ON January 16 you published a letter from Johann Lamont, chair of Govan Constituency Labour Party. As the vice-chair I have like her tried to keep my own counsel on the matter of the candidate selection. I must however write in reponse to what she has said.
I am surprised that she seems to be suggesting that there were no flaws in the process whatsoever and that everything was completely above board. I am even more surprised to read her stout defence of the CLP secretary, Donna Mackinnon, and her role in the process.
I thought that Johann Lamont was as appalled as I was at the way that Donna Mackinnon acted in the verification process.
One example involved Faiza Sarwar, the daughter of Mohammad Sarwar. She was ruled ineligible because she was not on the electoral register.
She was not on the register because at the time it was compiled, she was not old enough to vote.
She was able to prove that she was resident at her home address - that of her parents - and was clearly eligible to vote under the spirit and the letter of the Labour Party rules. Her appeal to the party executive was turned down amid complete incredulity from those present who were not diehard supporters of Mike Watson.
Many other equally ludicrous decisions were pushed through at that meeting, by Mike Watson's supporters, to force the party organiser, Lesley Quinn, to rule on the eligibility of members, putting her under extreme pressure. This was clearly an abuse of the system and one which Mike Watson's supporters carried out throughout the selection process.
I am surprised that Johann Lamont chooses to repeat their version of events, giving it more credibility than it deserves. I am even more surprised that she takes such issue with Jimmy Reid's comments, which have been a clarion voice on the issue of the Govan selection.
I would have thought that as a feminist she would understand the anger and sense of injustice that we Asians in the Labour Party feel.
Mohammad Shoaib,
8 Glencairn Drive,
Glasgow.
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