Refounding Labour – The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

By Mark Ferguson / @markfergusonuk

This morning we showed you the interim Refounding Labour document that has recently been released by the party. Our initial reaction was “Is this it?” – the document seems to be full of bureaucratic speak and short of concrete ideas. In some ways that’s understandable – there are plenty of stakeholders who will want their say before the final document – but since we’re only likely to see that final document weeks (at best) before conference, the are legitimate concerns about the whole process. Essentially, what is it all about?

There are some concrete ideas and plans in this document though. We’ve divided them up into the following sections:

The Good

– Simplifying rules, reducing bureaucracy and less top down control over CLPs. This is really important, and should help remove (some of) the alienation new members feel when they join the party. – Representatives allowed to communicate with each other and those they represent. It sounds obvious, and the kind of thing we should do already – but it isn’t.

The Bad

– The spectre of “registered supporters” voting in the leadership contest has been raised again. Whilst primaries are popular, surveys we have done in the past have suggested Labour members aren’t keen on the idea. We’d like an idea of how many of the submissions supported primaries, and how many supported “registered supporters”.

The Ugly

– Plenty of worthy, but distracting, focus on trade union bureaucracy, and how Labour can work with the unions. With the scale of the task ahead of the party, dictating to unions can’t be our priority.
– Gender balance in the leadership team. 50% cabinet/shadow cabinet representation is a must for the party. But specifying that one of the notional top two in the party must be a woman could be a logistical nightmare. It also suggests that the deputy leader is the second most important person in the party, which hasn’t been the case for some time. Also, why shouldn’t both deputy leader and leader be women…?

Missing in action

– Parachutes and stitch ups. They annoy local party members, they infuriate potential candidates who aren’t anointed by the leaders office, they take up valuable time that should be spent on campaigning. If you’re good enough to be elected, you’ll win a selection. No more parachutes, and open contests only please.
– The central party. Conversations with party activists often turn to the role of the central party, and how they work with local parties. Yet there’s no mention of the role of head office, the nations or the regions. This may be one for the new General Secretary, but surely we need some direction of travel in the final document.
– Funding. The party is poor. We need money. Where is the acknowledgement of that?

It seems strange that the party have only published a 12 page summary when there is a full 30 page report circulating. When that surfaces, it’ll need to be much more impressive than this, if members are to be convinced that this is anything more than tinkering around the edges.