Ah, the
morning after the night before. I was lucky enough to get a ticket last night
to the closing party of The World Transformed – the Momentum fringe event at
the Labour Party conference. Sadly, due to childcare arrangements I left 10
minutes before Jeremy Corbyn arrived. But I did get to see a visibly
“emotional” famous Guardian columnist arriving. It was a great party – I
managed to see fantastic sets from Barbieshop (who did the most amazing cover
of Birdhouse in Your Soul) and All We Are. Who knew people were still making
music like that? Anyone who likes 80s pop electronica really should go and see
them. Of course, it is now 8am the next day and I am travelling to London by
Virgin “You can stick your data protection laws around CCTV up your arse”
trains. So feeling a little jaded.
Of course that is the party over,
but we still have one day of conference left (although by the time I publish
this we will know what JC had to say). Whilst details of his speech, in time
honoured fashion, have been given to all of the major reputable news channels
(and News International I imagine) I am not going to delve so much into that
speech, but more generally look at the state of the overall party, given the
conference so far.
Firstly, we now have a twice elected
leader. Once could be seen as a fluke. Twice, with an increased mandate, and
the fact that the runner up in the election was Purged voters, really should
show to those who are unhappy with JC that they will not be able to get rid of
him that easily. For a man who is unelectable, thin-skinned and unresilient he
has proven to be remarkably electable and robust. Of course, those are only the
votes of the Labour Party members, and they are all mad lefties who don’t
understand the real world or concerns of the general public. So what would they
know. It is, after all, their party.
Whilst JC has again won the
leadership of the party, it looks as if he still doesn’t have control of it. I
mean this in 3 different ways.
Firstly, as can be seen from the lack of discipline in
comments at conference from some people – and the “faux” outrage that Laura
Kuenssberg has spent 3 days trying to ferment over the Clive Lewis speech – JC
does not have the level of control over the party that Blair / Brown /
Mandelson / Campbell mastered. Of course, this is not necessarily a bad thing.
Anyone who has seen it will remember the Mark Thomas Comedy Product where he
used a list of pager numbers to frighten terrified MPs and delegates into
giving repeated standing ovations during a speech (Series 3, Episode 8). I am
not sure we should want to return to a party that has absolutely unwavering
discipline to a messiah at it’s heart. I believe that debate and democratic
tension is really important. If we lose this we will lose the right to call
ourselves a democratic, socialist party.
Secondly, due to movements behind the scene, JC has also lost
control of the National Executive Committee. Just days after gaining control of
it. Depending on what you believe, the decision to increase the size of the NEC
by an appointed member by the leader of each of the Welsh and Scottish parties
has been on the cards for ages, it just happens to be now that it has become
imperative OR Progress / Saving Labour have done this in order to ensure the
balance remains, for now at least, against Jeremy Corbyn. Now, you can make up
your own mind on that. But one thing that I certainly would draw your attention
to is the fact that on the evening before these proposals were going to be
voted on Saving Labour begged people who backed this to be in conference early
to stop a card vote / line by line discussion. Even asking their members and
supporters to “incentivise” people to turn up early and vote their way with
free drinks.
I think that shows a third way that the left wing faction /
JC is not in control of the party. And that is they are playing a different
game from Progress in terms of how to pull the levers of power and how to get
things done. We will really see this in 3 ways through the next cabinet
reshuffle and elections to it (should they be reinstated), formulation of our
policies and getting on an election footing, and how any question of positive
selection of Labour candidates is handled.
I strongly believe that we should aim to be a party of power,
and that to do that we have to win elections. I also believe that to win you
have to have strong performers in your team, and that your team needs to work
as one. I would therefore strongly urge that there is no immediate major
reshuffle. I think that would show quite poorly however it goes. If too many
MPs who have no loyalty to the leader and who are seen as superstar parliamentarians
go back in, we end up with a fractured top team. It also sends a really strong
signal to people like Clive Lewis and Angela Rayner and Emily Thornberry (who
have been doing an excellent job) “Thanks, you have done a really good job, but
the big boys are back now”.
If not enough changes are made then Jeremy Corbyn will be
pilloried in the press and the right wing of the party as having snubbed them,
aiming to be a party of opposition etc. If a major reshuffle happens, then it
would need to be done with a deftness that so far we have not really seen from
Corbyn and his team – balancing all of those things, individual drive and
ambition, views from the party and an ability to deliver people in to jobs they
might not have necessarily considered. So far, in my opinion, JC has not shown
the level of managerialism to pull that off well.
