Labour scrambles for candidates to avoid local elections bloodbath

[IwantToRetire]

... an email sent to Labour members stated: “The deadline for candidate nominations is next week and we still have a number of places left for members to stand for us in those wards where the aim is mainly to fly the flag for Labour and to give Labour members and Labour voters the chance to vote Labour on the ballot paper.”

The message, in bold, underlined, red text, continues: “To complete that task we need your help NOW as members by some more of you volunteering to stand for us.

“Don’t assume others are applying, so do please contact us now.”
To highlight the ease with which people can apply to stand, the email emphasises that there is “no complicated interview process” and decisions are “made locally”.

Several hours later, a second email was circulated stating: “Please reply to this email if you are willing to be a paper candidate in any of these seats.”

The party has significant concerns about losing some of its safest seats in London, where Labour is set to face serious challenges from the Greens, who are projected to do well in urban centres and areas with a high student population.

Meanwhile, an insider in Tower Hamlets told The Telegraph that the Labour Party had been struggling to find enough female candidates to stand in the ward to meet its policy of positive discrimination.

The party can use all-women shortlists to increase female representation in local government, often targeting “winnable” seats, with the aim of eventually achieving a 50-50 gender balance in elected positions.

But this has inevitably made recruiting harder. ...

Extracts from https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/04/04/labour-candidates-local-elections-bloodbath/

Also available to read at https://archive.is/cJkpH

I wonder why recruiting women is harder?!

Could you be an undercover agent for Women's Sex Based Rights?

If you have a current membership of your local Labour Party, why not put yourself forward?

Once you are in on the inside think of the secrets you could learn!

All parties have had issues in recruiting candidates particularly in areas they've not chance of being elected for years.

This is not new or an issue exclusive to Labour.

Did you read the article?

It is about Labour having always been confident of just getting in on a long stand assumption of a council being Labour.

If you want to talk about how difficult it is for Parties to recruit local councillors why not start a thread on that?

It's someone making something out of nothing.

Of course people don't want to stand somewhere they have no chance of winning. It's a lot of effort for no reward.

Its not bloody rocket science.

But putting yourself forward as a "paper candidate" is not hard work. Often they don't even bother doing any canvassing or anything other than lending their name to the ballot.

I am close to people who have been paper candidates. They did a lot of work regardless of what you say and they had to put up with an enormous amount of abuse for putting their name to paper. The amount of abuse and from whom is actually quite shocking.

As was the case with many Reform candidates. Some were annoyed at being expected to attend Council meetings.

I know a Lib Dem local councillor, who was a paper candidate and ended up winning when there was a local shift to the Lib Dems. It was a bit of a shock for her.

But Labour are not expected to, nor are they expecting, to win any of these seats where they are soliciting people to be paper candidates. Getting abuse because your name is down as a Labour candidate is unpleasant and probably if you know it's likely to happen, something to avoid. But it's certainly not "a lot of effort". I stood as an Independent one year. I did absolutely nothing other than fill in the paperwork (I suppose you might call that "a lot of effort"!). You don't have to come up with a deposit or pay for any leaflets, and if the party is organising it, they'll get the people who will nominate you. Of course it would be "a lot of effort" if you weren't expecting to win and you did and then had to attend meetings and do the work of a local councillor. But that's not what we're talking about here.

Paper candidates is a thing. We have always used them. Don’t campaign or even put a leaflet out.
The internet is full of cranks who don’t understand this - we believe that anyone who wants to vote Labour should be able to vote Labour hence standing someone everywhere in every election.

The headline confuses two completely different issues - finding paper candidates, which is always a last-minute scramble, and Labour's likely disastrous results. The two don't have very much to do with each other.

Indicentally, doing any campaigning as a paper candidate is considered a bit self-indulgent. The view is that if you're campaigning, it should be in a target seat instead.

Well as I said up thread as far as I am concerned I was hoping this was a way to learn a few Labour "secrets" not anything more than that.

But maybe not just Labour but all Parties dont let paper candidates into the inner circle.

