National Executive Committee report – 17 July 2012

July 29, 2012 By 1 Comment
This meeting marked the first anniversary of Iain McNicol’s election as general secretary.  Looking back over an eventful year he stressed that community organising and building relationships with members and supporters were essential to counter the prevailing cynicism about politicians.  His goal remained the same:  to ensure that Labour spent only one term in opposition.
Harriet Harman reinforced the message, saying that the main tasks were holding the coalition to account and presenting Labour as an alternative government.  She and Tom Watson gave an update on campaigning, for police and crime commissioner elections and the Bristol mayor in November, by-elections in Manchester Central and Cardiff South & Penarth, county elections in May 2013, and the general election expected in 2015.  Labour must do more to represent the diversity of the electorate, with more women, disabled, gay and ethnic minority candidates, and more from working-class backgrounds, where the trade unions could play a key role.  It was pointed out, again, that standing for selection is prohibitively expensive for those with normal jobs and no rich backers. 
In the latest batch of early selections Brighton & Hove North will choose from an all-women shortlist, with open lists in Brighton Pavilion & Hove and Brighton East & Lewes.  Around 40 seats in the south-east, south- west and eastern regions with large opposition majorities and no boundary changes can also go ahead.   The organisation committee agreed that where selection timetables are too short for postal votes, for instance in by-elections, proxy votes will be provided only for disabled members and their carers, to comply with legal requirements, rather than being issued on demand.
Tom Watson was then reminded of the Euro-elections in 2014.  Some NEC members visited our comrades in Brussels in the preceding week, and came back with renewed commitment to convincing our core vote that Europe does far more to protect their rights than to limit their freedoms.  The procedure for choosing candidates has been agreed: sitting MEPs will be subject to a trigger ballot in the autumn, with each constituency casting one vote, and regional panels will interview candidates for the rest of the list before March 2013.  These will be ranked in ballots open from late July to September, with the five-month interval between selection and ranking giving candidates the opportunity, and the incentive, to meet as many members as possible before the vote.  As before, sitting MEPs will have the top section.  The new candidates’ section will alternate men and women, with a woman at the top except where one woman MEP is reselected, in which case the list will be topped by the highest-ranked of either gender.  This is particularly controversial in the south-west, which currently has no MEPs, but any other decision might have led to worsening the gender balance.
Looking Forward
Later Ed Miliband addressed the NEC.  He enjoyed the Durham Miners Gala, as the first Labour leader to speak since Neil Kinnock in 1989. Labour had earned the chance to be heard.  Now we had to pose big questions for the country, and change the way we do politics: perceptions that “they’re all the same” would only benefit the Tories. Members reported that police were being removed from vital community work to fill security gaps left by G4S at Olympic venues, and raised concerns about victims of asbestos, charges for employment tribunals, attacks on collective rights and the rising retirement age, where Ed Miliband was sympathetic to those who worked in manual jobs from the age of 16.  Asked about recent media chatter, he welcomed Tony Blair’s help with fund-raising and his advice on the Olympic legacy:  however, while the party honoured his contribution, Labour now needed to write a script for the future. 
Partnership into Power Mark IV
The organisation committee met on 3 July and again immediately before the full NEC to discuss the latest plans.  These were endorsed and will now go to conference for approval.  Key features include:
-           an on-line policy hub, where members and the public can read national policy forum (NPF) and policy commission papers, submit comments or amendments, and see everyone else’s contributions; 
-           those who do most work in their communities, as measured by the amount of support for their ideas on the hub, may get the right to present evidence to policy commissions;
-           a ballot at conference 2012 to choose policy priorities for the NPF from a list drawn up by the joint policy committee (JPC).  This is in addition to contemporary resolutions, which will continue as now;
-           “challenge papers” on these topics to be published on the policy hub in November 2012, for comment until February 2013. Revised papers would be available for discussion during April/May;
-           the NPF to meet in June and vote on any outstanding issues, with the JPC signing off revised papers and sending them to conference for approval;
