More On Labour's Non-Consultations

See Peter Kenyon once more.

A Death Of Party Democracy

See here for my viewpoint on the first day of Labour's Recent Conference.

Harry Barnes.

Labour's Conference Agenda

The BBC has published this agenda for the Labour Party Conference.

The three consultations which we have been trying to track on Dronfield Blather will be dealt with under the following brisk timetable.




14.00 Sunday 25th September - Conferences Opens. Then after the normal wide range of introductory sessions, Lim Bryne will give a Report about the Policy Review - this was our submission. Then as the final item of the day Peter Hain will Report on the two other Consultations on which decisions are likely to be made (1) The National Policy Forum Report and (2) Refounding Labour - this thread trawls back on these (logically you need to start at the end and work your way back to the top.) There will probably later be a single card vote to push these two through. That is virtually it comrades. Then at 16.15 on Monday 26th, Tuesday 27th and Wednesday 28th; there will be a set of brief Policy Seminars. The final one ends at 17.00, but we are not told how long the others last. These will probably relate to the areas covered in Lim Bryne's Sunday Report.

That is all. Now you see it. Now you don't.

Labour's Confusing Conference

With three days notice for blog watcher's, this seems to be what will be put to the coming Labour Party Conference. But you don't have to agree with it - or with the process under which it has been pursued.

Labour's Consultative Insult

This is Ann Black's take on the current consultative mess in the Labour Party

There is only one Peter Kenyon

But it wish there were more - see here.

Latest on Refounding Labour

Email to members of the National Executive Committee on 13.38 today.

"To all members

Dear .....

As you know, final recommendations arising from the Refounding Labour consultation will be going to the NEC next Tuesday, ahead of consideration by the Annual Conference in Liverpool.

Peter Hain promised to keep you up to date with developments and wanted me to provide you with a summary of the some of the recommendations agreed by the recent Organisation Committee, and which will be discussed by the NEC next Tuesday.

The Committee is acutely aware that delegates will be receiving the final recommendations for consideration quite close to Conference, and was therefore keen for these initial conclusions to be communicated now.

The Committee agreed in principle that rules changes will be proposed in the following areas:

Purpose and objects

• Clause I concerning the party's objects will be updated, giving greater emphasis to Labour's role in local communities.

Rights and responsibilities

• Rights and responsibilities of the party leader will be defined for the first time, including control over appointments to the Shadow Cabinet.
• Rights and responsibilities of Labour candidates and elected representatives will be defined, and provisions made for the use of model contracts.
• Rights and responsibilities of elected members of the Parliamentary Labour Party will be defined, including the right to be consulted on any positions taken by the leadership in the context of a hung Parliament.
• The ALC subscription will be abolished and councillors will instead, in line with other Labour representatives, pay a 2 per cent levy on total income arising from their elected role.

Enabling structures

• Local Government Committees will be replaced by Local Campaign Forums (LCF), which will allow for local adaptation and different models of structure and membership. LCFs may apply to the NEC to pilot new and innovative procedures for selections. CLPs will be free to adopt different models of organisation to suit local circumstances, with certain common features, to allow joint working across constituency and geographical boundaries. There will be a new model of CLP finances to help redistribute resources more equally, and lift struggling CLPs out of debt.

Encouraging recruitment

• The minimum age for becoming an individual member of the party will be lowered from 15 to 14 years old. There will be a lower local join rate for new members, to encourage recruitment.

Policy making

• We will open up the process to ensure a greater voice for members in a system that is more transparent and accountable, and which reaches out to the public. We will create a process that ensures the voices of young members, women, BAME, disabled, LGBT and other under-represented members are heard in policy development. One representative from Labour International will be added to the membership of the NPF; and a textual omission regarding the Northern Ireland CLP, which already has one representative, will be corrected.

A bigger voice for councillors

• The Leader of the LGA shall have the right to attend meetings of the political Shadow Cabinet when in opposition and the political Cabinet when in government. There will be better services provided for our councillors with a new website and enhanced online facilities, more training, design support for templates, and increased support for all Labour groups, large and small.

Full details of the actual textual rule book changes arising from these points will be sent to you as soon as the NEC has agreed the final recommendations to be put to Conference. The above recommendations do not represent the full extent of the changes likely to be proposed from Refounding Labour, and further issues are currently under consideration.

In addition, a number of reforms that do not require rule changes, such as new and improved technology for communication across the party, will also be proposed as part of the overall Refounding Labour package, and we will endeavour to ensure that you receive details of the final recommendations as soon as possible.

I hope this information is helpful and I will be in touch with further updates in due course.

Yours sincerely

Ray Collins

General Secretary"

What Will The Labour Party Be Like By October?

The Guardian claims that it knows what will emerge out of the "Refounding Labour" consultations at the Labour Party Conference in three weeks time- see here. Unfortunately, there has been no official announcement on these matters from the Labour Party, nor has anything been circulated to the membership. This is my satirical take.

What No Labour Party Democracy?

More on the latest developments over "Refounding Labour" (which we last covered here) and the possibility that Labour Party Members will be faced with a fate accompli. See this important item posted by Peter Keynon (photo). We may need an emergency meeting soon to discuss his concerns. Watch this space. Thanks for your efforts Peter.

Update 5 August : The plot thickens.

Update 7 August : Peter shows that things have just got worse.

For convenience I have placed the 12 threads on this topic onto the label "Refounding" which can be clicked onto in the bottom right hand corner of this item.

Refounding Labour Will Not Be Refinding Labour

If you ignore the item below this , there then follows ten threads which are related to this one.

