I've spent a couple of days trying to track this one down - and the VERY good news is that Labour Party Conference withstood serious pressure from the leadership and has backed a change in the way in which the National Policy Forum is elected.
I know that the trade unions were being arm-twisted for days before the vote on Wednesday afternoon. But they stood firm.
So now instead of delegates at Conference being the only ones who can vote on who represents us, we will all have a say in who gets onto the NPF. This is an issue which groups like CLPD, STLP and the LRC have been fighting for for a couple of years. It may end the farce by which dissenting views on the NPF have been effectively wiped out.
OMOV for the NEC has allowed the left of centre grassroots candidates to get four out of the six CLP places. Now it's time to take the fight to the NPF. And fight for the policies we need to change direction. This is not, as some have billed it , a return to the "bad old days" of internal strife. It may indeed herald a return to the "good old days" when Labour policy-making had input from all wings of the Party.
See link below for details.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8282449.stm
Friday, 2 October 2009
A MAJOR VICTORY FOR LABOUR PARTY DEMOCRACY
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
So are you now in favour of policy being determined by the NPF - or do you want it to revert back to Conference?
However, it is interesting that you see all this in terms of political positioning of one block against another rather than as a means of improving policy formulation. And I daresay that this will be reflected in the type of candidates which will be put forward - when instead of those who understand the underlying issues and can actually develop the detailed policies required we will get all the usual political hacks seeking to defend their sacred cows.
BTW - did you have a sense of humour failure regarding my last qoutation from Nye - the sentiment also applies in respect of monasteries, so I'm sure that we can drop the charge of sexism against Nye.
Policy is currently not determined by the NPF - there are very rarely votes and the NPF as it's currently comprised has ratified even the most unpopular of policies. Having a broader swathe of opinion will vastly improve the current situation.And the next step is to pass a rule chnge allowing minority positions.This is a step, but an important one, in the right direction.
Conference, thanks to the Blairite reforms under PiP, lost its sovereignty years ago.
Tory Boys Never Grow Up - But isn't the body already factional? It is a New Labour structure, from which left wing views are restricted. It certainly looks like the system was made to be as undemocratic as possible so as to influence the results of elections to it and make it is unlikely as possible that left-leaning NPF reps would be returned.
This is a welcome development.
When the initial proposals for the NPF - partnership in Power - were introduced, I was a political education officer for a local CLP, and I was active in organisaing lots of discussions, debates, policy briefings etc. At first I was in favour of the changes as I felt that 'resolution' politics was far from ideal.
However, the changes did exactly the opposite to what I and others had hoped in making it appear that ordinary party members could have no influence at all.
This will at least be a move in the right direction - and whilst I agree that those elected should be knowledgeable, I also think that it is reasonable that we know their stance on major issues. And for me, that would not necessarily mean voting for a left winger, should I return to party membership - I would never, ever support an anti-EU candidate, for example, no matter their views on anything else.
Conference really has become a charade - I'd question whether it has any real use at all
Otto
Perhaps we should try and move policy development away from factionalism - and try and develop something that uses values, analysis and argument? I fail to see how replacing one factionalism with another will actually improve anything. I suspect that the recent changes will just have the impact of strengthening the power of the trade union leadership faction - where is the devolution of their NPF voting rights down to their members (certainly doesn't happen in my union!)
Personally, I'm all in favour in anything that increase the direct involvement of members in the Party - and I suspect it may soon be time for an examination of the whole moribund structure of the party - including branches, CLPs, factions, candidate selection, policy development, involvement of trade union members etc. - rather that fighting factional battles over the existing structure. I suspect that most Party members will want to do the "right" thing first rather than thinking in terms of the left vs New Labour.
Post a Comment