-           final-stage documents to be published by January 2014, with local parties and affiliates able to send amendments until May.  As in 2008 these will go through NPF members who will decide which ones to pursue, and a June meeting will agree papers for conference to approve as the basis of the manifesto;
-           reconfigured policy commissions.  Instead of mirroring government departments, there will be a flexible list under four headings:  New Economy (stability and prosperity, cost of living, an economy that works), Decent Society (public services, secure communities), Better Politics, and Global Leadership;
-           the JPC to be renamed, possibly as the policy executive, with a reformed structure which better represents the party.  The NEC rejected increasing the terms of office for NPF representatives from two to five years, the subject of heated debate at the JPC, because of accountability, consistency with other internal positions, and issues around members moving region or otherwise becoming ineligible. 
Currently individual opinions dominate contributions to policy commissions, and the NEC agreed that greater weighting should be given to the results of collective discussions, with unease about the influence accorded to non-members.  Some argued that conference should be allowed to make more decisions, through amending NPF reports or voting on them in parts.  Others suggested that the JPC should be redesigned before it was given more powers, and wanted a role for the NEC. 
The acid test, as always, is how much difference all this will make on the ground.  However I am encouraged that senior people are at last looking at the auto-response when members reply to party mailings, which says  “I’m sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered”.  We must learn to relate to our own members before adding thousands of supporters to a flawed system.
New Brooms
Jon Cruddas, Labour’s policy co-ordinator, set out his vision for a winning programme to rebuild Britain instead of managing decline.  He hoped to build better connections between the shadow cabinet and the NPF, replacing the 36 mysterious review groups.  I asked about the Daily Telegraph report that Labour would bring the armed services into education, including academies and specialist service schools in socially deprived areas.  Stephen Twigg did not mention it at the NPF, and it seems to be another Jim Murphy bounce, taken to the press before the party.  It may or may not be a good idea, but that isn’t the point.  Jon Cruddas said that MPs were encouraged to devise “talking points” to stimulate discussion in areas such as housing, social care and immigration, but agreed that there were “process issues”,
More on Rules
Most constitutional amendments from constituencies to this year’s conference were rejected by the conference arrangements committee under the three-year rule, which prevents revisiting issues recently discussed.  The other two concerned Partnership into Power and have been overtaken.  However the NEC may itself revisit Refounding Labour, agreed in 2011.  This laid down a core constituency executive of Chair, secretary, treasurer, vice-chair, and vice-chair / membership, with local parties free to add officers for women, youth, ethnic minorities and other groups and functions.  In the pre-conference haste some colleagues did not notice that women’s officers were now optional, and reported concerns from members about the impact on women.  In September the NEC will decide whether to keep the new rule; restore a mandatory women’s officer; or add a mandatory equalities officer.  Comments are welcome.
Other NEC amendments will include police and crime commissioners in the rulebook, though a dedicated seat on the NPF was not pursued till we see how many there are.  Further consideration will be given to whether to allow members to stand for the NEC and the NPF in the same ballot. 
Although I’ve had some messages about low turnout in the NEC / NPF elections, 30% is the highest except for 2010 when they were combined with the leadership ballot.  Of more concern is the youth NPF seats:  eight out of 11 were uncontested and turnout in the other three ranged from 6% to 12%.  One member was elected by 65 votes to 60. Maybe casting votes separately and on-line made a difference.
Finally Byron Taylor, the national trade union and liaison officer, demonstrated a website which pulls together information from public sources about Tory MPs, their donors, their directorships and their voting records.  Labour’s income from millions of working people through their unions is sometimes criticised, but it is transparent.  This initiative will shed light into the darker corners of Tory funding.
Questions and comments are welcome, and I am happy for this to be circulated to members as a personal account, not an official record. Reports of meetings from July 2008 onwards are at http://www.labourblogs.com/public-blog/annblack, with earlier reports at www.annblack.com.
Ann Black, 88 Howard Street, Oxford OX4 3BE, 07956637958, annblack50@btinternet.com
Filed Under: News

