Even an imbecile can understand this, but it takes a very expensive lawyer to try and muddy the water.
Chapter 4, Clause II, rule 2 B ii.
“Where there is no vacancy, nominations may be sought by potential challengers each year prior to the annual session of party conference. In this case nominations must be supported by 20% of the Commons members of the PLP”
......... I really don't see where the ambiguity is
"Where there is no vacancy, nominations may be sought by potential challengers" ......
"nominations may be sought by potential challengers" ........
"potential challengers" .......
Its as clear as day.
The problem is.... people trying to bend the rules for their own ends.
Update 28/7/2016
Labour leadership: Corbyn ballot challenge rejected
High court rules there is no basis to challenge NEC’s decision that Labour leader should automatically be on ballot
LINKS
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/09/12/what-the-labour-leadership-election-rules-say-about-removing-a-leader/
http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN03938
Update 28/7/2016
Labour leadership: Corbyn ballot challenge rejected
High court rules there is no basis to challenge NEC’s decision that Labour leader should automatically be on ballot
LINKS
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/09/12/what-the-labour-leadership-election-rules-say-about-removing-a-leader/
http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN03938
No comments:
Post a Comment