Labour’s party reform confusion
“They’re just chucking things into a pot.”
By Dan Hodges Published 29 March 2011 15:17
The Labour leadership has moved quickly to dampen speculation that a new section within the party's electoral college will be opened for non-members, entitling them to a vote on the leadership and policy development.
A report in today's Guardian quotes Peter Hain as stating that individual supporters, as opposed to members, "could be given their own section in the electoral college of MPs, individual members and affiliates". It goes on to add that another proposal being considered would see supporters "put in the section for unions and socialist societies, indirectly diluting union influence and putting them under pressure to recruit".
A second report in today's Independent quotes Labour insiders as claiming the reforms to the party's structures "could prove to be even more radical than Tony Blair's landmark decision to scrap Clause Four, Labour's long-standing commitment to public ownership".
However, other party sources were this morning steering people away from the idea of a fourth section to the electorate college, claiming that the notion was "not familiar" to them. Instead, they stressed that the party leadership was committed to "a genuinely open-ended consultation" on future party structures, and that they were not inclined towards any one "prescriptive model".
But the source did confirm Labour was examining ways of giving "people other than party members" a say in policy and future leadership elections.
The speculation came on the day the party launched the "Refounding Labour" project, with the publication of a 10,000-word consultation document, described by Ed Miliband as "a frank assessment of our party's present condition and its future prospects".
The consultation poses "Four Big Questions": how to build an "outward-looking party", how to provide and enhance "a voice for members", how Labour's membership should begin "renewing our party" and how Labour should go about "winning back power".
The proposals have been met with some scepticism within the wider labour movement. "They're just chucking things into a pot," said a senior trade union source. "We're not likely to see much of this stuff forming part of a concrete policy proposal."
The idea of changes to the make-up of Labour's policy development and leadership election procedures was first floated by Miliband at last November's meeting of the National Policy Forum in Gillingham. Addressing that conference, the Labour leader said:
Some people will want to join our party. Some people will be trade union levy payers, but there are people beyond that, too, that we need to make part of our decision-making in this country and that is also going to be part of Peter's [Hain] review.
A Sunday Telegraph report at the time also claimed: "It is likely that Labour's electoral 'college', which currently gives a third of votes to MPs and MEPs, a third to union levy payers and a third to party members, will in future include a fourth section with a percentage of votes given to members of the public."
Labour Party members will be invited to hold consultation meetings in May, with rule changes arising from the consultation to be considered first by the party's National Executive Committee and then its annual conference in September.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists





















14 comments
Hain is saying I was that close to going to prison!The shit that would rule us.
Mathhew, you are a silly boy, I'm still trying to work-out, how old you are, is it 9 or 10.
Dan Hodges, does have a very good political-mind. Dan is correct about AV. Some on the political-left should be careful for what they wish for. AV would open a political pandora's box, and no one knows what would come crawling out.
It's 12.
they could just try making the labour party an organisation people want to belong to, but that would give up being corporate whores and murdoch tarts wouldn't it.
Brown became a disaster. The mechanics of removing a leader should be on the agenda.
Labour's party needs a reshuffle rather than reform confusion!!!!!
Reginald Fah-Fah will clear-up the confusion. It's simple, the Labour party should have a coronation for Ed Balls as the Leader. A big party!!!
Ed Balls is the top man in the Labour party! I have put my money were my mouth is and placed a bet that he will be the next Labour leader.
"...letting union leaders on bosses wages decide".
I wasnt aware the union leaders decided the Labour leadership election? i though Union MEMBERS had a vote - the block vote (ie union bosses voting with 2.3million votes at once) is long gone.
Has it!! Why do some have more votes then others?
Dan,
You're an egregious disgrace to the New Statesman. The Staggers is dedicated to progressive reformism. Your obseqious acquiescence to the 'No to AV' campaign contravenes all the New Statesman stands for. I hope you're not paid for your blogging, because that would mean my subscription indirectly assits you. You should be ashamed.
Why not just allow card carrying members of the Labour Party to vote. That shouldn't take to long to count, but would be far-fairer than letting union leaders on bosses wages decide. Labour are rightly seen by millions of voters to be the mouthpiece of the public-sector unions and there lies Labour's problem.
-
Good idea Luddite. Only card carrying of the Labour party allowed to vote. How much does a membership cost?
Don't be daft Frank, Dan Hodges writes more sense than anyone on the NS. You've got to agree with him that the new reforms are the usual 'lets stick it in the pot and see what comes out' mentality. Labour 'policy' is like that. On the run stuff.
There's no thought of how the government can change people's lives so that are either not unemployed or not working their arses off for their whole lives; doing stuff that they have to do to pay the mortgage. There's no thought or policy in this direction.
People want to have a certain material standard of living but they don't want to work till they're 67 in full-time work.
The communal housing policy is the answer. A scheme that enables people to be free from a mortgage in less than 5 years and to have enough assets to be free from full-time work in less than 15 years. I know how to do it because I've done it.
Shouldn't Lord Ashcroft appoint the Leader of the Conservative Party, he bankrolls the Tories.
Luddite is seen as the mouthpiece of millions of unthinking, bad-tempered, foul-mouthed conservatives.