Labour’s gap year

By Stella Creasy MP / @stellacreasy

This is an excerpt from a longer post for the Fabian Society.

At a time when 32,000 people have joined or rejoined the party, some might say Labour is renewing itself. But it will take more than new people alone to breathe new life into Labour. Our member base may be growing, but activism is in long-term decline. For too long our party has relied on the few to be able to function, rather than the many.

We face two related challenges: a culture that inadvertently alienates people and a structure that drains time, energy and effort. If we only seek to adapt or evolve, we risk replicating the difficulties we have, rather than reforming them. To deal with this, we have to change the way we work with each other. Our current structures only deliver one thing consistently: meetings.

These are not set up to maintain any shared intellectual ground; instead they’re focused on the particulars. The repetitive format of agendas, reports, standing orders, compositing and motions can sap the vigour of everyone. And, without a collectively agreed sense of what the Labour movement should stand for, everyone can lay claim to being right. This limits our ability to hold representatives to account. Even the hardiest pilgrim will find it hard to keep the faith if the faith is rarely articulated.

This sense of purpose links us with other progressives throughout history and in every city and every country. Our values are timeless. However, the world in which we live is constantly evolving. That our operational structures would still appear familiar to the founders of the Labour movement should not stop us from asking if they appeal to our contemporary followers.

Labour should introduce a moratorium on all formal meetings for a single calendar year. Instead of branches, policy forums, ECs, LGCs, CLPs and regional conferences, our party would make a commitment to run a programme of activities designed to explore how we can connect with every existing and potential member in Britain.

The Party Chair seems a natural choice to lead a year of reflection on the purpose and rationale of the Labour movement. This could use any number of formats -whether community organising methods or online networks to ensuring every region holds a regional assembly. Using deliberative techniques would ensure these discussions are not hustings, where politicians speak and people listen, but forums in which all voices are welcomed. Think tanks, socialist societies and sister organisations would be asked to contribute, along with other like-minded individuals and organisations

Alongside this year of argument would be a year of action. Each CLP should be encouraged to hold a debate and ballot on what motivates their members. Technology could allow a simple Facebook directory to collate this information and contact points for subjects chosen, helping connect people keen to work on the same concerns. Members could then sign up individually or in a group to an activity that they want to commit to for the year ahead.

Those facing elections in 2011 could choose to organise a group with this as their issue for collective endeavour. Others could choose to lead a programme of community action. Others may decide to spend their time working with local voluntary groups rather than generating their own campaigns.

Alternatively, members could choose to participate on a national level. The directory could also provide a way of networking for new” Friends” groups or growing existing ones. These could reflect a particular type of supporter, such as ‘teachers for Labour’. Or they could be supported through relationships with single issue pressure groups such as Amnesty International or policy themes such as the Labour Campaign for International Development. In turn, these bodies could also register to run a campaign that our members could join. Whether this happens in CLPs, in clusters around issues or in partnership with pressure groups, it should be given room to work to its own rhythm. The party would exercise light-touch supervision, intervening only to remove groups voted as unsuitable or inactive to help keep the directory manageable. Those who instigate groups would be given responsibility to organise how and when they meet, campaign, fundraise and influence policy. All MPs, regional party staff, councillors and candidates would be given training in volunteer management and community organising. They would be encouraged not to set up groups but focus on helping others join them. Regional leadership academies could also run regular meet ups to help participants talk through their projects.

Finally, details of the work that’s being done would be circulated, so that Labour’s actions are echoed throughout the UK. We can’t only learn from what others are doing – we can celebrate and promote their achievements, because we are part of the same progressive movement.

Such a moratorium would no doubt be controversial. The NEC would need to act as guarantor, willing to meet and take on both local and national concerns should an emergency arise. As an incentive for engagement, priority would be given to the policy proposals generated at the party conference and in the manifesto process. In addition, the conference could give over a day to showcase an assembly of participants who could report back on the outcomes.

In over a hundred years, Labour has never taken this many risks with its operational model. Yet no other exercise could bring the same rewards. We have to trust our grassroots to give expression to their progressive instincts to rebuild Labour as an active social force for good in our society. Go back to your constituencies and prepare to organise.

Stella Creasy is the Labour and Co-operative MP for Walthamstow. She has been a Labour member since 1994 and a Branch Secretary, CLP delegate, youth officer and local Councillor. Stella would like to acknowledge the assistance of Rhys Williams with this article.