NPF - could it ever embarass?

Free Radical Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 01:09:28 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

Does anybody here (including those standing for election to the NEC) believe that a National Policy Forum could ever produce policies with which the party leadership is not comfortable?




Whilst it is obviously not the aim of a democratic organisation to produce policies that would embarass the leadership of that organisation, it is the business of a democratic organisation to give effect to the views of the members.

Conference used to produce policy in this party. Much of it was embraced by all, but some was contentious and some was not liked by the leadership of the day. Surely this is a healthy situation in a democratic body?

Does anyone think that the new NPF system is inherently capable of producing policy with which the party leadership would be uncomfortable?



tags: , , , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
NPF - could it ever embarass? | 7 comments (7 topical)

Re: NPF - could it ever embarass? (#1)

by e10rifles on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 02:37:26 PM GMT

Of course not.

Instead of straightforward votes on a position and its amendments, we have a murky business whereby issues are "discussed" if NPF reps want to discuss them, leading somehow to a policy paper. Amendments to this can be discussed but are not voted on, so whoever has a majority on the NPF (which, because of how it is made up, will always be the leadership) can get exactly what they want through.


Re: NPF - could it ever embarass? (#2)

by GuardianReader on Wed Jun 25, 2008 at 10:20:02 PM GMT

You have short memories. The Warwick Agreement, where the unions wrung a deal out of Labour for the 2005 manifesto, in return for union support, was the culmination of the last cycle of the National Policy Forum. Nearly 90% of Warwick has been agreed, including a deal on Temporary and Agency Workers, which was unexpected.

The word is that the unions want equal pay audits for all companies written into the next manifesto, and they will fight for it at the final NPF meeting at the end of July. I suspect they'll get it, too, despite Harman's inability to get cabinet agreement.

So yes, the NPF has the ability to embarrass.

And before you all comment that only 90% of Warwick has been delivered, take a look at the detail here: http://www.amicustheunion.org/default.aspx?page=2824. Ambitious stuff that the party would never have signed up to if it hadn't needed the unions in 2005.

A tiny part of it remains to be delivered. But I think it's a very impressive shopping list and I expect to see another impressive list come out of the July NPF, particularly because the party needs the unions even more.

Some leaders are born women

Re: NPF - could it ever embarass? (#3)

by e10rifles on Thu Jun 26, 2008 at 11:03:30 AM GMT

"Nearly 90% of Warwick has been agreed, including a deal on Temporary and Agency Workers, which was unexpected."

The deal on Temporary and Agency Workers does not meet the aspirations of the union members who pushed for it to be tabled. It is watered down so far it's almost useless.


[ Parent ]

Re: NPF - could it ever embarass? (#4)

by wgm on Fri Jun 27, 2008 at 06:25:10 PM GMT

Conference might have been great for those who enjoyed embarassing the Party leadership with grandstanding resolutions composited in smoke filled rooms, but did it produce any intelligent policy that could actually be useful?

Not saying the NPF process is perfect - hundreds of amendments with little time to make sense of it all - but sometimes good ideas and good policy comes from the detail of an individual contribution or local discussion rather than the policy platform of a group or faction.


Re: NPF - could it ever embarass? (#5)

by e10rifles on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 06:48:09 PM GMT

Load of rubbish. Either the policy of the party is democratically voted on at Conference or we are not a democratic party.

 


[ Parent ]

Re: NPF - could it ever embarass? (#6)

by e10rifles on Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 06:50:12 PM GMT

Oh and well done on all the meaningless right-wing cliches: "grandstanding resolutions", "smoke filled rooms".

Our policy from a hundred years ago until last year was determined this way. Maybe you don't agree with anything Labour did before 2007?

 


[ Parent ]

Re: NPF - could it ever embarass? (#7)

by wgm on Tue Jul 01, 2008 at 03:56:04 PM GMT

OK, so in saying that there might be a better way to write policy - and manifestos - than having a "for or against" vote once a year in a big hall makes me right-wing - God forbid there's a debate! 

Yes, there is plenty Labour did before 2007 that was great - NHS, Open University, equal rights, employment rights and so on - but defeats of "the Leadership" on the conference floor were usually ignored. How many members could say that their proposal ended up being voted on at Conference?


[ Parent ]

NPF - could it ever embarass? | 7 comments (7 topical)