Thanks to central government, we local politicians now have much wider freedoms and powers to annoy and anger our electorate as we trim, cut and slash the services they need and have come to rely on. This anger at a local level in turn brings with it added pressure on local leaders from within their own political groupings of councillors and members of local political parties. How to ensure harmonious and united politics in a world of ever-tightening finance and tough decisions – time for the 21st century whip …
In perhaps something of a prophetic parallel to the new Localism Act’s community right to challenge, the ruling Conservative leadership in Epping Forest has recently been ousted by … some other Conservatives from their own group. In Westminster there is open rebellion through the pages of the Evening Standard and from Tories in government (so much for localism) about plans for parking charges. Neither is as straightforward as it may seem but I predict that in more places over the coming years, frustrated backbenchers, unhappy with the decisions or direction of their groups’ ruling elite will be more likely to rebel and in some cases revolt.
Party whips used to be responsible for making sure people voted the right way in the council chamber; ensuring councillors turned up to their committees on time; that they behaved and generally carried themselves appropriately; that the threats and rewards were dished out in the right places and unity reigned.
The role of the whip was simpler in times when local government finance was healthy. Giving out sweets to the public didn’t generally spawn too many vociferous local campaigns and as such the leader, cabinet or mayor were rarely pressed too hard on their decisions by backbenchers and scrutiny was mainly focused on whether council officers were actually doing their jobs right. (This is to generalise and apologies for all those diligent backbenchers who did and remain challenging of their own political colleagues).
But as politicians are increasingly forced to ration public resources, as assets are disposed of to plug capital budget gaps and services outsourced to glean efficiencies and reduce pressure on revenue budgets, in almost all local authorities I know the ears of backbenchers have pricked up and voices raised. The muscles of internal party scrutiny and challenge, which had become atrophied, are tensing all over the country.
And with the Lib Dems tanking in local government, Labour groups will undoubtedly grow, larger groups of more ambitious politicians cutting their teeth in local government. Further to that as the move to mayors for major cities comes on stream, it is vital that local government is training the next generation of Labour leaders for sensible government, not breeding them on infighting and frustration.
Chief whip 2.0
And here enters the modern whip, as the bridge between cabinet and backbench, sometimes between the leader and their cabinet. It has been said that executive members can sometimes be distant from backbenchers and their concerns, or too personally involved in a policy that they are intent on seeing it through whatever. The whip needs to act as the voice of the backbenchers in informal cabinet, challenging policy direction where appropriate and making sure policymaking includes backbenchers as more than just a stakeholder to manage.
Making sure that cabinet members, who get hours to thrash out policies with officers from ‘their departments’, spend the appropriate time getting their backbenchers up to speed on the whys and wherefores is vital in bringing your group with you, not least so that they feel confident defending a policy to their own electorates. Mechanisms and processes which allow space to air concerns ahead of decision-making, policymaking groups or workshops on key areas, an internal scrutiny process if you like, can help to solve the common refrain that decisions are being foisted on group.
Talent-spotting and ensuring that local councillors are trained and developed, are getting opportunities to influence policymaking, and are being prepared to step into decision-making hotseats is also a key role for the whip. Backbenchers need to be able to influence how their council operates, especially in responding to the new challenges resulting from changes to benefits, reducing services and new ways of doing things. The whip has the time to ensure that skills audits take place, that the right training and development happens and knowledge gaps can be addressed that suit backbenchers, rather than those who deliver them.
In keeping the group and executive alive to local politics, there is a need to ensure that cross-party agreement is found to lobby central government, putting aside previous political gutter fights for the good of the authority and its public. This will happen with an enlightened leadership, but the whip, so often involved in cross party deliberations and negotiation over constitutional matters, membership of committees and standards, can also act as a vital conduit between their leadership and opposition thinking.
How special is your whip?
In the most recent survey of members’ allowances (in 2008) only a handful of authorities are on record as saying their whips get paid a proper special responsibility allowance. Although I am confident this is not the whole story (my authority didn’t have their return correct and has long valued the role and paid for it accordingly) I know from talking to too many whips that they cannot afford to do the job full time and therefore feel they cannot do the job justice.
Furthermore, there is no real training for whips although I think this is probably right, each whip assessing the needs of their group and rising to the specific challenges they face. But here in London us whips meet regularly to discuss various matters from individual discipline, councillor training and development, the interface between our councillors and the officers, how the budget-setting process takes into account backbenchers as well as cabinet members, among other things.
Making the job more than financially token is critical and creating opportunities to share experiences and advice between whips across regions or even the country has to be stepped up in many places. In that way whips will provide the necessary grist to the mill and internal challenge, as well as ensuring the building blocks for the future are healthy and growing. Otherwise, Labour in local government runs the risk of stagnation, wasting potential talent, or even worse, replicating the infighting which plagued the last days of the national Labour government.
—————————————————————————————
Jack Hopkins is a councillor and chief whip in Lambeth Labour group
Great article.
I can honestly say as a Councillor who has rebelled (something I never, ever thought I would do and have even as an activist played a role in beating Independent Councillors who left the Labour party historically as they genuinly thought they were “greater than the Party” or had strange ideas as to their own importance to the public who barely knew who they were.
The description of Party whip you describe in this article has absolutely nothing in common with the whip we have on our Council in the Labour group. No negotiations, no compromises only total subservience to the Leader whose methods are less than sophisticated and quite frankly like a little child only wants his ickle wickle way all of the time. The whip merely an extension of his will and intent.
I was more than happy to broker a deal with the whip, more than happy to use reason, but that was not on the cards and as we know when the negotiations stop so too does the politics and I will not be the last Councillor to go independent to become a local politician in a democracy on this Council.
