The party is trying to treat the symptoms while the disease rages on

April 11, 2012 10:14 am

Yesterday it was The Guardian. Today it’s The Times. Suddenly the media have developed a fascination with the byzantine inner workings of the Labour Party. Nevermind that the party’s NEC had already taken a decision on Mayoral and PPC selections (and allowed MPs to stand – if they agree to stand down as MPs) – a few quiet words in the ears of a few lobby hacks and the whole issue seems to be blown wide open again.

As Gisela Stuart rightly told The Times today, stopping MPs standing for these roles would be “old-fashioned” and “backward-looking”. It would also make the NEC look daft by flip-flopping on the issue, and make a mockery of selection processes that are already underway.

It would be a monstrously foolish decision.

Yet focus on the “undesirability” of by-elections in the wake of the Bradford West debacle isn’t overly surprising – just last week I noted a shadow cabinet member telling me as much. The atmosphere after Bradford West was febrile. Some widely held assertions were shattered.

I share the concern that Labour could lose seats like Birmingham Hodge Hill to a Bradford West-esque result. But as is too often the case – as it clutches to an out of date system of political organisation that no longer works – the party is trying to treat the symptom, not the disease. That’s a far bigger issue than losing by-elections or party funding, but it’s at the root cause of both – a distrust of Westminster politics which feels distant to and alien from the lives of most voters.

To tackle that, the way the party campaigns and interacts with the electorate needs to change. While politics is “something that happens to other people” and the Labour Party is a couple of Eds in suits on TV, we’re going to struggle. Not just us, but all major parties.

Our politics looks frighteningly small – irrelevant even – to most voters. So the alternative must be that politics, politicians and political parties are something that lives and breathes in the communities we seek to represent – where the Labour Party is a neighbour, a friend or a local resident, not just a distant Westminster dwelling behemoth.

It’s imperative that Labour seizes the chance now to take on the challenges of 21st century campaigning rather than falling back into an old fashioned comfort zone. As I said in the wake of Bradford West, the case is stronger not weaker after that defeat. And if Labour doesn’t occupy this space and become the voice of communities – a genuinely engaged, interactive and responsive network – then someone else will.

The other argument against by-elections (other than the big one, that we might lose them), is that they’re expensive. The figure I’ve seen banded about is around £100k per seat*. But again that’s a symptom of wider malaise. Why does it cost the party that much to run an election in one seat? Because the old model dictates that by-elections are about bombarding the Labour vote and winning on a low turnout. They’re about the national party imposing a top down campaign upon an often weak and disorganised local party. They’re about being the biggest beast in the jungle of apathy.

When you’re up against only the two coalition parties that’s fine. You can tell people you’re the least worst option. But if you’re up against a candidate or party who are galvanising the electorate, you’re suddenly caught playing the wrong game.

In an increasingly open and transparent world what people value is authenticity and honesty. The outdated means employed by the party machine – the stitch up, command and control and the vice-like grip on information – are not only futile, but self-destructive. The party must change, because it has no choice.

And desperately clinging onto the old way of doing things – with the attendant dirt and mess that comes along with it – is only going to prolong the agony.

* – incidentally, if people felt a connection to or an engagement with our politicians, we’d have far fewer funding problems.

20120411-111103.jpg

  • Robert_Crosby

    The Shadow Cabinet relies on opportunistically catching the Tories and Lib Dems out when they commit gaffes.  There’s no statement to voters of what “being Labour” means and what we’re for.  We need to give people who support us hope (note, not specific spending commitments as Balls has disingenuously sought to frame the discussion) and stop trying to be so “earnest”.

    Kevin Maguire says there’s a vacancy for a rabble-rouser in British politics.  I agree with him.  We also need to dump the nastier elements who still leech off our Party.  The four or five who claim to have “assisted” the Coalition would be a good start.  They think that the public is attracted by their “centrism”.  I suspect that voters more look at them as some of the worst possible cases of “in it for themselves”.

    • Daniel Speight

       We also need to dump the nastier elements who still leech off our Party.

      Maybe one or two who write for the Tory press criticizing Labour also. I don’t  suspect Labour will lose that much by losing them.

      • Brumanuensis

        I presume you’re referring to Dan Hodges. Not much point. After all, does anyone take him seriously anymore? We all know the man’s a relentless contrarian and that the Daily Telegraph only offered him a post because he’d reliably churn out columns attributing the evils of the world to Ed Miliband. It’s not worth the hassle; let him carry on playing the role of the conservative press’s favourite lefty court jester.

