Today’s issues for Labour

Portraits, Powell and Phillipson

Labour is holding an election for the position of Deputy Leader, I have five questions I want to ask them.

  1. Where do you stand on immigration and the fact that copying Reform legitimises and emboldens them?
  2. Where do you stand on closer relations with the EU on defence, trade and economic co-operation? Where do you stand on rejoining the single-market?
  3. Where do you stand on fiscal/monetary policy? How can we end austerity and make people feel better off and what will you do?
  4. Where do you stand on Welfare reform? Why are we increasing poverty?
  5. What do you think the Government should do about Gaza and Palestine?
  6. I believe a Deputy Leader, in fact all MPs, should represent the Party membership to the PLP and its leadership, will you start to do this?
  7. What measures will you take to turn the Party’s democracy back on?

Now how to put these questions to them. …

#Lab25 will get to debate rejoining the EU

Labour Conference 2019 from the balcony

At the General Committee of Lewisham North last night we agreed to send a motion calling for the abolition of the two child benefit cap, and also proposed a reference back of the NPF report. I intiallly proposed the words in a blog article posted last week. This article repeats some of the text of the reference back and my notes for my moving speech, and right of reply, as it was opposed by both those who think that being outside the EU is a good thing, and those who fear Farage and think the time is wrong.

The crux of the reference back is,

Conference calls on the NPF to look beyond the ’24 manifesto commitments with respect to the EU relationship and to press for faster re-alignment with the EU single market within this parliament and to examine the possibility of rejoining  the European Union being a manifesto promise for the next general election.

Here are my notes, in moving the proposal,

The NPF report talks of much progress but draws little conclusions. It makes much of the UK-EU summit in May, which itself was inconclusive. No agreements were made. Not even on the softest of targets, Defence.

This reference back calls for the NPF to consider looking beyond the ’24 manifesto commitments with respect to the EU relationship and to press for faster re-alignment with the EU single market, within this parliament, and to examine the possibility of rejoining the European Union being a manifesto promise for the next general election.

In addition to its lack of ambition, the report fails to mention the reset meetings requirements that the UK must fully implement its commitments under the “withdrawal agreement”, the Windsor framework and the “Trade and cooperation agreement” and that, as said, it failed to conclude any improvement in the formal relationships between the United Kingdom and the European Union, including on youth mobility.

The OBR estimates that exit from the single market has cost the economy 4% of its value, this is not something that a growth mission driven government should leave on the table.

The fundamental reason for the UK’s poor economic performance is a lack of investment. Rejoining the single market would ease the entry of European capital into the UK investment market, and help to remediate the unpatriotic and global nature of the shrinking London capital markets which leaves the primary source of domestic investment to retained profits. It would also make the housing market goals easier to achieve as in order to build more houses the UK needs skills, effort and bricks from abroad.

A changed mood disguised by Brexit adjacent red-lines are not enough and chasing the dying Brexiteer vote is not a strategy for success.

But when making policy, we need to consider what’s right and not just what’s popular.

Please send this to Conference so it is at least debated and visible.

And my notes of my right of reply,

The referendum decision was taken three elections and 9 years ago. It is a dead and failed mandate.

For those of you who hang onto your line from the seventies, you were wrong in 79, wrong in 2016 and wrong today; for those that argue it’s a barrier to a socialist government may I remind you of the author of  the doctrine of “Socialism in one country”.

For those that fear giving Farage space, you can’t fight him by agreeing with him. He’s wrong on Europe and wrong on immigration and we need to say so.

For those who fear Reform’s reaction, when making policy and making promises, at least those we mean to keep, we should consider what’s right and not what’s popular with people who will never vote for us.

Our Spanish comrade suggested this is premature, he argues the Party needs an agreement about how to rejoin and that will take us time. I say what  better way to start the conversation than by taking it to Labour Conference.

 …

Thoughts on Labour’s NPF Report ’25

Thoughts on Labour’s NPF Report ’25

This article looks at the development of Labour's Policy as its annual Conference approaches. It looks at the rules commitment to "voting in parts", and reproduces an NPF report reference back motion on the subject of the relationship with the EU that I shall take to my local party. My motion calls to rejoin the single market immediately and to promise to rejoin the EU in the next manifesto. To read the whole article, use the "Read More" button ...

More on the ‘great reset’ meeting

Kier Starmer and Ursula von der Leyen in a conference room

In an article/podcast in inews, entitled "Starmer's Government sees closer ties with the EU as a key part of plans to ramp up economic growth",  the issue of deals with global partners to be a key part of trying to make Britain a more attractive destination for investment is allegedly discussed. See the full article at 'RemovePaywalls.com'. I made some notes inspired or provoked by this article, which was published in late July. Although much of this is extracted quotes, I make some comments. For more, use the 'Read More' button ...

Getting involved in politics

GMB banners on a march/demo

I went to London region's fringe meeting. These are held inside the conference centre and must be sponsored by a region. This meeting was called “Getting involved in politics”. It’s platform consisted of Dawn Butler MP, Robbie Scott (TULO), Miriam Myrwitch (London Labour), and two GMB voluntary officers from the Labour Party branch and the Parliamentary Staffs branch. I don’t know if the platform learnt anything, but some probing questions were asked, mainly about the Labour Party. This article uses my notes to report in the meeting, and I cross-reference and comment on Labour's rules on debate, social media and bullying. The full article is overleaf ...

Clause IV 2024

Labour Conference 2019 from the balcony

I have decided to reproduce Labour’s Clause IV, its Aims and Values. I think some need to be reminded.

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, prejuidice 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.

Or

 …

Disappointing and Dangerous

The door to a polling station with signs

The Election results on May 1st is disappointing for progressives in this country and dangerous. Reform won a by-election in one of labour’s safest seats, won two Mayoralties and took control of ten councils, two from Labour (Kent & Durham).

Labour’s response has been stupid, by suggesting we should have campaigned harder, or disgusting, as in we need to be harsher in “Stopping the Boats”. Copying reform empowers them, Labour must stop it!

Furthermore, it is little noticed that in Lambeth, the Greens, in a council by-election, won a ward from Labour. This is proof at the polls that there is clearly a constituency to the left of the Labour Party as it stands today.

It is little understood inside Labour that the “hero voter” strategy failed; few Tories came to Labour in 2024 with many voting either Reform or staying at home. In his article, “How Labour could beat Reform”, Phil Burton Cartledge, quotes the study, ‘Getting to Know Reform Curious Labour voters‘ which shows that Labour needs to ensure it does not lose its progressive base who seem more ready to vote for another party then Reform voters do to vote for Labour. As is the case for the Tories, the votes aren’t there on the right to make the difference.

The reasons for dissatisfaction withy Labour are clear, possibly best or at least succinctly summed up by John  McTiernan on twitter, and in this thread. Labour is no longer trusted with the welfare state or public services. It needs to re-establish that trust by keeping its implicit as well as explicit promises.

After posting my thoughts, I was pointed at “Entering Faragia” by David Aaronovitch and have corrected my stats. He also points out that Liberal Democrats beat both Labour and the Tories which is further evidence that Labour faces an electoral threat other than Reform UK and the Tories. You might like to read the article as he examines the likely built in delivery failure of Reform’s promises, particularity a DOGE in every county, and questions the calibre of many of Reform’s candidates. He offers Labour three responses, which he describes as panics, firstly to steal Reform’s clothes, secondly, to forget the long term and thirdly to return to Corbynism, which I feel he summarises and characterises unfairly if only by omission. Aaronovitch feels these are all deadends but I would offer a fourth, a return to Starmer’s 10 promises made to the party while campaigning for leader. …