LABOUR bosses are facing a growing list of complaints and legal threats over their attempted clear-out of "dead wood" city councillors in Glasgow, The Herald can reveal.
Doubts have been raised about the legality of the process, which would block around half Labour’s 47 councillors from standing for re-election next May.
Concerns include possible breaches of party rules, rushed appeals, and councillors’ fates decided before they were even interviewed.
The bid to bring new talent into the City Chambers, has prompted a fierce backlash among those de-selected, and there are now calls for a critical meeting of the city party next week to be postponed.
There are also questions about the credibility of a key official behind the process, procedures secretary Jamie Mallan, who runs a website pretending to be a dog. The regular online babytalk on his “Brodie the Beagle” Facebook page has raised eyebrows among activists, who believe Mr Mallan is a potential embarrassment to the party.
Other parties have now approached Labour councillors about defecting.
Around a dozen councillors are expected to lodge appeals, many alleging the exercise has been badly mishandled.
Labour last night said the process was “absolutely robust” and indicated the shake-up would continue. “Do not underestimate the will to change the people we are putting on offer in Glasgow,” said a party source.
Among those who failed recent vetting were veteran former city Treasurer James McNally, and former licensing chief Stephen Dornan. However, younger councillors were also rejected, including Euan McLeod, Andy Muir, Chris Hughes and Paul Carey.
Under Labour rules, sitting councillors are only interviewed ahead of an election if there are concerns about their discipline, attendance, campaigning or competence.
However, in Glasgow all the councillors were interviewed, a step which required Scottish general secretary Colin Smyth to waive normal procedure.
Activists claim this was done without the explicit agreement of the city party’s ruling general committee.
If true, it could undermine the whole basis of the vetting exercise, leaving the party open to legal challenges.
Some councillors are also challenging Mr Mallan’s status as procedures secretary, a post he holds by dint of being secretary of Glasgow East Constituency Labour Party. It is alleged Glasgow East’s annual meeting last month was not properly convened because not all members were told of it, and so Mr Mallan has no right to be procedures secretary.
There are also complaints there is not enough time to process appeals before the city party meets on September 22 to approve the first tranche of candidates.
At least one councillor is now considering going to court to interdict the meeting. In addition, two councillors claim their rejections were dated the day before they were interviewed.
Many councillors blame the cull on Ken Clark, a director of the London Labour Party, who is working for Scottish Labour for a year. “This is London Labour running Glasgow Labour,” said one disgruntled councillor.
A Scottish Labour spokesman said more than 100 members had applied to stand in Glasgow, and competition for candidacies was tough.
“Of course those councillors who have not been selected to stand again will be disappointed, but being a Labour councillor is not a job for life. Local party members in Glasgow decide who the Labour candidates are, and anyone dissatisfied has the right of appeal to the Scottish Executive Committee.”
Mr Mallan refused to comment last night.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article