The shadow cabinet should be elected, not selected

September 8, 2010 2:44 pm

Parliament in shadowsBy Mark Ferguson / @markfergusonuk

Today the PLP have a real choice to make that could prove just as important for the party as the leadership election. As they vote on proposals to alter the way in which the shadow cabinet is chosen, the PLP will ultimately be choosing between a democratic and plural system, or increased levels of top-down patronage within the party. For the party to flourish in opposition, the PLP should choose the former.

The current system, as it stands, allows the parliamentary party to exert pressure upon the front bench, and carry out an overseight role that allows frontbenchers who fall foul of the PLP to be replaced by their colleagues. The party leadership has gone through the process of realising that too much of New Labour was “top-down”, and has grasped the desire for internal democracy. Surely there is no sense in increasing democracy within the party, as all leadership candidates have promised, whilst removing it from a section of the party who should be the most actively involved.

Those who would favour a system based on patronage from the leader betray the desire within the party to embrace pluralism, to reach out to all sections of the movement and build on the best of all of our talents. Having a cabinet selected by the party leader is effectively playing “double or quits” with the leadership race. Want the issues that you care about to be represented in the shadow cabinet? Then you had better hope your candidate wins the leadership contest, or those who support your candidate might not be chosen by the new leader.

The issue of female representation in the cabinet is also being voted on today. It seems unlikely that the 50% target initially proposed by Harriet Harman will prevail, which is a shame. The targets which we give ourselves for breaking barriers to political participation should, be neccessity, be difficult to reach, even painful. Operating a sliding scale, which would rise to 50% during this parliament, is also a mistake, as it runs the risk of removing men from shadow cabinet posts to be replaced by women at arbitrary stages, purely on the basis of gender. The target should be high, and it should be constant throughout this parliament.

There are only a few hours left in the vote now, which is scheduled to finish at 5pm tonight. What seems likely at this stage is that some compromise will be chosen, both on electing the shadow cabinet and the percentage of women that shadow cabinet contains. That would be a shame for the party, after it has moved on so impressively in recent months from election defeat.

Of course it means that we’ll see a few “big beasts” elected who the leadership might have prefered to ignore. We’ll likely see more women in the shadow cabinet than before. But it won’t be as plural, as representative and as democratic as it could have been – that’s disapointing for the party, because democracy and women’s representation are the kind of issues that we shouldn’t be willing to compromise on.

Comments are closed

Latest

  • Comment Housing upheaval can be traced back to Thatcher

    Housing upheaval can be traced back to Thatcher

    If further evidence was needed that the Government is destroying our communities then it came by the bucket load with proposals to relocate hundreds of housing benefit claimants. Councils across London desperately searched for a solution to the housing benefit cap that made it impossible for some of the capital’s poorest residents to stay in their homes. First we heard of plans to move residents to Darlington, Stoke, Hull and parts of Yorkshire. But the revelation that Westminster Council planned [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured The austerity consensus has collapsed

    The austerity consensus has collapsed

    There is no alternative: the only way out of Britain’s current economic plight is massive cuts to public spending. Taxes on the wealthiest must be slashed: they are blocks on aspiration and economically counterproductive. Austerity is the only game in town. Or so we have been told ever since the Coalition was formed in the rose gardens of Number 10 Downing Street. The overwhelming majority of the media has gladly reinforced the Government line, and those voices calling for an [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Should Labour go further on football reform?

    Should Labour go further on football reform?

    “As a party, Labour should take great pride in the fact that we initiated Supporters Direct, but now is the time to go further.” These sentiments, expressed in a recent article for Progress by Steve Rotheram MP, hark back to a time where the landscape was somewhat different for the Labour party, but similar in many ways to that faced by football supporters in 2012. The Football Taskforce was established soon after Labour came to power in 1997, with the [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Making Labour Policy: Who calls the tune?

    Making Labour Policy: Who calls the tune?

    Excellent election results and rising polls have brought a mood of unity and created space and time for serious work on policy. Francois Hollande’s victory shows that austerity is not the only option, and Labour must start to develop an alternative agenda, rejecting the Tory politics of resentment and division in favour of policies which are fair, principled and credible: on housing, crime, transport, health, schools, higher education, manufacturing, tax, defence, social care, equality, employment rights and the environment. We [...]

    Read more →
  • News It’s the budget what won it…

    It’s the budget what won it…

    Why did Labour win the 2010 local elections so convincingly? It’s the budget right? This graph of polling from TNS BMRB certainly suggests that. Labour’s slim lead extends rapidly following the budget (highlighted) – and current stands at 12 points (42/30). And as for why Labour did better in 2012 compared to the 2011 elections – just compare May and May 2012. A year is a long time in politics…

    Read more →