2008 Conference dates changed

Peter Kenyon Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 09:23:44 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

Yesterday's Labour Party National Executive Committee voted 20 - 4 to change the dates of its 2008 Annual Conference without consultation. No prizes for guessing who voted against this move - yes, the four sitting members of the Centre Left Grassroots Alliance - Ann Black, Christine Shawcroft, Pete Willsman and Walter Wolfgang. (Details of the six candidates standing in the 2008 NEC elections can be found here.)




The proposal is that Conference runs from Saturday 20 September and finishes on Wednesday 24 September, instead of Sunday 21 to Thursday 25.

CLPs were notified of the original dates by post only last week. Obviously money is no object.

For dedicated followers of slates - Peter Wheeler and Ellie Reeves of Labour First voted in favour of the Head Office move without consultation. Peter W raised objections. But it's the vote that counts.

For those inclined to think it's only a day, what's the fuss? Apart from the principle, consider the implications for any CLP delegate taking their role seriously with business to be undertaken with the Conference Arrangements Committee - they will have to be in Manchester on the Friday - cutting into two working weeks. No problem if you are a full-time union official, or career politician. But a real issue if you are a volunteer in work. So much for extending and renewing party democracy, to coin a phrase.



tags: , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
2008 Conference dates changed | 27 comments (27 topical)

Re: Conference dates changed - no consultation (#1)

by Wiseman on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 10:06:05 AM GMT

I have to agree with you on this point Peter, but would have to say,  that if we as had a left, being doing this for a while with moderates, maybe the party would sit up and listen.  Consistency is the key point here.  Access to the coneference is key for members especially for the shared experience and democracy, although last year this was taken away from us.

John


Re: Conference dates changed - no consultation (#7)

by Val29 on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 10:00:23 PM GMT

Wisman, how is the campaign going? You can still count on my support


[ Parent ]

Re: Conference dates changed - no consultation (#14)

by Wiseman on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 01:12:05 PM GMT

Nominations have started to come in.  I am still consulting with grassroots and mainstream colleagues.  The sense is we are at a turning point for the role of the NEC and how much accoutability is needed.

Wiseman


[ Parent ]

Re: Conference dates changed - no consultation (#2)

by HenryG on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 10:28:04 AM GMT

Peter I don't understand what the problem is. There was a consultation - a vote at the NEC. What do you expect...a postal ballot of members? This is what we elect our NEC for.

It's the 1st February. Delegates have nearly 8 months notice to let their employer know what days they would like off. The conspiratorial stuff about this helping careerists is all a bit silly.  

And what a bizarre call to vote for the left slate off the back of this - 'Vote-Christine-Shawcroft-because-she-doesn't-want-the-conference-date-to-change-when-everyone-else- does'. It's not exactly 'Land and Freedom'. I can't help but feel that threads like this do not do the CLGA slate any favours Peter.


Re: Conference dates changed - no consultation (#3)

by rwendland on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 11:41:55 AM GMT

OTOH visitor pass booking is already open, so if you've already booked one day for Thursday 25 September? In fact I see you can still book for the Thursday now!

It is rather late to change now, after you are already accepting bookings. And I guess many delegates will now want/have to travel on the Friday, which some employers might not like.  

 


[ Parent ]

Re: Conference dates changed - no consultation (#4)

by grimupnorth on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 05:14:37 PM GMT

The  problem is that many people have already ( sad though it sounds) booked  provisional accommodation en bloc and will now have to negotiate with hoteliers to either  knock off a day or get an extra  one.......Manchester hotels were more or less all booked up four  months ago.  I know because i was tasked with doing it..... and we've already committed to a set number of days.....This  will deter yet more ordinary members from joining  in   and, of course, stops us organising beforehand. It is frankly  a disgrace...why don't they just abolish Conference altogether one wonders.


[ Parent ]

Re: Conference dates changed - no consultation (#9)

by andycharlwood on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 11:50:19 PM GMT

What HenryG said. We want Bread but we want a conference that begins on Sunday too!


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#5)

by rwendland on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 06:38:17 PM GMT

Anyone know what the reason for the change is?


Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#6)

by repub on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 08:04:21 PM GMT

Many organisations hold their fringe on the same day of conference every year...will this throw things out of kilter? Or will many keep the same day as they've already booked?

And yes, we haven't heard WHY the dates have been changed...


Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#8)

by Rathfelder on Fri Feb 01, 2008 at 11:04:38 PM GMT

I don't think this is a big deal.  For most people it actually means one less day off work.  And nobody organises fringe meetings on the Thursday.  It might upset the Christian Socialists because I suppose we will all have to be in conference instead of in church on Sunday morning.

There are more important things to worry about.


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#15)

by alsoleeds on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 02:34:20 PM GMT

What about observant Jews. Conference on a saturday will cause a problem for them. Maybe that's why Walter Wolfgang voted against ;-).


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#16)

by ChrisRoberts on Sun Feb 03, 2008 at 09:11:38 PM GMT

We are a secular political party! Religion should not be factor in these things. If we are going to bring religions factors into these deliberations perhaps the NEC should have moved it forward a day and start Conference on Monday so as not to offend Christians by doing politics on a Sunday. God give me strength.


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#20)

by Curlew on Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 10:11:14 PM GMT

Chris Roberts said :- God give me strength.

;-)


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#10)

by NorthernMonkey on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 03:33:25 AM GMT

To be honest, it's better that the weekend is fully utilised to allow working people the maximum time to attend conference.