        • Brumanuensis

          Incidentally, a shadow cabinet insider who is simultaneously a senior figure in the shadow cabinet, informed me recently that Dan Hodges doesn’t actually know any shadow cabinet insiders or inded senior shadow cabinet figures. I have an anonymous source, so it must be true.

      • treborc

         One or two who are basically Progress or new labour, but would like people to think they now back Ed, when I suspect we all know they are in fact backing David for the New labour leadership, even after David has spouted New labour is dead, while laughing.

    • Holly

      With all three main parties lurching left & right, to the extent they morph into each other, maybe the public are just plain sick of the lot of ‘em.
      Pointless hours of news about who ate a pasty, or even more pointless, where they ate it. Then, just to make sure we ‘get the gist’ of the pointless rubbish, they discover….. Cameron lied!Not a chance he could have been mistaken…just the MSM deciding for us Cameron lied!Then we have Miliband. Promising us what he will do if elected… YAY!!!In three years time when there is an election…Aw.Then we have Balls….Then the Lib Dems, who are in government, scoring points from the same government they are in????Point scoring rubbish, day in day out.Oh and don’t forget to be judgemental when the politicians show us their tax returns,One of them may have earned more/paid more tax than their opponent.

      Is there a ‘Sick Of The Lot OF’Em’ party? Because if there was they would end up point scoring against the other three main parties….British politics today is a frickin joke, hamstrung by the MSM, who are obsessed with triviality, and 24/7 news to ‘inform’ the public. Stop that giggling at the back.
      For the first time in my (voting) life, I don’t think there is a mature politician worthy of a vote. And that extends worldwide.
      With only gobshites in control around the world, How much trouble are ‘we the people’ really in??? 

      • http://twitter.com/gonzozzz dave stone

        “Lurching left and right”? Not so sure about that.

        They’ve made their beds and now they’re having to lie in them. Trouble is they’ve all made the same bed.

        An alternative is what we need.

        • Holly

          Well the ‘real Tories’ have had enough of ‘left leaning’ Cameron, and Miliband is ‘worried sick’ about those earning 30-60k, and now he  thinks those earning less should help fund their lifestyle…Holidays, horse riding lessons for the children etc.

          • AlanGiles

            “left-leaning Cameron”?

            if you say so…….

          • Holly

            Go read the comments on Conhome…. Day in day out…Wailing &  whining how Cameron’s not a ‘real Tory’/Conservative.
            Does one’s bloody head in.At least you can have a debate on here.

          • treborc

             That’s the labour party countering Guy on here for god sake.

          • GuyM

            I would hope no one in their right mind wasted any part of their life “countering” me. I am an irrelevance and happy with it.

          • GuyM

            Indeed, I find Conservative Home debates to be little more than a whine fest about how the government has betrayed Thatcher’s legacy or isn’t ideologically pure enough etc.

            Much like certain LL posters get all wound up about Blair and New Labour.

          • treborc

            I have no doubt Cameron is leaning to the left, he has to be careful what he drinks, best bitter can do this.

  • Renu

    Suppose those dinasaurs need to be thrown away to be fossils at least we can have another use out of them few hundred years later. Right now they need to stop ditching up and not having the heart n spine to stand up for democracy within part itself. I know that they are the one who ruining the access to open thinking liberal socialist positive debates. They are still inside the window not weaving colourful check materials straight blac n white as their thinking capacity has shrunken and I recommend opening up the penal gland of NEC members and every executive constituency member so they will have the ability see from their 3rd eye. Until that we are busted.

  • Daniel Speight

    And if Labour doesn’t occupy this space and become the voice of
    communities – a genuinely engaged, interactive and responsive network –
    then someone else will.

    This is I’m afraid very likely. It may not be just from the far left, it could just as easily be from right wing extremists.

  • http://twitter.com/gonzozzz dave stone

    It’s only a short step from “the undesirablity of by-elections” to the undesirability of a general election.

    If the shadow cabinet are too timid to face down the opposition and provide an alternative to the discredited austerity/privatisation agenda they should retire from their posts, and make way for others. Or is the PLP so bereft of talent that there are no others available? Heaven forbid…

  • ovaljason

    Ed M promised to fix these problems by re-founding the entire basis of the Labour Party, starting afresh with policy and reconnecting with the electorate through community organisation.

