Jun 10th

Funding.

By Steve Lawrence

Is there a case of creating a fully paid up membership before anyone can stand as a candidate under the Jury Team, After all it is the Jury Team providing a platform to help enable them to get their word out.

I know that I want to stand as a candidate at the next election, I also know along with this
aspiration
there will be financial costs, i.e. - deposit, leaflet distribution, printing costs etc.

Anyone seriously wishing to stand for election would surely be willing to enter into such a membership?

Wouldn’t you?
I know I would.

Would this be against the whole idea of  Jury Teams principles?
Without funding there is no Jury Team.

Steve Diffin

Jul 4th

Where are they now

By Steve Lawrence

It seems to me that all those candidates that stood in the EU elections under the JT banner have disappeared. They after all the help they have been given by JT, should be here posting anything to keep this site alive, to help maintain public interest, then maybe as has been pointed out stop all the posts I’ve seen all over the net declaring the JT dead.

I’ve been looking at when some of these people last logged in to the JT site and many haven’t for 3 weeks and longer.

Others that have haven’t blogged during their visit. Shame on them.

Where are they all?
We need this site to be a hive of activity. Wake up.

Steve diffin

 

Jun 15th

Hold on there, Bald Eagle!

By Lyn Tofari
Interesting reading the email and ideas flying around, but the next move has to come from the Jury Team founder, Sir Paul. After all it is, to use a friends saying,  his 'train set'.

I would suggest that it is up to him how, or if, the Jury Team continues and hope that he is reading the comments/suggestions/ideas that appear on this site.

I love the enthusiasm that everyone is showing and really hope that JT continues, bearing in mind that the 'Kippers' and the other lot took time to actually gain real support. 

Money/fundraising is also a real issue as in our proposals there is a 'limit proposal' on Party Donations. I think the proposed limit was £50,000, which might seem a great deal of money, but in an election campaign 'tis but a drop in the ocean. So we need a lot of wealthy donors to give us a real boost, or millions of smaller amounts!

Libertas, apparently, spent 30,000,ooo Euro in the EU Elections. 
Jun 21st

look like interest failing

By Austin Compson-Bradford
Hi everyone by the number of posting, imputus is being lost any ideas how to keep up momentum
Jun 12th

Talking politically...

By Helen Critchell
Hi all

I'm just wondering whether we should actually be debating and discussing current political issues on this site as we are, after all, hoping to be tackling the issues that the public are either troubled by, or want answers to. If we are to go out canvassing tomorrow surely we are going to have to have an idea of how to answer queries. Of course we shall all have different opinions and our constituents will have different issues but debate and discussion may, at least, give us all food for thought.
Jan 11th

Alliance for Democracy

By Frances Spelling
How do Jury Team people feel about the Alliance for DEmocracy? Is it a good thing that Jury Team are now linked to Veritas, the Christian Party and the English Democrats? Will this give the Jury Team a better chance at the General election?

“The Alliance for Democracy is an Alliance of political parties who together polled 719,655 votes in the 2009 EU Elections, jointly campaigning in the 2010 UK General Election for much-needed practical and political reform”

Referenda for the People

- on European Union membership to control our borders and halt immigration.

Fairness for the People

1) English Parliament in England

2) Scottish Referendum on independence in Scotland

3) Welsh Parliament

Justice for the People

- Army Style punishment “Boot Camps” for convicted criminals

Nationality of the People

-Citizenship is a privilege not a right – no convictions for 10 years.

Reform for the People

Proportional representation in elections.



http://www.alliancefordemocracy.info/
Jun 25th

Debate: Closed primaries, "Wide Open" primaries or halfway house.

By Mike Brown
This subject is discussed by various people in various comments attached to other articles but maybe this and other key subjects need a separate article where all the comments on a single key issue can be debated and viewed.

I apologise if there is already an article on this specific subject that I have not yet found.