LDN: Moving Forward

May 9, 2012 By Leave a Comment

Last weekend LDN met to discuss its future and potential programme. We were in mixed mood, delighted at Labour’s showing in the local elections across the country and worry about the continued democratic drift of our Party.

LDN — and its predecessor organisations Labour Reform and Save the Labour Party — has always — been committed to practical partnerships and practical politics. We want to champion the cause of Party democracy but also actively explore how we can better facilitate policy discussion and debate.

Over the coming months we will be aiming to focus on two new initiatives both which are designed to commemorate the life of our sadly departed comrade and colleague Martin Cook. 

The first initiative will be focussed around ITC solutions to debate, discussion and policy making and we will be working with some of those who have been leaders in this field. Low cost but powerful ITC solutions offer us the chance to revolutionise participative politics in this country and LDN is committed to supporting the development of new tools and products that could be utilised by Labour and by progressive campaigns across the country.

Secondly, we will be actively seeking to revisit the Save The Labour Party’s LabOUR Commission, Renewal — a to way process for the 21st century. While the Commission’s existing report is a substantive one it was always designed to be an interim.

New of these initiatives will be posted here but if you think either or both of these of interest to you we would be happy to here from you. Contact either:

 

andy.howell@me.com

peter.g.kenyon@btinternet.com

Filed Under: About LDN, News

Luke’s Bizarre Dossier!

March 19, 2012 By 1 Comment

Our old friend and comrade Luke Akehurst would regard himself as a prolific blogger. He’s recently penned one of occasionally strange pieces, “A dossier I compelled – and not anonymously“. I won’t bore you with the contents but this seems to be a repost to the anonymous dossier that has been going around and which focusses on Progress, to which comrade Akehurst is connected.

Luke’s dossier is really more of a rant and as such doesn’t really concern us. However, at one point he says of LDN:

This has now been replaced by the Labour Democratic Network – LDN  which seems somewhat moribund as it last posted on its blog in November.

Comrade Luke, LDN is certainly not defunct. When the Party can’t manage to convene its own National Policy Forum for over twelve months, at a time when it is having a major policy review, there is clearly work to do.

But one thing. We are committed to action and pronouncements when we have something to say. Sometimes organisation is everything.

Comrade Akehurst would be rise not to confuse verbal diarrhoea with actual action. But then he is a prolific blogger!

It’s always quality that counts Luke, and not just quantity at any cost!

Filed Under: News

NEC CLP section nomination and election timetable – 2012

November 24, 2011 By 2 Comments

The Labour Democratic Network understands that full details will be sent to all interested parties by Head Office in December.

Nominations for the six NEC places elected by fully paid up members under OMOV have to be submitted by 30 March 2012.

Nominees require support of own CLP and two other CLPs from two different regions, and must have been in membership 12 months.

At least three elected candidates must be women.

We are still waiting for clarification of the precise dates for the issue of ballot papers and the close of the poll.

Filed Under: News

NEC report – 1 November 2011

November 18, 2011 By Leave a Comment

The meeting after conference is always a marathon, reviewing the state of the party and planning the year ahead.  First up was Tom Watson, deputy party Chair and campaign co-ordinator, praised for his tactics in the famous Hodge Hill by-election.  Tom saw his role as mobilising members, consulting on policy and raising funds.  At my suggestion he included a working return address in his latest e-mail, and had already replied to 500 messages.  I said again that members want doorstep ammunition, visible leadership and rapid rebuttal of Tory lies.  Others added hope in tough times:  pensioners are losing part of their winter fuel allowance, the council tax freeze will cost more jobs, youth unemployment is at record levels and Labour cannot be neutral as public service workers defend their modest pensions.

The critical battle-grounds next year will be London, with the mayoral and assembly elections, and Scotland, where good council results would help to derail the independence bandwagon.  Two weeks earlier the NEC’s organisation committee agreed to devolve many powers to the Scottish party, and authorised local organisation around Scottish rather than Westminster constituencies.  This is the clear will of Scottish members, and I have asked only that the NEC is kept informed of developments.

