Labour’s leader has been brave to take on the task of reforming
the party. He deserves to succeed

‘Party reform,’ Sedgefield MP and former Tony Blair aide Phil Wilson once suggested, ‘stopped on 2 May 1997.’ Until this point, New Labour’s drive to reform the party was rightly based on the notion that it had become dangerously detached from the public – evident in Labour’s four consecutive election defeats – and that the creation of more internal democracy through one member, one vote and mass membership were the key to healing this breach.

At the same time, the need for a professionalisation of the party’s communications and more centralised messaging should not be forgotten. The ill discipline and chaotic nature of the party’s campaign in 1983 further undermined many voters’ faith in Labour’s ability to run the country.
 
Nonetheless, as Progress stated in our submission to the Refounding Labour consultation, which closed in June, ‘since 1997, the need to control what the party does has overwhelmed other potentially important aspects of engaging members and internal stakeholders.’

That’s why we welcome the sustained, comprehensive and coherent approach that Ed Miliband has brought to the task of reforming the party. Now, however, he faces his biggest test.

According to reports throughout the summer, Labour’s leader is pushing ahead with plans to reform the structure of party conference. He is right to do so. The present composition of conference – in which the unions have 50 per cent of the vote, of which four-fifths are controlled by just three general secretaries – is unsustainable. Indeed, it undermines the very legitimacy of conference and the resolutions it passes: because its voting structure is so palpably undemocratic, it is all the more easy for the leadership to ignore conference’s wishes.

Miliband’s proposed solutions – to give the National Policy Forum a share of the conference vote or to allow the party’s elected representatives, MPs and councillors, a voting role – are the right ones. Indeed, giving the NPF – which runs the party’s policy process outside of conference – a role would strengthen that process. Similarly, there is a strong case for MPs and councillors – whose role would stem from their election by the public – having a formal, enhanced role in the party’s ultimate decision-making body. Miliband is believed to want to cut the union share of the vote from 50 to 40 per cent. We would go further, with conference’s composition mirroring the electoral college which elects the party leader and each section having one-third of the vote. We believe these reforms are in the unions’ own interests: by requiring them to win over NPF and CLP delegates, the motions they pass would acquire more legitimacy and be more difficult for the leadership to disregard.

But, as Miliband recognises, reform of party conference is only part of the solution.

First, he is right to want members of the public to be able to register as supports of the party by resurrecting the notion of a Labour Supporters’ Network. As party chair, Hazel Blears made a valiant effort to kickstart such a system during the tail end of Blair’s premiership. Miliband’s desire that the network should be locally, as well as nationally, based makes it more likely to become a reality. Crucially, his plan that registered supporters should play a role in future leadership elections by allowing them to vote in the affiliates part of the electoral college will give the network real power and provide an important incentive – hitherto lacking – for people to join. We are also firmly of the view that by working with the unions to encourage their members to join the supporters’ network, the union link can be democratised and strengthened.

Second, our submission to Refounding Labour made the case for ‘closed primaries’, by which members shortlist the candidates for parliamentary selection but Labour voters get a vote in picking the party’s eventual nominee. A registered supporters’ network would provide the basis for this electorate. We thus strongly support the current proposal that parliamentary selections begin with a vote by members on whether they wish to retain their sole control of the process, or shortlist candidates and allow local registered Labour supporters to vote for them.

Third, many local branches and CLPs have already put the community at the heart of the party, with constituencies like Birmingham Edgbaston reaping rich electoral dividends for their efforts. But we want to see such trailblazers become the rule, not the exception. As an incentive, and to make conference truly a reflection of the concerns of the public, Progress’ submission suggested that emergency conference motions could be admitted if CLPs had collected 2,000 signatories locally in support, thus demonstrating that they had reached out and that the issue had political salience. 

Since his election, Miliband’s relations with the unions have come under much scrutiny. Party reform would not have been the first priority of many union general secretaries. It is much to the credit of Labour’s leader that he has pressed ahead nonetheless. In the next month, Miliband will need to summon all his energies to turn aspiration into achievement. He deserves the fullest support in doing so.

—————————————————————————————

Photo: Ed Miliband