Ed Miliband backs open primaries
Climate Change Secretary says the "tide of history" is with primaries
By George Eaton Published 28 September 2009 21:53From the Labour conference
Ed Miliband has become the latest leading Labour figure to come out in support of open primaries for Westminster constituencies. At a fringe meeting this evening, I asked the Climate Change Secretary whether he backed the proposal, which would allow non-party members to select parliamentary candidates.
Miliband replied that while he had some anxieties about the idea, he now believed the "tide of history" was with primaries.
He said: "If you put a gun to my head and asked where I'd land I'd say with open primaries."
Others who have backed open primaries include James Purnell, David Miliband and Tessa Jowell. Until now the idea has largely been seen as one favoured by the "Blairite" wing of the party but Miliband's response proves it's gaining ground on the centre left, too.
At a time when all the major parties are haemorrhaging members, I'm sceptical of anything that further dilutes the status of those who remain. It's very hard to point to any direct influence, aside from selecting election candidates, that members enjoy. The introduction of primaries would provide another excuse for thousands of people to leave the Labour Party.
I'm also concerned that primaries would lead to a big increase in the influence of money on election contests. Candidates competing to win the support of thousands of voters would be required to spend substantially more on their campaigns.
The influence of money on US congressional primaries is well evidenced by the fact that 40 of the country's 100 senators are millionaires. A cap on spending could remedy this problem but it's another question mark over an idea that doesn't deserve the status it's acquired.
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




















2 comments
So, first party members have to surrender more and more power to the party leadership, so they have little influence over policy - and then we aren't even allowed to select our own candidates anymore?
I can't think of a more profoundly undemocratic way of running a political party - what, may I ask, would be the point in remaining a member? We already have a way of allowing non-party members to have a say - but that is affiliated organisations like the trade unions. I don't mind trade unionists who aren't a member of the Labour Party having a say, I DO mind having everyone from the BNP to Thatcherites having a say.
What this boils down to really is trying to raise money without giving up the centralisation of power around the party's leadership. Do this and it will be the final straw.
Open primaries might be a way of
getting young people used to the
political process.Primaries are
expensive but Labour needs as many
new voters as possible at the next
election.