What appears below is taken from Ann Black's unofficial report of Labour's National Executive Committee Meeting which was held on 19 July. It covers the latest known stage of developments in the follow up to Labour's consultations on "Refounding Labour". Much of what is emerging will be presented in a "take-it or leave-it" form at the coming Labour Party Conference. Many of the ideas which are being peddled are in direct opposition to the proposals which were submitted by our Discussion Group, the Dronfield Branch of the Labour Party and the North East Derbyshire Constituency Party. In the final section which appears below, Peter Hain even seems to deny that he ever received our Discussion Group's submission. For we sent him the very idea he says had no support.

Without Ann Black we would have little idea of what is now likely to be foisted upon us.


"Refounding Labour Continued

Peter Hain introduced the latest proposals, after discussion in the organisation committee. An interim report has been circulated to stakeholders, and I’ve attached a copy. The NEC will not agree final recommendations until 20 September, four days before conference, no amendments will be allowed, and Peter will ask delegates to vote Yes or No to the entire package including rule changes. I think this is a bad way to begin a new era. In 2007 Gordon Brown pushed Extending and Renewing Party Democracy through conference, and we spent the next three years removing unpopular and unworkable parts. As a fallback I have asked for constituency NEC representatives to be engaged throughout the summer so we do not end up with deals or
stand-offs between the leadership and the unions, and I will consult as widely as I can. I was also promised, again, the full membership of the shadow cabinet review groups, a request outstanding since November 2010.

There is plenty of good stuff in the paper: welcoming new members, engaging with the community, more flexible local structures and so on, though much of this concerns good practice rather than rules. It recognises that many developments are only feasible with new technology, although these risk widening the digital divide. Development plans for constituencies and contracts between local parties and candidates or elected representatives gained general support but the details will be crucial.

The same applies to registered supporters. Maintaining lists of people who will help with campaigns, and inviting them to social events and local policy discussions, seems uncontentious. While Refounding Labour would not give them votes for council or parliamentary candidates, it does envisage allowing them to vote for the party leader as part of the affiliates’ section. Further, external organisations could apply for “registered consultee” status and gain rights to give evidence to policy commissions greater than those enjoyed by constituencies. Sharing contact information between the party and the unions is
another sensitive issue, and the unions are keen to regain nomination rights in parliamentary selections.

From Each According to their Means …

The paper tries to balance concerns that subscriptions are too high against the need to maintain income. The minimum age for joining would be reduced to 14, paying £1 a year until the age of 20, then £12 from age 20 to 26. Unwaged members and registered supporters would pay £15, and this would also be the first-year rate for new joiners. After that rates would be linked to income: £24 for trade union levy-payers and those earning under £20,000, going up by £12 a year for each additional £5,000 of salary.

Currently constituencies receive 33% of reduced-rate and 22% of standard-rate subscriptions. For some this is less than central charges for election insurance and the Euro-levy, and optionally Contact Creator, so they are permanently in the red. Many have argued that national charges should be proportional to the number of members, and so I will pursue this. It fails to address inequalities in wealth related to property or legacies, but no-one has yet found a way of
grasping that nettle.

On openness the paper is patchy. I agree that women, ethnic minority and young members should be able to work across party boundaries on common objectives, and hope that this will extend to constituency secretaries, and indeed to all members. The section on Young Labour has been subject to exhaustive consultation: among many changes, constituency youth officers and national policy forum youth representatives would in future be elected by young members only. There is a commitment to further discussions with the Northern Ireland CLP, the SDLP and the Irish Labour Party. And it is proposed to change the rules so that constituency AGMs would normally be held in November rather than February, leaving the spring free for campaigning: I would be interested in views on this.

Counting the Votes

Most agreed that multiple votes for the leader were not defensible. MPs could be restricted to their own section, but enforcing single votes across individual and affiliated members would only be possible if the ballot was conducted by a single body. The principle of having a woman in the leadership team was endorsed, but there were doubts about a leadership ticket, where candidates would choose a running-mate of the opposite gender and members would vote for the leader only, so discussion will continue.

Also still unresolved are voting procedures at conference, the make-up of the conference arrangements committee, and the composition of the NEC itself, apart from a proposal that the Scottish and Welsh leaders should each nominate a member of their executive committees with voting status. I am opposed to the idea of giving some of the conference vote to the national policy forum: it does not exist as a collective entity, and the NEC, as part of the forum, would gain a significant share. All these are central to the party’s future, and it would be wrong and dangerous to bounce them through conference without proper consultation. Finally Peter Hain said that submissions supported the continued vital role of the joint policy committee, and that there was no support for restoring any policy-making role to the NEC."

UPDATE 26 JULY: On this theme, see today's important contribution from Peter Kenyon here.

Still Refounding Labour

We devoted two of our recent discussion meetings to a consideration of the Labour Party's consultative document "Refounding Labour", as well as to certain related documents. We also forwarded submissions on these to the Labour Party. Similar action was taken by the Dronfield Branch of the Labour Party and by the North East Derbyshire Constituency Labour Party. The Regional Offices of the Labour Party also ran consultative meetings on "Refounding Labour" at Chesterfield and Sheffield. Details of these and related activities can be found here.

The Labour Party has now produced what it calls a "Summary Report" arising from its consultation procedures on "Refounding Labour". It can be found via this link. Comments upon this stage of the proceedings would be welcome. We will be pursuing the issue further.

A Black Report On Wrexham

The following is an unofficial report by Ann Black (above) of what went on at Wrexham when the National Policy forum met to discuss the submissions which had been received by the Labour Party on its three consultations - (1) Redfounding Labour, (2) Partnership Into Power (which now is seemingly incorporated in "Refounding Labour") and (3) New Politics, Fresh Ideas.

