Posts
Labour Leadership: Changing the Rulebook
On 18th May Calder Valley CLP unanimously passed a resolution calling for the nomination threshhold to be dropped from 12.5% to 7.5%. These are the figures that apply where there is a vacancy. Where there is a challenge the figure is I think 20% and that one is not slated to change.
This doesn't seem like a bad idea. I might be tempted to trade this - or a fixed figure (20?) - for an increase in the number for a hostile challenge when there is no vacancy. However, I do not think this resolution gets to the heart of the problem. The membership and affliated trade unionists numbering 3 million or more can easily be excluded from input by the Westminster professionals numbering around 350. It's not happened before quite like this. Perhaps it will never happen again.
But the system is wrong. Very wrong, even if it provides a contest of sorts. There is a huge conflict of interest for MPs. They rely on the winner for opportunities. I believe all three elements of the party should be able to nominate in case of a vacancy. Anything else is an undemocratic travesty.
Luke Akehurst suggests (as an amusement) a self nomination process confined to those who have not once broken the whip in the current parliament. Not the worst idea Luke's ever had.
3 comments:
You are joking......aren't you??????
Could be! Not about the direction of the STLP/CLPD model resolution though. Changing the level of the PLP hegemony is not the answer on its own. The affiliates and the CLPs must be able to nominate, don't you think? Just changing the % is not getting to the heart of the matter IMO.
On the not breaking the whip thing Luke's joking, I'm joking, but it would hardly be the end of the world for one lefty to play by the book for even a couple of years ... I'd need to see Luke's small print.
Lefties would play by the book if New Labour played the democratic socilaist game instead of rubbishing its people. Notagainst nominations thesholds for unions and CLPs. Anything, beter, frankly than current dstatus quo.
Post a Comment