Unmusical Chairs

Meanwhile the whole country is in the throes of the boundary review.  In most regions Labour, working with MPs and local parties, has developed a united response to the initial proposals, but may have to adapt as other parties make submissions.  The picture should be clearer by autumn 2012.  Careers are at stake and the NEC wished to support MPs through traumatic times ahead, as well as constituency parties which will re-form on new boundaries from January 2013.  Of course Labour is not the only party affected, and insecurity was thought to be fuelling rebellions.  If Tory MPs have to compete with each other, better to keep their activists happy than try to please David Cameron.
A few more constituencies will be able to choose parliamentary candidates in the New Year and feedback from early selections is welcome, so we can modify procedures if necessary.  Keith Vaz regretted that no ethnic minority candidates had yet been selected, and I am concerned that there are far more male than female applicants, making it hard to draw up gender-balanced shortlists.  However these are opposition-held seats, meaning years of hard slog with no guarantee of reward, unappealing to those wanting a fast track.  Last- minute retirements in plum seats will attract more interest.

Committees and Conferences

The meeting agreed the membership of subcommittees.  The equalities committee, specified as 13 members, has 17, and the organisation committee now includes 27 of the 33 NEC members. (The joint policy committee has even more, but most of them don’t come to meetings.)  I continue as a member of the prosperity and work policy commission, where Jennie Formby of Unite takes over as co- convenor.
This year 630 delegates from 522 constituencies attended conference, the highest since before 2002 (570 delegates from 527 constituencies) and well up from the 412 constituencies represented in 2010. Liverpool was praised for the weather and the spacious dockside site, though accommodation costs, at £70 – £100 a night, were high.  As usual the biggest complaint was too little time for delegates, with only nine speakers on health, and some suggested culling videos and pre- scripted panel discussions.

Refounding Labour:  Next Steps

Peter Hain and Alicia Kennedy introduced a guide to implementation which takes forward the 124 recommendations agreed at conference. This, and much other material, is available athttp://members.labour.org.uk/refoundinglabourandyou , or I can mail copies.  A working group will oversee progress, with a separate group on achieving gender balance in the leadership team.   New youth structures will be phased in through 2012 and 2013 and NEC Chair Michael Cashman will meet members in Northern Ireland, reporting back in March 2012.  Model contracts for parliamentary candidates are being drafted, with Scotland and Wales responsible for MSPs and AMs, and European variants will be agreed in autumn 2012 together with procedures for selecting Euro-candidates.

Councillors will pay the new 2% levy from May 2012.  Much heated reaction was reported, but their representatives were pleased with the improved legal services, campaign materials, training and support which this will buy.  I emphasised that the new local campaign forums needed flexibility and a role in policy, particularly where there are few or no Labour councillors.  In October councillors were consulted on ways of improving candidate selection, and local parties have now also been asked to comment:   ideas can be sent to councillors@labour.org.uk . On the technical side membersnet will be revamped, and requests were again made for the party telephone line to be open throughout the day and evening.

Peter Hain’s top priority was to register 100,000s of supporters, building a massive database for fundraising and communication.  All supporters, whether joining nationally or locally, would be checked against Contact Creator and details supplied to constituencies, and their status would be verified before a leadership election.  The guide guarantees that locally-collected e-mail addresses will not be used for national spam or pleas for money, though Peter is keen to revisit this.  I still have reservations, but the French experience, where nearly three million people paid a euro each to vote for the socialist presidential candidate, has caused me to think about the positive potential of wider engagement.

Parliamentary Report

Ed Miliband joined us in the afternoon.  He thought the economic argument was shifting, and rising unemployment showed the need for alternatives.  This was a crisis about growth, not just the deficit, and the kind of economy that we should build.  Ed Balls’ five-point plan would tax bank bonuses to fund jobs for young people; invest in infrastructure; cut VAT to relieve family budgets; reduce VAT to 5% on home improvements and repairs; and give tax breaks to small businesses hiring extra workers.  The St Paul’s protests showed that the system is failing, and Labour should speak out on top pay and argue for rules which reward hard-working families.  Andy Burnham was attacking the Tories on the NHS, where patient experience was deteriorating and waiting times were rising.  All this was well received.
Tackled on public service pensions, Ed Miliband felt that maximum pressure should be exerted before 30 November, so that if strikes went ahead it would be clear that the government was to blame.  He agreed that the living wage is an idea whose time has come, and he was talking with business minister Chuka Umunna about Labour’s response to attacks on employment rights, particularly charging for employment tribunals and restricting claims for unfair dismissal.  For young people Labour would cap student fees at £6,000, and review whether to restore the educational maintenance allowance.