    Re-founding Labour: Fail
    New policies: Fail
    Re-connecting with the electorate through M4C: Fail.

    Whatever the problem, the answer is the same: Ed Miliband.

    • Holly

      As an ‘outsider’ looking in Ed Miliband is not really the ‘problem’.
      The biggest problem is the public opinion of the last Labour government’s 13 year record.Now the public are not stupid, and they know who was doing what, and in which department, so having to listen to the same bods telling us they would be marvellous if re elected, is a plea too far.
      Miliband could have done wonders for the party, and his poll ratings when he did his cabinet re shuffle by making sure he got rid of the ‘dead wood’.
      Being able to pin bad policies/bad results because of bad policies on to present shadow cabinet ministers make Labour unelectable in a general election.

      The ‘dead wood’ are quite content at all the blame being pinned onto Miliband and they will eventually get rid. However IF Miliband was to do something REALLY out there, the public MIGHT just warm to him a bit more.

      • Robert_Crosby

        I agree with this entirely.  Some of the has-beens weren’t voted into the 2010 Shadow Cabinet – which was a good thing.  Surely the whole point of EM getting to pick his own front bench was to free him of any possible constraints.  Why he still has the likes of Byrne (at least for now) and Caroline Flint involved is beyond me.

  • AlanGiles

    For the first time in my life I am going to say a word in favour of Sion Simon. I can’t stand the cut of his jib, but he had the courage to stand down in 2010 from Parliament because he wished to become Mayor for Birmingham. This at least shows some genuine commitment and enthusiasm.

    Constrat this with the spinless Liam Byrne, who will see which way the wind blows before giving up his position.

    You can only suspect some of the people who are jumping on the Mayoral bandwaggon are doing so, because either they fear losing their seats at the next election, or don’t relish a lengthy period in opposition. In any event it sounds bogus and opportunistic.

    I really do not like Mr Simon, but credit has to be given where it is due. Perhaps if the voters of Birkenhead start making a fuss about their incumbant MP Mad Frankie might suddenly discover an overwhelming desire to be Mayor?

    • Robert_Crosby

      We can but hope??

    • Winston_from_the_Ministry

      What about commitment and enthusiasm for the job he was doing?

      • AlanGiles

        But the point is he obviously believed in the Mayoral job to sacrifice a fairly safe seat in Parliament – I don’t like the Mayoral system but the fact is much as I might dislike the man he showed a commitment well in advance, and took quite a brave decision.

        Byrne apparently wants a safe bolt-hole because it looks as if his parliamentary constituency will disappear at the next election (perhaps he has seen his ranking each month on LL and knows he will find it hard to find another billet?)

        Either way Byrne in my view doesn’t deserve to be considered, since it is questionable whether he wants genuinely to be a Mayor in the same way Simon does, and the fact that he is not prepared to put his money where his mouth is, until he feels “safe”.

        I cordially dislike both men as politicians, but one shows courage while the other shows cynical opportunism.

  • Johndclare

    Two problems:
    1. At central level, a prevaricating, timorous and out-of-touch leadership widely believed to be merely trying to helicopter its interns into safe seats.
    2. At branch and consitutency level, too many lazy party officials who secured election to their positions for political and power/status reasons, but are not prepared to do the work involved.

  • ianrobo

    “I share the concern that Labour could lose seats like Birmingham Hodge Hill to a Bradford West-esque result”

    Mark if you are going to comment from the safety of London get some bare facts right. Hodge Hill is nothing at all like Bradford West. Yes it has a large Muslim electorate BUT it is not the same as Bradford and no respect presence at all.

    IF Byrne stepped down I could almost guess the labour candidate and he would not be beaten by Respoect and anyway that Party is a one man party who can not stand again.

    So lets stop spreading the scare mongering, I see it is holiday time and the likes of Watt are agitating again, some people just can not let go of the fact their man lost. shall we look positive at how good the local elections will be for us or shall we just concentrate on London once again in a race between two mavericks.

    I can almost feel the glee in Dan Hodges writings as he sees a probable Johnson win, it is sickening to see so call labour members like this.

    The vast majority of us actually campaigning forLabour on the doorstep are seeing positive returns and expecting very good results whilst the likes of Watt and Hodges do nothing at all to win actual candidates and victories.

