Your CV Is A Work Of Fiction... You're A Liar... No You Are... Ner Ner Na Ner Ner...

The Labour Party seems to be seeing its first ever internet-based bitching campaign, with LabourHome running a campaign for its editorial team member Mark MacDonald to become Party Treasurer against Jack Dromey the incumbent. This could be interesting, not least to see exactly how much more damage can be done to Labour by Party members tearing eachother apart in public. And although I've been criticised for exactly the same problem, I'm disappointed to see the poor standard of spelling and grammar, as well as the cat-scratching. I haven't noted the missing apostrophes because there are so many that my notes would make the text virtually unreadable. Here are some extracts from the debate thus far.

I'm going to support Mark for the Treasurer position because I believe he will help provide oversight and accountability in the party and help prevent the mistakes that negate the work of Labour activists.

Mark I am glad you will support me and I will make sure that I put your name around for treasurer (no problem!)

I though [sic] you were neutral (only joking), just make sure you support me.

For goodness sake John - this isnt the John Wiseman show - this post was about an important position on the NEC which quite frankly the current occupier has shown not to be up to the task on [sic]. People will vote democratically for the NEC in due course - although I am compelled to warn people to take a very close look at your CV it isnt 100% true now is it?......

I think I know better. I think you will find I have held or our [sic] holding every position on that CV. You are entitled to your opnion [sic] and I am sorry, [but I?] don't do tv appearences [sic].

Yes the key word being "held" - people should ask why you dont hold these positions anymore.... Interesting to note on teh [sic] Youth Officer you say you dont hold it anymore why not tell people upfront [sic] that you don’t hold the other positions either? So Lets take a look at your CV:

Experienced local activist and Councillor – Councillor for West Sutton Ward in St Helens - LOST THE SEAT NOT A CLLR ANY MORE! North West Regional Board Member – Labour Party, Active across the North west - LOST THAT POSITION NOT ON THE REGIONAL BOARD! Vice-Chair of our Constituency Labour Party – consulting our members, developing a recruitment strategy and encouraging young people into the party. - LOST THAT POSITION NOT VC any more! Political Education officer for Sutton BLP – working to recruit in a ward which is low on members and educate local people on politics – HOW MANY PEOPLE DID YOU RECRUIT? Member St Helens Local Government Committee – making sure members’ views are put forward at every level - ST HELENS LOCAL GOV COMMITTEE DOESNT EXIST ANYMORE.... Putting across latest information to help in campaigning. - WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU WENT TO A LABOUR GROUP, ah maybe its because you are not an observer anymore or havent been for sometime. Amicus & Labour Party Parliamentary Panel Member - YES ONLY BECAUSE OF AMICUS - IS IT NOT TRUE YOU FAILED a LOCAL ELECTION PANEL? Regional Political Committee Member Amicus - NOT ANYMORE. As an active member of the Labour Party since my mid-twenties and a trade unionist since sixth-form college, I have had a breadth of experience to bring to any post. I have been involved in a number of campaigns locally. I have a good knowledge of campaigning. I was the youngest Councillor on the council, when elected, and so I had to learn about local Government very quickly, which I was able to do. WHAT CAMPAIGNS WOULD THESE BE? I THOUGHT YOU FAILED YOUR LOCAL GOV INTERVIEW NOT ONCE BUT TWICE DUE TO LACK OF CAMPAIGNING!!!! As a lead officer in the CLP I was active in three wards during the last local elections. I also campaigned to get the local MP elected in 2001 and 2005. IF YOU WERE SO ACTIVE WHY DID YOU FAIL THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PANEL INTERVIEW?

I think people can get the picture, I am not having a go at you John, so I will stop going through the CV there but you have to agree your CV doesn’t really summarise the position as it is, does it now?

Dear comrade calm down!! This sounds like your [sic] annoyed about something. People can judge for themselves. Just make sure your contact knows to get all of their facts correct [sic]!! Please don't turn this personal [sic]. Thanks.

I just thought, post your CV ah you can't because your can't be that honest we don't know who you are, you probably sat at home, because somebody is having a go [sic!!!]. I did positions held past and present [sic]. I am the honest one unfortunately your [sic] not. Goodbye.

Also I hope you are still thinking of supporting me.

I never did say I was thinking of supporting you. You will have to make a much more convincing argument. You seem to stand for all the following: Unite, The Left, The Centre Left, The Centre, Accountability, Youth, Aganist [sic] Factionalism. You tend to respond to any negative comments by trying to assuage them. Mark's campaign on the other hand has a clearly defined purpose, if he is capable of demonstrating his ability to deliver it then he will accrue support. You seem to be trying too hard to be all things to all people. I think you lack the experience and should try for a feeder position like NPF and come back later to the NEC. I don't intend to keep having the debate with you, so lets put a line under it now.

I speak from the heart and through the experience of my life and seeing the miners strike at first hand.