Ed Miliband believed the Tories were alarmed about falling support among women, and this explained David Cameron’s flurry of announcements on elective Caesareans, easier adoption and allowing royal women equal succession rights.  None of these would tackle women’s basic need for jobs, fair pay, public services and security for themselves and their families.  Nor would they protect an estimated 25,000 women every year who suffer domestic violence but would no longer be able to get legal aid.
I asked about the mystery policy documents, launched at conference without being seen by MPs, the national policy forum or the NEC.  Ed Miliband said they came from the shadow cabinet groups:  he had not intended to bypass party structures, and the NEC should have been kept informed.  I would hope for more of a partnership, along the lines of his wide-ranging discussions before the 2010 election.

This linked into a presentation on Partnership into Power.  Liam Byrne’s New Politics Fresh Ideas exercise made four million contacts and gathered 6,000 written responses.  However submissions on policy- making processes showed a degree of cynicism.  Peter Hain said that some people wanted more time and comments would be accepted at http://members.labour.org.uk/policymaking up to 31 January 2012, though I suspect this is more about cutting the union share of the conference vote than addressing deeper issues.  The next national policy forum will not be till summer 2012, particularly frustrating for constituency representatives who wonder they bothered.  It was suggested that they could lead further consultation, but members are tired of talking about structures: they want engagement and action.

Going Forward

Harriet Harman said that it was important to blend political and organisational strategies, and others emphasised the need to work in every seat, not just the marginals.  They asked for campaign materials which are straightforward but not patronising.  Iain McNicol reported on the management and commercial review led by Charles Allen, and gave an update on finances.  One point deserves wider publicity:  the press often claim that Labour is wholly dependent on the unions, but this is because only large donations must be declared to, and published by, the electoral commission.  In fact over a third of our income is from members’ subscriptions and small donations, and union funding is itself composed of a few pounds each from millions of individual levy-payers. Lies, damn lies and statistics …

And finally alert members may have noticed that e-mails from the party are now suffixed @labour.org.uk rather than @new.labour.org.uk … so we are once again plain Labour and proud of it.

Questions and comments are welcome, and I am happy for this to be circulated to members as a personal account, not an official record. Reports of meetings from July 2008 onwards are at http://www.labourblogs.com/public-blog/annblack, with earlier reports at www.annblack.com.

Ann Black, 88 Howard Street, Oxford OX4 3BE, 07956-637958, annblack50@btinternet.com
Filed Under: News

Refounding Labour – New Rules: an example

November 7, 2011 By Leave a Comment

This is how the new rules could apply to the Westminster parliamentary constituency of Greenwich and Woolwich. This paper has been circulated to branches for consultation.

A new rule book was agreed at 2011 Annual Conference. While our Constituency Labour Party (CLP) objected, on the grounds that most of the changes had not been subject at all to consultation, and that we had just a few days’ notice, nevertheless they were approved and must be implemented. Key decisions for the CLP are:

Annual Meeting (AGM) Dates – under the new rules this should be held in or after May. Branch AGMs are not set down by the rules (January is deleted) but advice is they should be after elections. Currently, we have the Branch AGMs in early-mid January and the CLP AGM at the end of February. We could:

  1. Hold Branch AGMs and CLP AGMs all in May
  2. Hold Branch AGMs in May and the CLP AGM in June
  3. Hold both the Branch and CLP AGMs in June

Delegate or General Meetings – Currently, we have a delegate General Committee (with delegates from Branches and affiliated organisations but we open all GCs to all members and have made a number of them all-member meetings with invites to everyone. Though any voting is by delegates only, the one exception being when we did our leadership and National Executive nominations. Two options:

  1. We can keep the current delegate structures allowing a fair representation across all branches and affiliates, but opening meetings for wider participation and have a number of all-member meetings
  2. We could have General Meetings only, with no delegates. The full membership would then elect the Officers and executive as well as take decisions on resolutions. Thus no delegates would be elected, and any member could attend, vote and stand. Members would be able to attend and vote at both their Branch and constituency meeting; it may therefore blur their distinctive roles.

Officers – The CLP currently has 8 Executive officers. The new rules provide for a base of just 5 with a number of co-ordinators (functional officers) though there is the option to have more Executive Officers if we choose.

