Labour’s winning election team in 2018

• THE question to be asked about your report (Labour short of filling election slate after ditching councillors, January 20) is not only about deselection of exiting councillors, “retirements”, real and pushed, but non-selection of new applicants.

The Labour Local Campaign Forum (LCF) needs to publish the data on how many new wannabe councillors applied and how many were rejected at the first “interview”; how many appealed; and how many had their appeal turned down.

Within these groups, how many were, for example, from BAME communities?

Is there any monitoring of the LCF selection panels’ decision or checking on the accuracy of the “reports” sent to the LCF on applicants?

We know that the former chief whip of secret tweeting fame sent reports on all present Labour councillors. These were said to be accurate, unlike his trolling tweets.

Given that councillors’ allowances are relatively attractive, is it not curious that there is a dearth of applicants? Perhaps fewer residents applied than compared with 2017.

Maybe the current LCF process is a paragon of democracy and fairness. It does not look like this to many residents and applicants.

Should there not be an independent scrutiny to ensure there was no bias? Is Camden’s LCF process in line with that of other boroughs?

Perhaps Mike Katz, chair of the LCF, could enlighten us.

Oh, I forgot, proposing scrutiny, criticising or questioning Camden Labour Party actions could lead to deselection, rejection or expulsion.

I have already had an email telling me that I had left the Labour Party! That was put down to a computer error… but no apology when I queried it.

MICK FARRANT, NW5