Mark MacDonald says :- "but it is not about evidence, it is about perception". Sorry mate but that's the last thing you should have said. The recent troubles with the party can be put at the door of all the legal careerists who moved into the party since '97 (and I include Blair in this). The message is coming across that it's okay to do wrong, to lack the moral high ground as long as enough spin is put on it that it is not "perceived" as being a wrong-doing. No thankyou.

After hearing that put down about perception I'm definitely supporting you.

After only a few dozen posts, we are already seeing the usual mixture of cynicism, personal ambition and lack of discipline that unites the Labour left these days. It's why neither Meacher nor McDonnell ended up on leadership the ballot paper [sic] and why Bob Wareing will be out of parliament after the next election. I predict that this is why Dromney [sic] will remain as Treasurer, unless another candidate is put up by No. 10.

Thanks Mark for the interest, unfortunately our party is crammed full of well meaning amateurs, who have not delivered. Have you even been a ward treasurer, have you been a CLP treasurer, have you ever been a treasurer for anything. If the answer is no, I am afraid your chances are slim to zero. I certainly could not in all honesty recommend you to my branch, clp, dlp and union. Bravo for raising the subject and now can the real candidates step forward.

If I can recall correctly, the role involves providing oversight and doesn't really have anything to do with account-balancing. Our CLP's treasurer is a useless git (he's a bit senile like me), and I think Mark's experience as a barrister counts for a lot more. Additionally, he says he's worked on cases that revolve around finance, which is enough for me. You have my vote, Mark and I'll be asking my CLP to support you.

I have to say I agree here; the amateurs within our party are actually people who have absolutely no experience in the real world (or in matters related to their current job in the party) - Mark's actually got all the necessary qualifications to provide that oversight on behalf of the NEC/membership. The last guy didn't deliver, so he's got to go. I'm going to give Mark a chance, and if he doesn't deliver then he'll have to go too - or at least that's how I think accountability works these days.

Thank you for your comment Comrade. I dissagree [sic] that only an accountant can do the job. You should be competent and dedicated - which I am. The idea that the oversight needs to be provided by an accountant infers a very confrontational approach where the party sees itself as being under investigation by its own officers. I do happen to believe we need a traditional style Finance Director in the party with an [sic] management accounting background.

"The idea that the oversight needs to be provided by an accountant infers a very confrontational approach". So you intend to leave your professional scepticism at the door in the same way as the previous treasurer? "I do happen to believe we need a traditional style Finance Director in the party with an [sic] management accounting background". So you are happy to have less ability than the bloke you are reviewing? Remember, he or she is going to be paid by the party and beholding to the PM not you. Ulitimately [sic] it will be you carrying the can as well. Personally Treasurer and Finance Director should be the same post [sic]. If you are prepared to take some advice, don't try and bullshit when it comes to finance. There are two qualities that we need to fulfil this role:

1) someone who is going to build a control environment that is confrontational. Make no mistakes, people have got to know that if they do something wrong they will be found out and right royally shafted. That way no-one messes about in the first place. I'm Welsh and supported Hain but personally I would be hanging Harman and Hain up by their delicate areas outside Westminster if I was Gordon Brown and the country would have respected him for it. By not doing so it looks like he hasn't got a moral compass and/or lacking a backbone. Its harsh, but its the truth and if you don't believe it then why are diehard labour supporters on this site calling for resignations?

2) someone who can implement that control environment without pissing everyone off while they are doing it.

The answer to 1 is an accountant because they know how to set up their systems along the fundemental [sic] principles of accountant and the experience to ensure they work. The answer to 2 is an accountant because if its a qualified accountant showing you a set of numbers and this is how things are going to be it will be accepted whereas the party is full of lawyers and they are not going to be told by another lawyer what to do [sic]. Be sure that you want this job. You can try and slide the issues like you lawyers do and that would probably make you a good MP but you have to be able to do the job and this is one which most qualified accountants would baulk at. If you muck this up you will not recover from it.

"this is one which most qualified accountants would baulk at. If you muck this up you will not recover from it." Absoloutely [sic] Comrade. I cannot see why any qualified accountant would take this on, unless retired. Currently the job has perceived responsibility without any real power - you're the fall guy for when something goes wrong and public. It could be career ending. I think a barrister wouldn't be a bad choice, given an accountant is unlikely. As Mark said "As a Barrister, I am used to a lack of disclosure, but it is matter of perseverance, and making sure that people are aware that without proper disclosure the job cannot be done properly." There are a lot worse choices.

I have just realised, I've met Mr McDonald a couple of times. I only met him briefly but he seemed an extremely ambitious individual who is obviously impatient to make a career in politics. I don't think that's quite what people want to see in a Treasurer - sorry. I wish him the best of luck in seeking a parliamentary seat, which is what he really desires, I'm sure.

If you had said you took A levels and then worked for a charity or the local Union I have said yes ok, but another lawyer within Labour, nope.

I do hope that we get some sensible debate here. Otherwise it starts to look as if the Labour Party membership is simply a rump of illiterate, ignorant, feuding idiots ignored by a leadership of pigs at a trough, increasingly looking after their own interests and ignoring the Party base.