  1. Have just 5 Executive officers (Chair, Vice Chair Membership; Vice Chair Campaigns; Secretary and Treasurer of which at least two must be women
  2. Have 6 Executive Officers (above 5 plus Equalities Officer) of which three would be women. The Equalities Officer would co-ordinate the roles currently carried out by Ethnic Minorities Officer, Women’s officer, Youth & Student officer and Disabilities officer)
  3. Retain current 8 Exec Officers with at least 4 women. This would need approval

Co-ordinators – we need to refresh the functional officer roles as Co-ordinators. This may mean we want to rationalise the roles and rather than having job shares to have teams.

 

Local Campaign Forum (LCF) – The new rules replace the Local Government Committee with a re-focussed Local Campaign Forum for co-ordinating council elections, selections and liaison with the Labour Group. The CLPs in Greenwich will need to collectively determine their preferred model but in general it will meet less frequently and be much slimmer (currently 65 members altogether). The Management and Executive Committees can be replaced by a single unitary body. Options include:

  1. A unitary LCF of 10 Party delegates (4 G&W CLP), 1 Co-op plus Group Leader and Deputy. This could be supplemented by a Borough Conference open to all Labour councillors and either all members or all CLP GC delegates which would be at least annual but possibly more frequently to help develop policy and policy commissions which would draw from the wider membership and be co-chaired by Party and group co-ordinators.
  2. A unitary LCF of 17 Party delegates (7 G&W CLP), 2 Co-op plus leadership. Again, this could be supplemented by a borough Conference and policy commissions
  3. A Management Committee of 39 Party delegates (16 G&W which could be 2 per BLP plus Chair and Sec); 4 Co-op and Group leadership. This would need a separate Executive.
  4. A Management Committee broadly as currently of 55 Party delegates (22 G&W CLP) plus 5 Co-op and group leadership. Again, a separate Executive.

 

Filed Under: Conference 2011, Constituencies, News, Refounding Labour

New NEC and what next?

October 17, 2011 By Leave a Comment

The Changing of the Guard:  Wednesday 28 September 2011

On Wednesday evening the NEC said farewell to departing colleagues and welcomed new members.  I shall particularly miss Cath Speight, who without seeking the limelight has contributed an enormous amount over the years, and been loyal throughout to her party and her union; also Norma Stephenson for her work on equalities and Chair for 2010/11, Simon Wright of the socialist societies who is sadly leaving after just a year, and Chris Weldon of Unite.  We are joined by Wendy Nicholls of UNISON, Susan Lewis of Community, Martin Mayer and Jennie Formby of Unite and Conor McGinn of the Labour Party Irish Society.  Michael Cashman MEP was elected as Chair for the year ahead and pledged to represent all voices on the NEC, with Harriet Yeo of the TSSA as his vice-chair.

Looking Forward: After Conference

Peter Hain stressed that conference approval of Refounding Labour is the beginning, not the end of the process, and agreed that working groups should oversee implementation.  There are many matters of detail:  for instance moving constituency AGMs to the autumn raises questions about approving annual accounts which close in December; nominating to national committees where the deadline is usually April, and electing conference delegates, based on membership figures at 31 December. More seriously the section on Partnership in Power is still detached from reality.  Better feedback has been promised so often that members will believe it when they see it.  Only one meeting of the national policy forum is planned for 2011/12, following two short sessions in 2010/11, and representatives who competed for constituency seats last year must wonder why they bothered.  This would only partly be compensated by giving every member a place on one of the policy commissions. And yet again the joint policy committee, supposed to steer the process, was attended by only 13 members in September, again with no departmental shadow ministers showing up.

The NEC statement to conference on Partnership in Power says: “Discussions during this consultation have focused on the need to make a reformed policy-making system more accessible and responsive to party members, with a fresh empowered annual conference with even greater democracy,.  We are determined to take a new approach to policy-making with meets those objectives and will take more time to develop the details.  The NEC therefore agrees to further consult between now and the end of March 2012 on how to make the policy and decision-making processes more dynamic, open and democratic with a view to taking forward proposals to the NEC next spring, ahead of conference.”

