Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party?

HenryG Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 11:48:16 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

In the last two days Deputy Leadership contender Jon Cruddas MP has highlighted the significant decline in Labour membership since 2000.  The newspapers have quote the sensational figure that we've lost a member every 20 minutes since then. Though a little alarmist, I feel that Cruddas is right to talk about the political significance of this and the danger of Labour becoming 'a virtual party'.  



http://politics.guardian.co.uk/deputyleader/story/0,,1978821,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,17129-2519961,00.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/27/npolitics27.xml

The Guardian points out:

'Labour's membership topped 405,000 as Tony Blair came into office, but declined in government from 361,000 in 2000 to 215,000 by 2004. The decline has slowed since then, but membership dropped to 198,000 at the start of 2006.'

"These figures are really alarming. It's time we as a party woke up and realised that we could reach a tipping point soon," Mr Cruddas said.

"We have to drop the 'steady as she goes' attitude. Revitalising the party and rebuilding our ability to win elections all over the country will only come about if we change the way we operate. We have to listen to members more, and we need a culture change so members are more involved. The days when all you needed was a good spin operation are over - we have to get back to local pavement politics."

Jon Cruddas' intervention came on the same day that Labour announced it was using market research firms to identify 100 members of the public to act as a consultative group on Government policies.  The contrast between Cruddas' emphasis on pavement politics and the Blears announcment on focus groups is striking.  But which is the future?  

How we can rebuild our party is something that could involve the ideas and contributions on thousands of members, old and new.  Do we need to modernise structures, look more outwards to our communities and follow the approach of pavement politics?  Or do we need political parties in the same way in the 21st Century?  Can we survive and win elections as a virtual party?  And what has been the role of policies such as Iraq, top-up fees, PFI and certain public service reforms in causing people to leave?

I'm broadly with Cruddas on this, but believe we need to make clear the case for joining Labour and playing an active role.  One excellent initiative called the 1000 Club developed by Peter Wheeler off the NEC is already underway http://www.wheelerswebsite.org.uk/

So what are YOUR thoughts and ideas of how we can rebuild.  Or are the days of mass membership political parties over?


tags: , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? | 19 comments (19 topical)

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#1)

by NeilF on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 12:02:26 PM GMT

Good post HenryG.  I see that Tom Watson has mentioned this on his blog:

http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/archives/2006/12/a_mass_membership.html#more

He says that "Cruddas is right to raise the poor membership rates and to say that it is an issue we need to address. There are a number of things we can do to address it:

  1. Rebalance expenditure from the centre (HQ and Downing Street) to the regions and local parties.
  2. Embed the policy forum process to give members a genuine say. None of this faffing around cancelling meetings when it doesn't fit the diary of the great and the good. Allow local parties to express themselves properly.
  3. Take the views of party leavers seriously. It isn't good enough to say that they've gone because the job is done - they got rid of the Tories.
  4. Reduce not increase membership rates."

In my experience very few leavers explain why they are resigning or not renewing their membership.  I don't know if there's any research on why Labour members leave, but I'm sure that it's not just on ideological grounds.  Perhaps they don't feel involved or their local party has put them off in some way.  

The role of a Labour MP is very important in terms of recruitment for their local CLP, but many CLPs are not that lucky.  Similarly in rural areas there are challenges in engaging people in meetings that may take almost an hour to travel to.  I've come across a number of rural CLPs that have successfully used technology to engage members.  

On the point of are we becoming a virtual party, I think that modern communication methods can lead to a more inclusive party.  The key is whether people feel their views are being heard.


Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#3)

by Andrea on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 12:17:13 PM GMT

"The role of a Labour MP is very important in terms of recruitment for their local CLP, but many CLPs are not that lucky"

Councillors can also play a role in this field. The problem is that some constituencies have been left with a tiny council base (some with no Labour councillors at all)


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#5)

by NeilF on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 12:27:35 PM GMT

Yes Andrea, good point - the role of Labour councillors is very important.  They're becoming the mainstay of many local branches and play a vital role bridging the communities they serve.  There's a cause and effect issue though, a weak activist base will make it harder to elect councillors, which in turn undermines the ongoing support they can provide the party.


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#11)

by nickparrott on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 04:28:39 PM GMT

The point about membership rates is an interesting one - those on reduced rates of £1-5 must have made up a significant part of our membership at one point, and as they were students, pensioners or unemployed there must have been good potential for them to be active. I wonder if that's still the case?

