Jennifer Powers is a former Number 10 Special Adviser on Energy, Business, and Regulation and a lead at Smartphone Free Childhood in South-West LondonÂ
It is over and in truth never really began. My parliamentary career that is.
What good can come from failure? Soon many will be faced with that question. As for every winner on 4 July, there will be three, four, five, or more losers. My answer is to reflect on the Conservative Party’s candidate selection process and what it tells us about the challenges the party will face after the ballots are counted.
After the election, the party must consider what makes a good candidate and an effective MP. How do we balance the desire for local candidates with the need for talent? How do we devise a system that does not put off the people we need to attract into public life? How should we treat the people we wish to govern the country?
At a higher level, what does it mean to be a Conservative? What values does the party stand for and how does it apply them?
There is no right way, no perfect system for selecting candidates. There will always be a subjective element to the process, and rightly so. But the existing process is opaque, unfair, and ineffective.
There are excellent candidates just as there have been many impressive Conservative Members of Parliament. But too often this is despite the selection process, not because of it.
The Parliamentary Assessment Board (PAB), the gateway to the approved candidates’ list, was overhauled after the 2019 election. Prospective candidates were evaluated on various criteria such as resilience and communication skills in online tests and in-person activities. Perversely, there was no assessment of political views. Recent defections – and the number of Conservative MPs to the left of party members and Conservative voters – are the unsurprising results.
The PAB was in many ways the most objective part of the process. Once on the list, CCHQ provided a range of training courses and Women2Win offered a comprehensive professional development programme for female candidates. Â But in terms of finding a seat, the only certainty was the uncertainty of what you needed to do to be successful.
The machinations to be longlisted, known as ‘the sift’ are especially opaque. What if you meet everyone, make a good impression, and still don’t make the sift? Does CCHQ favour some people and if so, why?
Everyone would agree that dedication to the party, a good work ethic, and campaign skills are essential candidate attributes. But does this disadvantage people with young children, demanding professions, or caring responsibilities? Does it favour the single, the childless, and the wealthy? Does that matter?
Outside of selections conducted under by-election rules, the moment for maximum skullduggery is the meeting between CCHQ and the Association sift committee.
Prospective candidates get to know each other on the circuit. We compare notes. The make-up of the sifting committee can be the biggest factor in selection. One friend was not longlisted for his home seat despite a good reputation. He thinks the sifting committee had a favourite and kept off anyone they saw as a threat. Another friend was helped onto longlists by CCHQ but failed to be selected. A third friend made a longlist because he was mates with the Deputy Chair of the Association. I don’t blame any candidate for using their connections, that is the game. But these anecdotes point to a larger truth.
Readers may have little sympathy for those who fail to get selected. If they were not good enough, so be it. But candidate selection is not a meritocracy. It is part lottery, part cronyism.
Attracting good people into politics is bigger than the Conservative Party. Abuse, intimidation, and threats to safety, coupled with unreasonable expectations, poor working conditions, and lower pay than many professions understandably put off many talented people.
Conservatives should work collaboratively with the other parties to address these issues. But in the meantime, the party should get its own house in order.
The party has a duty of care to people who give so much of themselves. The financial and emotional cost of trying to be selected can be significant. The opportunity cost to one’s family and career can be immense. No one is entitled to a seat but everyone is entitled to honesty, transparency and to be treated with respect.
That means taking a strategic approach to candidate recruitment. It means being upfront with candidates about their prospects rather than leading them on for free labour. It means having the courtesy to keep them informed and return their calls.
Dozens (perhaps hundreds?) of candidates received no bespoke communication from CCHQ between the Prime Minister calling the election and the deadline for registering candidates on 7 June. This caused intense mental anguish to many, and profound mental health impacts for some.
Now is not the time to select and elect novices. Britain needs the very best people to meet the challenges of our age. We must renew conservatism. We must forge a party worthy of government. We must govern as conservatives if we are fortunate to return to power. None of this can happen until we change the culture of the party.
Any boss will tell you the importance of people to an organisation’s success, be it a school, a company, or a charity. Rebuilding the party must start with its people. What values does the party hold? What is the culture? How does it treat people?
After the election, a group of prospective candidates, ex-candidates, MPs, and former MPs will come together to wrestle with these questions and propose a better way. If you are interested in taking part, please contact [email protected].
To lead, we must be leaders. To govern, we must be worthy of the public’s trust. It starts and ends with people. It starts with how we treat our people. It starts with us.
The post Jennifer Powers: Whatever the election result, CCHQ must overhaul the candidate selection process appeared first on Conservative Home.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Jennifer Powers
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, http://www.conservativehome.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.