It is reproduce because our last two discussion meetings, the eight blog items below this one, the last two meetings of the Dronfield Branch of the Labour Party and the last meeting of the General Committee of the NE Derbyshire Constituency Labour all focused on some or all of these consultations.

I have highlighted some items which can be linked back to the general trust of what the thirteen avenues mentioned above tackled.


"National Policy Forum, Wrexham, 24 June 2011

The Chair Peter Hain welcomed members to Labour Wales, where student fees remain low and the NHS is safe from privatisation, and expressed solidarity with the public service unions fighting for justice. He reported that Refounding Labour had received 125 submissions from constituencies, 35 from affiliates and groups, and 2,660 individual contributions through the website. The party’s reaction to the splits and losses of the 1980s may have prevented blood on the conference floor, but at the cost of over-centralisation and shutting out the grassroots. The task now was to re-establish the original inclusive, interactive vision. An audit trail should let members see what happens to their views, currently disappearing without trace, and genuine differences should again be debated at conference.

Leader’s Questions

Ed Miliband also addressed the Forum, accusing the government of U-turns, handbrake turns and three-point turns on everything from selling forests to sentencing policy to the NHS, and recklessness with the future of health, young people and local services. They could not even get it right on barring wild animals from circuses (a pledge which should have been in Labour’s manifesto, instead of waiting for courageous Tory backbencher Mark Pritchard to take
the lead).

No party in a generation had bounced back after one defeat, but he was determined to buck the trend. Britain did get better under Labour, and he would never deny our record, but mistakes were made. Internal squabbles and MPs playing the expenses system damaged politics itself. Members sent warnings from the doorstep about housing, immigration and scrapping the 10% tax band, and were ignored. The current consultation did not make easy listening, and showed we had lost touch with working people, who want those who do the right thing to be rewarded. Many of the three million affiliated trade unionists no longer voted Labour, and we must reach out to them and beyond them. Good ideas also came from outside the party, for instance “safe havens” in community centres and churches for young people worried about gangs and knives. Conference should be opened up, and local parties encouraged to build their own supporters’ networks. He confirmed his intention to appoint the shadow cabinet in opposition, as with ministers in government. This seems sensible, and feedback suggests that members are more concerned with frontbenchers’ performance than how they got there.

On pensions he blamed the government for handling the situation disgracefully, with Danny Alexander announcing conclusions while negotiations were continuing. His main concern was whether strikes would help or hinder in winning the argument. The public were now persuaded that it was unfair to delay pensions for women in their 50s, but too many still believed the myth of gold-plated public sector pensions and universal retirement at 60. The living wage was an exciting idea, and Labour would look closely at the recommendations of the high pay commission. Members also raised soaring fuel costs, the future of social care, compulsory sprinklers in new buildings (already law in Wales) and the new academies, including selective admission policies and what would happen if they went bust. Ed Miliband summed up Labour’s themes as the promise of Britain, the squeezed middle, stronger communities and life beyond the bottom line.

New Politics, Fresh Ideas III

Liam Byrne introduced his latest draft, following nearly four million contacts with the public, 70 shadow cabinet events, and thousands of members taking part in regional and local discussions. I’ve been to several and they were genuinely lively and engaging, but it’s hard to tell how far the paper represents Labour values or reflects the range of views of members, supporters and random voters. (Of 60 direct quotes four are from Ann in Brighton, with Kathy of Cheshire and Ian of Livingston getting two apiece.)

Forum members repeated, as we do at every level and every opportunity, the need for sharper attacks on the coalition coupled with clear statements of what Labour would do differently. Opposition should not be left to the archbishop of Canterbury. Voters want to know who and what we stand for, and cutting the deficit a bit more slowly is not enough, as Scotland showed. Some thought the current paper could have been written a year ago. No-one expects a detailed manifesto, but dividing lines and directions of travel derived from explicit values are desperately needed now, on the doorstep and in the media. Indeed the rolling programme of policy development seems designed more for government, where we control the agenda, than opposition, where fast, intelligent and well-informed reactions are essential. And I passed on messages from Reading: David Cameron should be congratulated for sticking to the target of 0.7% of GDP for international aid despite disapproval from his own backbenchers, and some of our attacks on Ken Clarke smack of opportunism rather than principle.

Workshops

We had to choose three out of six topics: economy, growth and jobs; the cost of living crisis; the British promise; rights and responsibilities; Britain in the world; and the Partnership in Power review. No-one was clear on what these covered, so some of the conversations were at cross-purposes, but doubtless the hardworking policy officers will ensure that everything ends up somewhere. As last time some groups had more than 20 people, giving each of them just two minutes at race-commentator speed. This tends to produce lists of unconnected points and there is no chance to develop themes through dialogue, or establish which views attract consensus and which are just one person sounding off. We would never run a local forum with groups larger than ten.

The cost of living session was supposed to include transport, and a few points were made on travel costs and loss of bus routes making it difficult for people to get to work. Housing was still in short supply: speaking from Nottingham Christine Shawcroft said there were luxury city-centre flats, student accommodation and buy-to-let, but little that normal people could afford. But mostly we talked about the impact: citizens’ advice bureaux filled with desperate people, and many others only one step from disaster. The shock of suddenly having to exist on £65 a week was greater for those losing well-paid jobs than those more used to scraping by. One person thought the gap between benefits and wages was too small to provide incentives for work, but most were unhappy about portraying all claimants as scroungers, or assuming that disability allowances were generous. Many people were ashamed even to talk about not having a job, blaming themselves as failures. Members also argued that the private sector was unable to employ all the sacked public servants, and indeed businesses depended on the wages from public service employment to keep going. I added that pay for most public sector workers had been frozen for several years while inflation ran at nearly 5%, and any further increase in
pension contributions would mean cuts in cash terms.

