11 University Labour Clubs threaten to disaffiliate from Labour Students over OMOV

February 20, 2014 12:34 pm

11 University Labour Clubs have written an open letter threatening to disaffiliate from Labour Students over the latter’s refusal to allow a debate at their national conference tomorrow on the use of OMOV. A motion had been submitted by three clubs (York, Salford and Hull) urging Labour Students to adopt OMOV for future elections, but these motions have been ruled out and will not be voted on tomorrow.

vote_ballot.png

The letter is reproduced below:

Dear Labour Students National Committee Officers (the Committee),

We are writing to you to protest your unconstitutional and undemocratic decision to disallow the Labour Clubs of the Universities of York, Salford and Hull from submitting motions to this year’s Labour Students National Conference on the use of One Member One Vote (OMOV) and One Club One Vote in Labour Students elections. If these motions are not allowed time for debate and put to Conference for a democratic vote, we feel that, following Conference, we will have no choice but to consider disaffiliation from Labour Students.

The blocking of these motions is just the latest example of a wider and ongoing reluctance on behalf of the Committee to open up Labour Students and allow it to engage fully with the many young people in Further & Higher Education institutions which are not currently represented in the movement. Reaching these young people is vital if Labour Students is to be an effective campaigning force in winning our key seats and defeating the Tory-led Government in 2015.

The Committee’s stated reason for blocking York, Salford and Hull’s motions, communicated by National Chair Callum Munro to the clubs’ respective Chairs, was that it would be “wrong to go against what was voted for at our last democratic event”. Labour Students National Council voted for a report dismissing OMOV in December 2013.

But by preventing Conference from having its say in the matter, the Committee has denied ordinary Labour Students their right to decide on the future of their organisation.There is no justification for assigning more importance to the views of a past Council than to subsequent democratic events, particularly since Conference is by far the larger event. Indeed, Labour Students’ own constitution says in Section 5 that “The work of the organisation shall be under the discretion of National Conference and National Council”, so giving special status to the decisions of the latter would be entirely arbitrary.

Furthermore, the Committee does not actually have the power to disallow motions from being discussed. Labour Students’ Constitution states in Section 5, part H, that clubs can “submit up to three separate motions for National Council and National Conference”. Nowhere is there a provision for Committee to decide which motions can go forward and which cannot, and to do so is a flagrant violation of the constitution. This behaviour is all the more egregious because it comes at a time when Ed Miliband is reforming the wider Labour Party, pioneering a new politics and casting aside the ghosts of the past.

Some have argued that actually allowing the members of Labour Students to decide who runs Labour Students is a distraction from day-to-day campaigning. But can we inspire young people to fight alongside us for fairness when our own Committee can’t follow the rules? How can we grow our movement when most members in the Million+ Universities have never been introduced to another Labour Student? Far from being a distraction, OMOV or a similar system would allow every member a voice and a stake in Labour Students. And as Arnie Graf’s work has made clear, it is only through recognising and valuing our members on the ground who give up their time to pound the streets each week, that we can motivate a strong and sustainable campaigning team.

The report recommending against OMOV consulted 134 people, just 2% of the 6000-strong membership. It was voted through by approximately 30 people, or 0.5% of the membership. National Committee would like to use this as a justification for shutting down even discussion of the idea that there could be a better way of doing things. But it’s not just those at Conference who’ll suffer because of this decision. It’s the people who aren’t even in the room. It’s the Labour Students at the hundreds of FE and HE institutions who’d be happy to campaign in a marginal seat the other side of the country, but whose potential goes to waste because they have no stake and therefore no involvement in our movement.

Blocking York, Salford and Hull’s motions is arbitrary, it is unconstitutional, it is undemocratic, and it flies in the face of what Ed Miliband is attempting to achieve in his reforms to the Labour Party (which include OMOV), and in wider British politics. We have sought change within the structures of Labour Students but it seems clear that the Committee will not allow this to happen. For these reasons, if the Committee’s decision is not reversed, our clubs will reluctantly be forced to seriously consider disaffiliating from Labour Students after National Conference. We sincerely hope that the Committee will make the right choice, for our movement and for our party.