What a shame. I was hope for post election revalations from GC feminists who had gone undercover in order to expose Labour's real beliefs.

I have a friend who, years ago, let himself be talked into being a paper candidate. Next thing he knew, Labour did unexpectedly well and he'd condemned himself to four years of sitting on Camden Council, and the only thing I can say about that is that there are worse councils in London.

Not an option for me, because I'm not a Labour member, my local CLP is in special measures so candidates are selected by some anonymous pen pusher at HQ, and, even if I thought Labour weren't heading for a bloodbath locally, I don't want to be a councillor. Everyone I know who's been a councillor hated it. Voters come to you and expect you to sort out their problems.

A different friend once asked me if I'd be a paper candidate for the Conservatives. I was assured that I wouldn't have to canvass, or even necessarily be a party member. I still wouldn't do it. You let yourself in for a whole lot of grief being a candidate, and IMHO the only reason for tolerating that is if you actually want to do the job.

I stood as a Party of Women candidate in a Council by-election in 2024, leafleted the area of foot with friends and it was fine.

What is all this "grief" that people got when they stood just as a paper candidate, which is just filling in a load of paperwork to get Nominated and then that's it, nothing more to do. 🤷‍♀️

Everyone I know who's been a councillor hated it. Voters come to you and expect you to sort out their problems.

😁

Well, thanks for the thread, I did not know this was a thing and have been baffled by Labour parachuting random people in to our area at the last minute.

It's fascinating.

Aha, one of those 'internet cranks' eh?

Welcome to the world of 'thinking there were some standards, somewhere, with the people paid to govern a country'.

It's not just Labour who put up "paper candidates": most of the main political parties do it to keep their "brand" active and to give their loyal voters someone to vote for. If they can, they will usually have someone who lives in the ward rather than just someone who lives in the district council area as that's more attractive to voters in local elections.

This is quite different to what is commonly referred to as "parachuting" a candidate into what is a safe seat. That's when a national party generally overrides the wishes of the locals to gift a seat to one of their favourites for some reason. Paper candidates are not "parachuted in", but are strong-armed to stand in a seat that is deemed to be unwinnable (which quite probably most of Labour's seats are for this coming election!).

Ahhhh I see. Okay. What we have here is generally Labour using someone who doesnt even live here and has no history of political involvement appearing on the ballot and sometimes at hustings (little Labour support here).

Sturgeon was parachuted into Pollokshields East, and was never seen nor heard from before or since polling day.

I mean it still seems parachuting to me? We had a bloke from Edinburgh once who just looked utterly baffled on all the leaflets, to mirror the baffled looks from all the folk reading them, I suppose.

'Who are you and what the fuck are you talking about and why do you have that rosette pinned to your chest?'

@ArabellaScott if a candidate is coming to doors with a rosette and appearing on leaflets, then they're more than a "paper candidate". They are an actual candidate who has either been chosen by the local party or imposed on the local branch by the national party and think that, however slim, they have a chance at winning. A paper candidate only appears as a name on the ballot.

It works differently in different parties. There's a Conservative tradition of cutting your teeth standing in unwinnable seats - somewhere like Liverpool or Northern Ireland - before they'll offer you somewhere better. IIRC Boris Johnson had to be a candidate somewhere in North Wales before they let him be a contender in Henley.

Parachuting is more a thing where the rules get bent to allow someone with connections at the top of the party to get in ahead of a local favourite. Again, I know someone who was in this position many years ago (spend long enough in the wrong places and you get to meet lots of politicos) and there was a lot of local grumbling that the popular local councillor wasn't the candidate, and dark rumours that she got the candidacy because a particular Labour bigwig fancied her. That last bit might even be true, but she was a pretty good MP, better than most of the current lot.

I don't have a problem with paper candidates. It's good to offer the voters a choice, it helps build the party's grassroots strength and data, and it might be ideal to have an enthusiastic candidate who'll work their socks off, but sometimes all you can do is find someone who lives in the ward and get them to put their name down.

Thanks, Sylvan and Sionnadh. It would be great if there was a Dummies Guide to Politics.