Welfare also featured under rights and responsibilities, including an interesting discussion on the shift from contribution-based to needs- based systems. Even though childcare and in-work benefits go fairly high up the income scale (or did, until the coalition started hacking into them), separating them from payment into the system could cause resentment among those who paid but did not receive. Some suggested that taxes should be seen positively as part of a collective enterprise, but that may be too idealistic for 21st-century Britain. The group also touched on crime, including whether communities used to be more self-policing, and on whether it made sense to talk about “communities” at all, when they were so varied geographically, socially and economically, and overlaid by commuting and new technology. The best single contribution was a call to distinguish between listening and leadership: in the current consultation we should listen, but not succumb to populism, because people may be wrong: if 25 applicants are chasing every job, it is not fair to scapegoat those who lose out.

Deja Vu

The last session was on Refounding Labour, and specifically the review of Partnership in Power included within it. Those of us who joined the Forum in 1997 have been through this many times before. Representatives still cannot contact the members who elected them, or read comments and ideas from their own region. Forum dates are not planned far enough ahead and papers were again circulated late, despite the requirement for seven days’ notice. However keynote speeches are provided to the press, so at least we can read them on the way to the meeting. Most constituency representatives are still excluded from policy commissions, so the sum total of their participation has been six hours in Gillingham in November and six hours in Wrexham in June essentially repeating the earlier meeting. The format does not allow coherent discussion or summarising collective views. Was the whole thing value for money, above all for the members whose subscriptions pay for the Forum?

Interestingly a long-serving trade union member recalled that in 1994, when the Forum was a shadowy organisation existing outside the rulebook, there were indeed formal reportbacks from every workshop, with late-night negotiations, and votes on what had or had not been agreed. All that disappeared when it was opened up to ordinary members like your current elected representatives, but perhaps Peter Hain should learn from the Forum’s own history as we try for a fourth time to get this right."

ANN BLACK

Comments will be forwarded to Ann.

Ed Cuts Us In Half

Our Discussion Group submitted six set of ideas for the "Refounding Labour" Consultation. The closing date for submissions was Friday, whilst yesterday Labour"s National Policy Forum (NPF) met in Wrexham to start examining the ideas which had been submitted to it.

The meeting at Wrexham started with a keynote speech from Ed Miliband. Unfortunately, Ed seems to have kicked half of our proposals into the long grass before the NPF got down to its work. His comments undermined our following three proposals.

(1) We proposed that the NPF should be scrapped as its operations are not understood by the bulk of Labour Party Members and it operates under a system which is talked about as being one of "smoke and mirrors". We wanted its work to be open and democratic and undertaken by the National Executive Committee and Annual Conference.

Instead, Ed Miliband wishes to keep the NPF, but to reform it on the following basis - "If local parties get enough support for a particular cause, it should be debated at the National Policy Forum or conference. Here's the offer: the more support from the public you get for your ideas, the more weight they will have."

(2) We proposed that Clause 4 of the Labour Party Constitution should be amended to remove its New Labour's commitment to a "Dynamic Economy" based on "the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition" and to substitute a commitment to a "Sustainable Economy which pursues high quality public services operated democratically for the public good."

However Ed Miliband argued in the opposite direction saying "New Labour got us back in touch with the hopes and aspirations of the British people. It was right to change Clause 4."

(3)We argued that there needs to be a change in the make-up of the Parliamentary Labour Party, for parliament at the moment contains too many members of a “political class” where MPs often have more in common with each other across the political divide than they do with their own voters.

Whilst Ed Miliband made no reference to this area in his Wrexham Speech, yesterday morning's Guardian claimed that his position as disclosed to them was that - "All parliamentary candidates and councillors are to be asked to sign a code of conduct committing themselves to be in regular touch with the public." We had rather more than that in mind.

But we still have three more points left on the board and will be keeping an eye on their progress.

Our Discussion Group's Submission to the "Refounding Labour" Consultation

Submission to the “Refounding Labour” Consultation from the Dronfield Labour Party Discussion Group which is attended by Labour Party Members and supporters from various Constituencies in North Derbyshire and South Yorkshire.

We discussed the first two of the ideas given below and then fed into our parent body the Dronfield Labour Party and from there to the local Constituency Party of North East Derbyshire, where they took on the form of resolutions. Both the Dronfield and the NE Derbyshire Constituency have separately submitted these. We have also gained support for these proposals from a dozen Labour Party members from six constituencies ranging from Romford to Darlington. This support was received via a blog we operate here.

1. "Complex and convoluted systems undermine the operations of supposed democratic procedures. Democratic arrangements need to be straightforward and understood. The current 'Partnership Into Power' system and the functions of the National Policy Forum are not understood by the bulk of Labour Party members who participate in Labour Party Branch and Constituency activities, serve on local councils and/or engage in local electoral activity. The current system is dismissed as being one of "smoke and mirrors". It should be abandoned. In its place we require a clear structure for policy making, in which democratically run units of the Labour Party have a direct link into the activities of the National Executive Committee and into the decision-making procedures of the Annual Conference of the Labour Party".

2. Clause 4 of the Labour Party Constitution should be re-examined, especially in relation to the sub-clause which most strongly reflects the areas in which New Labour's economic failures were concentrated with its call for a "Dynamic Economy" based on "the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition". This sub-clause should be replaced by one that seeks a "Sustainable Economy" which pursues high quality public services operated democratically for the public good.

This is the suggested amendment to Clause 4 -

Replace sub-clause 2a on “A Dynamic Economy” with the following -

“A SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY, serving the public interest by operating through the principles of co-operation and participatory democracy, in which wealth and economic power are fairly shared.” (Some of the Discussion Meeting came to prefer the word “equitably” to “fairly” in this proposal).

