I wrote something for Labour Briefing, called Time for a local government clean up, I talk about the history of control and the members charter and the rules committent to provide representation for communities and groups currently under represented. I talk about the smallness of the LCFs and thus the ease of control, and threat of corruption through poor definitions of conflict of interests. I identify the change in rules about AWS and while I don’t mention it, I remember the failure of Lewisham LCF to select enough woman for the candidate panel. …
Labour’s 3 year rule
When considering making rule changes in the Labour Party, designers need to take into account the so-called three year rule, and in 2021, need to consider that the rule defines the embargo in terms of conferences and so 2020 will not count. The rule states,
‘When Party conference has made a decision on a constitutional amendment, no resolution to amend the constitution or rules of the Party having the same or similar primary objective shall appear on the agenda of the three following annual party conferences, except such resolutions to amend the constitution and rules that are in the opinion of the NEC of immediate importance.’
Chapter 3, Clause III, 2.H (page 20 of the 2020 Rule Book)
So, let’s dispose of two pieces of pedantry; motions become resolutions on passing. Therefore proposals for change are motions, the use of the word resolution in this rule is legally illiterate. It’s referred to as the three-year rule, but in effect it’s a five year rule, only rule changes that failed in 2016, or earlier can be considered, and a lot of rules were changed at the 2017-2019 conferences.
Critically, we have the phrase, “the same or similar primary objective”. This is designed to stop factions behaving like children having a tantrum and nagging until they get what they want, but not to prohibit CLP (or affiliate) proposed rule changes designed to review or improve a rule.
The CAC decision as to whether a proposed rule change contravened Rule C3.III.2.H is taken on the recommendation of staff. The CLPs have two representatives, the Unions and other affiliates have five and one member is elected by Conference which seems to mean that the Unions choose them. The fear is that staff will rule out motions that the leadership don’t want and be backed by a compliant CAC majority. Recently we have seen that the Unions will not vote for a rule change not supported by the NEC, on which they have ⅓ of the members. The CAC and staff may well play fast and loose with ‘primary purpose’ and consider any further changes to a specific rule to be ultra-vires.
Careful study of the text suggests that a revoking motion would be in order, as would an orthogonal amendment. I think I might still try my Nolan Principles rule change proposal which seeks to amend C2.II.7 which was introduced in 2018 to see if primary purpose will be interpreted with textual literacy or with factional intent. The ‘open selection’ motion at 2018 was deemed to have fallen because the NEC rule change was carried. Has conference ‘made a decision on a constitutional amendment’? Sadly probably as it carried the trigger ballot reform motion and the CAC report that deemed open selection to fail but the words ‘made a decision’ require conference to have done so, withdrawal means that a decision has not been taken.
It’s a mess but the same as everywhere else, like the sailing the rules are a weapon, unlike sailing, there’s no real independent judge as to what the rules mean. …
Lessons from the Liverpool inspectors
There has been an inspection, a so called best value inspection, into the running of Liverpool Council, and they have issued a report. They recommend, surprise, surprise that commissioners, who will look like … er them be appointed for three years to supervise an improvement plan. One of the recommendations, §11.3, I quote below, the Secretary of State should/shall/must,
Direct LCC to prepare and implement an Improvement Plan, to the satisfaction of the Commissioners with, as a minimum, the following components:
- In the first 12 months review and implement changes to the Council’s constitution which will
- Improve the ethical governance framework to best practice incorporating the LGA model code and a fully functioning Standards Committee.
- Constitute the Audit Committee as a stand-alone committee with a direct reporting line to Council and a right to have its recommendations considered by the Executive Mayor and Cabinet, with either an independent Chair or an Independent Technical Advisor.
- To re-establish Scrutiny activity in line with Statutory Guidance ensuring that Councillor leadership of the activity is on a cross party basis and with appropriate officer support.
- Introduce best practice Standing Orders and Regulations for contracts and property disposals.
- Review the scope, content and reporting of all delegated powers.
- Establish a specific code of conduct for all Members in connection with dealing with Planning and Licencing matters.
- Require mandatory training of members in key activities, including behaviours, before participation in Council activities other than full Council.
- Improve the content and updating of declarations of interests and gifts and hospitality, for both Members and Officers.
This is quite comprehensive, I wonder if any other organisations in the news could benefit from such an improvement plan.
I shall write something a bit more political later but I have to troll some Labour Party NEC members now. …
Fair votes at Labour Grassroots
Crispin ran a show on PR, which he invited me to speak at. I was surprised to hear Howard Beckett speak in favour and it was a good speech focusing on what we want our parliament to look and behave like. The full show is behind the preceding hyperlink, I am on towards the end, my contribution can be viewed in the hyperlink/screen below.
I tried to say that this is about great and broad principles, how we choose governments, what sort of parliament we want, and how governments construct their coalitions. I take a pop at those who want a short cut to obtaining untrammelled state power without doing the campaigning and persuading necessary to win power, and those who think that the constituency link as it is worth defending. There wasn’t time to talk about the unhealthy forces that FPTP imposes on the Labour Party, nor on the impact on democracy of the size of the parliament, about which I have a planned blog. …
Democracy Threatened
Daniel Blaney wrote a piece on the suspension of the Newham Labour Parties on the Labour Briefing site. The article gives some context, documents the NEC’s hesitance in getting involved in the mayoral reselection last time round, but this quote, may sum up his fears.