In a comment on Steve Diffin's more general article on Funding I wrote :

“There is a valid case for expecting members to pay a membership fee before any primaries are held for the general election. There is also a valid case for suggesting that only paid up members should vote in that election. Conversely, people may be reluctant to pay up before they can be shown that there is a fighting chance of some JT candidates actually winning. Therefore the more people we can get to vote in the primary the more valid is our case for then asking both for people's votes and for their money. Chicken or egg?”

However, because we are a fledgling party, and because I suspect that most of us would want to avoid a landslide victory for any major party, there is also a case to be made for a completely open primary. It should be feasible, with the existing technology that was used for the Euro Election to open up the JT primary to any of the official candidates of other parties, excluding Conservatives and Labour (but maybe not BNP) This should be contingent on a written guarantee from all JT candidates and the official candidates and constituency chairman of the other parties that if they lose the primary they will not contest the constituency and will instead fully endorse and canvas for the winner of the JT primary.

I am not sure how practical this would be, or how it would go down with electorate, or how it would go down with other parties, but at the next election it may just make the difference between a Conservative landslide and a parliament that can genuinely hold the executive to account.

I look forward to your thoughts.

Jun 17th

IMPORTANT - JURY TEAM UPDATE

By Lyn Tofari
The current situation which is that JT is in hiatus as Sir Paul looks into further sources of funding.

If anyone can offer;
suggestions on where funds can be obtained
donate amounts
willing to raise funds 

I'm sure all will be happily recieved.




Jun 25th

Why Jury Team is important.

By Alan Wallace
There's been a bit of frustration about the lack of news from Sir Paul and although I sympathise, we just have to be patient. I also think there's a bit of confusion about the nature of Jury Team.

For me, Jury Team is more than a support group. Although the candidates are all independents, JT provides a unifying thread that helps place us on the political map for voters. Agreeing certain principles doesn't make us a party, it's proof that a large group of independents can in fact coalesce around an issue and provide a coherent response - a point that the parties do not hesitate to use against us.

Let's be clear, except in unusual and bizarre circumstances, 300 independents could stand in the General Election and not have a hope of winning a single seat. Why? Because any promise we make to the electorate to achieve manifesto pledge A or commitment B will not be believed.

Let's say I stand on a platform of (say) repealing the smoking ban. Why should anyone vote for me? Even if elected, I'll be a solitary voice with no influence or power to change anything. But if we have 300 candidates standing with the realistic prospect of 50 being elected, the aim becomes achievable and the promise believable.

So Jury Team acts as a force multiplier and gives us a realistic chance of having independent MPs elected.

Sir Paul came up with a number of core principles for the European Elections. Many were about corruption and good governance, but they've been adopted almost wholesale by Westminster. How can we campaign on issues that have been resolved? Until the dust settles over the expenses scandal, we don't know for sure what core principles will remain unsettled.

The next step is the most crucial one. I truly believe that Jury Team offers something fundamentally different from the parties, but it's something that is hard to convey to the electorate - especially in a 10 second soundbite.  To change Parliament, we have to get there. We need a banner to rally around, a hymn sheet to sing from that will make voters want to vote for us. More importantly, we need to have a message that inspires non-voters to turn out at the Polling Stations and vote for us.

A first step is to attract as many people to this site and to Jury Team as possible. Get sending e-mail requests out. Start blogging and joining message boards. Invite everyone you know. Speak to other political activists and explain how they can stand as a candidate with Jury Team now and promote their Green/Left/Right/Libertarian agenda once elected. Speak to exceptional councillors, business leaders or public figures in your area. Explain how Jury Team can support them and empower them.

If Sir Paul sees dozens of people joining the site each day, he might be encouraged.

We're all sitting here waiting for Sir Paul to make the next move. Maybe he's waiting for us?
Jun 8th

European Disappointment

By Helen Critchell

My heart goes out to disappointed MEP candidates everywhere. However, I believe that this election was going to be disappointing in many ways for many people and everyone should have expected it (in hindsight, no doubt!).

