Persistently below 200,000, Labour party membership figures make grim reading for the new prime minister. But they disguise a more complex picture of the state of participation: membership decline is compounded by decreasing activism among those who have signed up. Gordon Brown inherits a party which faces twin challenges: to open up to involve new people, and to improve the experience for those who do commit.
Debates about Labour party reform are too often thinly disguised battles over policy and power. Some believe that electoral success is dependent on a rigid and disciplined ‘top down’ party, while disaffected activists demand ‘bottom up’ reform with power in the hands of members to ensure democratic legitimacy. Both visions amount to a zero-sum, monolithic model of the party, and reflect a tendency towards internal debates that could lead us further down the path to obscurity and irrelevance among the wider public. A successful model of party reform must be based not only on the views of those already within the party, but crucially also on the preferences of those progressives currently outside.
Labour, like any left-of-centre party, cannot compete successfully in the long-term without a wide and active base of participants, reflecting and embedded in the communities it seeks to represent. But party structures currently make it far too difficult for people to join: the traditional, one-size-fits-all model of membership sets a very high barrier to entry and a narrow view of what constitutes participation. There is more to social democracy than leaflet delivery and procedural meetings, but judging by the activities on offer in many local parties, you wouldn’t know it.
Moving beyond this uniform model of membership would allow more people to become involved and associated with the party in new ways. Recent attempts to establish looser forms of affiliation, via the Labour Supporters Network, have been viewed with cynicism in some quarters as attempts by the leadership to dilute the power of ‘real members’. But other organisations manage the duality between members and non-members perfectly well. A football club has season ticket holders, who make a greater financial and time commitment, and enjoy greater access as a result. Other supporters play a different, but valuable, role filling empty seats, advocating the strengths of the team to their peers and through their numbers providing legitimacy.
Crucially, new evidence suggests that more flexibility is what people want. Recent Fabian/YouGov polling identified the preferences of Labour identifiers who were not members but were politically engaged in non-party activities. As opposed to signing up to full Labour party membership, they were three times more likely to become a supporter, five times more likely to attend Labour events and debates, and over six times more likely to sign up to a specific Labour campaign. A more variable model of participation should accommodate these preferences, and recognise the value of enabling a plurality of activity under the Labour umbrella.
This will involve the creation of networks standing alongside and complementing existing constitutionally defined relationships. A new ‘engagement arm’ should deliver locally and nationally organised events, campaigns, and other outward-facing activities to provide a more effective vehicle for the expression of progressive values and inspire people to participate.
As well as broadening the possibilities for participation, an objective of reform must be to deepen the involvement of those already committed. Polling of Labour members by YouGov found that many do not feel listened to or perceive a great sense of personal political efficacy from their involvement. Strengthening the deliberative processes and feedback mechanisms of the NPF should be a key priority, increasing the impact and demonstrating the effectiveness of members’ voices.
Minimising disillusionment will involve an honest articulation of the ways in which members can and cannot expect to influence policy. For example, recognising the status of contemporary resolutions passed at annual conference as important expressions of majority opinion, but not policy mandates, would discharge much of the tension that currently surrounds them, and enable a more constructive debating platform for all sides. On a local level, better training of the organiser base and matching volunteers to appropriate activities would improve the quality and experience of participation.
Gordon Brown has indicated he is ready to accept the challenge of party reform: annual conference will consider proposals for local parties to better consult and engage their communities and new rights for members to be consulted by the NPF during policy discussions and vote on final policy documents. These changes are a good start, but a more radical culture shift is needed: the party must learn to face out as well as up. Only by involving new people in a broad, dynamic Labour movement, with a confident membership at the centre, can a credible and successful progressive consensus be established. If Labour party members continue to talk only among and about themselves, there is a danger that there may soon be no one left to listen.
Perhaps we could widen the appeal of the Labour Party to include socialists, too?
I agree with you over the problems the party face over membership. Its not that their are not people willing to help in election campaigns as that is not the case, how many CLPs forget to talk to all their members except just the few who go to the meetings.
People today are willing to be active but you have to give them reasons and make them feel part of the process, explaining why 10000 leaflets are going out and how it benefits a candidate or MP leads to greater willingness to deliver them then just saying there’s your lot, get on and do them.
Their are many members & supporters who will not go to meetings but will give an hour of their time when needed most. Its just as important as a person who is always there.
Treating people with respect and making politics interesting again is the next big challenge for the party. Ive long believe that we need to leave branch and large concepts of rules from the heyday of CLPs in the history books.
Sums of money need to be used for campaigning if available and not horded like some CLPs have in the UK which denies our ability to counter the Conservatives or Lib Dems.
Election campaigns today have to be what the public expect on the issues they care about. Getting the messages we deliver on the door right can make the difference to winning and loosing.
However we have to start thinking like a campaigning organisation and not just little power base for differing view points. I know I will be unpopular for some of this but its time we faced up to the new challenges ahead.
Building a wider and more inclusive party that is vibrant and actively engages with the topics of the day but sets it in the concept of how can we campaign and achieve for the party needs to be today’s aim.
The public who support us do not cringe at the thought of joining the Labour Party as there are many who will if asked. The problem lies with either hearing or seeing their first local meeting.
While it still serves a purpose the style and relevance on how messages are distributed looks more like something from the 1930s then a modern forward thinking party.
A party who is proud of its history but wants to do more to ensure we hold office to benefit more people.
Minuets of the last meeting, treasurer reports are all formal admin aspects and do not relate to people.
And frankly we do not need such formality.
Its time to think outside the box and make CLPs about campaigning and not just who is Chair, Secretary and sticking how to things have been done from the year dot.
The rules are too ridged and need to be simplified to common sense approaches. They act as a barrier to having a campaigning structure that people want to engage with.
To often a small group of people will use them to prevent alternative views and stifle debate if its against their own view.
Taking forward message delivery and the new campaign methods that only Labour has successfully developed means we can reach more people directly on the issues that concern them. Street by street there are few political parties in the worlds that can match our campaign initiatives.
Yet we have allowed the CLPs to remain in a time vault and its not surprising it does not appeal to people. Meetings by in large can be dull and Ive been to thousands on all different aspects and issues.
If I am turned off by Branch & CLP meetings after 15 years as an activist then think how a person for the first time feels when confronted by a handful of people talking about issue that they would have seldom herd of or worse being board by the formality.
The party is modern and it forever looks forward, its just for some reason the CLPs and Branch level has failed to keep pace with what the public want and expect…
We need a complete review of how the party works, how it links together and how it delivers its messages. If we get it right then we can go from 200,000 members to many more.
We just have to look beyond how its been done in the past.