And then there were three ...

It may surprise some people, though probably not the people who know me well, that I welcome the news that a third candidate has declared this week in the election for Copeland's  first directly elected mayor.

Nominations formally open next week for all four elections - for MP, Mayor, CBC councillors and Town/Parish councillors - and close on 9th April. At this stage in Copeland there are five declared candidates for parliament (Conservative Stephen Haraldsen plus Labour, Green, Lib/Dem and UKIP candidates) and now three for Mayor (myself, Independent candidate Mike Starkie who announced his candidacy on Wednesday, and the Labour candidate backed by Elaine Woodburn and the existing failed administration which the voters rejected last year.)

So why on earth do I welcome more competition?

Because the whole point of having a directly elected mayor is to have someone running the council who has a mandate from all the voters of Copeland and is accountable to all the voters of Copeland. And without a strong field of candidates, that mandate is weakened.

A strong mandate will make it easier for the mayor to champion local causes like the need to keep consultant-led maternity at West Cumberland Hospital (#SupportOption1).

A competitive election strengthens that mandate.

The reason I was so horrified by certain recent decisions forced through Copeland Council by the Labour whips was not just the possible personal consequences for me, but that if there was a limited choice of candidates for mayor then the decision taken by the voters last May would have been sabotaged.

Obviously I would not have put my name forward unless I thought I was the best candidate for the job, and I would have withdrawn if I did not still think that. But I am not afraid of healthy competition and whoever does win will have a stronger mandate to deliver the change Copeland needs from having emerged from a genuine  contest.

Hence I am pleased that there are at least three candidates. There may of course be more who emerge between now and 9th April.

If this was a "first past the post" election I would stop there, but it isn't. The ballot paper for Mayor will give each voter the opportunity to cast a "first preference vote" which will be counted first, and a "second preference vote" which might be taken into account but only if the voter's first choice candidate has already lost.

If someone gets a majority of the first preference votes (which in the election for Copeland Mayor is not likely) they will win outright on the first count.

Otherwise the two candidates with most votes go forward to a final round. The second preferences of the people whose first preference votes were cast for eliminated candidates will then be counted and the extra votes for each of the remaining candidates added to their totals, and the candidate whose revised total is higher becomes Mayor.

As we do not yet know whether there will be any more candidates coming forward it would be premature for me to make any definite comments yet about second preference votes, but the shape of the election at this point is becoming clear.

At this point there are two candidates with a positive view of the creation of the post of a mayor for Copeland, and one who was an officer of a trade union which spent it's members money unsuccessfully campaigning against it.

There are two candidates who want to reform Copeland, and one who is backed by the present, failed administration.

I look forward to the debate, which I hope will be positive and constructive, about who has the best ideas for the future of Copeland.

May the best candidate win.