It would be better if the party bigwigs like Brown, Harman etc. actually gave their big speeches on the weekend when most of the population can actually watch it.


Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#11)

by Curlew on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 08:52:49 AM GMT

I think it's better - as an ordinary member who has to work, I'd really prefer a Fri to Tue conference as I could just make it a long weekend off work and probably skip the last day. Certainly Sun to Thu meant almost a whole week off work which really cuts into your holiday allowance.

Agreed it should've been sorted before advertising though :-(


Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#12)

by ChrisRoberts on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 10:43:34 AM GMT

I actually think this a great idea. It allows people like me, who work in education and are unable to get time off work outside term time, to attend Conference for two full days. Having previously attended just on Sunday's  you don't really feel the full fun of conference as thngs are still getting going.

Thumbs up from me to the NEC!

If Peter Kenyon thinks the CLGA opposition to this is a reason to vote for them, me thinks their oppostion might be a reason to NOT vote for their slate, and insetad vote for those who support access to conference for all members and not just the activists classes?


Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#13)

by rwendland on Sat Feb 02, 2008 at 11:47:06 AM GMT

To be fair to Peter & the CLGA, I think they voted against a change so late and without widesperead consulation, after bookings were already being taken. I doubt the CLGA would be against it if the known consensus of members were for it.


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#17)

by Just Labour on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 08:43:05 AM GMT

Storm...teacup...


Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#18)

by bigpapi on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 01:14:28 PM GMT

I accept that the change of dates may pose a problem for some delegates/visitors travelling a long-distance, but to make this a reason to vote for the CLGA bloc on the NEC is ridiculous - you complain about the postage costs of mailing people last week - what would you propose: by-passing the NEC (which, if so, becomes an irrelevant waste of money) and having an OMOV ballot of all members which would cost a heck of a lot more? 

You have just further persuaded me why I shouldn't vote for the CLGA slate - thanks I needed that!


Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#19)

by Val29 on Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 10:55:56 PM GMT

well as people will know I'm supporting Wiseman in the NEC elections, and I've congratulated Peter Kenyon for bringing some much needed democracy to the GRA faction(and we assume willsman, shawcroft et al aren't pro GRA democracy as they weren't put on the slate democratically), however, i think Peter is wrong on this one - this means people like me will probably be able to come to Conference this year so I'm actually quite pleased if Peter Kenyon's report is true.


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#21)

by peterwheeler on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 12:53:56 PM GMT

Dear Peter,

 

Just noticed the report of the NEC meeting on Thursday.

 

You are right that I spoke strongly against the way this decision was being done. There is too much decision making on the hoof and the danger of this approach is that it leads to ill considered decisions.

 

There are however advantages in the proposal to bring Conference forward by a day – the principle one being that it allows us to have an extra Conference session, thus allowing more participation by delegates in the working of Conference. As one of the major complaints about Conference is that there is not enough participation by delegates from the floor, it struck me as crassy to vote against this. Sometimes you have to think on your feet!

 

Peter Wheeler


Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#22)

by PGKenyon on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 01:09:29 PM GMT

Dear Peter

If this proposal had been brought forward with regard to Conference 2010, then everyone could have been given an opportunity to give it proper consideration.

The Party's current NEC has an unfortunate track-record of allowing itself to be 'bounced' into taking decisions by the Party leadership.

In my role as a chair of a whatever tyoe of organisation, I have a simple rule - no papers are allowed on the agenda unless they have been through the organisation's due processes, unless there is an over-riding operational reqirement demanding a prompt decision arising from circumstances in which no notice could have been given.

If you can provide chapter and verse to meet those tests in this instance, I'll reconsider my position and risk having to criticise the decisions of my colleagues on the CLGA slate.

Over to you.


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#23)

by PGKenyon on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 01:42:39 PM GMT

Dear Peter

Please accept my apologies, the change you agreed to referred to Conference 2008. My challenge applies to Conference 2009, not 2010 as set out in Comment 22.


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#24)

by bigpapi on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 09:51:39 PM GMT

Nobody criticising this decision has yet explained what the purpose of the NEC is if it is not able to make any decision without widespread consultation first.

It is this outdated, the rules are some kind of Holy Orders, attitude that is so damaging to the Party in the real world. 

Mr Kenyon, come to Stoke - we're trying to fight the BNP not each other!


Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#25)

by Peter Kenyon on Wed Feb 06, 2008 at 10:52:31 PM GMT

Dear bagpapi

Happy to come to Stoke. Let me know when I could combine campaigning with talking to members about rebuilding the Party.

Sorry you see debate about governance as in-fighting. Have you have read the LabOUR Commission Interim Report available at:

http://www.labourcommission.org.uk

We need more members, lots more active members to help win back those 5 million lost voters. You're not telling me Stoke has bucked the 11-year national decline in Labour Party membership, are you?


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#26)

by bigpapi on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 06:59:32 PM GMT

I'm afraid we're rather too busy trying to prevent the BNP from gaining councillors to sit around in meetings discussing the governance of the Party; we leave that to the Local Government Committee.

And no, Stoke has not been immune from the loss of members - but that is down to certain Government policies (particularly Iraq) and, probably more significantly, the failure on our part to actively chase new members - since we began to do this we have seen an upturn in our membership, and in my constituency we have 12 more members than at this stage last year - most of them students from either Staffordshire or Keele Universities.


[ Parent ]

Re: 2008 Conference dates changed (#27)

by Wiseman on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 11:13:02 PM GMT

Good point

Wiseman


2008 Conference dates changed | 27 comments (27 topical)