The other thing is that recruitment generally seems to have become less of a priority recently. This is just a perception, but it doesn't seem to get pushed quite so much by the party machinery.


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#2)

by smiley on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 12:08:04 PM GMT

The stats used are a little alarmist - but there has been an alarming drop in membership.  Cruddas is right to raise this an issue, and i thought Blears' comments about rebuilding the party were reassuring, if a little defensive.  

My real worry is that some think reconnecting can come through gimmicks like this panel the party has come up with - market researchers randomly picking a few people to second guess govt policies is not the brighest idea ever.  There arent any short cuts to building a real party in every area of the country.


Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#4)

by NeilF on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 12:23:28 PM GMT

Yep, that's right.  It's going to be hard work and sure we need ideas of substance.  But if we do it right then it will be rewarding.  Campaigning is an end in itself - it engages people and makes politics real for people.  

In her recent report back from the NEC, Ellie Reeves correctly highlights the need to modernise our  canvassing methods beyond 'The 5 Questions' to identify the issues that matter most to people.  This will help us go beyond campaigning for elections around election time and deeper and richer findings of the needs of neighbourhoods could stimulate the pavement politics Jon Cruddas has been talking about.  

I was alerted to an classic book by an American called Saul Alinsky mentioned on Jon Cruddas' blog about community organising:

http://www.joncruddas.org.uk/wordpress/?p=20

I got it before Christmas so will give it a read and see what lessons we can learn.


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#6)

by doctordunc on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 01:52:53 PM GMT

I fear they may not be alarmist.  Looking across local membership figures, I see we no longer push people off when they're months in arrears; there's even a few dead people, and that's just one constituency.  I suspect the real membership numbers are closer to 100,000 than 200,000.  And that's a big worry.


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#7)

by HenryG on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 02:22:52 PM GMT

And of course activists make a much bigger contribution to the election effort than 'passive' members.  I've noticed that it's been the number of active members on the ground that we've lost that's hitting us hard - those who were experienced council agents, would manage the leafletting rounds and help fundraise too.  


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#13)

by nickparrott on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 04:56:58 PM GMT

Me too - I'm one of the few people left in my CLP who has any idea how to run election campaigns in the modern era - all it takes is a couple more people to go, and we literally wouldn't have anyone who could write a leaflet or print off VID sheets.

The rate of decline since 2001 is alarming and I for one am certainly alarmed!


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#12)

by nickparrott on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 04:33:23 PM GMT

Speaking as Secretary and looking at the membership figures month on month, I have to say we've been having a similar experience in my CLP, though it's just a sample of course.

I know some places (in fact Jon Cruddas' own CLP is an example) with a concerted effort have reversed the trend and actually recruited over the last year or two but we've actually reached a dangerous point where we don't have enough activists to sustain basic activities let alone recruit new people. Cruddas is quite right to highlight that there is a tipping point where the lack of active members does become a vicious circle and that we need to use the forthcoming elections as a way to break out of it - but that can only happen if there's a proper debate that pulls people in.


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#8)

by MM on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 02:28:43 PM GMT

Conservatives' success story stalls
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/27/npolitics127.xml

I remember hearing one stat once that went something along the lines of 'the RSPBA having more members than all the political parties in the UK added together' is that true?


Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#14)

by nickparrott on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 05:00:37 PM GMT

Going completely from memory I think that membership of the RSPB is about a million, whereas combined political party membership in the UK is about 600,000.


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#9)

by TimSwift on Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 10:27:48 PM GMT

The poor membership rate is an issue, but I'm afraid I don't agree with the way Jon cruddas has raised it. It's given an element of crisis which is somewhat misleading - the rate of decline has slowed dramatically - and it just gives an opportunity for 'the leadership does not listen' stories which are only half true and just add to the sense of malaise.

The emphasis on bulding throgh grass roots activity is right, but we should not blind ourselves by saying that the problem is just with the leadership.

Many of our local parties are dominated by 'the proceduralist faction' - from the left, good at the rule book (or what they say the rule book says, which is not always the same thing), not much interested in campaigning. And defnitiely not much interested in encouraging new members, particularly if they have joined because they are broadly sympathetic with the Blair / Brown view of Labour.

Add to that decrepit local party structures that may well mean that many people who join the Labour party never hear from the local party and never get the chance to be involved in local activity.