Hidden agendas

I hope this does not just mean more arguments over the union share of the conference vote, with constituency representatives shut out, because there are bigger issues at stake.  Policy-making seems to have moved not only beyond the NEC but beyond the national policy forum and conference.  Near the end I discovered four glossy booklets entitled “Towards a new economy”, “Britain’s role in the world”, “Restoring responsibility, strengthening our communities” and “Fulfilling the promise of Britain”.

Maybe the papers came from the elusive shadow cabinet working groups.  They appear hastily compiled, with inconsistencies, identical quotes attributed to different people, and repeated paragraphs, but they make interesting reading.  On defence policy there is no mention of Trident, and the document says that “our strategic position needs to be rethought and ‘smart defence’ must move from rhetoric to reality”.  I may be too optimistic in hoping that this heralds real change.  On the other hand I am deeply uneasy over attitudes towards immigration, with granting priority for social housing to “those who give back to their communities”, and with the repeated emphasis that people should “get out what they put in”.

What happened to “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs”?  Some of us are lucky in health, talent and family, others are less fortunate from the start, or they become ill, injured, or overwhelmed.  The deepest silence during Ed Miliband’s speech was when he said that benefits are too easy to come by, and he was challenged at the question-and-answer session:  when the sick and disabled were being hardest hit by government cuts, why did he reinforce the stereotype of all claimants as scroungers?

Recently the tabloids had a field day with a woman filmed sky- diving while she drew incapacity benefit for a bad back.  Yes of course this is wrong.  But what are we saying to this member: “I have a severely disabled son, and he tells me he feels guilty for being in a wheelchair. This is the first time he has used the word ‘guilty’ in the almost 20 years since he was paralysed as the result of viral encephalitis.”

Or this, from the father of a profoundly deaf 50-year-old man on disability benefit: “He got an HND in engineering, was made redundant, and has been out of work for 15 years.  This has not been for want of trying, and it is not because of any limitation to a narrow range of employment;  he has tried for jobs as packer and shelf-filler.  He has done course after course of updating skills. People with disabilities are constantly made to feel that it is all their own fault.  The Archbishop of Canterbury is quite right when he says that this causes a sense of hopelessness and despair.”

Who will stand up for them if not the Labour party?  And with government intransigence driving public sector workers to ballot for strike action over pensions, the leadership urgently need to understand a little more and condemn a little less.  There are serious issues about both policy and process, and a great deal to do if we are to regain power and promote a Labour vision which can convince and also inspire.  I hope that we will all be able to contribute.

Questions and comments are welcome, and I am happy for this to be circulated to members as a personal account, not an official record.

Reports of meetings from July 2008 onwards are at http://www.labourblogs.com/public-blog/annblack, with earlier reports at www.annblack.com.

Ann Black, 88 Howard Street, Oxford OX4 3BE, 07956-637958, annblack50@btinternet.com

Filed Under: News

Conference rule change proposals – rejected

October 17, 2011 By Leave a Comment
As these can be hard to find I’ve listed them below, with separate
percentages for constituencies and affiliates.  All were rejected,
though a couple came close to 50% among CLP delegates. 
1 -        replace clause IV with new wording (proposed by Castle
Point, Ceredigion and Dagenham & Rainham, opposed by
the NEC because Refounding Labour showed no demand for
change).  Lost with 12.4% in favour (21.1% of constituencies,
3.6% of affiliates);
2 –        establish a Labour party code of ethics (proposed by South
Ribble, opposed by the NEC because standards are already
set out in codes of conduct and staff contracts).  Lost with
20.1% in favour (29.6% / 10.6%);
3 –        establish a charter of members’ rights (proposed by
Hyndburn, opposed by the NEC because most items are
already in the rules or guidelines).  Lost with 18.1% in favour
(24.7% / 11.6%);
4 -        allow CLPs to send a male delegate to conference for two
consecutive years where they cannot find a woman
(proposed by Winchester, opposed by the NEC because the
rule was amended in 2008 so that CLPs can send another
man after two years if they are still unable to find a woman. 
Further change would dilute women’s representation).  Lost
with 7.4% in favour (12.7% / 2.0%);
5 –        debate constituency rule changes in the year that they are
submitted (proposed by Dewsbury, opposed by the NEC
because a year’s delay allows them to be considered fully. 
Delegates contrasted the 15 months which the NEC
demands with the hours that they were given to digest
Refounding Labour.  They were told that the rule was set in
1968 and had served the party well, though any rule which is
43 years old would normally be considered ripe for
modernisation);
            The vote was lost with 28.2% in favour (44.5% / 11.9%).  I’m
surprised that this made it past the conference arrangements
committee, as Lancaster & Fleetwood submitted the same
amendment last year, lost with 22.7% in favour, and
proposals cannot be brought back within three years;
6 -        increase the number of NEC constituency places from six to
eight, with one representative elected from Scotland and one
from Wales (proposed by Beverley & Holderness, Stratford-
upon-Avon and Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale,
opposed by the NEC because “CLPs are already adequately
represented” and the Scottish and Welsh leaders have a
standing invitation to attend NEC meetings).  Lost with 20.6%
in favour (39.5% / 1.8%).
An amendment from Rotherham, Sheffield Central and Wentworth
& Dearne to allow Young Labour group officers to contact their
own members was withdrawn, but the thrust of Refounding
Labour is towards better communication across the party, and I
hope this will be solved through other means. 
Filed Under: Conference 2011, News