But it was another lesson and wake up call to everyone in the political arena as to the real and true meaning and purpose of what it is to be a politician, whether in government or aspiring to govern. It’s no good the media and mainstream politicians declaring that the public voted out of protest to all the fringe parties (including far right) because that simply – in my eyes – makes a mockery of all those who made the effort to go out and vote in the first place. It was the 53% across Europe who didn’t vote who were protesting. Why insult the intelligence of the electorate and suggest that they didn’t really know what they were voting for because it was done in a fit of pique? How dare they!

Why is it that politicians, including aspiring ones, absolutely fail to see that whomsoever the electorate vote for is their choice based on their perception of the political process and the state their own world is in and I have to say that after many hours of door knocking this last year the public were making their choices about who to vote for in the European elections months ago. And that was way before the expenses fiasco. Why should someone who cares deeply that the country is being vastly overpopulated be branded a protest voter (or worse, I suppose) because they vote for the BNP? Why should someone who is sick of the way Europe interferes in the law making of this country be considered some kind of wayward and delinquent child for voting for UKIP? Why should someone who feels that animals are incredibly important to our survival be considered a freak for voting for Animals Count? There are so many, many people in this country of ours who are feeling disenfranchised and ignored. Their voices are not being heard.

To disapprove of uncapped immigration seems to render you a racist; to disapprove of European involvement renders you xenophobic and insular; to care for animals/pensioners/religion renders you marginal/ pointless/weird. Unless you sway towards supporting mainstream doctrines and beliefs you are considered, as one of the amorphous body of the electorate, to be irrelevant. This is where politics (and the media that supports it) has screwed up in such an incredibly bad way.

In my view, this method of making contemptuous remarks about fringe parties and independents (and those many thousands of voters who voted for them) by both the media and the mainstream parties smacks of the continued arrogance that they maintain despite the mess they are all in.

What is vitally important to the Jury Team and Independents everywhere, right now, is to remember – unequivocally – that they must reach out to the electorate in a way that the major parties just don’t seem to do. You can’t just tell the people of this country that you will listen to them; you actually have to listen to them physically and formulate a manifesto based on what you are hearing and which you can propound with passion. We are being told on a daily basis that GB is listening to us but he’s not, and never has done.

There has to be a cohesive approach to bringing the British Public to believing in a whole new concept of politics and I’m afraid it’s going to mean a lot more work (and possibly many years) than resting on the belief that those voters who habitually go out and vote will change their allegiances to a ‘Party’ they have never met before simply because they are fed up with the current mob.Telling people that this is a 'Party' with Principles, then perhaps we need to articulate those principles a little clearer? 

I would really have liked to have heard more from/about those candidates who stood in the Eastern region, other than reading their profiles on the JT website. After all, I was interested and was looking for information. What about all those people who only hear of the mainstream parties (plus the smaller odds and sods) and who wouldn’t have a clue about the JT? I met many of them when I was out campaigning for the local elections. Maybe the JT does need more publicity outside of London but if that is going to happen then there needs to be a better plan in place and an avoidance of the impression that it has no policies or manifesto. Maybe a statement of intent, a constitution or mandate or something that gives the many hundreds of thousands of voters who really do need clarity of purpose from their chosen political leaders is needed? After all, the majority of people in any given country are very happy to be led (leaders are few and far between) and it’s essential that they are led responsibly and effectively. As much as we would love every voter in this country to take the initiative, make a decision as to what they want, tell the politicians, follow those requests up and fight for their rights, etc, it just ain’t going to happen! They will continue to sit quietly in the wings until they know that they will be listened to and – more to the point – that they do actually have a voice.

Change is essential, but until then the tried, tested and failing system we have in place is all that the majority of people in this country know about. For any intending JT parliamentary candidates out there please go out and meet your voters face to face. I know that I would be far more inclined to believe in someone who bothered to knock on my door, smile and say Hello than someone who waited for me to go look them up on the internet!