Amend sub-clause 2b on “A Just Society” as follows -

"Replace the words"equality of opportunity" with the words "social equality".

3. The Labour Party needs to involve itself with people seeking to defend their quality of life, including their public services, by its members being out in the market places with petitions on issues such as the defence of the NHS. The membership also needs to be encouraged to establish links with groups such as Tenant Associations and to be proactive locally in monitoring key issues such as the impact of inflation upon the vulnerable and then publishing their findings.

4. Labour should draw up a “Charter of Youth” attracting the involvement of people in its development. This is because they are at the forefront of problems faced in this country and throughout the world. Then without the support of young people, Labour will have no future. More details of this proposal can be found on our blog here.

5. There is a huge need for a strong commitment to non-dogmatic forms of political education to take place throughout the Labour Party and the wider Labour Movement. A person who knows only their own side of a case, knows little of that. Hence ideas need to be fully debated and dissent encouraged. When members join a political party they expect leading political matters to be to the fore. Political Educational activities need to be a major part of our work from national to local levels. More details of this proposal can be found here, which is the clearest version of our approach.

6. There needs to be a change in the make-up of the Parliamentary Labour Party, for parliament at the moment contains too many members of a “political class” where MPs often have more in common with each other across the political divide than they do with their own voters.

Our Discussion Group's Submission to Labour's "New politics, Fresh ideas"

Submission to the “New politics, Fresh ideas” consultation, from the Dronfield Labour Party Discussion Group which draws from Labour Party members and supporters in numbers of Constituencies in North Derbyshire and South Yorkshire. Dronfield is itself in the NE Derbyshire Constituency.

(1) In the introduction to the "New politics, Fresh ideas" consultative document. Liam Byrne states that as a Labour Party “Our values are non-negotiable”. We wish to challenge this claim. The only place where the aims and values of the Labour Party are spelt out is in Clause IV of the Labour Party's Constitution. Far from this clause being set in stone, it was radically amended in 1995 to usher in New Labour's political stance. It is, therefore, always open to amendment if this is what its membership wants. Below we reproduce the current Clause.

Clause IV.
Aims and values

1. The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many not the few; where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe and where we live together freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.

2. To these ends we work for:

A. A DYNAMIC ECONOMY, serving the public interest, in which the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition are joined with the forces of partnership and co-operation to produce the wealth the nation needs and the opportunity for all to work and prosper with a thriving private sector and high-quality public services where those undertakings essential to the common good are either owned by the public or accountable to them.
B. A JUST SOCIETY, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as much as the strong, provides security against fear, and justice at work; which nurtures families, promotes equality of opportunity, and delivers people from the tyranny of poverty, prejudice and the abuse of power.
C. AN OPEN DEMOCRACY, in which government is held to account by the people, decisions are taken as far as practicable by the communities they affect and where fundamental human rights are guaranteed.
D. A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, which we protect, enhance and hold in trust for future generations.

3. Labour is committed to the defence and security of the British people and to co-operating in European institutions, the United Nations, the Commonwealth and other international bodies to secure peace, freedom, democracy, economic security and environmental protection for all.

4. Labour shall work in pursuit of these aims with trade unions and co-operative societies and also with voluntary organisations, consumer groups and other representative bodies.

5. On the basis of these principles, Labour seeks the trust of the people to govern.


As democratic socialists, we can just about live with much of the above. Sub-clause 1 appears on the front of Labour Party Membership Cards and is what many members may believe is the full Clause. But there are four more sub-clauses given above. The first section presses for each person to be given the chance to reach their own potential, rather than seeing people as benefiting by sharing and helping each other. But the overall phraseology is ambiguous enough to be given a general form of democratic socialist interpretation. And the meaning given to the sub-clause depends to some extent on what then follows.

It is sub-clause 2a which is the major drawback.. It encapsulates the New Labour approach which came to fail us both morally and electorally by 2010. Here the concept of the "Dynamic Economy" attempts to marry together the opposing forces of a mainly unrestrained free enterprise approach with that of the public well-being. Below we offer an alternative form of words in favour of advancing the alternative concept of a "Sustainable Economy". In sub-clause 2b, we are also concerned about the commitment to promoting "equality of opportunity", a concept which creates the image of us being lined up on the starting line to race against each other, rather than our working together to form an egalitarian, participatory and sharing society. The notion of "social equality" seems to us to point us in a better direction.

Two proposed amendments are given below. Limiting the changes in the overall wording, whilst trying to get to the heart of the matter seems to us to be a practical yet principled approach.

Proposed amendments.

A. Replace sub-clause 2a on “A DYNAMIC ECONOMY” with the following -

“A SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY, serving the public interest by operating through the principles of co-operation and participatory democracy, in which wealth and economic power are equitably shared.”

Amend sub-clause 2b on “A Just Society” as follows -
"Replace the words"equality of opportunity" with the words "social equality"

(2) We also criticise this whole consultation exercise as being a marketing exercise illustrated by the character of its associated booklet, which is aimed at non-party members such as “small business owners”. 20 Shadow Cabinet Review bodies are linked into the exercise and the final wording on the booklet (in small print) indicates that those completing the booklet are likely to be nobbled by these bodies where appropriate.

We are, however, in favour of Policy Commissions being run under the auspicious of the National Executive Committee of the Labour Party with their reports being fully discussed throughout the Labour Party and the wider Labour movement, with the Annual Conference of the Labour Party being given a full opportunity to determine or reject proposals, along with amendments and alternatives submitted from the grassroots of the Party. To give the NEC, Annual Conference and the membership of the Party control over these procedures, we call for the abolition of National Policy Forum and of all other arrangements under “Partnership into Power”.