    So Sad

    • http://twitter.com/gonzozzz dave stone

      “that Party is a one man party who can not stand again”

      I’ve always considered Salma Yaqoob to be a very credible candidate. In the 2010 general election she achieved 12,240 votes in Birmingham’s Hall Green against Galloway’s 8,460 in London.

      • ianrobo

         Dave, this is the thing when people from outside comment.

        She stepped down of being a councillor because of ill health, those conditions still continue, no chance she can stand in any by election. The respect organisation has totally collapsed in Brum and not fielding one single candidate.

        Bradford west is one really weird result but can not be spread out to any other area, unless you wish to point score against Labour

        • http://www.facebook.com/elliot.bidgood Elliot Bidgood

          ianrobo, that’s interesting to hear. I’m not from Birmingham either and it’s always good to hear a local perspective on these things. I would note that Yaqoob was asked about running in Hodge Hill and says “never say never”. but the non-commital nature of that is maybe explained by the things you’ve pointed out. Tbh though, I’d still be more relieved if she didn’t run- I remember she appeared on Question Time a while back, and I must say, she seemed very likable and articulate, a great spokesman for Respect. Far better than Galloway himself, I’m my opinion.

          • ianrobo

             If she could not win in Hall GReen then can not win in Hodge Hill.  Plus the internal politics and organisation of Hodge Hill CLP are way off of Bradford

        • http://twitter.com/gonzozzz dave stone

          “really weird” ?

          I’m not convinced by “really weird”. To me the Bradford West outcome indicates a crisis of representation and until that is addressed we can’t sleep soundly in our beds.

    • AlanGiles

      “IF Byrne stepped down I could almost guess the labour candidate and he would not be beaten by Respoect ”

      Ian, I take it you are a local to the area, so perhaps you could  help me out:

      Sion Simon sacrificed his Westminster career two years ago to start the job of preparing himself to be the Mayoral candidate. A few weeks ago Mr Byrne announced he might or might not step down from Westminster if a vacancy occurs?

      I am not keen on either man, but surely, Simon has shown his commitment to the job, whereas Byrne seems to see it is as some sort of consolation prize – only to  be gone for if he is guaranteed the nomination.

      Both men are on the same wing of the party, but why should a man who has only recently shown an interest in the job be preferred to a man who has already shown some committment to it?

      As labour’s favourite word is “fairness” what is fair about this situation?

      • ianrobo

         totally spot on Allan, but Byrne has in fact replaced the leader Albert Bore in the contest and has his blessing and his vote sway.

        Put it another way the Simon and Bore camps within Brum labour party is well known and the feeling is that Bore could not beat Simon but Byrne could.

        Of ocure the other factor in all this is that Hodge Hill under present proposals disappears and Byrne had no seat to go to, Under these circumstances a by election for Hodge Hill is a complete waste of time.

        • AlanGiles

          Thanks for the info Ian. However this more than proves that Byrne suddenly wants to be Mayor out of expediency rather than conviction – his seat will disappear so no more Westminster gravy train.

          That should tell Birmingham all they need to know about this man

          • ianrobo

            You have to remeber though the first vote is between labour members

          • AlanGiles

            Well, Ian, I sincerely hope they remember the concept of “fairness” and resist the dubious charms of the Johnny-Come-Lately.

          • Brumanuensis

            Oh we will Alan. We will. Looking forward to the hustings.

          • Ianrobo

            Is it fair to say that Simon is the favourite, done so much legwork already.

          • Brumanuensis

            It’s quite hard to tell. Simon has indeed put a lot of effort in, but Byrne’s profile and Stuart’s good reputation mayprove enough to compensate. I can’t really say more.

  • Brumanuensis

    I actually agree with the NEC’s recommendation, mainly because I feel we need a more diverse political culture than just re-circulating former MPs back into local government. I like Gisela Stuart, but she’s doing a good job as MP for Edgbaston, and I don’t fancy a by-election in that seat at the moment.

    Additionally, we all know party resources – both in terms of money and man-power – are stretched to the limit. Multiple by-elections at the same time could push us past breaking point. The long-term issue is, as you rightly identify, the decline of local parties and the side-lining of CLPs. What we need is a membership drive and a vigourous ground war.