…the local Left has very strong reservations, and fears this will lead to a longer term frost in local democracy when we had hoped for a thaw, – there is no doubt that Newham Labour politics needs to be cleaned up, something the wider party apparatus has neglected for a very long time.
Daniel Blaney – Labour Briefing
The last sentence is key, neither the London Regional Office, nor the NEC seem to be safe guardians of democracy and even decency. We need to do better. …
Starmer, a new chapter?
Late last week, Kier Starmer made what was billed as the first of his major policy speeches. You can see it here, and read it here. (I have only read it.) Some people’s reactions seem instant, and I am not sure how well thought out they are. I am OK with the economics of "Recovery Bonds". This article I look at what James Meadway & Phil BC have to say, on the economics and what it means for strategy. I add that failing to mention or criticise Brexit continues the mistake of only permitting the Tories to talk about the growing disaster, you’d think we’d learned the message over deficit fetishism, we can’t let the Tories set the narrative unchallenged. Silence on climate change is also very disappointing. I conclude, So on economics, strategy and justice, it’s all a bit meh, but also dangerous for Labour. If Starmer, his consiglieri and acolytes misjudge the Tories and/or our core decides that the compromises with Blue Labour are too much and if Brexit's costs gets worse as more of the exit deadlines pass, his collusion with Brexit and errors of psephological judgement will also cost him and Labour dear. ...
Let’s see the Brexit deal risk assessment
While thinking about how to make waves around the Tories Brexshite mess, I have come to the conclusion that the fact they’ve turned off parliamentary scrutiny is a big problem; we have no effective politicians to engage with. They are also treating us to mushroom therapy by withholding the impact analysis on the future relationship treaty. It’s clear that small businesses are having difficulty exporting, jobs in finance and distribution are moving to continental Europe, there are stirrings of border fetishism rising in Northern Ireland and the settled status programme will lead to massive hardship although in the latter case it’s as much be design as by accident. Let’s see the Impact Assessment, we’ve paid for it.
Why won't they publish it? Here's the parliamentary petition site - Petition: Publish an Impact Assessment of the new UK-EU relationship https://t.co/6wiQkjsk5g #brexit #BrexitReality
— Dave Levy (@DaveLevy) February 18, 2021
Eire is an independent country!
I was pointed at this article, in the Guardian, by Ireland’s President, Michael Higgins, foreshadowing the 100th Anniversary of the Anglo-Irish Treaty that established Eire as an independent state. Given the lethal violence that has occurred ever since those that came to be called British arrived in Ireland, this is a remarkable piece. This is a remarkably gentle offering recognising that both the British & Irish peoples are victims trapped by their own history, a history rarely studied in the Great Britain, at least not by me. It is more urgent than at any time since 1997 due to the growing inter-state animosity between the UK and the EU over the issues of the Irish Border resurrected from its resting, and it was only resting, place by Brexit. The full article says more ...
News on the Forde Inquiry
The Labour Party have announced further delay in the issuing of the Forde Inquiry into the leaked document prepared for the General Secretary on antisemitism in the Labour Party. The Forde Inquiry reports this delay here, which includes the text of a letter to the General Secretary and a note for the NEC. I believe the report is essential for the Labour Party to begin to work together in a unified fashion and to genuinely begin to end factionalism. I believe it is important to do so and do so in a way that doesn't involve one side winning. If wrong doing has occurred, it needs to be discovered and punished. The delay, it seems, is caused by a fear that premature publication would interfere with the ICO investigation. Some commentators dispute that this is the case. Forde says, in his letter to David Evans, hosted on the Inquiry site on a page named, 'Update on the Forde Inquiry', For more, inc. the text of Forde's statement, use the read more button ...
Thank you Lewisham Deptford Labour
I was elected as Secretary of my CLP tonight. We were running late and so I wasn’t able to speak. This is what I would have said.
Thank you for your confidence in me.
Most of you know me, I have been in Deptford for 10 years and in the Party for much longer. I campaign more than some, less than others. I ave done a couple of branch offices and been on the EC for a number of years although not last year. I am Union delegate from the GMB.
We have a task to pick ourselves up after our defeat in 2019, the last year has not been easy for local activists due to the pandemic, we need to learn new tricks to keep in touch with our voters and those our MP and councillors represent.
I hope to serve in maintaining members power in the Party, a manifesto based on our collective experience with democratic legitimacy is a powerful tool that will help us reconnect with voters, win power and allow us to build a better society.
Our strength is our collective experience, knowledge and thirst for justice, together we develop a programme, distil a manifesto and then choose candidates for public office to pursue these policies.
We, in Lewisham Deptford, have a proud record fighting racism, we campaigned to oppose NRPF in Lewisham and London, opposing the hostile environment, and acting in solidarity with the families of the dead and dispossessed of the Grenfell fire, and in solidarity with the Windrush generation, supported by our MP who has signed the “MPs not border guards” pledge. I hope we continue with this.
We need to make the party welcoming for all, everyone’s opinion counts, everyone must be able to speak without fear.
Let us remember the Labour Party is a cause not a career. Let’s win the London Mayoral election and have a great Conference as we prepare for the next council and general election. …