The Scottish Labour party is a queer beast. An organisation firmly rooted in tradition, our policies may have constantly urged progress and social innovation, but the infrastructure that has supported this constant call for change remains shaped by procedures developed at the birth of our movement.
We have much to be proud of in our heritage: huge social advances; the individual role of giants such as Keir Hardie; and the cultural legacy of the contribution we’ve made in international solidarity, for example during the Spanish Civil War, continues with us through our music and banners.
Our past is important, but our movement exists for a purpose; to make the world a better and fairer place. As circumstances change, and when traditions begin to get in the way of enabling us to achieve our purpose, it’s time to look at them again.
One of the challenges we face in Scotland is the increase in the number of elections we now have to fight: Westminster, the Scottish Parliament; Europe; and with it looking ever more likely that local government elections will now also be a stand-alone election, the burden on our activists has never been greater.
This is coupled with the realities of longer working hours and a change in culture which makes people much less likely to sign up as a member of any organisation, never mind a political party. Not all changes are making our work as a party more difficult: advances in ICT make it possible for members to connect with each other, and with the policy process, in more efficient and effective ways, if we are willing to harness that potential.
During her leadership campaign, Wendy Alexander emphasised her commitment to party reform, and in her barnstorming conference speech, the shape that this reform may take started to look a little clearer.
One idea is the introduction of a system of candidate selection more akin to the US primaries, which would enable registered supporters – rather than just the members – who turn up on the night, to decide which potential candidate goes on to represent Scottish Labour at the Scottish Parliament elections. This system may work in a similar way to that adopted by the Tories for the selection of their London mayoral candidate, with the merits of the candidate selected in that particular process perhaps not the best litmus test of its overall success.
The benefits of the system would be to draw in supporters, making them more likely to turn out to support ‘their’ candidate on polling day, it would raise the profile of candidates in the local media, and it would act as a training ground for candidates before they go on to tackle opponents from other parties. However, issues of the potential costliness for both the party and for individuals wishing to be selected, and the addition of further bureaucracy to a structure which is already carrying significant burdens would need to be resolved. At the end of the day, most arguments have a flip-side: opportunity to wash our dirty linen in public, or trust-building, vote-attracting transparency? You decide.
That party structures work, and are fit for today and for the immediate future is vital, but ultimately the most important motivating factors for members will continue to be the generation and communication of exciting ideas that they can be proud to expound on the doorstep, and a leadership which attracts their trust and respect. Luckily, the Scottish Labour party of 2008 looks to be in the position to deliver on both.