    • http://www.facebook.com/elliot.bidgood Elliot Bidgood

      Agreed, Brumanuenis. Far from Gisela Stuart’s comments, I think it neglects the point of localism if MPs run for seats. Facing facts, better-known MPs will probably defeat more local candidates every time in mayoral/PCC elections, merely on weight of name recognition/establishment support, and that prevents the emergence of new talent from the local communities.

      Moreover, there’s the public message it tends to send. As AlanGiles was saying, Sion Simon’s decision to step down in 2010 in order to run for mayor is admirable in this regard. I get that MPs have needs and career aspirations like everyone else, but running for Parliament isn’t the same as every other job, it’s a pact with the voters, at least as far as most voters are concerned. You’ve asked them to elect you to represent them for the duration of the next parliament, and they probably have a right to be offended if you shirk that commitment just because you found a better gig (retiring on grounds of health, personal issues, scandal etc is different, of course). This is precisely the sort of thing that tells the public that MPs take their jobs for granted and don’t respect the electorate. And for all the concern about the financial cost to the party of having to fight a raft of by-elections, few have mentioned the fact that an unneccesary by-election also inflicts costs on the taxpayers, at a time when the public purse is already strained.

      • Brumanuensis

        Certainly I feel more warmly inclined towards Sion Simon thanks to that decision. I would add that the habit of councillors being elected and then immediately putting themselves for selection as MPs, does a great deal of harm for the reputation of local government. Lucy Rigby, the recently selected PPC for Lincoln, is a case in point: she was elected for a ward in Islington in 2010 and now has moved to Lincoln to be in place for 2015. Not good form.

        • AlanGiles

          Forgive me for doing a “Guy” but all I can say is, if I were interviewing two lads for a job, and Sion had prepared for the interview and shown interest and commitment (which he has) whereas Liam had turned up because he was losing his current job next week and had previously shown no interest, I would be saying to Sion “can you start on Monday?”.

          I cordially dislike him but as far as I am concerned he showed courage – and also he didn’t let his constituents down by resigning mid-term, whereas Byrne, knowing his seat becomes defunct in three years time couldn’t give a damn. He gave decent warning he was stepping down in 2010, and I frankly think it would be one of the most unpleasant  misjustices if SS was denied the chance to try for the job he has shown interest in, because some fading shadow minister needs a new job.

          I’d say the same thing if the positions were reversed, BTW, as far as I am concerned if Labour really are seriously about “fairness” they will do the decent thing.

  • John Slinger

    For some new ideas across a variety of issues and for an opportunity for Labour activists and supporters to pitch ideas to Shadow Ministers, please see http://www.pragmaticradicalism.co.uk. Our next Top Of The Policies event is chaired by Shadow Housing Minister Jack Dromey MP and is on 23 May, at 6.30pm in the Barley Mow pub, Westminster 
    http://pragmaticradicalism.co.uk/top-of-the-policies-on-housing-chaired-by-jack-dromey-mp-shadow-housing-minister

    • AlanGiles

      (From above mentioned website):-


      90 SECONDS PER SPEAKER TO PRESENT A POLICY IDEA (up to 20 speakers)
      3 MINUTES Q&A PER POLICY”

      Alas, I feel the problems and solutions are far, far deeper than this somewhat gimmick-ridden, ITV-like presentation will allow.

      Didn’t Aristotle have it? ; “Truth invites examination”.

      Three minutes is not exactly allowing for that.

      • Alexwilliamz

        We have been here before haven’t we? Was it you Alan who had it out with this chap last time? I’m still tempted to go to one of these events to work out what the hell it looks like. Maybe when I’m next ikn London. Is it a bit like speed dating do you think?

        • AlanGiles

          Yes Alex. I think the last show was just after New Year. It seems to me like a desperate attempt to look as if they are men and women of action.

          It sounds the sort of thig ITV would stick on to fill up half an hour on a Sunday afternoon – I wonder they don’t get Louis Walsh and Simon Cowell to be the judging panel!

  • http://twitter.com/bencobley Ben Cobley

    Couldn’t really agree with the conclusions of this article any more. In this new world we are in in which we can find out so much easier about all sorts of things, the old command and control model just doesn’t work – that is a blessing really, but it will take a lot of re-adjustment from a lot of people.

    Also, in terms of funding, if a national democratic political party cannot raise enough money to keep itself going, that can only be its own fault. If people like you and want you to do well, they will give.

