How do you triangulate once politics is no longer one dimensional? …
Racism
At Tory Party Conference, earlier this week, the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd proposed that employers would be asked to monitor their foreign workers; of course, some wags immediately suggested that they be made to wear a badge; it worked so well last time. …
Zombies
A bunch of New Labour survivors are presenting the idea that the Labour Party’s commitment to winning public office means that this is the only way in which the Labour Party should look to change society; they contrast this with Corbyn’s ambition to build a movement. In this article, “A hijack or a mutiny? Labour, leadership and the left”, Jeremy Gilbert dissects this claim by studying the rules and referring to the Labour Party’s history.
He also at the nature of movements and parties; the road to elitism and concludes with the statement, that the party has not been hijacked by arrivistes and entryists, but that this is a mutiny; the membership, even those who joined before 2015 want to turn to the Left and rebuild Labour’s campaigning movement.
Bea Campbell, in an article called Corbynism, also writes about movements and Parties and examines rump New Labour’s inability to evolve; she pointed me at the Gilbert article. She says,
The surprising dullness of candidates challenging Corbyn during the first leadership election campaign, and their performance since then, is indicative — it is a kind of mute inability to connect with the impact of 2008 and the neo-liberal implosion; it renders them the living dead.
As summed up by one of the speakers at the CLPD rally, it isn’t a choice between electoral politics and a movement, we need both; something that was understood in the ’70s and ’80s. It was also understood more recently when the local Labour Party supported, maybe incubated the movement to “Save Lewisham A+E”. …
Impressions from #lab16
It was my first experience of conference as a delegate. Since I rebooted my membership of the Labour Party, I have been arguing for a member led policy making process so it was important to be able to see the pinnacle of the members expression of voice at first hand.
This year was unusual in that on the Saturday, the Special Conference to announce the results of the Leadership election was held. Corbyn won with an increased mandate despite the appalling campaign run against him and the bending of the rules.
As a delegate, one is very busy but often to little effect. Conference remains very stage managed. The rules give primacy of policy initiation to the National Policy Forum, which presents a 250 page report on the proposed programme. This has not met since it was elected last year, so not sure where the NPF report came from, but it’s structures govern the political agenda of Conference, it’s broken into sessions mirroring the policy commissions of the NPF. Motions are submitted but must be “Contemporary” which means pertaining to an event after the publication of the NPF Report, which was mid-August this year. The Conference Arrangements Committee determines if the motions are genuinely “contemporary” and for instance this year ruled that motions on the economy/austerity weren’t contemporary since we had an Economy in July. The CAC also groups the motions into topics. The topics are then voted on by conference in two classes, the Trade Unions and Socialist Societies and the CLPs representing the individual membership. For each of these classes, the top four topics are selected for debate and all organisations submitting motions invited to a meeting to see if agreement on the words can be reached which is a further opportunity for the Leadership to ensure that uncomfortable policies do not reach the floor of conference; it seems a serious mistake was made by the team working on “Employment Rights” as the words on requiring a popular mandate once the terms of Brexit are known obviously got through by accident.
In the Education composite, we were badly stitched up, partly through inexperience. The front bench and CAC brought a form of words which contained four of ours. The front bench believe that they can add to the 22 parliamentary victories from the last term and defeat the Tories on Grammar Schools in parliament; it they believe that if LP conference condemned academies, demanded a return to local democratic control and called on councils to oppose further academisation that this would weaken the parliamentary struggle, or maybe the otherwise impressive Angela Rayner hadn’t covered these issues in the speech she had written. The final motion put to conference had five words from ours and focused exclusively on opposing Grammar Schools, the speech was considered a great success. We should submit our motion to the NPF at their site, it should be signed by the Constituency.
It is my view that the rules and standing orders are there to ensure that the will of the meeting is expressed; they shouldn’t be seen as weapons in a winning or losing contest. It seems this is not a view shared by many of the people acting as Chairs of both Conference and the compositing meetings. In too many cases, the Chair moved to votes on the original proposal without allowing votes and in some cases debate on amendments moved. In one case, the Conference Chair failed to ask for votes against and had to be corrected by the Compliance Unit staff member on the platform. Properly conducted debates and votes heal division, this sort of manipulation does not. What would Citrine say?