Two Ideas To Transform Labour : Internal Party Democracy and a Democratic Socialist Vision.

(Click on the cartoon to enlarge it). Just as we needed to found a Labour Party in 1895 when this cartoon appeared in "Labour Leader", in order to tackle the Liberal and Tory Parties, so we need to refound what we have today. The preparatory work was done by Keir Hardie and his friends in 1893 in setting up the Independent Labour Party (ILP). How do we prepare today? For the modern ILP see here.


Yesterday evening the Dronfield Branch of the Labour Party in the North East Derbyshire Constituency examined the three consultative documents issued by the Labour Party and determined its submissions. Below we give our two main ones. The first one has already been forwarded to the Policy and Research Department of the Labour Party, as the closing date for submissions is tomorrow. Arising from earlier work on this blog, we had also received the backing of people in eight other Constituency Labour Parties - from Romford to Darlington. This support was also listed in our submission to the Policy and Research Department.

The first submission, is also relevant to the separate consultation entitled "Refounding Labour". As there is still time to contact Peter Hain and company about this, other Labour Party members are still welcome to send in their support to us via the comment box below. Please add the names of your Labour Party Branch and your Constituency Party. As the submission needs to be received by 24 June, we ask you to send your support to us by 20 June.

The second submission will be sent under the arrangements of the consultative document "New Politics, Fresh Ideas" being run by Liam Byrne. On this, the Dronfield Branch is recommending a change to Clause IV of the Constitution and Rules of the Labour Party which deals with its Aims and Values. The logic of this being seen as of importance is that we feel that ideas on policy issues need first of all to be shaped by what should be Labour's general direction of travel. We also welcome support for this proposal, which again should be sent to us by 20 June.

Remember to let us know which of the submissions you support or whether you support both.


First Submission.

"Complex and convoluted systems undermine the operations of supposed democratic procedures. Democratic arrangements need to be straightforward and understood. The current 'Partnership Into Power' system and the functions of the National Policy Forum are not understood by the bulk of Labour Party members who participate in Labour Party Branch and Constituency activities, serve on local councils and/or engage in local electoral activity. The current system is dismissed as being one of "smoke and mirrors". It should be abandoned. In its place we require a clear structure for policy making, in which democratically run units of the Labour Party have a direct link into the activities of the National Executive Committee and into the decision-making procedures of the Annual Conference of the Labour Party".

Second Submission.

The current Clause IV appears below.

Clause IV.
Aims and values

1. The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many not the few; where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe and where we live together freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.

2. To these ends we work for:

A. A DYNAMIC ECONOMY, serving the public interest, in which the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition are joined with the forces of partnership and co-operation to produce the wealth the nation needs and the opportunity for all to work and prosper with a thriving private sector and high-quality public services where those undertakings essential to the common good are either owned by the public or accountable to them
B. A JUST SOCIETY, which judges its strength by the condition of the weak as much as the strong, provides security against fear, and justice at work; which nurtures families, promotes equality of opportunity, and delivers people from the tyranny of poverty, prejudice and the abuse of power.
C. AN OPEN DEMOCRACY, in which government is held to account by the people, decisions are taken as far as practicable by the communities they affect and where fundamental human rights are guaranteed.
D. A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, which we protect, enhance and hold in trust for future generations.

3. Labour is committed to the defence and security of the British people and to co-operating in European institutions, the United Nations, the Commonwealth and other international bodies to secure peace, freedom, democracy, economic security and environmental protection for all.

4. Labour shall work in pursuit of these aims with trade unions and co-operative societies and also with voluntary organisations, consumer groups and other representative bodies.

5. On the basis of these principles, Labour seeks the trust of the people to govern.


Sub-clause 1 appears on the front of Labour Party Membership Cards and is what many members may believe is the full Clause. But there are four more sub-clauses given above. The first section presses for each person to be given the chance to reach their own potential, rather than seeing people as benefiting by sharing and helping each other. But the overall phraseology is ambiguous enough to be given a general form of democratic socialist interpretation. And the meaning given to the sub-clause depends to some extent on what then follows. But sub-clause 2a has a major drawback. It encapsulates the New Labour approach which came to fail us both morally and electorally by 2010. It is where the concept of the "Dynamic Economy" attempts to marry together the opposing forces of a mainly unrestrained free enterprise approach with that of the public well-being. Below we offer an alternative form of words in favour of advancing the alternative concept of a "Sustainable Economy".

In sub-clause 2b, there is a commitment to promoting "equality of opportunity", a concept which creates the image of us being lined up on the starting line to race against each other, rather than our working together to form an egalitarian, participatory and sharing society. The notion of "social equality" seems to us to point in a better direction.

Our proposed amendments are given below. They limit the changes in the overall wording, whilst trying to get to the heart of the matter, which seems to us to be a practical yet principled approach.

Proposed amendments.

A. Replace sub-clause 2a on “A Dynamic Economy” with the following -

“A SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY, serving the public interest by operating through the principles of co-operation and participatory democracy, in which wealth and economic power are fairly shared.”

B. Amend sub-clause 2b on “A Just Society” as follows -
"Replace the words"equality of opportunity" with the words "social equality".

******************************************************************

Update 11th June : Yesterday evening the General Committee of the North East Derbyshire Constituency Labour Party included the two proposals given above in its submission for the consultation on "Refounding Labour".

Consultations, Consultations, Consultations

There are three consultative documents which are supposed to be circulating in the Labour Party at the moment, although I suspect that few members know about them all.

First, there is a document entitled "Partnership Into Power". There are only nine days left for comments on this document to be submitted. See here.

