Peter Kenyon

London Labour Party - a governance free zone

In four weeks time on 13 November, the London Labour Party will be holding its biennial conference in Stratford Town Hall.

Our CLP has lined up a delegation, two men and two women, who have elected a Head of Delegation. But what is going to be discussed? Is there a Biennial Report and Accounts, are there resolutions to be voted on, is there an agenda? As a CLP secretary, I have no idea. How is the delegation going to be guided when it comes to choosing what should be debated?

I have access to Survey Monkey, so I could offer every member on eMail a chance to express a view on the performance of the London Regional Board, or set out preferences for debate, or choose whom the delegation should vote for to represent the region on the National Policy Forum. For most members it would probably be the first time they have ever even heard of the London Labour Party.

In this new bottoms-up Party of ours, I hope my avid readers close to our new Leader will be moved to have a think about the regional structures - listed as among the darker corners requiring a powerful light shined on them in my book.

The regional director might get a feather in his cap if he put all this material up on the regional party's website, if, of course, the powers that be let him. Think of the precedent it would create in the other 10 Labour regions. if you think every member has a right to know, toot for transparency.

Glazing over - bewilderment at joining the Labour Party - what's the antidote?

I'm struggling with what to say, beyond the usual welcome and signposting, to all those people who have just joined the Labour Party,. They have now been assigned to a local Labour Party branch based on their postcode. I wonder how many of them knew that when they filled in the application form and paid their membership fee? I have a dual responsibility as local branch secretary, as well as secretary of the constituency labour party (CLP) - all the detested aspects of 'Old Labour' rolled up in an official function - booking rooms, drawing up agendas, assembling papers, finding speakers, writing minutes.

I'm already drowning. How do I explain a branch? Ditto a constituency? My branch is City of London. It covers 25 electoral wards. Elsewhere some are contiguous with a local government electoral ward from which councillors are elected to the local councils and so I could go on.

My experience of Labour Party life is that the majority of members pay their subscriptions as an expression of civic engagement and that's it. They have lots of entitlements such as choosing candidates for balloting, whether for public office or internal positions, like currently that of Leader, and helping shape policy. On the other hand the vast majority of staff who work for the Labour Party believe members are for delivering leaflets, and knocking on doors - fullstop. According to one apocryphal tale - the Labour Party should be 'massive, but passive'. Their latest wheeze is not even to send out nomination papers for Deputy Leader, when Rule 4.2.D.i says:

When the PLP is in opposition in the House of Commons, the election of the leader and deputy leader shall take place at each annual session of party conference.

I know it came as a bit of shock to some people that we might not win the 2010 General Election. But we are where we are - in Opposition. So given my tasks this morning, assembling all the information cascading in about elections - Leader, Deputy Leader, National Executive Committee - Division III CLPs, Party Treasurer, Auditors, Conference Arrangements Committee, National Constitutional Committee, National Policy Forum Division 1 CLP section, London Mayor, not forgetting the CLP Chair's report, 2010 General Election Report, Westminster City Council 2010 Election Report, Treasurer' Report - you may discern my dilemma. Mark my words, if I omit any prospective candidate's statement for any one of the offices cited above, I run the risk of being accused of a 'stitchup' by someone in the Labour Party who does not share my views either about governance or policy.

In the meantime, those eager new or returning members are awaiting encouragement (or, perhaps, not). So it's time to hit the eMail/telephone and find out. I think that should be my first priority. But.... the paperwork. Procrastination, yeah. But it's all in a good cause. I just hope my initial contact is warmly welcomed. Our branch has what I like to think of as a healthy blend of campaigning, debate, fundraising and socialising. There's a risk. The idea of meeting with an agenda could provoke glazing over, and bewilderment. It just that the campaigning, debate, fundraising and socialising don't just happen - they require organisation. We could revert to the leitmotif of new Labour - sofa government - no written agendas, no minutes. That worked didn't it? Oh, stop it, Kenyon, get on the blower.

Labour Party - post election priorities - local organisation then leadership

Last night I attended the first 'business' meeting of my local Constituency Labour Party since the election. I hope my brief account doesn't put off any of those 13,000 new recruits since Tory/Lib-Dem nuptials were consummated. On the contrary, this is the stuff of democratic politics - deeply steeped in the need for accountability, opportunities to let off steam, learn lessons and kindle new ideas - all focussed on winning more votes next time.

It was our Executive Committee comprising the CLP officers, and delegates from each of the local party adminstrative branches (not to be confused with electoral wards). In the first place, a week earlier, as secretary of the CLP following consultation with the chair, I had assembled an Agenda - a list of the issues to be tackled. Requests for reports from the agents for the local and general elections were requested, the Treasurer offered to update on finance now the election spend has been totalled, as Secretary I flagged up forthcoming national Party elections.