The energy debate was interesting; it was written by the Unions, and opposed from the floor for being insufficiently green and too orientated around fossil fuel industries but we can all agree we don’t like fracking.
Card Votes aren’t, each delegate gets a fraction of the organisation’s card vote and thus if mandates are unclear, the votes may council each other out. In our case, we had four delegates, two left, two right and thus most of the card votes will be a net of zero.
I went to the Liberty Fringe meeting, I raised the issue of the Investigatory Powers Act, not much interest.
Delegates had blue badges, the platform and other ex-officio members had red ones and member visitors had orange and yellow badges. On the last day, it was clear that many of the moderates had gone home. The staff cleared the conference hall between the morning sessions and then let people come in, once the delegates and ex-officio seat holders were in, all the hall seats including “balcony” seats were given to the previously excluded member visitors. The atmosphere in the morning had been much better than Tuesday, which was terrible, but the massive number of orange badge holders in the room to listen to Jeremy’s speech can only auger well for 2017, when they come back with blue badges. …
Notes from #lab16
This was written at the time and published 11 months later, It consists of notes I made at the CLPD meeting and at #lab16 on the first day. It looks at the 1st CLPD meeting, their Delegates briefing and makes some critical comments on the proposed rule changes and Lillee and McNicols speeches. …
Chilling Effect
At Conference I have just spoken against the Regulation of Powers Bill/Act at the Home Affairs Policy Seminar. I mentioned that Labour has removed “Economic Security” from the list of grounds for spying on people, but that the authorising of “bulk powers” and the desire of the intelligence services to find bad people by comparing them with good people and the need to trawl all the UK’s Internet traffic is creating/will create a chilling effect on the right to free speech.
I also made the point the Labour Party’s bureaucracy’s similar trawling of people’s social media spores also creates a chilling effect; there are people in the Party that are avoiding social media other than with friend and family, and even unsure on using the new my Labour app. …
Morning all
The morning session was kicked off by the traditional CAC shenanigans. They had ruled out any discussion on the economy and austerity on the grounds it wasn’t contemporary. Doh! Three organisations moved reference back.
The NEC have collected all their rule changes into a single omnibus amendment, this includes some technical stuff, but also two new members of the NEC appointed by the Leaders of the Scots and Welsh Parties and making voting against a council budget a disciplinary offence.
The use of an omnibus motion was questioned in the reference back debate as was the absence of a debate on the economy and the ruling out of discussion on branch rights in MP selections. I voted to uphold the reference backs, the conference disagreed …
Black ink
Labour’s NEC is proposing rule changes which will make voting against council budgets a Party disciplinary offence. #clpd #peoplesmomentum . This rule applies to Labour Councillors in Labour Groups. …
Thirst
I had a great time last night, some friends arranged a get together of some party comrades, not a large meeting but I met two recent joiners and had the chance for a longer chat with someone I’d known for a while. A fascinating wide ranging conversation about how to organise, how change occurs, the impact of the European radical left, ideas from global development politics, the dichotomy between the old and the young and the roots of the current left insurgency in the UK i.e. the life experiences that had led people to where they were. And people say there’s no thirst for theory! …
Digital inclusions & democracy

25% of the UK population don’t have broadband, this is higher amongst the poor and the old; it generally costs more than the BBC Licence. Also not all internet users are Facebook users. Facebook (& other social media providers) cannot act as a guarantor of identity in government and political business, partly because they’re proprietary, closed source systems and thus users, citizens and judges do not know what the code does. Digital inclusion is still one of the key political issues to be addressed in the internet age, governments and political parties need to step very carefully when they use social media platforms as a means of understanding people’s views; this is before we consider the anti-democratic nature of survey’s and referenda, you can only answer the questions asked, usually in a binary or scalar fashion. It’s not good enough …..oh yeah & open source. …