Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up!

youngLeft Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:58:26 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

The Grassroots Alliance are standing a slate that lacks full democratic legitimacy in this year's NEC elections. As a young and perhaps idealistic member I am outraged at the partisan attacks on a committed democrat and activist who dares challenge this hypocrisy.



The recent discussion around NEC elections has caused me to reconsider whether I am really a member of a "democratic" left in our party.  Call me naive, call me idealistic but I thought we held ourselves to a higher standard. I guess its best I get the hearty dose of cynicism now rather than later in life.

It is simply not goof enough that two of the GRA slate were "approved" - ALL should face a slate ballot . Otherwise the candidacy of Wiseman is just as legitimate as they are. It sickens me to see the sectarian attacks launced against Wiseman. Why is Kenyon asking him to stand down???? Why should he?

If the "democratic" left slate doesn't even hold themselves to our standard of democratic buy in then I say lets vote for Wiseman. Just as legitimate and lacking in the baggage that our so-called "approved" candidates have.

I guess some of us have not been around the party as long as others but I thought this was a genuine attempt to engage all on the left. Instead it looks like a stitch up. I fully respect those members who were subject to a ballot and cannot understand the arcane differences within the GRA that have produced this situation.

Hold a mass meeting. Hold hustings. Hold engagement and get our grassroots engaged. Otherwise stop bullying  Wiseman to step aside and be prepared for a new generation to sidestep this sham democracy and stand up for the real grassroots activists.

tags: , , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! | 15 comments (15 topical)

Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#1)

by NorthernMonkey on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 04:45:12 AM GMT

When are these NEC elections? Hopefully the sooner the better, so we don't have to read anymore of this pointless bickering.

The phrase 'it's like watching ten bald men fighting over a comb' springs to mind.


Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#2)

by repub on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 08:35:54 AM GMT

From one young member to another, this is  my view.

Why are you so bothered about the CLGA slate not being subject to ballot of its members?

The main point of the slate is to get grassroots members on to the NEC, who will challenge the ideas of New Labour. The fact is this requires some discipline, and so the organisations and ordinary members striving for better representation of their political views need to coalesce around a slate and not spread their vote among too many candidates.

Labour First failed on this last time when too many right/centre-right candidates stood. They have learnt and are only backing five.

They have had no democratic process on who they're backing, but they are doing what is necessary.

Us younger members are often accused of being idealistic. I think this holier-than-thou approach of balloting to approve a slate before even the nominations period plays into the sectarian approach of which left group has most members (obviously Compass, who are not gunning for a role in the slate, and then LRC some of who's prominent members are backing Wiseman over the slate), and overlooks the political  need to just get people on to the NEC.

The CLGA is not an organisation, it is an alliance. Save the Labour Party choose to ballot their entire membership on its candidates for the slate, CLPD doesn't. And CLPD members seem to be happy with the arrangement, as it haven't heard of the process being challenged at the Exec or AGM.

And finally, why so much hot air for this particular election (compared to previously), it's not like the NEC asserts control over the party...


Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#4)

by youngLeft on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 01:49:45 PM GMT

I am complaining because I am sick of being forced into a choice between voting for the right wingers and a bunch of candidates who none of us really have much say in choosing.

I am complaining because when an individual does decide to come forward and seek wider grassroots support people in STLP/CLPD demand that the individual steps down.  

I bet there are plenty of hard working committed activists of all generations who have the record to run for this role...to represent ordinary members on the constituency section of the NEC. I for one would like to see more of that and less of the machine politics that have failed us in the past. I don't have a problem with the individuals running per se... it is the arrogance that they are the "official" candidates of the democratic left. And therefore anyone else wishing to run on this platform must get out of their way.


[ Parent ]

Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#3)

by Wiseman on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 12:30:39 PM GMT

These are important NEC elections for the party.  I do take the democracy seriously, some groups with the grassroots are democratic others are not.  I have talked directly to members of the grassroots, some saying there not bothered about me standing.  The process needs to be domocartic.  The alliance has only a part mandate at present I suggest we all get togther next time and chat about it.  In politics you must expect to be sniped at that is just part of the process, you just got to take it and move on.  The about of debate about myself standing has shown that there needs better communication.

Thanks

John Wiseman


Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#5)

by Sudsy on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 02:30:33 PM GMT

I totally agree with what is being said here, and I'm actually relieved I'm not the only one who is thinking these things. I am aghast that there is any group in the Labour Party which claims to legitimately represent the real left, and further who takes it upon themselves to propose an unelected slate. It's shocking that they even use the word 'democracy' when their own practices are decided undemocratic.

I am actually quite angry at Kenyon asking Wiseman to stand down. Why should be? Because he hasn't been anointed by you and your friends? Because he isn't a part of the CLGA clique?

Wiseman's canditure clearly demonstrates that he understands the concerns of the left, and the attacks on democracy that go on in the party.

As I said at the start of my post - thank heavens I'm not alone.


Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#6)

by doctordunc on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 09:15:39 PM GMT

Let's remember that none of the candidates for the NEC have been elected beforehand - it is our job to elect our preferred candidates at this stage.  It has been practice for a number of years now that some candidates stand as a 'slate': both the CLGA ones and the Labour First ones.  Those candidates, in both slates, are completely within their rights to stand as a slate and suggest that people who support them as individuals vote for the other candidates on the slate, in order to maximise the chances of people with those views being represented on the committee.  It has proved very successful for the CLGA in the past.  It is particularly useful as, without this sort of system, we know very little of the politics and approaches of the various candidates for the NEC.

Of course, anybody else is welcome to stand who is not on either slate, and everybody has the right to nominate and vote for whoever they like.