The reports duly arrived, too late for some to have had time to print off between work and meeting. But copies were shared as each item arose. Frustrations over the inevitable election-tide cock-ups were aired. Then the moment arrived for deciding what was to be said to the CLP's General Committee - a larger gathering which ultimately governs the affairs of the Labour Party locally. So, I asked is it to be recriminations or recommendations?

Sanity prevailed - so I had better get on with the minutes, and assemble the agenda for the GC before events bowl me over. That evidence-based blog whirling round my brain on why the General Secretary of the Labour Party misdirected the NEC about the conduct of the Labour Party leadership elections yesterday will just have to wait until after lunch.

Will Chilcot help clarify the constitutional powers of PMs?

Shortly after former Prime Minister Tony Blair had finished giving evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry on Friday, I commented on Nick Robinson's Newsblog. I was No.5 but remained unpublished until shortly after midday today, Monday.

I made the mistake on including the URL to a .pdf document issued by the Ministry of Justice in 2007. Doh! I'm glad I was patient. I do not want the point about the constitutional powers of Britain's Prime Ministers to be lost. Here's what I wrote with the URL removed:

Dear Nick

Just heard the following expression uttered by former Labour Prime minister, Tony Blair:

"The decision I had to take."

Could you tell us on what constitutional grounds it was a decision he had to take. I thought we were a democracy with an executive accountable to Parliament. This goes to the heart of how Britain was embroiled in the Second Iraq War and why Blair's successor Gordon Brown, published proposals entitled, 'The Governance of Britain' immediately after taking over as Labour Leader and Prime Minister.

[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

Peter Kenyon

Unlike most commentators, I continue to give Chilcot the benefit of the doubt. If nothing else he and his colleagues are exposing the scale of prime ministerial power and (without wishing to put ideas in their heads) the need to contain it. To his credit, I think Gordon Brown understands that at one level, or at least he did when the MoJ released its White Paper, "The Governance of Britain".

The Labour Party needs to hone its election messages with this in mind.

Making the public think: Labour Party NEC must require declarations of interest

In the struggle to catch the public's attention, the Labour Party National Executive Committee could do worse than adopt a simple good governance practice at the start of all its meeting from now on. It should maintain a register of members' interests and require declarations of pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests at its meetings relating to the agenda.

Sometimes it is necessary to be even more demanding of members representing the different sections of the Labour Party

Next Tuesday's bi-monthly meeting of its National Executive Committee will have the first set of minutes from the newly-established Special Selections Panel (SSP) on the agenda. Candidate selection is an important right of party membership, and that was set out explicitly in the NEC November resolution concerning the final prospective parliamentary candidate selections. Any suggestion of impropriety aroses passion, as was evident in the Erith and Thamesmead selection last year.

I have already suggested to NEC chair Ann Black that any member of the SSP who has either expressed an interest in a parliamentary seat or is even thinking about it should resign from the SSP immediately. That would be for the avoidance of any doubt about why a particular seat has been designated an 'open' selection or an all-woman' selection, or why a particular individual had voted in a particular way when short-listing starts in earnest using the 'fast-track procedure'.

Imagine my surprise, therefore, at receiving an eMail at the end of last week from a journalist pal suggesting that a certain well-know member of the NEC, who sits on the SSP, was expected to declare his interest in Leyton and Wanstead early this week. Last week the SSP declared an open selection for L&W. I hope that's just a misunderstanding. If we want to restore public trust in our Party, we have got to clean up our own act first.

Labour Party staff - exceeding authority

Ever since I became a Labour Party explorer the bush telegraph has resounded with allegations. Today, I was telephoned by Ken Clark, London Labour Party Regional Director to confirm that one of his regional officers had issued incorrect instructions to a group of CLPs instructing them to postpose their AGMs. I thanked him for putting the record straight. What better way of making the case for AGMs at the regular time? I reflected on this here.

The temptation for anyone in a position of power is to hang on. Of course, that will not be the case with Gordon Brown. He will be going to the country on 6 May, rather than hang on until 5 June. But for party unit officials in obscure places like, to name a couple of examples, say, Barking or Stoke, who ought to face re-election in February, it would be so convenient to have their AGMs postponed.

Key message to CLP secretaries - how are we going to motivate members to come out and campaign, if we don't ensure that they have a say?

More insinuations, and innuendo sprinkled with the occasional fact can be read here.

Labour Party branch challenge - AGM time

My wife and I got to bed in the wee hours this morning following the City of London Labour Party 2010 AGM and monthly Fundraising supper.

We had an AGM with a written Annual Report (partial) and Accounts (unaudited). We elected a chair, vice-chair, secretary (me), treasurer, campaigns officer, youth officer and membership secretary (me), plus four GC delegates with a vacancy that will be filled before the CLP AGM

There was a full and free debate about Labour's electoral propects and how we are going to campaign. Our newest member has only been in the Party a week! S/he was not press-ganged into taking on any elected position at his/her first branch meeting.

