However, I would imagine that people in Scotland would be happy to see someone representing them.

UkipScot

We need an NEC comprised of regional representatives. This will stop power residing in the hands of the same old faces from the Home Counties and ensure that the NEC actually speaks for the whole of the UK party membership instead of themselves.

UkipScot

That`s the whole point, they`re not. They are merely those who`ve been around long enough to make their faces the best known, thus perpetuating their place at the top of the pyramid because, as Bluemerle says, people tend to vote for who they know. This brings all the inherent problems of corruption brought about by extended terms of office.
Tenure is no indication of talent.
It is more democratic and fair for each region to have its own representative, thus enabling the NEC to speak for the whole party membership.
To maintain the present system is to perpetuate the concentration of too much power in too few unrepresentative hands. That power must be dispersed throughout the country to those who truly have this party`s best interests at heart - the membership.

SponPlague

Hmmm. :? It's possible that, with no-one currently in mind, under a regional NEC system, we could get a poor choice of candidates, purely because they were all a given region could put-up. ops: If a region has a bias of talent, that talent should be electable - but I quite agree that "known names" tend to get re-elected: when the whole NEC were forced to resign at an EGM a few years back, many of the same names returned. What was the point? :evil:

kernow

[quote="UkipScot"]I can't see a true representation of the Country any other way, regardless of the competance of members representing each region.

steve allison

The problem with regional representation on the NEC is that it could result in the bigger regions feeling under-represented. If (for sake of argument) Scotland has 1,000 members and the South East has 8,000 then with Regional representation Scotland gets 1 NEC seat per 1,000 members and the South East gets 1/8 Seats per 1,000 members, hardly fair? The only way to balance that would be to take the smallest region and say that gets 1 seat and the other regions get multiple seats, this would produce an NEC with around 40 members, getting a bit unwieldy. Alternatively we could go for a hideously complicated voting system with PR type calculations. There isn't an easy answer!

As North East Regional Organiser I would of course say we should have Regional Seats but I can see both sides of the argument. As a regional Organiser I also think I am banned from standing for the NEC, even though I am a member of the Party....how fair is that!!!!!

SponPlague

I don't think you are disqualified as an RO, Steve, but you would be disqualified as a salaried employee: You could stand, but would need to resign your salaried position(s) immediately if elected. Nikki SInclaire knows all the specifics and was in the same boat - ask her at conference... :P