The executive position was clear, they would rule over us all, we would be told no more than the general Public (we would find out what the Council was doing by reading the local newspaper not the Council-produced propoganda Newspaper Goebbals would be proud of).
Back benchers here literally have no role, they exist on the Council and do nothing beyond being an extension of the Call-center.
Scrutiny is of course pathetic as decisions sent back for consideration (if/when the whip is not being applied or when labour Councillors exhibit their own views courageously – how dare they!) can be ultimately ignored by the Exceutive. So there is no feedback betweent he Exceutive and the representatives of the public. Why apply a whip when the exec can do what they want anyway? Totally bonkers powermongery, greed and stupidity.
I would hardly describe our Excetive as “Elite” lol as I recall they were spinning the economic idea that banks would employ the local youths around Barking and Dagenham and would solves all the problems we have, that was the bases for their economic plans lol.
Labour just got it so wrong here and this idea by the Tories that elected Mayors is a good idea is complete madness. I agree for a change with Blunkett, we need to be increasing local democracy and giving people and their communities which they must be linked in with a voice.
Barking and Dagenham due to its very “brave” Leader is going in the opposite direction and so the problems with the Far Right cannot be addressed and the situation will worsen as people seek a democratic/undemocratic alternative.
I wish it was just down to austerity but there is a crazed ideology behind all this, reckless, vain and ultimately destructive.
An interesting interpretation of your role in Lambeth.
No mention however of the sustained attack against Labour’d Cllr Abrams, whom you have personally instigated a witch hunt, and twice proposed banning him from the Labour group just because his views don’t fit into your own right wing views.
And what of your role as Chief Whip and the campaign to destablise the sitting MP, in order to clear a path for the council Leader to take her place?
Your loyalty to your paymaster is admirable.
Hmm I feel that you are only giving part of the story here – I should declare that I am a party member in Vauxhall CLP – as far as I can see Abrams has contributed considerably to his exclusion from the Labour group – he has wilfully defied the Labour whip and seems to go out of his way to antagonise his fellow councillors and the party leadership on the council. Appearing at anti-cuts events denoucing his own council is not necessary – this is far more than just voting against the cuts. He has no realistic proposals to implement instead and seems to be almost willing a return to the 1980s ‘loony’ Lambeth time of not setting budgets etc for which the whole of the borough suffered.
Being cynical I think its to do with Abrams chasing a position in Unite – he presumably sees his future in the union and wants to be able to present his rebel credentials to be elected in that position. Meanwhile the people who elected him suffer.
And as for the electoral selections: it is the party members who have the final decision here and I dont think Mr Reed is sufficiently well liked in Vauxhall and so would find it hard to be selected. He doesnt seem to go out of his way to endear himself to us party members at least!
Grrr. I think I sense some of what you are trying to say here Jack, but little grates more than the phrase “cutting teeth” to describe a career in local government. Pre Coalition Local Government was also about a lot more than ‘giving out sweets’.
I am sure the work you do personally in Lambeth is excellent – your borough stands out as a Labour Council doing a job of promoting its achievements externally, which is a very fine thing, but I am not sure a full time whip post in each borough is much of a solution to anything.
Different boroughs have different takes on this issue but because someone can’t do a job full time doesn’t mean it can’t be done ‘properly’. I am not sure you have thought through the equalities implication of that suggestion either. Frankly, I find the idea of a full time whip pretty ghastly – and I doubt either of the last two people who have done this job in Tower Hamlets (and done it well – it’s a role with some challenges!) would have wanted to abandon the workplace and do it on a full time basis. In fact old fashioned aren’t necessairly bad- when we had a majority of one in the Council chamber the role of the whip in an impromptu ‘toilet-rota’ familiar to primary school teachers and prison officers but few more was a tangible and useful contribution of the Whip.
The model you set out places a vast amount of power and agency in one individual – I can’t think that on a political, practical or indeed ethical basis this is anything other than a bad thing.
Every Labour Councillor has a responsibility to work towards a unity of political vision that also respects debate and difference internally, which isn’t an earth shattering observation. Whilst the last Labour Government was indeed plagued by infighting I think that had little to do with the training and renumeration of Government Whips per se.
Grrr. I think I sense some of what you are trying to say here Jack, but little grates more than the phrase “cutting teeth” to describe a career in local government. Pre Coalition Local Government was also about a lot more than ‘giving out sweets’.
I am sure the work you do personally in Lambeth is excellent – your borough stands out as a Labour Council doing a job of promoting its achievements externally, which is a very fine thing, but I am not sure a full time whip post in each borough is much of a solution to anything.
Different boroughs have different takes on this issue but because someone can’t do a job full time doesn’t mean it can’t be done ‘properly’. I am not sure you have thought through the equalities implication of that suggestion either. Frankly, I find the idea of a full time whip pretty ghastly – and I doubt either of the last two people who have done this job in Tower Hamlets (and done it well – it’s a role with some challenges!) would have wanted to abandon the workplace and do it on a full time basis. In fact old fashioned aren’t necessairly bad- when we had a majority of one in the Council chamber the role of the whip in an impromptu ‘toilet-rota’ familiar to primary school teachers and prison officers but few more was a tangible and useful contribution of the Whip.
The model you set out places a vast amount of power and agency in one individual – I can’t think that on a political, practical or indeed ethical basis this is anything other than a bad thing.
Every Labour Councillor has a responsibility to work towards a unity of political vision that also respects debate and difference internally, which isn’t an earth shattering observation. Whilst the last Labour Government was indeed plagued by infighting I think that had little to do with the training and renumeration of Government Whips per se.