BTW the supper raised £90, and will go a significant way to offsetting our loss of £129.59 in our local election year 2009, when we spent around £2,500 taking on the City establishment.

My pals in Charlton Labour Party across the Thames in Greenwich tell me they had 23 members attend out of 95 at their AGM the previous night. The position of chair was hotly contested and went to a second ballot after a tied vote. Save the Labour Party Secretary, Mark James, was elected chair 11:9 on the second ballot.

Labour Party NEC Officers meanwhile decided that party units could defer AGMs until after the General Election. I shall be be registering my objections to this major lapse of good governance at the next NEC meeting on 26 January. But coincidentally, NEC Officers advice has been misinterpreted by Party staff in at least one region. Party units there have been instructed NOT to hold AGMs. I have demanded an immediate retraction.

How else can party members hold their colleagues exercising delegated authority to account? How else can they be satisfied that income and expenditure has been handled honestly? Of course, such trifling matters are not of much concern at Labour Party HQ.

I'll back Brown for a further term as PM, if he accepts party democracy

Today's Times is reporting that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown is promising to serve a full-term as PM if re-elected. Tom Baldwin reports:

Gordon Brown will ask voters to give him “a full second term” at the election...

Let's unpack this story. We, the British people don't elect our Prime Ministers. Gordon Brown is PPC for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath. If he gets re-elected (and I genuinely hope he is) is will be by the voters in that constituency. Political parties, not 'voters'  elect their leaders. The Queen invites a party leader most-likely to be able to form a government to do so and appoints s/he as Prime Minister. That's the case whether the Tories, Lib-Dems or Greens win the largest number of seats in the House of Commons.

In New Labour's case a confidence trick was pulled on the Labour Party after the 1997 General Election. Labour Party members were denied an annual opportunity to make nominations for the elected post of Leader/Deputy leader, as set out in Rule 4.2.B.ii. No nomination papers for Leader/Deputy leader have been routinely circulated to party stakeholders ever since. The powers that be' have maintained that this practice only applies when Labour is in opposition. They insist that this interpretation of the Rules has been checked out with the Party's lawyers. I have looked into the expertise of those lawyers 'consulted' and none is a constitutional expert. Arguably, Tony Blair would have lost the confidence of the Labour Party much earlier had that 'safety-valve' for member opinion about the Leader's performance been in place throughout the last 13 years. Alternatively, had that reality check been in place, the Labour Party would never have drifted so far from addressing the needs of the majority of the electorate, who depend on their wits and/or labour (as opposed to capital) to keep body and soul together.

Hopefully, those advising the Prime Minister will see the electoral merit in being honest with voters about Britain's unwritten constitution, as well as the critical importance of raising, not eroding, party morale at this vital moment.

I would happily support Gordon Brown continuing as Party Leader and PM. But that depends on his willingness now to state unequivocally that serving a full-term would depend on his ability to retain the confidence of his Party throughout that period.

Labour Party reconnecting... closing ranks - united to win!

City of London Labour Party - a local branch - is going ahead with its AGM next week. This is despite a message from Head Office just before Christmas allowing such meetings to be suspended until after the General Election on the pretext of enabling more campaigning. That illustrates the gulf between Labour Party head office and rank-and-file members more familiar with everyday life. The real world in which the vast majority of us live is very demanding as far as accountability and governance are concerned. That is in sharp contrast to the Political Class - Labour Party branch as was illustrated vividly yesterday by the snowflake plotters.

So an Annual Report and Accounts are in production. Nominations are being sought for Branch offices. Participation is being encouraged with personal telephone calls. Then there are the reality checks. A survey has been designed by Save the Labour Party (STLP) to gauge Labour Party member opinion towards involvement in the 2010 General Election campaign.The local branch chair and vice-chair have agreed it should be circulated to all members. The thrust of the five questions follows the conclusions of the LabOUR Commission interim report in 2007 - that members expect a say in policy making.

With an election only a few months away is it too late, or could this be part of an election strategy that enables the Labour movement to feel involved, close ranks and reach out to the electorate to secure an overall majority in the next Parliament?

TV debates: will Brown repeat you are voting for your future, not mine?

Confirmation here of the details being finalised for three TV debates between the three mainstream political party leaders offers Brown a great political education opportunity. Will he take it? There was an excellent line in his 2009 Labour Party Conference speech.

And so I say to the British people the election to come will not be about my future – it's about your future.  Your job.  Your home.  Your children's school.  Your hospital.  Your community.  Your country.

Or are we going to be bombarded with more - I, I, I, me, me, me?

In the UK the electorate votes for Members of Parliament. Political Parties choose their leaders. It's a small detail, a constitutional nicety. But one which in the wake of Chilcot's grilling of Blair could be well worth developing. In the meantime, there is a campaign-a-day job to be done to link leadership back to party policies that define our values.To mobilise opinion that means Labour has to redirect its paid staff to retention and recruitment, and halt command and control - regional directors and general secretary, please take note.