Conference report – 26/29 September 2011

October 17, 2011 By Leave a Comment
Overall the mood was positive, and it’s always encouraging to
meet like-minded people committed to the same ideals.  Ed Balls
gave a fighting speech as shadow chancellor, and Ed Miliband
was applauded, particularly when he challenged the Tories over
the NHS.  As he said, it was not an attack on business, but on
business-as-usual.  I cannot entirely explain the reaction of some
people to Tony Blair’s name, though it may have reflected general
frustration, spilling over from Sunday, at being unable to express
views in any other way.  Many attended Ed Miliband’s question-
and-answer session on Wednesday, figuring that they were more
likely to be called by Eddie Izzard, despite attempts to give
precedence to “ordinary people”, than in the main conference. 
Star of the week was Tom Watson MP for pursuing the Murdochs,
starting at a time when few others would risk their political career.    
Constituencies will get detailed reports from their own delegates. 
However I have always said that conferences are best judged by
members at home, not those in the hall, and I am interested in
what  made it through to mainstream TV, and what impression it
left, if any.  Should we concentrate on new policies, perhaps
years before we can implement them, or on holding the
government to account?  And how do we get messages across,
when as an opposition we do not command the agenda? 
Filed Under: Conference 2011, News

Conference report – 25 September 2011

October 17, 2011 By Leave a Comment
Conference opened after lunch, with delegates unhappy at being
bounced into a take-it-or-leave-it vote on over 100 pages after
only hours to digest the contents.  Unusually points of order
seeking a more democratic process were applauded, and
conference came close to rejecting the standing orders committee
report, with most delegates sitting on their hands.  After a string of
speakers urging a Yes vote the package was carried with 93.9%
in favour (88.3% of CLPs, 99.5% of affiliates).  
From conversations the change in funding for local parties, where
constituency representatives were involved, was a significant
selling point:  smaller parties will gain, and many of the “losers”
accept the  principle of redistribution.  And despite justified
complaints, extra time and separate votes would have ended up
with the same result.  So politically it was best to get Refounding
Labour out of the way and turn back to the economy, health,
education and real issues which affect real people. 
Delegates then thanked outgoing general secretary Ray Collins
for keeping the show on the road through choppy financial waters,
and ratified his successor Iain McNicol, who was cheered for his
opening:  “I’ve never dumped a leaflet round, and I’ve never
crossed a picket line.”  In Iain’s first party role as a local organiser
he had to raise his own salary, which may yet come in useful. 
Conference also voted on which contemporary resolutions to
discuss.  As usual the four trade union topics – health and social
care; jobs, growth and employment rights; public services; and
phone-hacking – were selected, with housing added by
constituencies.  (A more balanced system would have included
the August riots, service for young people and high-speed rail, all
of which attracted significant constituency support.)   After
resolutions on each topic were combined, the NEC decided to
support the resulting composites.  Hopefully they will be on the
party website, but if not, I can forward copies.
Filed Under: News
« Older Posts