Secondly, there is the document "Refounding Labour." Technically we have until 24 June to send in our responses, but on the following day the National Policy Forum meets in Wrexham to examine proposals drawn from all the various submissions! Here is our own summary of "Refounding Labour", whilst here are the responses raised at our last discussion meeting. We aim to finalise our responses at out next meeting on 12 June. But then we also need to discuss the following.

Finally, there is a document entitled "New Politics. Fresh Ideas" by Liam Byrne which is supposed to have been circulating in the Labour Party since 27 November. It states that the "first phase of work will last until summer 2011 and a document arising from the work will be presented to the coming Labour Party Conference" and will then be developed via the work of the National Policy Forum.

Furthermore, under this procedure Ed Miliband has asked Shadow Cabinet Members to set up working groups and expert panels to explore "the big questions that confront our country". This work is to be fed into "New Politics, Fresh Ideas". Ann Black who is an National Executive Committee Member is making valiant efforts to discover what these groups have been up to. She states "I am still pursuing the shadow cabinet policy review groups. Thanks to Comprehensive Future for circulating a list for one of Andy Burnham’s groups; warm appreciation to Harriet Harman for full information on the international development review and its six expert taskforces; and rather less for Douglas Alexander, launching “Britain and the BRICs” * in Beijing through a press release which gives no indication of who else is involved. Another 17 are still unknown beyond short summaries."

But at least we can try to respond to (or go beyond) the four broad questions which Liam Byrne asks, these are -

1. How we grow our economy and ensure good jobs and a sustainable future?
2. How we strengthen families, communities and relationships?.
3. How do we put power in people's hands, over politics and public services?
4. How do we secure our country and contribute to a better world?

It should also be noted that Liam Byrne's document states at the start that Labour's "values are non-negotiable." But as Labour's aims and values are supposed to be reflected in Clause IV of the Labour Party's Constitution as amended in 1995 to fit in with a vision of New Labour, then surely they are still amendable if that is what the membership wants.

There will be plenty to discuss on the above matters at our coming meeting as currently advertised in the right-hand column.

* BRICs = Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa who are seen as the coming economic challenges to the dominance of the USA.

Ten Days To Transform The Labour Party

A review of the Labour Party policy making process was launched at last year's Annual Conference of the Labour Party and a subsequent report will be presented for endorsement at this year's Annual Conference.

The deadline for submissions to the review is 10th June - in only ten days.

Submissions can be made either: - Via the Labour Party website at: members.labour.org.uk/pip - Or in writing to:
Review of Partnership into Power
Policy and Research Department
The Labour Party
39 Victoria Street
London
SW1H 0HA

I intend to submit the following -

"Complex and convoluted systems undermine the operations of supposed democratic procedures. Democratic arrangements need to be straightforward and understood. The current "Partnership Into Power" system and the functions of the National Policy Forum are not understood by the bulk of Labour Party members who participate in Labour Party Branch and Constituency activities, serve on local councils and/or engage in local electoral activity. The current system is dismissed as being one of "smoke and mirrors". It should be abandoned.

In its place we require a clear structure for policy making, in which democratically run units of the Labour Party have a direct link into the activities of the National Executive Committee and into the decision-making procedures of the Annual Conference of the Labour Party".

If you would like to add your name to the above statement along with your Labour Party Branch and Constituency details, then please confirm this via the attached comment box within the next week. An alternative is to send your own submission directly to the Labour Party.

Harry Barnes.

Refounding The Consultation

We can make Christmas come early this year for Labour. What are your own ideas on the following? They would be most welcome in our comment box.

Labour's consultative document "Refounding Labour" came in for a wide range of criticism at last night's Dronfield Labour Party Discussion Meeting. It was described as "a top down exercise, lacking any political perspective", "being like a Government Consultative exercise which provides too little time for independent discussion to take place", "a procedure where those in the know get their ideas endorsed in line with what was planned for all along", "a document that assumes that Labour only faces structural problems, yet it faces fundamental problems which go much wider", "containing nothing on policy issues", "another example of the tail wagging the dog" and even "a crap consultative exercise."

Nevertheless in an attempt to improve matters, a variety of ideas were put forward, including -

1. That because Labour's system of Policy Forums is not understood by the bulk of Labour Party members and tends to be made up of self-appointed people linked in with the leadership, they should be abolished.

2. In place of the National Policy Forum procedure, the Annual Conference of the Labour Party needs to be revitalised in order to involve members in policy-making.

3. The Labour Party should establish a set of Policy Commissions drawn from people with relevant expertise, to draw up reports on key issues such as how to control the operations of the banks and financial institutions. Such reports should then be discussed throughout the Labour Party and its affiliated organisations, with Annual Conferences of the Labour Party deciding what to accept, reject and amend.

4. The Labour Party needs to involve itself with people seeking to defend their quality of life, including their public services, by its members being out in the market places with petitions on issues such the defence of the NHS. The membership also needs to be encouraged to establish links with groups such as Tenants Associations and to be proactive locally in monitoring key issues such as the impact of inflation upon the vulnerable and then publishing their findings.

5. Clause 4 of the Labour Party Constitution should be re-examined, especially in relation to the sub-clause which most strongly reflects the areas in which New Labour's economic failures were concentrated with its call for a "Dynamic Economy" based on "the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition". This sub-clause should be replaced by one that seeks a "Sustainable Economy" which pursues high quality public services operated democratically for the public good.

6. Labour should draw up a "Charter for Young People" which can attract the involvement of young people and thus help safeguard Labour's future. (See the case in "Dronfield Blather" here).

7. There should be a strong commitment to non-dogmatic forms of political education throughout the Labour Party and the wider Labour Movement. (See the case in "Dronfield Blather" here).

8. There needs to be a change in the make-up of the Parliamentary Labour Party, for parliament at the moment contains too may members who belong to a "political class" where MPs often have more in common with each other across the political divide than they do with their own voters.