    The answer as much as there is one lies in re-engagement with the public on their terms as much as the party’s or any sect of it. People need to be brought into the tent rather shut out from it.

  • aracataca

    I can understand the logic behind this article but I fear that the scenario envisaged by Mark has been seen before, notably in 2 different contexts. Firstly, the Labour party of the 1960s & 1970s did give local branches and party members a real and effective voice. At one level it was great and there was a real feeling of empowerment and a connection between local politics and the community. However, at another level the consequences of this approach were pretty awful. The Revolutionary Socialist League (Militant) took over  a significant number of CLPs along with the entire Labour Party Young Socialists organisation. Secondly, party conferences were shambolic with repeated, systematic and  binding defeats on the party leadership and government in the full glare of the media. Indeed I often wonder if the members of the Conference Arrangements Committee at Conference at the time were in fact taking LSD and/or secretly working for Conservative Central Office. In a similar vein this article has the smell of ‘community politics’ about it. Of course the Fib Dems are masters of this kind of politics but they have ended up not believing in anything, having no firm principles, with 8% of the vote and endorsing a Thatcherite agenda in government. The real dilemma for us is how do we become real community activists without abandoning  our democratic socialist principles. Imho it is a hard circle to square.

    • Daniel Speight

       The fight against militant ended up throwing the baby out with the bath water. The Labour  Party was a social democrat party in its true meaning, not the Roy Jenkins -  Shirley Williams meaning. It wasn’t a revolutionary socialist party which Militant was and wanted Labour to be. By the time the Blair/Brown axis was in control Labour was neither. If anybody ever figures out what Blair’s third way was, maybe we can figure out where Labour ended up.

    • GuyM

      In answer to your last question, I don’t think you can.

      Most “communities” have 95% of the population disengaged from “comunity activity” and largely happy with that. You try and pester people in 2012 about “democratic socialist principles” or anything Tory or any other party and you’ll get looked at as if you are about to try to sell them the Watchtower.

      The amount and variation of social activities and opportunities now a days means that the wort of engagement you want just isn’t going to happen.

      I was heavily involved in politics a few years back until I realised I couldn’t manage the 3 Ps – politics, personal and professional – all at the same time. I reealised politics was the least important to me in terms of enjoying life so I dropped it completely, which was the best decision I ever took.

      I suspect I was slow on the uptake, as most of the rest of the population had already realised politics was something to be avoided if you wanted to enjoy life.

  • Disgruntled

    Labourlist is as bad as the “Westminster” bubble. On another thread you have comments carving up winnable seats across the country. What about people from ordinary backgrounds. That is where Lab should seek to recruit from. Sadly, Lab is not recognised as the party it should be, by the population that need it. While people here talk of nec’s, clp’s, bubbles, to engage, to connect and how to be progressive – all which mean sod all – the Tories/Lib Dems carve up this country. Politics needs to be plural.

    Lab is elitist. Elitist in a different way to to the Tories of course – but elitist to the same extent as the Tories.

    This is why people don’t vote Labour

    • Alexwilliamz

      That is an unpleasant thread, but those involved are not names I have seen that regularly on here. Interesting…

      • Guest

        All talk of m4change, progressive, re engage, change means nothing until lab truly represents

    • Redshift

      To be fair, on a national website there is going to be far more hacks than if you spoke to local Labour Party members in your area. 

      Our problem is that we need to mobilise our members in all areas to get out and talk to people all year round

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Barker/1546990341 Paul Barker

    Good piece but labour really isnt in the same boat as its two main rivals. Neither tories nor libdems have massive debts or your apparent inability to spend within your limits. Neither seem split down the middle on where to go next or have so little confidence in their leaders. We will see in 3 weeks whether those polling leads mean anything in the real world.

  • madasafish


    In an increasingly open and transparent world what people value is authenticity and honesty

    Agreed.  And what have they got? A series of MPs of all parties who have cheated on expenses and ALL appear unrepentant..  A series of funding scandals – both Labour and Tory – which show politicians at their worst.

    And a series of politicians cynically lying and getting away with it.. See: well the list is just too long. Iraq, repatriating criminals and university fees cover all main parties.. just for starters.

    The sad thing is: politicians themselves attack each other on the above – and then take great care to ensure they themselves are free to do likewise.

