Advice to Delegates

My guide for delegates to Labour Conference.

1. Get your card votes at Regional Briefings, the location of these is advertised in the Delegates Guide.
2. Get your voting papers inc. the priorities ballot paper, these will be issued somewhere else
3. Be there for conference start as the CAC report will be voted on by Card Vote
4. If not all delegates have their card vote because Region mucked up, move a point of order before the vote on the CAC report, they reopened the ballot office and extended the voting time last year because a large number of London Delegates did not have their cards
5. You will know what the Unions are going to prioritise, don’t vote for the same subjects, you have 10 options, these will be voting for subject groups
6. Remember your mandates, people and subject matter and priority ballot
7. Take a photo of the ballot papers so you can prove you did what was needed.
8. If absent, leave the card vote books on the floor with someone else
9. Most Votes will be at the end of the session or day.
10. There will be CAC reports each morning by email. These need to be read so leave time for this.
11. Read the CLPD Yellow Pages, it’s full of good advice
12. Composite meetings decide the mover & seconder, rule changes have no seconder
13. If you want to speak from the floor, wear something distinctive but not stupidly so. Red is no good at LP conference.
14. Take some water, any refreshments you need and any medicine you need. Queues in the Conference Centre during breaks will be long.
15. Remember to take enough photos
16. Dress nice for leader’s speech (last day)

You may only speak once now. This cannot be guaranteed but you might want to wait for specific debates.

Thanks to those who helped me with this! …

Member’s rule change proposals

Member’s rule change proposals

I met up with some people who had seen Labour’s Conference Agenda items and they said that the following rule amendments were to be debated, or at least rules on the following topics. N.B. I have not yet read these, so my comments may be a bit off.

  1. A proposal to amend the so-called three year rule on rule changes, allowing popular changes to be debated within the current three year moratorium.
  2. There will be a rule change about OMOV for Executive Mayor’s and Council Leaders (& Deputies).
  3. An amendment to re-establish Clause IV, the rule not the group
  4. A proposal to permit amendments to motions at Conference.
  5. A rule change to clarify the rules on access to membership data lists.
  6. A rule change to permit BAME only shortlists; I have not read this rule change but am aware that this is likely to require legislation.
  7. A rule change on democratising the LCF, barring councillors and increasing the size, and having 25% of delegates as TU delegates.
  8. A proposal to submit  both a rule change & a motion. Again I have not read this so I don’t know if it changes the number to be submitted beyond one of each.
  9. A motion changing the rules to ensure the transparency of public official’s/candidate’s finances
  10. A proposal to revise revision of disciplinary rule, C2.I.8. (I have not read this, but it’s a clue to search it out and read it.)
  11. A proposal on greater diversity in CLPs.

It seems the NEC will be proposing to amend the disciplinary process. The desire is to create a fast track process but the fear is that they are proposing to fatally weaken the legally necessary separation of powers/segregation of duties between the NEC and the NCC. Obviously one needs to read it, but this sounds like one to oppose.

Rules are currently proposed to be debated on Saturday afternoon. Delegates will need all their credentials, including their card vote books which are *not* sent by post. …

What I said on the surveillance state

What I said on the surveillance state

I took my “surveillance society/human rights law” motion to my CLP GC last week. This is the speech I intended to give, it runs for about 2 mins; I had to cut it down.

In 2013, Edward Snowden, a contractor at the US’s National Security Agency blew the whistle on the NSA, and it’s five-eyes’ allies attempt to bug the whole of the internet, exposing the lengths that the intelligence services were prepared to go in building a surveillance society.

A debate exploded about the legality of their activities and we came to see the importance of their failed attempts under both Labour & Coalition Governments to legalise their activities with the Communications Data Bill versions 1 & 2.

In 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union struck down the Data Retention Directive as in violation of the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights; in the UK a law was rapidly passed to leave the rights of the intelligence services in place.

Over time these surveillance powers have been extended by via both Legislation such as the Immigration Act, the Counter Terrorism and Security act which authorises Prevent and by “voluntary” agreement such as the #getitrightfromagenuine site programme.

This has been capped of by Theresa May’s Investigatory Powers Act, which has since been declared in contravention of the Charter of Fundamental Rights because the captured information can be retrieved for reasons other than serious crime and these retrievals are not reviewed by a Judge.

To this list we should add the Data Protection Act’s immigration exception, which means that immigration data is not subject to the GDPR rights of accessibility and correction.

At the centre of this is the intelligence service’s desire to treat everyone as suspects and to infringe their privacy without proving “reasonable suspicion”.

This is also about political power and how to exercise it; these measures are designed to take power away from us, from citizens and our neighbours.

If you look at the laws that underwrite the surveillance society, Immigration, Counter Terrorism and the DPA Immigration exception, you can see that the first victims of the surveillance society are migrants and ethnic minorities.

We should say and conference must state that freedom of expression and the right to privacy are universal human rights, that the current surveillance and investigatory powers regime is in breach of these rights.

It’s time for Labour to get on the right side of this debate, for too long the portfolio has been in the hands of fans of, or those that fear the securocrats.

250 words is too short to make the whole argument which is why I propose a commission to develop the policy further.

This motion is unlikely to be passed elsewhere so it’d be great if you voted for it and agreed to send it to conference.

The motion carried but we decided to send a great motion on social care. Does anyone have time to put it to conference? …

Labour and the Surveillance State

I am planning to get a motion on the Justice and the Surveillance State to LP Conference, I asked for help in this article on this blog, and I believe the final words for CLPD are very similar to my version 2. Here they are,

Investigatory Powers to be subject to Human Rights Law

Conference notes the absence from the NPF Report 2018 of the surveillance society.

Conference notes the continual use of surveillance powers in the private and public sectors authorised by law, or government programme including:

  • Investigatory Powers Act 2016,
  • Immigration Act 2014
  • Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015
  • Digital Economy Acts 2017/2010,
  • Data Protection Act 2018

Conference notes that the IPA 2016 and DEA 2010 were both interdicted by the CJEU as contrary to Human Rights Law and/or the EU acquis.

The intrusive programmes include Prevent and ‘get it right from a genuine site’.

Conference believes that freedom of expression and the right to privacy are universal human rights, that the current surveillance and investigatory powers regime is in breach of these rights.

Conference resolves that a Labour Government will ensure that private and public surveillance technologies and systems will conform to laws that meet the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights, including a need to prove reasonable suspicion before collecting evidence and the right to a fair trial with the principle of innocent until proved guilty.

Conference calls on the Labour Party to draw up a Human Rights based policy for the regulation of British Law Enforcement authorities and their investigatory powers. This to include the abolition of Prevent, the repeal of the 2014 Immigration Act and the repeal of the immigration data exception established by the DPA 2018.

Conference instructs the relevant Policy Commission to launch a consultation on Surveillance and Justice to report to Conference 2020.

If you can get it to Conference that would be very helpful.

I have put the words in a word document,  Motion on Investigatory Powers for Lab19., or in a .pdf if you prefer, Motion on Investigatory Powers for Lab19. …