To be fair to Jon Cruddas, I understand that he has led by example and that his constituency is one that has recruited new members and has revised its structures to give people a chance to participate. My challenge for everyone else deploring the drop in membership would be, are you doing the same?


Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#17)

by nickparrott on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 05:41:24 PM GMT

Many of our local parties are dominated by 'the proceduralist faction' - from the left

Whilst recognising this particular problem, it is not at all my experience that proceduralists are uniquely or even primarily on the left of the party.

Also, I don't really see attending meetings as being synonymous with activism, let alone membership.

It's not whole picture nor the only problem, but the leadership's disinclination to allow fair and open debate and make decisions in an inclusive way should not be dismissed and does need to be addressed by this leadership election. I'm glad someone's doing so.

NB I place my flag firmly on the centre ground of the party, and we have done away with almost all rules and bureaucratic procedures in our meetings.


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#10)

by Juvenal on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 09:42:28 AM GMT

Political party membership is on a long term decline, and not just here.  It's a long term problem, rather than the immediate one that Cruddas appears to suggest.  The fact that 150,000 people left us between 2000 and 2004 says two things to me.  One, the main reason for leaving was the invasion of Iraq.  Two, if you haven't left the party by now, I don't think you're likely to (I can't think of anything else we could possibly do to put off the 'occasional' party member!)

Solutions?  Well, there are a couple from the US that we might try.  Registering as a supporter, rather than a full member, and running primaries.  This would allow more people to participate in serious party decisions.


Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#15)

by nickparrott on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 05:32:03 PM GMT

Political party membership is on a long term decline

Yes and no. The Tories had a similarly dramatic period of decline 2000-2004 but since then it's turned around and their overall decline is only about 11,000 since end of year 2001.

The Lib Dems also suffered a pretty serious decline in membership over the period 1995-2001 but have stabilised since then.

It's a long term problem, rather than the immediate one that Cruddas appears to suggest.

Varies place to place but it's looking pretty immediate in my CLP. The steep decline through the second term also suggests that there may have been very specific short-term factors at play as well as any long-term trend in party political memberships.

The fact that 150,000 people left us between 2000 and 2004 says two things to me.  One, the main reason for leaving was the invasion of Iraq.

Well, 33,000 (net) did leave in 2003 but there were bigger falls in preceding years - the biggest single net drop being 50,000 during the year 2000.

The most obvious political factor for that would be the stitch ups over selecting our leader in Wales and our Mayoral candidate in London.

People don't just quit over government policies they don't like, it's the way decisions are made and feeling they don't have a say, or it just isn't their party any more.

As for the war, we certainly had more resignations from my CLP when the military action commenced than at any other point; but we also had one of our busiest period for recruitment with quite a few people joining too. So the net fall was not as great as you might think.

Two, if you haven't left the party by now, I don't think you're likely to (I can't think of anything else we could possibly do to put off the 'occasional' party member!)

That's not actually my experience. Just looking at my own CLP we have had several resignations this year, mainly over health and education policy. People just reached a breaking point, and didn't feel that they could do anything from within the party to change things.

At a national level, the lower net drops in recent years disguise a high turnover - large numbers are still leaving but there has been a bigger central effort to re-recruit lapsers and the like.

It's also worth noting that only c190,000 ballot papers went out for the NEC over summer, which suggests there may be a significant decline on the end of year 2005 declared membership of 198,026.

Registering as a supporter, rather than a full member, and running primaries.  This would allow more people to participate in serious party decisions.

Those just sound like ways of making it even less worthwhile being a party member than it is now.

I don't mind the LSN in principle but having a quick look at the list in my CLP I notice that it's full of obvious spies from other parties, people who aren't on the electoral roll, people who don't even vote in elections, and existing party members.

I'm heavily in favour of becoming more embedded in local communities, with various different forms of public engagement, particularly through our elected representatives, but I am a bit concerned that blurring this with party building will actually make us less likely to do either successfully.


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#16)

by Andrea on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 05:38:51 PM GMT

"It's also worth noting that only c190,000 ballot papers went out for the NEC over summer"

I think the ballot distributed for NEC elections this summer were only 178889


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#18)

by doctordunc on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 06:52:50 PM GMT

And note how many came back...


[ Parent ]

Re: Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? (#19)

by otware on Thu Dec 28, 2006 at 07:54:54 PM GMT

Yes the turnout for the NEC elections was exceedingly distressing.


[ Parent ]

Is Labour Becoming a Virtual Party? | 19 comments (19 topical)