Voting win for Labour grassroots

[Big Daz]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8282449.stm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A move to give grassroots Labour members more control over the party's policy-making has been successful.

Nearly 67% of delegates backed changes to allow every member to vote on who sits on the National Policy Forum.

The move - which could lead to pressure for more left-wing policies - was opposed by the party leadership.

Conference chair Cath Speight had said it was not the time for "piecemeal" changes to party structures and efforts should be focused on the election.

But campaigners had insisted it would not spark a return to the "bad old days of internal strife" and would increase democracy inside the party, arguing the old process gave the party leadership too much control.

Labour's annual conference in Brighton voted on the "one member one vote" move on Wednesday and the results were announced on Thursday morning.

At the moment 55 members - more than a quarter of the forum which will meet ahead of the next election to decide the party's manifesto - are drawn from constituency Labour parties.

'Dynamism'

They have been chosen at the annual conference by the conference floor so the party hierarchy has some control over who gets appointed. It also meant the 20% of party branches which do not send delegates to conference do not get a say.

Eleven constituency Labour parties called for a postal ballot with every member taking part and the unions had said they would not use their block votes against it.

Such a change could lead to more left-wing members of the party being elected to the forum.

The party's ruling National Executive Committee urged delegates on Wednesday to reject the changes, arguing it was not opposed in principle but would examine them as part of a wider review of internal democracy next year.

But Islington North delegate Cat Smith told the conference that the old system was leaving a lot of ordinary members disenfranchised.

Ann Black, a member of Labour's National Executive Committee, told a Campaign for Labour Party Democracy news sheet: "The change would not take the party back to the bad old days of internal strife, as some have suggested.

"That has not happened on the NEC, where I and my colleagues are elected by one-member-one vote, nor in Scotland, where their successful policy forum is already elected through an all-member ballot."

[BELIAL]

Yep, dead in the water,too many bridges burnt.
Might have seemed like a triumph to some,but denying the mass of people political representation will bear consequences

[Tman]

(Oh i still want representation and not Government!)

Totally meaningless. If it were possible to have "representation" without "government", who would the "representation" be to? The Monarchy? The Lord of the Manor?

The Sun says, "RMC poster wants return to Feudalism". Although there's probably quite a few Tories who would be happy to go along with that.

[CourtneyCox]

(Oh i still want representation and not Government!)

Totally meaningless. If it were possible to have "representation" without "government", who would the "representation" be to? The Monarchy? The Lord of the Manor?

The Sun says, "RMC poster wants return to Feudalism". Although there's probably quite a few Tories who would be happy to go along with that.

1/10

The cut and paste king strikes again.

You should check out your political theory as I don't think its feudalism he is promoting but Modern Anarchy in a Political sense- hopefully without the violence.

[Tman]

You should check out your political theory as I don't think its feudalism he is promo

It was irony, but carry on............

but Modern Anarchy in a Political sense- hopefully without the violence.

Oh, "Modern Anarchy in a Political Sense" eh? A concept that ought to get the voters flocking to the polling booths everywhere, without a doubt.. (That was irony too.. )

{I swear this RMC list exists in some parallel universe to the "usual" one; either that or RM has addled the brains of too many of it's workforce}

[CourtneyCox]

Now you can't even cut and paste properly - but then when you think its acceptable to call people addled in a debate I can't expect much else.

Ah well my first Foe (but your the subject of loads of those on here), and before you say that's hardly the aim of an open debate, I would prefer to debate multiculturalism with a BNP member, or tolerance with an Al-Qa'ida supporter as long as they actually did debate rather than name call or decry my input just because they don't agree with it.

[dvbuk55]

Oh, "Modern Anarchy in a Political Sense" eh? A concept that ought to get the voters flocking to the polling booths everywhere, without a doubt.. (That was irony too.. )

Too damn right - I'm on my way - errr - what exactly is Modern Anarchy in a Political Sense - is it a good thing or a bad thing I wonder - anyway it sounds impressive, is Screaming Lord Sutch involved by any chance?

[Thorby Bislam]

I doubt it. He died in 1999. Saw one of his gigs a couple years previously.

[dvbuk55]

I doubt it. He died in 1999. Saw one of his gigs a couple years previously.

I knew he was dead but thanks for putting a date to it - I think he would support it though

[IWW Fellow Worker]

Far too little and far too late! Blair and Brown have cut the last link with the working person / people! They are so crushed as a party working for US and yet some saps dont even notice! Still they will when the wolves waiting in the wings to take POWER do! We are are all gonna pay then, cause the CONS have had years to think of new ways to RULE over us and give their mates in the city OUR cash! Oh well that is party POLITICS for you. (Oh i still want representation and not Government!)

Some people can't live without Whitehall telling them what to do, a Government ruling for them, a police force ordering their lives for them and bosses telling them what to think. These people are the ones who criticise any idea of real democracy which is what you advocate.

[Fred B]

Far too little and far too late! Blair and Brown have cut the last link with the working person / people! They are so crushed as a party working for US and yet some saps dont even notice! Still they will when the wolves waiting in the wings to take POWER do! We are are all gonna pay then, cause the CONS have had years to think of new ways to RULE over us and give their mates in the city OUR cash! Oh well that is party POLITICS for you. (Oh i still want representation and not Government!)

Some people can't live without Whitehall telling them what to do, a Government ruling for them, a police force ordering their lives for them and bosses telling them what to think. These people are the ones who criticise any idea of real democracy which is what you advocate.

Mainly Sun readers and the like.

[Tman]

Too damn right - I'm on my way - errr - what exactly is Modern Anarchy in a Political Sense - is it a good thing or a bad thing I wonder - anyway it sounds impressive, is Screaming Lord Sutch involved by any chance?

Might have been a good thing, if he had have been. At least that way, the advocates of "Modern Anarchy in a Political Sense"
might have had a chance (however small) of being elected.

Trouble is though, being Anarchists, having been elected would they then have to kill themselves? Or maybe worse, they'd have to accept that they'd compromised their principles by having agreed to the governmental system which had elected them?

Those Modern Anarchists don't have it easy.....

[axeman]

Just imagine tman if lil ad was inteligent enough he could become a politician and you could vote for him ! he could also become you spiritual leader

[dvbuk55]

Just imagine tman if lil ad was inteligent enough he could become a politician and you could vote for him ! he could also become you spiritual leader

Well he definitely gets my vote - what are we voting for?

[Tman]

I have also said that spoiling a ballot paper is a fantastic first step in doing that.

Clearly the gateway to that parallel universe is in Bognor.

{Or Links does a nice line in hyperbole}

Now which might it be..