Of course, delaying it does risk(?) a move towards some form
of direct democracy in terms of choosing the shadow cabinet. Now whilst I
believe that there are some in the PLP who are not pulling for the party (and
fuck knows why Tristram “the 1% should rule you all” Hunt is still a Labour MP)
I find myself moving towards some or all of the positions being chosen by the
PLP and some by the party leader rather than direct democracy from the
membership. My rationale for this is that any form of democracy or governance
needs to be robust. That is, it needs to be the right size for the job, strong
enough to get things done and flexible and agile to deal with issues. If we had
direct elections to the shadow cabinet from the membership the administrative
burden of this would be so great as to tie us down. We would not be able to
deal with issues quickly and if there were resignations we would end up
paralysed until the process was put through the NEC and the invariable legal
challenges so beloved of millionaires and members. So maybe certain key posts
being appointed by the leader, regular elections to the others by the PLP
(maybe every 2 years) with any resignations being filled by the leader’s
choice. This allows and forces the PLP to work together with the incumbent
leader (whoever that is) and vice versa.
Of course, that also plays into the next point – formulation
of policies and getting onto an election footing. Many would see this as having
a fixed direction of travel in terms of policy aims, which we are settled on
and that are easy to explain and understand. We can’t simply go with
platitudes. We need to focus on offering an alternative to not only the tories
but UKIP and the SNP. They are the parties damaging us in what are working
class areas. I’m stealing from a friend of mine here but as he said “winning
power means winning back UKIP voters – let me know how many of them you see at
your next Momentum event”. This will not be done by going back into arguments
around Trident, internal party politics, whether capitalism is good or bad. The
focus on these, because they are close to the leaders and many members hearts
(and rightly so) needs to stop. That is not a party geared up to face the
country.
So we should focus where we can win – with clear unambiguous
policies. I think we must focus on the reasons for the brexit vote. 52% of
voters voted brexit. Whilst we can’t know why they all voted that way, we need
to understand for those voters where it was a protest vote what we can do to
improve their lives. But we need to listen to them first.
We also need to act in unison. We can not, as a party, win an
election whilst we have Chris Leslie MP running around briefing against Labour
policies and actively trying to scare voters away from voting Labour. It is not
enough for the party to try to connect to the electorate. MPs need to connect
to the party, the message and their electorate too. Where they can’t or won’t
do that, then they need to consider whether they still have the desire to be a
Labour MP. Part of that needs to be in my opinion, a move away from threats of
deselection or mandatory reselection. I don’t even recognise what those terms
mean. However, I strongly support the idea that each CLP should, on a regular
basis positively confirm who they wish to support to stand up and go in front
of the public on behalf of the party. Whilst there is currently a trigger
ballot mechanism, this is unhelpful, combative and goes against working in a
co-operative democratic party.
I would therefore strongly support a standing, regular
scheduled positive confirmation from each CLP that they still support their
candidate, before that candidate stands in front of the public. This should
include, where it is welcomed by the members of the CLP, the opportunity for
others to stand for that candidacy. We must ensure we have a strong link to the
local CLP – after all their funds, hard work and resources will be spent in any
election campaign. If not, then there can be NO argument if we go back to the
days when Peter Mandelson could decide who would stand in constituencies where
a resignation or retirement takes place, only now with Corbynites parachuted
in.
My worry is that when you look at how the party is being run
too many decisions are being made still by those who directly and openly oppose
the current leadership and direction of the party. Momentum are (so far)
holding true to their aims of developing a community, grassroots and activist
movement. Even dispatches when they tried couldn’t find evidence of concerted
efforts to get hold of those levers of power. What they found was what is there
– a group of people of mixed ages, abilities and social backgrounds trying to
embed a new way for the world to be from the ground up. What we need to see is
some level of maturity and control from the centre. If Jeremy Corbyn and
Momentum are not going to do this for the leadership, they need to find someone
who will. But it is hard to see who will be able to save the party by pulling
it back in line – without being willing to go against the leaders newer, nicer way
of doing politics. And without it, will Corbyn ever control the party? Well, we
should know by the time of the next general election.
No comments:
Post a Comment