To the chair of, and all delegates to, Greenwich and Woolwich GC,
Tonight I attended your GC for the first time. I have been a member of the Labour Party for six years and have been a member of six different CLPs. In that time, I have never experienced such an unwelcoming meeting as I did tonight.
I have been a member of Greenwich and Woolwich CLP for nine months. I receive your newsletters and campaign bulletins, and find them informative and refreshing. I haven’t had the opportunity to attend a meeting until tonight, as I study at college in the evenings. Unfortunately, I do not think I will be returning and I am writing you this letter to outline the reasons why, in the hope that if new members attend your meetings in the future, they do not have the same experiences that I have.
At tonight’s meeting, I was one of only three young members in the room. Two of us had never been to a meeting before. Attendants at the meeting included elected representatives at all levels. Despite this, nobody welcomed us or introduced themselves. Instead, I felt ostracised to the point of tears. I spent the first five minutes of the meeting trying to find a seat, because they had all been reserved. I ended up sitting in a corner.
I understand that tonight was your annual meeting to elect delegates to National Conference, and make nominations for national positions. Greenwich and Woolwich GC operates on a branch delegate system, which is something that I had hoped Rfounding Labour would change. Still, I expected that this would be the case. I did not need to be shouted at every time an election was held, that ‘if you’re not a delegate, you can’t vote!’ or ‘only delegates can vote!’. This procedure was explained by the chair at the beginning of the meeting, I did not need reminding. I saw that the only non-delegates in the room were the other two young people and I. At no point did I try and vote.
The Membership Secretary, in his report, noted that the CLP had seven new members that month. One of those could have quite easily been me. Throughout the meeting no procedures, acronyms or ‘inside jokes’ were explained to me. If I hadn’t been a member for six years, the whole culture would feel alien to me. Unfortunately, it is all too common for young members across the country.
At the end of the meeting, you held a raffle. You asked a young member (who was not a delegate) to draw the raffle, as he was a ‘visitor’. I hope you understand that no member is a visitor in their own CLP. You then went on to give him a copy of John Prescott’s book, to educate him on ‘Old Labour’, which I found patronising at best. You then went on to invite the room to the pub. I assume this was for delegates only, as no explanation of which pub
you were going to, or where it was, was made. I am not from the area. Nobody came up to me to ask me to go along.
I hope you will take my comments on tonight’s meeting on board. I did not write this letter to shame Greenwich and Woolwich CLP, but do I believe it is important that you understand how the actions of some can make new members feel. It was clear from the meeting that the CLP is an active campaigning force, but I’m afraid that in order to encourage members to get involved in your activities you must be welcoming to them when you first meet them.
I trust you will read my letter out at your next meeting. I have CCd in Iain McNicol (General Secretary) as I understand he will be attending your April meeting), Susan Nash (Chair of Young Labour) and Dean Carlin (National Youth Officer for the Labour Party).
Kind regards,
Melanie Haslam
L0088262
—————————————————————————————
Sadly Mel it isn’t just young members who are treated like this.
There was a significant fringe debate at our regional conference that highlighted the problem in most CLP’s here but as is the norm it was ‘taken on board’ which as we all know equates being ignored.
I’ve even been told in a meeting by my CLP Chair that new members defecting from the Limp Dems are just a passing phase and that there is no need to welcome them which is pathetic.
Senior party members have also been told that it’s an issue but for reasons known only to themselves they chose to ignore what is wrong in so many CLP’s, ignorantly choosing to highlight what is good in some CLP’s and I guess it’s just to save rocking the boat.
New faces come and go at meetings dismissed as lack of interest but I was always believe it is down to they welcome they receive and you have done the right thing by raising these concerns.
The challenge now is will anyone who can make a difference reading this do anything or maintain the status quo and believe everything is rosy?
I agree wholeheartedly with Andy – there is a natural tendency for party hacks of whichever persuasion to speak in code and to stick with what they know. Indeed it is one thing that unites the left of the party and the right (such as Progress) that it is clearly not in their interest to have too much debate – better still to dominate a rump of a few members of a CLP to enable them to use this as a launchpad elsewhere – at regional or national level.
I do believe that all Executive Committee meetings and similar should be open (with caveats for certain items) to all members of the party – transparency is the enemy of the schemer. I wonder if Progress allows its members to attend Executive or Board meetings – including who to back for the NEC ?
Well Done Melanie, the party needs more individuals like yourself and not those you are referring to in your letter!!
I totally agree. It’s a particular problem as a Young Person living in London… the fluctuations in price of the private rented sector make it difficult to put down roots, so you constantly find yourself moving from CLP to CLP, transient. We need to be welcomed but seldom are.
