Peter Kenyon

No cheer for Labour members in Leader's New Year message

In a momentary lull in the festivites, I have just read Gordon Brown's New Year message on the Labour Party website here. Hoping  for encouragement, I did a word search for 'member' - result  - 0. So I logged on and posted the following comment:

Dear Gordon Brown

The diminishing band of us who are members of the Labour Party work voluntarily to get Labour candidates elected.

Without wishing to sound churlish, shouldn't you have acknowledged that contribution in your New Year message published on the Labour Party website?

Wouldn't it be a good idea to make sure that you have someone on your staff or at Labour Party HQ focussed on rebuilding the Party?

You promised in your paper: "Extending and renewing party democracy" to rebuild the Labour Party.

A group  of reasonably respected Labour Party members, who formed the LabOUR Commission spent two years putting together constructive ideas to rebuild Labour as a mass membership force in British politics.

Why not make it a New Year resolution to learn more about those proposals, and task the new General Secretary with implementation?

Peter Kenyon
Save the Labour Party

Labour/Lib-Dems to seek taxpayer bung to remain solvent?

Reading between the lines of Gordon Brown's overture to the new Liberal Democrat leader as reported here every taxpayer should keep a firm hand on their wallet. The worthy goals of constitutional reform are, I fear, camouflage for the more urgent business of funding party politics. Lib-Dem support is needed to get proposed legislation expected to be tabled early in the New Year through the Commons. Brown is willing to include donation caps as well as spending caps by all accounts.

Both party leaders face major financial problems of their own making, both parties have been seeking increased state funding for their political activities on the spurious pretext of cleaning up British politics.

Will Nick Clegg adopt a principled approach and shame Labour by opting to rely on increased membership and small donations, in addition to pressing the case for electoral reform for the House of Commons?

Labour General Secretary recruitment may be delayed

Further to my Boxing Day posting here, I now hear that the Labour Party national officers have advised the NEC that interviews may be delayed until March!

Headhunters have been indentified and a national advertising campaign is planned. Labour Party national officers are concerned about the poor response on previous occasions, namely the departure of David (now Lord) Triesman and then Matt Carter. I seem to remember that following Carter's departure the NEC did not even bother to agree a Job Description or Personal Specification. This was subsequently a source of some embarrassment at least to the Trade Union representatives on the National Executive Committee whose commitment to equal opportunities recruitment methods was found wanting.

Perhaps it's been decided that a consensual approach by the National Executive Committee would be appropriate this time round.  Is it conceivable that  they might even agree  that whomever is appointed and subsequently elected by Annual Conference (as required under the Rules) must have a proven ability to run the Party in partnership with, but not at the whim of No. 10 Downing Street? That is, of course, in addition to the capacities to rebuild the Party's reputation, finances and membership and win a 4th term for a Labour government in Westminster.

An earlier NEC is expected to be arranged than that scheduled for 31 January. Does this mean there might actually be a debate by the full NEC about these matters before ads are place and recruitment packs prepared?

Labour job vacancies - general secretary

Boxing Day morning. What better to do than check on progress to fill that vacancy at the top of the Labour Party, namely the post of general secretary. The Labour Party's own Jobs section carries no reference. Ann Black's December 2007 NEC report carries a timetable.

The NEC agreed a timetable for recruiting a new general secretary, with a closing date of 16 January for applications and interviews on 31 January at the next scheduled NEC meeting.  The officers would oversee the process, and were granted authority to take any other necessary decisions until then. 

Has anyone seen an advert or a JD and PS? All my searching this morning has drawn a blank. Perhaps, it's the Christmas spirit.

Exposing Labour Party Leadership patronage

This is how a Labour Leader, when appointed Prime Minister,  now controls the Labour Party.

A committed democratic socialist Leader (read your Party card, Gordon) could change all this at a stroke.

But as the Blairites infamously boasted 'rules are for little people'.

Labour Party patronage purge plan

Today's Guardian report of the findings of the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee reminded me of a plan published earlier this year by the LabOUR Commission.

The diagram shown sets out the Commission's understanding of the current state of the Labour Party in government.

Gordon Brown ignored this report on taking up the invitation of Her Majesty to form a government - his words not mine.

But in the light of MPs recommendations, Gordon, why not be decisive and purge patronage from the Labour Party too?

More detailed diagrams of what will have to change will be published here in the run up to Christmas.

Labour's Blears warns of life sentence for members

Last night I went to the launch of a new publication: Participation Nation - Reconnecting Citizens to the Public Realm, a joint venture between Involve, and IIPS. A keynote speaker was Hazel Blears, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. One line in her script, which I have heard so many times before, I despair:

"If you join the Labour Party, you sign your life away."

What sort of encouragement is that to rebuild a mass-membership party?

Can Labour rebuild trust in government?

The latest Ipsos/Mori poll in its year-end review shows that 63% of those polled don't trust government to tell the truth.

The press release states:

David Cameron achieving the highest satisfaction rating for any Conservative leader in 15 years, since John Major won the 1992 General Election. Net satisfaction for Cameron is at +6%, while satisfaction with Gordon Brown falls to -23% and satisfaction with the Government is at -37%.

Our latest voting intention figures show a 7 point Conservative lead, with the Conservatives on 42%, Labour on 35% and the Liberal Democrats on 14%.

I accept this is not a big enough lead for the Conservatives to get overly excited about. But I remain convinced that the key to Labour winning a 4th term involves a radical repositioning of the party to change the public's perception of Labour politicians, and Labour policies.

The scale of the challenge is in the Ipsos/Mori Delivery Index questions 7 to 10

I trust the government to act in the best interests of the country Disagree  53%	I trust the government to tell the truth Disagree 69%	I have influence over the government's policies Disagree 79%	I have influence over how public services are delivered Disagree 70%

'Jinxed' Labour leader visits NW frontier

BBC's man in a plane en route to Kabul reports:

Some journalists certainly wondered aloud if a surface to air missile might have hit our military plane because the prime minister seems to be currently jinxed.

As a loyal party member I'm not just worried about our Leader's survival, but that of the Party of which he and I are members. De jure OUR party is a voluntary association. I suppose the consolation in his travel plans is that he went to the NW frontier, not the NE.

Vote Labour..... and become a millionaire

In the midst of the Donorgate affair you couldn't make this one up.  An esteemed former Labour Council leader is recommending that a Labour government should legislate to reward voters financially to boost turnout. This is according to a report in today's Observer here

A ground-breaking idea to enter voters in a special lottery will be one of the main recommendations in a government report that aims to increase the turnout at elections.

And which charitable causes will be sacrificed to pay for the prizes? Or is this another wheeze to fleece the taxpayer?