Yours faithfully,

Caitlin O’Kelly – Chair, University of York Labour Club

Andrew Sproat – Acting Chair, University of Salford Labour Club

Frank Longdon – Chair, University of Hull Labour Club

Freya Govus – Chair, University of Leeds Labour Club

Caroline Hill – Chair, University College London Labour Club

Marc Geddes – Chair, University of Sheffield Labour Club

Daniel Turner & Henry Zeffman, Co-Chairs, University of Oxford Labour Club

Rob Anckorn – Chair, University of Warwick Labour Club

Oliver James-Flatt – Chair, University of the West of England Labour Club

Sam Marner – Chair, Sheffield Hallam University Labour Club

Lauren Gilmour – Chair, University of the West of Scotland Labour Club

Update: Labour Students have responded to this open letter – a Labour Students spokesperson said:

“Following an extensive consultation with members, a vote was held at Labour Students National Council in December which resolved that the voting system should not be changed to OMOV and that this matter would not be considered again until after the next General Election, a decision agreed by 75 per cent of delegates. Labour Students is a democratic organisation, and the Labour Students Steering Committee agreed to uphold the decision of National Council and ruled the submitted motion was not accepted.”

  • RWP

    Whilst we shouldn’t pay TOO much attention to student politics/posturing, it’s disappointing that branches of a party openly committed to democracy are opening themselves up to BEING SEEN TO BE against OMOV.

    Although the associate membership aspects are open to question, this should be implemented ASAP as a mark of progress and then adjusted later.

  • MikeHomfray

    The party is moving towards OMOV. I thought Progress supported that?

    • Graham Day

      LOL. Only when they think they can gain a factional advantage out of it.

      • Doug Smith

        Nail on the head.

  • Timothy Sykes

    Its a troubled situation at the moment, two of the three positions in Labour Students are uncontested. There have been fishy things going on in the only contested full time election as well.

  • Jan K

    I thought that Labour clubs didn’t pay subs and Labour Students funding was from elsewhere? So how can they disaffiliate? LS is just a committee that imposes itself on clubs and claims legitimacy by its vast “membership”.

  • Nick

    Para 2: “many young people…….who” not “many young people….which”. Stop writing pompous letters and learn the basic rules of grammar.

    • Socialismo

      Of course, a typo renders the deep-seated disillusionment null and void. We should cut benefits for people who don’t speak standard English too…

      • treborc1

        That’s me F*cked then, fy iaith gyntaf yn Gymraeg

    • Graham Day

      The “which” clearly refers to the “Further & Higher Education institutions” it follows, not the “young people” in the earlier part of the sentence.

  • Socialismo

    Labour Students needs to be dissolved and reformed with open elections.

    Any other course of action will only exacerbate the problems with an already undemocratic, cliquey and unrepresentative body.

  • SonofBoudica

    Yawn. Why do socialists always bore people to death?

    • Socialismo

      We’re nothing if not humane.

    • treborc1

      Your safe on here they are so boring they have left.

  • Guest

    The only reason the Committee can have for rejecting the motion is that they’re afraid they’ll lose it. If they genuinely believed that the majority of their membership preferred One Club One Vote then why block the motion?

    This is just a further example of Labour Students being a club for the advancement of a small clique. It’s ugly, but worse than that, it is seriously damaging for the Labour cause because there is so much untapped potential in currently ignored young Labour members (and potential members).

    I was put off any form of politics when I was at uni a decade ago for exactly this kind of things. But the letter is great, and hopefully we see more activism from the signatories of the letter.

    As for the Committee Offices – be aware that the future political careers you’re are planning will be damaged by this, and perhaps you should mitigate your losses and allow the motion.

  • Wanzle

    The only reason the Committee can have for rejecting the motion is that they’re afraid they’ll lose it. If they genuinely believed that the majority of their membership preferred One Club One Vote then why block the motion?

