For those of us who still bear the scars of the Bermondsey election (where the sanctimonious Simon Hughes campaigned on the slogan ‘the straight choice for Bermondsey’), forgive us the quiet satisfaction of seeing the Liberal Democrat campaign machine crumble. Not only in Oldham East and Saddleworth but in by-elections across the county. The party of insurgency cannot change into the party of government without massive collateral electoral damage. Just like a crazed cyclist the Liberal Democrats can only operate by making campaign gains. Large losses of Liberal Democrat councillors will create panic and confusion. You can smell the fear emanating from Cowley Street.
But it’s not just the junior partners who are approaching the May elections with ominous precedents to consider. In 1987 Mrs Thatcher introduced the poll tax with the avowed intention of encouraging people to vote. They did in large numbers but not quite in the way she intended and hundreds of Conservative councillors lost their seats. For ‘poll tax’ jus substitute ‘huge youth unemployment’, ‘massive public sector cuts’, ‘abolition of EMAs’ and ‘increase in tuition fees’. May 2011 is shaping up to be a perfect storm for the Conservatives.
Good news for Labour? Clearly but there are a number of organisational issues that we need to surmount if we are to take full advantage of the coalition’s disarray and provide the voice that the electorate need in hard times. Let’s be clear for Labour in shire England the most important issue is that you can only vote Labour if you have a candidate to vote for. For a party that has been battered over the last five years we should not underestimate the challenge. By April 12 we need to find over 3000 candidates to stand for Labour – many in areas in the south-east and south-west of England where Labour has simply disappeared (nearly half of the councils in the south-east don’t have a single Labour councillor). And the clock is ticking – we have until April 12 (the official date for close of nominations for the local elections) to fill every vacancy.
So what needs to be done? Well the first thing is a ‘big hug’ from Ed Miliband in the form of a personal letter to the leaders of all district Labour groups in England asking them to spare no effort in standing a full slate of candidates.
Secondly (and with due apologies to our colleagues in Scotland and Wales) we have to maintain our organisational focus in England. It is simply nonsense to move experienced organisers from the south of England to assist in these elections (as has happened in previous elections). There is a huge job of work to do in encouraging a full slate of candidates but also in putting pressure on Liberal Democrat ministers in their home districts (our very own decapitation strategy). Quite frankly if we can’t win well in Wales and Scotland in 2011 we never will!
And the third (and biggest) element? We have to let go and pick candidates who are keen and willing but recent members and even supporters. Many of our CLPs have been hollowed out. We used to talk about ‘paper candidates’ (who often won). Maybe this is the year for ‘Facebook candidates’ who we can support and develop during and after the election campaign.
For the last years a dwindling number of Labour activists have huddled together for mutual support and comfort. Now we have to re-engage with an angry electorate, even if it means tearing a few pages from the rule book.
Paul is quite right – the challenge to run a full slate of candidates is considerable, especially in the south. In May 141 southern councils hold elections – 82 of them are “all out” elections where the whole council is up for election, not just one third. That means in authorities like Surrey Heath, we need 40 candidates. Our membership there is only 141, so nearly one in three of our members there must agree to be a candidate to obtain a full slate. In Taunton Deane we need 56 from 201; Chichester, 48 from 198. There are plenty of other examples, elsewhere, too. Stuart King http://www.southernfront.org.uk
I fully agree – and am doing just what you ask! I rejoined the party last summer, and expect to be standing for Labour representing Finchampstead North in the Wokingham Borough Council elections. There are few stronger Tory strongholds, but it would be a disgrace if voters could only choose to vote for one of the two governing parties. If the sitting councilor is returned, at least it will be in the knowledge that there was an alternative.
There is a lot in this. The other parties are not quite so picky about membership and we have a lot of new members who will not be eligible under the present rules. In Northampton the process is barely begun and one constituency is still suspended. The Liberal Democrat Council is ripe for the taking but we have barely started. So whats to be done?
The aim of making sure we have a presense across all areas is incredibly important for our credibility but also for our growth and devlopment. As a place to debate, discuss and grow ideas (and activity) an active CLP is critical. Equally in the South East and London many can be active in other areas (e.g. nearer their workplace) and spurred on by involvement in their local unwinnable CLP. HOWEVER – I’ve long argued that our inability to win any representation in my borough (Richmond) is largely due to our standing 3 candidates in all council seats. People around here already tactically vote out of habit and sharing our vote amongst three candidates reduces our lot. In many wards we have been soundly beaten into 4th by the single green candidate. SO I believe we should try and find one candidate for the next set of elections for every ward. Someone who wants to do the job and if they win would be a good Labbour councillor. We could well pick up “protest” votes and seats – in the current climate across the borough. Once we have a strong opposition group we can expand and even think about going for real influence, shatter the myth we can’t win here and stuff a few bar charts where the coalition sun has stopped shining. With three votes for three candidates there is a built in AV mechanism but this is only used where someone thinks they can transfer to a possible winner – ironically this I think is more likely to be us where we say we’re not going to win control in one hit but instead want to offer a strong alternative voice.