NEC Results in full

doctordunc Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 06:33:03 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

The full results for the NEC elections can broadly be shown to be good news for the left.  But the headline figures disguise one or two uncomfortable truths, the most pressing being that more than 140,000 party member chose not to participate.



Here are the NEC results in full:

Ann Black 19491 ELECTED
Christine Shawcroft 17974 ELECTED
Pete Willsman 15759 ELECTED
Walter Wolfgang 14129 ELECTED
Peter Wheeler 13961 ELECTED
Ellie Reeves 13850 ELECTED

Mohammed Azam 13435 (GA)
Lorna Fitzsimons 13093
Bill Thomas 12830
Gaye Johnston 12498 (GA)
Helen Jackson 11443
Louise Baldock 11118
Azhar Ali 10493
Philomena Muggins 7982
Naz Sarkar 7303
Mehboob Khan 5567

Ballot papers distributed 178889
Ballot papers received 36316
Spoilt ballot papers 400

I repeat: good news for the left that those party members active enough to participate clearly liked what many of those on the Grassroots Alliance slate had to say.

But what about those who didn't participate?  Despite the various voting methods presented to members, the vast majority chose not to bother.  Clearly some of that inactive majority would be engaged by a leadership contest and we could expect a higher turnout for that.  But what does it really say about the membership of the party?

Is it that people can't see the relevance of the NEC elections?

Is it that the candidates are relatively unknown (you couldn't imagine something similar when it was all about whether it was Livingstone or Mandelson, etc.)

Or is it that a large part of those approximately 180,000 members are little more than paper members?

Any thoughts?  Leaving aside the left/right stuff for a minute, this is presumably a concern that transcends such things.


tags: , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
NEC Results in full | 8 comments (8 topical)

Re: NEC Results in full (#1)

by stuartbruce on Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 07:50:12 PM GMT

I think the two main problems are that most members don't know what the NEC does and that they haven't heard of any of the candidates.

That was the almost universal response that I received when trying to get people to vote. Interestingly some mentioned Walter Wolfgang as the only one they knew and that they didn't want to vote for him.

They still didn't buy my argument that this made it even more important to vote for others if they didn't want him.

The document sent out to members doesn't help as it is far too dull, badly designed and wordy. If it was done in the style of a magazine or tabloid newspaper with interesting profiles and photos of the candidates out working for the Labour Party then it might actually engage with people.


Re: NEC Results in full (#2)

by nicolaheaton on Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 08:45:30 PM GMT

I do think the manifesto booklet is extremely boring and it's hard to make a fully informed decision when the manifestos are so short and prone to say similar things.  It would also help, I suppose, if people knew more about the NEC and saw its relevance.

From my point of view, with the people elected who were elected I'm almost glad there was a low turnout.  I'm not a fan of the grassroots alliance, and though they may have had 4 candidates elected, it would be pretty hard for them to claim to be representing the majority of the membership.  I really hope that the majority of members don't think like them.


Re: NEC Results in full (#3)

by doctordunc on Tue Aug 08, 2006 at 09:59:12 PM GMT


I think that's a shame: I was delighted with the results and wished far more people thought like them!  But there we must agree to differ, I suppose (unless you want to discuss it on another thread).

My feeling isn't so much that people don't know what the NEC does, but that they don't feel their vote makes an awful lot of difference.  There's a disarmingly honest post on Luke Akehurst's blog, where he points out that Grassroots Alliance members of the NEC are never allowed to respond to debates on the NEC's behalf (he thought of this as a good thing). The argument is that they represent a minority on the NEC (which is true) - but they are the majority of that part of the NEC which is elected by party members, and that ought to count for something.  Dennis Skinner and Tony Benn used to be a much smaller minority on the NEC, but nobody would have dared not let them speak at conference!

I think this contributes to the problem (though there's a lot more to it than that, of course).  Another problem is that as well as a lot of people having left the party, there is another whole tranche of people who have disengaged and will allow their membership to lapse, or will get round to cancelling their direct debit at some point.  My worry is that there may be a lot more people in that category than I had previously realised.


[ Parent ]

Re: NEC Results in full (#4)

by bornin84 on Wed Aug 09, 2006 at 01:26:59 AM GMT

I have to say that I think you're wrong when you say that people don't know what the NEC does. A lot of people don't know. Any many of these, along with lots of those that do know what the NEC does, just don't care!

The party (and actually I blame the local party here, the CLPs) don't inform new members about party structure. And new members quickly become old members! But also for many members, party structure and the 'rulebook' just aren't important! They'd be far more interested in discussing issues and changing things, if only people would let them!


[ Parent ]

Re: NEC Results in full (#5)

by doctordunc on Wed Aug 09, 2006 at 01:44:50 PM GMT


Well that's why local parties don't tell people much about rules and structures...  Apart form the occasional freak like me, it would send everyone else running to the hills (all 3 or 4 of them!)

Labour Party members don't get all that much chance to actively participate in the party (even if they go to various regional conferences and national conference - even if they go to policy forums, which are largely expensive PR exercises designed to get people to agree a load of vague inanities) - selecting a parliamentary candidate, or electing a new leader of deputy leader doesn't happen very often.  Participating in the NEC elections is one of the few ways we can alter anything.  The fact that some of those elected are prevented from the public part of the role of an NEC member is (at the least) regrettable, but at least we know that we have helped put voices close to the ear of those who run the party.

I think one reason, then, why the GRA does well (apart from being sensible and right!) is that their members on the NEC do give good reports on what happens.  Most people who read Socialist Campaign Group News, or get hold of GRA members' NEC reports by other means, know exactly what goes on at NEC meetings.

I assume you're confident, then, that turnout for a leadership/deputy leadership election will be something like the reverse of the figures we saw for the NEC?  I hope you're right.


[ Parent ]

Re: NEC Results in full (#6)

by bornin84 on Wed Aug 09, 2006 at 02:29:40 PM GMT

I'm sure turnout will be a lot higher for the leadership election!

Especially as John McDonnell is intent on boosting membership figures to bolster his own compaign!


[ Parent ]

Re: NEC Results in full (#7)

by TimSwift on Tue Aug 15, 2006 at 08:45:54 PM GMT

For me, the most disappointing feature was that every successful candidate was a member of a slate, and that the more independent candidates were squeezed out. Although as a supporter of Louise Baldock, I think it's moderately encouraging that she polled so well when she was not on a slate; is not a former MP; and did not have specific Union backing / endorsement.

As Stuart comments, the lack of engagement is worrying but perhaps not surprising as the literature about the elections seemed design to bore and confuse. It's a real concern that at a time when we are facing a major reorganisation of the party, and key decisions about how we organise our structures to support campaigning in a probably radically different financial situation from previous elections, there appear to be few people on the NEC with direct links to local and effective grass roots campaigning.


Re: NEC Results in full (#8)

by Andrea on Sat Aug 19, 2006 at 05:55:06 AM GMT

"Although as a supporter of Louise Baldock, I think it's moderately encouraging that she polled so well when she was not on a slate;"

was she on a slate in 2004 NEC election?


[ Parent ]

NEC Results in full | 8 comments (8 topical)