    This is just a further example of Labour Students being a club for the advancement of a small clique. It’s ugly, but worse than that, it is seriously damaging for the Labour cause because there is so much untapped potential in currently ignored young Labour members (and potential members).

    I was put off any form of politics when I was at uni a decade ago for exactly this kind of thing. But the letter is great, and hopefully we see more activism from its signatories.

    As for the Committee Officers – be aware that the future political careers you’re planning will be damaged by this, and perhaps you should mitigate your losses and allow the motion.

    • Jan K

      There is always Young Labour or the Young Fabians

  • franknowzad

    Why don’t you have postal votes? Everyone can have as many votes as they like.

    • treborc1

      yep you can have mine

  • Cllr Bally Singh

    Labour students should be our party’s radical conscious not a political career pageant! #goodluck to the omov campaign

    • franknowzad

      With spelling like that you’re certainly not the educational elite.
      Seriously, why are you into student politics? Don’t you like girls or something?

  • FMcGonigal

    OMOV is in keeping with the wider party reforms. It seems bizarre to block it or even block debate.

  • Pingback: Labour Students Split – Vitriolic Infighting Divides Party’s Youth Wing | Matthew Hopkins – The Witchfinder General

  • Pingback: Why did Hull University Labour Club Disaffiliate from Labour Students? | Hull University Labour Club

Latest

  • Featured Talk of a breakaway “Workers’ Party” is dangerous and wrong

    Talk of a breakaway “Workers’ Party” is dangerous and wrong

    On Friday, for the second time in recent weeks, Unite General Secretary Len McCluskey said something really important and dangerous that ought to have caused a reaction across the entire labour movement and Labour Party. But virtually no one reacted. According to the Guardian Len “repeated his warning that his members may force a split from Labour and urge support for a new workers’ party if Miliband fails to set out a radical vision to inspire people before the next […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Jim Murphy has set out an ambitious (and Labour) vision for development

    Jim Murphy has set out an ambitious (and Labour) vision for development

    Since its earliest days Labour has been an internationalist party and proud of it, too. From Keir Hardy and Harold Wilson to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, those who shaped Labour’s vision in the 20th and early 21st Century regarded the fight against poverty overseas as a natural extension of the fight against poverty at home. If Labour wins in 2015, we look forward to our proud tradition continuing. But with the clear focus of the current leadership on the […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Party democracy is important, so let’s fight for it

    Party democracy is important, so let’s fight for it

    Contrary to popular belief (and by popular belief, I mean the belief that prevails amongst the Shadow Cabinet and its apparatchiks) the Labour Party does not exist as a fan club for the Parliamentary faction. The Labour Party is an instrument through which ordinary people can shape their own lives and change the future of this country in a direction that is beneficial to our people. The recent decision by the Labour leadership to vote with the Coalition and implement […]

    Read more →
  • Comment What can Labour offer young people?

    What can Labour offer young people?

    Tony Blair proclaimed in 1997 that his three main priorities in government were ‘education, education, education.’ This has not translated to an increase in votes from young people.  Voter turnout between 1997 and 2005 amongst those aged 18-24 fell from an estimated 54.1% of this age range in 1997, down to 38.2% in 2005.  By contrast, voter turnout amongst those who are aged over 65 has never fallen below 70% since 1964.  As voters aged over 65 are more likely […]

    Read more →
  • News Iraq Inquiry report now expected in 2015

    Iraq Inquiry report now expected in 2015

    Sir John Chilcot’s report into the Iraq War is now not expected to be published until spring 2015, leaving worries for Labour as to how it will affect the election campaign. The Independent reports that “discussions between the inquiry and the Cabinet Office remain deadlocked, and a year-long stand-off is now unlikely to be resolved before the current parliamentary session ends. Even if a deal were reached over the summer recess, legal protocols and procedures would push the Iraq report’s […]

    Read more →