If Peter had TOLD John to stand down, I would feel as you do - but he is quite within his rights to ask him to (with a full explanation of the reasons for the request) just as John is entirely within his rights to remain in the contest.

Although I think there could be useful reforms to the CLGA in future and the possibility to involve more activists in the process, nobody is ever going to be entirely happy with a caucus choosing candidates for an election (unless it was a caucus made up of all the members of the party - which is, of course, the OMOV ballot itself!!)  A slate is useful for those standing - as by the strength of our common endeavour we can achieve more than we can along; and a slate is useful for those of us voting - by a person's friends shall we know them.  None of that is to take away John Wiseman's right to stand as a candidate and on the platform he chooses.

My personal recommendation to those people who are declaring their support for John Wiseman on this thread is that they follow his lead and vote for 5 of the CLGA candidates as well.


[ Parent ]

Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#7)

by doctordunc on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 09:17:22 PM GMT

The first time I've ever tried to quote Blair's "clause 4" and I did a silly typo!


[ Parent ]

Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#8)

by Val29 on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 10:08:36 PM GMT

I think you're missing the point. It is how the slate is put together that is causing many of us problems. If the slate came about through a ballot of supporters - as in the case of STLP - then I think there would be less complaining on these and other blogs. That's why many us are welcoming Wiseman's decision to stand - he has kicked off a debate about how the left organises itself, because the current approach is clearly unsatisfactory.

ps which member of the CLGRA slate would you recommend not voting for if you are voting for Wiseman?


[ Parent ]

Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#10)

by youngLeft on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 12:56:40 AM GMT

Plus are STLP and CLPD the only vehicles one must be in to then be eligible for this? I am sure there are plenty of active party members of our way of thinking who are not members of either. I let mines slide as there comes a point when you have so many things from your Union to a socialist society to say something like Compass to really be acitve or even a paper member. In that case why should those candidates with outstanding records feel frozen out of the "official" left slate???

The message now is that we all must join rather small and inaccessible organisations  on top of the work we do elsewhere just in case we are drafted by our fellow activists to run one day? That's not genuine grassroots that smacks of careerism, profile raising and cliquery!

Wiseman may not have been told to stand down but the implication is clear.


[ Parent ]

Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#9)

by jkitleft on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 10:36:18 PM GMT

The problem with many left-wingers in Labour, is that they seem to focus on 'undemocratic' elements within the party, which is fine, however the focus on real undemocratic policies in other countries is criticised. I have found with many un-pragmatic left-wingers, that if I mention autocracy in other countries, they turn the focus onto someone like George W. Bush, perhaps for rear that calling our democracy, and as so far to western civilisation, superior, can be purported to be 'racist' or 'ignorant'


Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#11)

by MatthewStiles on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 04:49:05 PM GMT

As I remember it the Grassroots Alliance was set up as an alliance of several groups on the centre-left and left of the party.  I understand that the process of selecting candidates for the slate is often difficult partly because there are so many different groups involved in the Grassroots Alliance. Candidates are and have been in the past selected by consensus between the groups. This is done at meetings where representatives of the groups are in attendance. This has been the system adopted ever since the new system of electing NEC reps was adopted (in 1998 perhaps).  It has been fairly successful in that on average the Grassroots Alliance has won half the seats in the CLP section of the NEC.  Indeed, last time it won 4 seats.  This has happened despite various dirty tricks against it.  For example, in his recent book Blair's former spin-doctor Lance Price admitted to campaigning from No 10 against the Grassroots Alliance. 

It is legitimate to ask for a debate on how to select the slate but it is very late in the day to start now.  A debate like that needs a lot of time, several months at least.  

Mr Wiseman is perfectly free to do what he wants and I am sure in many respects he would be a fine candidate.  However, the danger is that as he not very well known in the party, he will probably get just a few votes but possibly enough to deprive someone on the slate of a place. 

In comradeship

Matt 

 


Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#12)

by youngLeft on Wed Jan 30, 2008 at 08:11:15 AM GMT

Probably not well known? And some of the others are??? Some names are there just because they are currently on the NEC as part of the slate but I have no idea how they got there in the first place. Some may not be relevant to all members. How do you judge just what well known is???

I have spoken to several activists in my area and they are familiar with Wiseman. People in our unions know the name and this sort of attitude that favours a self perpetuating bunch of anti democratic hacks has to end.


[ Parent ]

Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#13)

by doctordunc on Thu Jan 31, 2008 at 08:18:25 PM GMT

I would really ask people not to stir up division over this.  John Wiseman is a good candidate and, as I've said elsewhere, I'm minded to vote for him myself, but not as an attack on the Grassroots Alliance which I support - and at least 5 of whom I will vote for.  They are not anti-democratic hacks.


[ Parent ]

Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#14)

by Val29 on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 10:02:56 PM GMT

Well they are because only two of them on that slate are there through democrtatic means (Kenyon and Black)


[ Parent ]

Re: Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! (#15)

by doctordunc on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 09:49:03 PM GMT

Well nobody on the LabourFirst slate are there 'by democratic means'.  Our involvement in this comes in the actual election; at this stage we can choose between candidates (some of whom form slates, others are independent).  Most people seem to mix and match.  There's nothing "undemocratic" about CLGA candidates standing based on a limited process, or Labour First candidates standing based on no process at all.  (I might add, John Wiseman - who at the moment I expect I will vote for alongside 5 of the CLGA slate) is not a candidate 'through democratic means' either - up till now that hasn't been the way candidates for the NEC emerge (other than being nominated by CLPs, which is - of course - democratic).  It does look as though the selection of the CLGA slate will change next year: that's great, but I'm sure these sorts of arguments will still be around.


[ Parent ]

Grassroots Alliance in dodgy NEC stitch up! | 15 comments (15 topical)