We need to think hard about how Labour councillors’
voices can be heard in Westminster
Councillors are the building blocks of our party. Labour’s strong showing in the 1995 local elections was the springboard for our 1997 landslide, and defeat in 2010 was foreshadowed by a string of heavy losses locally. The local elections this year showed just how far we have come since the general election, but also how far we still have to go.
At the very least we have to ensure that the public are able to vote Labour – we cannot win seats if we do not stand candidates. Our candidate coverage in 2011 was up by an impressive 12 per cent compared to 2007, but over a quarter of seats still went uncontested and we were still well behind the Tories, who had candidates covering over 93 per cent of the country. In those crucial election battlegrounds, especially in the south, while we made huge progress, there is still much to do. Inspiring stories from places like Broadland, Guildford, Torridge and Winchester show that, if we fight, we can win against the odds.
But we also need to think seriously about the rights and responsibilities of our councillors.
Becoming a Labour candidate and elected representative is an honour and privilege that comes with responsibilities. Drawing on what is already developing in Labour groups around the country, Ed Miliband has set out proposals to be voted on at conference that would see the introduction of councillor contracts. It is right that there should be a simple set of principles based on transparency, accountability and representation that gives the public and party members a model of what they can expect, and it is fair that councillors know what is expected of them.
These commitments must look beyond the town hall. Council committees are vital for the delivery of Labour policies but councillors know that their most important job is to be in touch with the people they serve. Councillor contracts should cover things like attending surgeries, responding to residents in good time, canvassing at least once a month or making a certain number of contacts, producing regular mailings, as well as attending Safer Neighbourhoods Panels, and friends of parks and libraries meetings.
Most Labour councillors already do this, but by building those sorts of relationships with our communities, it makes our councillors less reliant on the popularity of the party at a national level.
In return, we need to listen to local government and make better use of its expertise. In government, councillors were warning us about problems like housing, and we were too slow in responding. By giving a seat in the shadow cabinet to Labour’s leader in local government, we have already begun to give councillors a greater voice. But we know this is only the first step. All of us want to get our party on the best financial footing, but a genuine Association of Labour Councillors, answerable to our councillors and drawing on their experience, would be a powerful tool for policy development and engine for campaigns.
Labour councillors are a credit to our party and our most important resource, especially while we are in opposition nationally. It is only right that we give them the tools they need to do the job.
—————————————————————————————
Caroline Flint is MP for Don Valley and shadow secretary of state for communities and local government
—————————————————————————————
Well they cannot of course cover the whole country activist are the life blood of Labour, only in Ms Flint mind would councillors be seen as the life blood of a party.
Well they cannot of course cover the whole country activist are the life blood of Labour, only in Ms Flint mind would councillors be seen as the life blood of a party.
Carline good to see a considered contribution.
I can with the Labour Action Team make well over two hundred contacts in as little as a few hours on a weekend morning and though my fellow councillors in the same Ward hold surgey where they may meet as many as three or four people in four hours.
I prefer the doorstep method of reaching out and building relations with the puvblic we serve.
The contract would be wiser focusing on the most important aspects;
1) Good conduct which should go without saying.
2) Contact rate, why are we having dramatic contact rate targets for elections when we can create good habits throughout each year. This should be monitored by CLP Campaign agents/co-ordinators/whatever.
3) In terms of including who goes on what committees etc I would avoid this as you are dealing with internal party politics and not taking into account democracy. There is always a rat race for the higher paid positions and then comiseration for cash earning Chairs and Vice Chairs and the taking up of these positions is often less than dignified and noble. It would then be wrong to punish those who either choose not to serve for cash or when the scrutiny system is abused by overly authoritarian regimes (as the Local Government Ombudsman warns of) and choose to boycott a corrupt situation.
As long as Labour is playing its role in recruiting new members, reaching out and finding those Labour voters, pursuading people to vote and support the candidates and passing caseworks onto said candidates then the game is being played.
The focus then is on campaigning and “fighting” (as John Prescott calls it).
One thing is for certain we have to, and as I prefer to do, go beyond the box and think beyond it and look at ways to incentivise and reward those harder working people.
If we are to focus on the working people of Britain we should begin with those in our Party too.
Carline, have a lovely conference.
Diorthalion = Councillor Ralph Baldwin