    And their choice of candidates: Oxbridge, Spads etc just show they are out of touch.

    Fertile ground for a clever demagogue . Not G Galloway as he has no widespread popular appeal but someone like a Moseley.

    I have not mentioned nepotism but …..

    • Daniel Speight

       Jeez! I agree with madasafish. Beam me Scotty.

      • madasafish

        You have seen the light! :-)

    • GuyM

      Agreed with all of those comments.

      I do believe though we get the politicians we deserve, so I can’t see anything changing.

  • Redshift

    Our problem is basically that too many local parties still only campaign at election time – where inevitably it is and should be election-focused campaigning. When local parties campaign all year round, they find local issues that they can translate into interim campaigns during the rest of the year. 
    You can then petition people for example on the doorstep and simply pick up the Voter ID whilst you’re at it. You then talk to other local organisations about whatever issue you’re campaigning on, go along to their meetings to talk about it, etc

    So it is rather simple in the way, establish regular campaigning all-year round and community engagement becomes a natural outcome. 

    The net effect of the above will be higher membership, more candidates for elected representatives – probably far better MPs as well to be perfectly honest.All that said, I don’t think barring MPs from standing would have been a bad move had they done it initially. It is only changing their mind that is problematic. Barring them on the basis that they have been honoured to serve their constituents and shouldn’t walk away for a better paid job is perfectly reasonable – this is politics and our role is to promote social justice, not climb a corporate ladder.

    • GuyM

      I don’t think in 2012 with membership and more importantly activist numbers any political party is going to be able to manage much more than token campaigning outside of major election periods.

      Life has moved on and I suspect 99% plus of the population has many more enjoyable things to do in life than political canvassing and the like.

Latest

  • Featured Why are the Tories putting a price on loving commitment?

    Why are the Tories putting a price on loving commitment?

    So here we are again. Gay Marriage. Civil Partnerships. And a Tory rebellion. Except this time it’s different. Tim Loughton’s amendment calling for Civil Partnerships to be extended to heterosexual couples is being branded a “wrecking amendment” and could – bizarrely – see anti-gay rights Tories like David Jones voting the same way as staunch defenders of equal rights on the Labour benches. The argument being put forward by the Tory leadership is that granting such rights would delay the [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured We must challenge the biggest welfare myth of all

    We must challenge the biggest welfare myth of all

    Who can forget Gordon Brown’s meeting with Gillian Duffy? Nothing has come close in recent years to symbolising the disconnect between the Westminster bubble and the working class. As someone who had to endure every painful minute of Duffygate it’s a lesson I’ll never forget. Mrs Duffy’s memorable intervention on the campaign trail means it’s now widely accepted in our party that calling someone racist simply for raising concerns about immigration putting pressure on public services or pushing down wages [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment The culture of high risk credit is being exploited by betting shops

    The culture of high risk credit is being exploited by betting shops

    Since the financial crisis, the perfect storm of recession and banks restricting access to credit has led to the rise of payday lenders. Our high streets are slowly deteriorating from the vibrant, diverse places they once were into an abyss of pawnbrokers, payday loan shops and bookies. The three feed off of each other, targeting some of our most deprived areas and perpetuating a cycle of despair driven by the need for extra income. Research carried out by Geofutures found [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Should people be asked if they are party supporters when they register to vote?

    Should people be asked if they are party supporters when they register to vote?

    Chris Clark and Rav Seeruthun on a small change that if adopted, would free activists to spend more time on community work Every year at party conferences we hear professional politicians eulogise hard-working party volunteers. And there’s no activity more often evoked than that of ‘knocking on doors’. It’s a common delusion that the purpose of doorstep canvassing is to ‘persuade’ voters. Having taken part in our fair share of Labour canvassing sessions, we’ve both had the dispiriting experience of [...]

    Read more →
  • Europe Featured You can always rely on the Conservatives to ignore the public when it comes to Europe

    You can always rely on the Conservatives to ignore the public when it comes to Europe

    Europe is not often the issue which comes top of people’s concerns on the doorstep. Nor do opinion polls suggest that Europe is a priority for voters when compared to issues like the economy or jobs. But you can always rely on the Conservatives to ignore the public when it comes to Europe. This week saw over a hundred Conservative MPs rebel and vote against their own Queens Speech. They were angry that it hadn’t included a bill which would [...]

    Read more →