At our next discussion meeting, we will go on to refine and develop the above points for submission to the "Refounding Labour" consultative procedure. It will be an attempt to lift matters beyond the mundane.

Refounding Labour : a summary of Labour's consultative document

Keir Hardie is one of the primary founders of the Independent Labour Party (ILP) and then of the Labour Party, of which the ILP was itself a part. Labour is now seeking to refound itself.

It is, therefore, appropriate that I should have recently returned from a week-end school run by the ILP (now Independent Labour Publications) where we discussed the "refounding" document which I summarise below.

It will also be discussed at our Dronfield Labour Party Discussion Meeting on Sunday.

Harry Barnes.








Peter Hain is Chair of the Labour Party's National Policy Forum. He has issued a Labour Party Consultative Document entitled "Refounding Labour : a party for the new generation". He says "I want to hear from as many people as possible - in constituencies, in the unions, in the affiliated societies, from those holding elected public office and beyond - about the future shape of the Labour Party.....After May 5 all local parties should arrange a meeting to discuss these ideas ahead of the deadline for submissions on 24 June."

Unless someone has access to the document, plus the time and inclination, this is not an easy matter to pursue. The document contains introductions from Ed Miliband and Peter Hain and is a further 9,000 words long and asks no less than a total of 105 questions. Nor is it easy to summarise, as it tends to be dominated by technical problems related to the complexities of the current structure of the Labour Party.

So below I have settled for (a) linking together quotations from the document about the current problematic position the Labour Party now finds itself in, (b) selecting several quotations from the limited number of areas where the document comes near to making any suggestions of its own and (c) selecting a dozen questions from the 68 "Big Questions" it lists at the close of the document. I would only add that what may be missing from the document is an overall question which might clarify matters and then make it easier to tackle the many the bits and pieces in the document. A question such as "what should the objectives of the Labour Party be, and how can these best be achieved?". It is a Keir Hardie type question.

(a) Facing the Facts (the bits in brackets are mine).

"...we need to be...frank with one another about where and why Labour has been abandoned by people who used to support us...between 1997 and 2010 Labour lost nearly five million voters...With our party massively in debt...After the 2009 elections they (the Tories) held nearly half of all council seats...we (were) left with some 4,500 Labour councillors in the UK facing well over 9,000 Tories...Labour's share of the vote in European elections...(was) only 16 per cent in 2009....General Elections used to be a two horse race (between Labour and Tories)...(but reached) a new low last year (between these) of only 67 per cent...the lowest since 1922 when Labour first emerged as the main opposition to the Tories...We began 2010 with half as many individual members as we had twenty years ago and less than 40 per cent of our 1997 peak...members nowadays get involved less often in canvassing on doorsteps, delivering leaflets, attending meetings, signing petitions, or even displaying election posters...affiliated membership among unions linked to Labour has gone down too, from a peak of 6.5 million in 1979 to 4.6 million in 1992, and in 2010 just 2.7 million...(in 2010) Nearly 40 percent of voters decided which way to vote during the four week election campaign...The number of constituency parties represented at Conference fell from 527 in 2002 to 444 in 2009 and only 412 in 2010, or under two thirds the total entitled to attend."

(b) Seven Suggestions (my emphasis).

1." Some have suggested the delegate system could be abolished except perhaps for election to a CLP Executive which managed the administration of the Party. That would leave as the main agency for policy-making and direction of campaigning the regular meeting for all individual members and affiliated members - with the option of adding in registered supporters, maybe also with recognised consultee groups invited to take part where appropriate."

2."Online users confirm that the internet makes it easy to participate in civic and political affairs, such as by accessing websites, signing an e-petition or responding to a government e-consultation."

3."Local Labour Parties must work more closely with other civic activists and social entrepreneurs, building local alliances with community groups where we share a common sense of purpose."

4."... a successful renewal of Labour's bases demands councillors who are community orientated, not committee orientated, facing out from the town hall, to the community, not locked in the town hall remote from the electorate. That also requires breaking free of the large committee structures and rule-bound approach of Local Government Committees and large district or county borough parties - or even perhaps their abolition".

5."Our representatives are elected because they carry the Labour banner. There may be a case for adopting a code to which they all must adhere, requiring minimum levels of participation in Parliament or their Councils and engagement with local communities."

6."... the National Policy forum... where there are major options or disagreements...minority positions need to be routinely reported to the Annual Conference for final decisions."

7."The fundamental aim of our policy making process should be to support the Party in developing a policy programme which appeals to, and connects with, the electorate."

(c) A Dozen Questions (my emphasis).

1."...members...How do we better encourage their participation in campaigning?"

2."...how should CLPs and local branches be reorganised?"

3."How do we better engage affiliated trade union members with Labour locally and improve their relationship with Labour MPs, councillors and candidates?"

4."...local community groups...may contain many Labour supporters: how can these...be better linked with the party and our representatives locally?"

5."How do we strengthen the voice of members?..."How can we increase our membership...?"

6."Conference is the supreme decision-making body of the party. How do we make it more exciting and relevant, more responsible, less corporate?"

7."What can we do to support our members and local parties in debating policy?"

8."How do we decide which policy issues to focus on?"

9."Is the National Policy Forum the correct focal point for our policy discussions?"

10."What should be Annual Conference's role in deciding policy?"

11." How do we need to change the way we campaign to win in 2015?"

12."How can the candidate selection process be improved?"


There is also an important section entitled "Political education and training" which suggests holding an annual summer weekend 'Festival' plus "modules and courses that cover political education for new and especially young members, covering the history of socialist ideas and the labour movement..." (on this see Dronfield Blather's presentation on Political Eduction here.)