Should Labour practice good governance?

Peter Kenyon Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 11:26:26 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

In my capacity as chair of Save the Labour Party I wrote to Dianne Hayter, chair of the Labour Party national executive committee yesterday about the proposed change to the dates for Annual Conference 2008. A decision had been taken in principle on 31 January, but pause for thought was agreed even if it was only amongst a select circle.




The covering letter reads:

This sets out two principled reasons for not proceeding with the proposed change – one concerning governance,the other constitutional. We appreciate there is a risk in such an approach. We are aware there is precedent for such changes. However, the over-riding test is whether the manner in which any NEC decision is taken will help the recruitment and retention of members, or fuel increased cynicism and distrust about how the Party conducts itself.

In the absence of a specific legal code governing the affairs of our Party (which in any event we would not advocate), members rely on the NEC and, in particular, its officers to work to the highest standards of good governance. 

In the light of recent experience, it is difficult to imagine that there is any alternative but to maintaining the status quo pending a thorough review of the options for Party renewal, including the role and format of Conference.
To find out more about the practice of good governance, there's a good primer on Wikipedia.
Obviously my colleagues and I on the STLP committee think it's time for a stand on such matters, or is it that rules are still for little people?

 


tags: , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Should Labour practice good governance? | 4 comments (4 topical)

Re: Should Labour practice good governance? (#1)

by Peter Kenyon on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 10:13:28 AM GMT

Update: 14 February - Dianne Hayter replied to my letter of 12 February. You can read it here:

http://www.savethelabourparty.org/080214_DHayter_reply.pdf

Speed of response is impressive compared with any previous correspondence with a senior Party officer. The content leaves the two principled objections raised by Save the Labour Party to the proposed change to Conference dates unanswered. It also poses another: were the post 31 January consultations extensive as she claims?

Our first aim in the interests of good governance is to ensure ALL NEC constituency representatives get NEC papers in advance of NEC meetings, and the Party Leadership is stopped from laying round proposals, aka 'bouncing through' decisions. 

I hope this move will be supported by all current NEC members from all sections of the Party in the interests of good governance.


Re: Should Labour practice good governance? (#2)

by Ann Black on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 01:30:30 PM GMT

I'm not aware of any systematic consultation of constituencies or ordinary members either before or after 31 January, and some of their representatives only heard the proposals verbally in the meeting ( a full report is at 

 http://www.annblack.com/nec_Jan_2008.htm )

 
My informal consultation via e-mail produced the following, from the first 120 responses:

1a) a good idea for 2008 - 32 people

 

1b) a good idea in future but not this year - 18 people, with many having already arranged accommodation, travel, time off work, domestic cover etc

 


2) a bad idea - 25 people

 


3) mixed / indifferent - 15 people

 


4) can't the NEC find more important things to talk about? - 25 people 

 


In contrast to the letter you received, not one of my correspondents welcomed a longer conference, and several thought it should be shorter, essentially an extended weekend.

Since then I have established that delegates will need to be in Manchester on Friday if they might need to discuss their contemporary issues with the conference arrangements committee, so it will still mean four days off work for them. 

Also, many will imagine that Wednesday afternoon is the new Thursday morning, and leave before the prime minister closes the conference, in order to collect their luggage, reach the station, and get home while trains are still running, and without getting clogged up in rush-hour traffic.






 


[ Parent ]

Re: Should Labour practice good governance? (#3)

by Peter Kenyon on Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 06:04:17 PM GMT

Dear Ann

Thanks for telling it as it was. I am going to eMail all constituency section representatives to see if they had:
1) prior notice
2) requests to consult extensively

When's the Socialist Societies' section representative next up for election?


Re: Should Labour practice good governance? (#4)

by Wiseman on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 05:52:03 PM GMT

Dear Comrades

Lets please concentrate on getting more grassroots candidates elected and not a right winger in another sector.  We are wasting time even though there should be better consultation.

John


Should Labour practice good governance? | 4 comments (4 topical)