I’m used to the culture of Labour Party meetings now. But the nonemclature – GCs, EC’s, motions, acronyms – and the obsession with process can be extremely confusing. And, utlimately, offputting.
We need to open up and change.
Ah well – that’s the English for you. Come to Welsh Labour ……. 🙂
There are always people who’s comfort zone is creating discomfort for others and it’s unusual to find so high a percentage of them (like 100%) in one meeting. Don’t be intimidated.
Ah well – that’s the English for you. Come to Welsh Labour ……. 🙂
There are always people who’s comfort zone is creating discomfort for others and it’s unusual to find so high a percentage of them (like 100%) in one meeting. Don’t be intimidated.
Oops. For ‘who’s’ read ‘whose’.
Oops. For ‘who’s’ read ‘whose’.
At the age of 19 I was elected by my branch as a delegate to the GC of Brighton Labour Party (this was back in 1988). As far as I was aware, GC meetings were not open to all members and the only people who attended were elected delegates from branches and affiliated organisations. The then leader of Brighton Council used to come sometimes to make reports and answer questions.
Since GC meetings were not intended for ‘ordinary’ party members, the issue of welcoming newcomers didn’t seem particularly relevant. I agree that it is an important issue for local branches, and other meetings like Young Labour or Labour Students (where such groups exist).
Certainly in those days there was a general lack of awareness of the need to make all party meetings and events as welcoming as possible to new and potential members.
While I was chairing the Labour Student club at Sussex Uni, my policy was to make sure that meetings were as welcoming as possible – even enjoyable – with everyone encouraged to participate and express their ideas. I believe that the number one priority for any political party (or other voluntary organisation) is to make participation a satisfying and enjoyable experience, so that people want to join, will keep coming to meetings, and want to get actively involved. Otherwise you will keep losing members as people get frustrated and give up. And if your active membership is shrinking it will make it difficult to do anything else (like campaigning or winning elections).
Noticeable that not a single member of the party hierarchy who are members of Progress have responded to say these concerns will be looked into.
Rosy tinted glasses or worse lack of backbone which is why some CLP’s will just plod on and the handful running things will always remain the usual handful running things 🙁
Miserable!
‘I saw that the only non-delegates in the room were the other two young people and I.’
‘The other two young people and me.’
Have you really commented to criticise my grammar?
Yup. When you’ve lost the argument, pick on the inconsequential…
Melanie, I remember the first time I went to the Branch meeting in London as a student how welcoming and helpful they were, which contrasted very much with my student Labour Club, then very much in the grip of the small faction of NOLS that ran it for many years, and were highly suspicious of any new members, who were Trots until they could prove otherwise. Then I moved out to the sticks and the CLP and Exec were appalling and unapproachable, and I had a similar experience to yourself. Adding to that was the considerable acrimony that existed between 2 wings of the party, and the inevitable slanging matches that EC and GC degenerated into.
The big difference for us was that you and I wanted to do something about it. I hung around and made enough of a nuisance of myself to eventually get accepted – I guess they realised in my case that I wasn’t going to go away, and indeed you have made your views known to the powers that be.
The sad fact of the matter is 99% of people would never show such tenacity and would not bother coming again. If we leave the party to the hacks and the self-servers, we are doomed to irrelevance.
Yes, well done Melanie, we need more members of all ages to get involved in our activities and the first meeting someone attends is always a bit scary. New members will never come back to meetings and get involved if they are made to feel unwelcome and our activist base will continue to age and shrink. This problem needs highlighting and you have raised it excellently here.
Thankfully I was made to feel very welcome in my CLP and I am now the CLP Chair. This is largely because our members, who are mostly retired, were keen to hand over to a younger generation. Sadly however there are too few young people choosing to get involved in my CLP and in CLPs natiowide.
As a party we cannot afford to push aways those enthusiatic few who want to participate.
That does sound like an unfortunate experience. I wonder if it is often easier to get involved at the branch level, meet some people, and then go to the GC with them? That’s how most new people get involved in my experience. I think GCs tend to be slightly more impersonal by their nature until you have seen some faces a few times. In areas where the delegate system is used, I suspect that often if there are only delegates present this will be because the allocation per branch is pretty generous so pretty much anyone who has a burning desire to go and vote can be appointed. That is certainly my experience – I don’t think delegates/non-delegates makes any real difference to the numbers of people who attend GCs ( a symptom of too much interest in process rather than materiality). The idea of having lots of seats “reserved” seems a bit rum to me… A bit of warmth costs nothing. But I would say, why not try your branch and get to know the folks there, and get appointed as a delegate? Seems a shame to feel frozen out.