Peter Kenyon

OccupyLSX stirs Labour Party City abolitionists

Labour Party policy towards to the City of London as a local government unit pre-1997 was simple and straightforward - abolition. At least that is how some of those who were prominent on the left at the time remember matters. Under former leader Tony Blair that policy was abandoned in favour of an renewed licence for the City continuing to run its local affairs as set out in the City of London (Ward Elections) Act 2002.

I should declare an interest, I have lived in the City of London since 2004 and am secretary of the local Labour Party branch. Rather than taking our lead from Labour in government, branch members took a tactical decision to fight the 2009 Common Council (local government) election as Labour candidates. Our manifesto recognised the role of City luminaries who are either elected as Aldermen or Common councillors in sustaining neo-liberalism, banking excesses and corporate greed. We sought to make an impact by exposing the City of London Corporation's  failure to pay a London living wage to hundreds of its own contract staff i.e. people whose employment contracts were administered by the City rather than third-parties.

Today I was asked in the Twittersphere to conjure figures about the number of business voters are enfranchised to take part in Common Council and Aldermanic elections, while Labour Representation Committee chair, John McDonnell MP reminded his followers of Labour's policy pre-Blair. It has taken #OccupyLSX to stir the abolitionist into remembering.

It would be easy to jump on the bandwagon. But rather than abolish the City of London Corporation as a local government unit, my personal view is that this democratically elected entity is a vital tool for the global demos seeking a new settlement between the 99% and the remainder. A theme for many more posts. But first of all, I have been charged by my branch with designing and conducting a City of London Labour Party membership survey about whether we should run a slate in 2013, and if so whether the Labour Party hierarchy will let us, as they did in 2009.

Labour left observations from Upnorth

I want Labour to win the next British General election whenever. In the meantime I want us to re-elect the London Mayor, keep budgetary control of the Greater London Assembly and strengthen Labour's position in Welsh and English local elections in May.

Most of the Party action needed to achieve those goals is going to be on the watch of the current NEC, including the four current members out of six in the Constituency section elected back in 2006 on the Centre Left Grassroots Alliance (CLGA) slate.

A lively discussion is under way on Grimmerupnorth about the merits of the CLGA slate for the 2008 NEC Constituency section elections. That should really help the hapless six who have agreed/been elected to stand. For the record Save the Labour Party is one of the organisations that belongs to the CLGA. We hold postal ballots of our members to decide who is going to fill allocated place on the CLGA slate. Ann Black came top of our poll. I came 2nd and Susan Press came 3rd.

Grimmer says the CLGA should get real. What's her game? She was a member of the STLP national committee that discussed tactics and met the CLGA and reluctantly agreed that we could not force the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy to hold an all-member ballot of its members. Given the relative strength of membership in STLP and CLPD compared to the Labour Representation Committee and Compass, this all seems barely representative. I agree with that. None of the above, to the best of my knowledge, has a membership as large as the biggest CLP in the Labour Party. Nor has the 'non-membership' organisation Labour First, which includes Luke Akehurst amongst its leading lights.

All of the above hit above their weight. All are failing to force the leadership to listen to the calls for rebuilding. The only light is that tomorrow the NEC will hold a briefing meeting about recruitment of a new General Secretary, Party finances and internal and external inquiries into hidden donations. That meeting, albeit only a briefing, is thanks to a CLGA member of the NEC posing questions to which the current NEC are entitled to answers. STLP officers actively encouraged that call for an early meeting. STLP considers that radical steps will need to be announced at the 2008 Spring Conference to rebuild the party to have any hope of transforming the Party's electoral prospects in May. That is an essential springboard for a 4th term.

In the meantime the Centre Left has to remain united and disciplined even behind a slate that Grimmer finds fault with. If I were to fall under a bus, she would be the first person to whom CLGA would turn to fill the vacancy. Who then would she be encouraging you not to vote for on the CLGA slate to get John Wiseman elected? 

Labour representation - a case of identity theft?

In the history of the Labour Party, the Labour Representation Committee founded in 1900 was key to its development as a party of government in the UK.

I was at the 'coming-of-age' fest of that eponymous body in London last weekend. Membership rules were changed to allow non-members of the Labour Party to enjoy full voting rights in the recently formed the Labour Representation Committee, providing (of course) they they do not belong to any other political party. That as we were told by the National Secretary was consistent with the rules of organisations affiliated to the successor body to the authentic Labour Representation Committee, namely the Labour Party.

What we were not told was the newly formed body's policy towards either its members or affiliates that support candidates opposing official Labour Party candidates for public office. SoI have put the question to John McDonnell MP, the newly formed body's chair. 

In the light of ambiguity about the newly formed body's real aims, well set out here, I'm just wondering if it isn't another case of plain old identity theft. After all the authentic version formed a new political party, remember?

1215 Update - my questions have apparently got under the skin of the LRC thought police here go to Owen at 1036.

1430 Update - torchbearer for LRC says questions posed are 'dishonest' here go to Owen at 1352