All the candidates in the recent Labour leadership election emphasised that the party in power lost touch with its grassroots members. While there appears to be a welcome change of attitude among Labour’s higher echelons, it is frustrating that it took a very bad general election defeat to bring this about.
Reforming policymaking procedures is back on the agenda. So how does the Labour leadership propose to engage with ordinary party members? How will their views get a fair hearing in the policymaking arena? In theory, this already happens through the National Policy Forum. However, there has been criticism that some NPF members have been keener to pursue their own agendas or do no more than tell the leadership what it wants to hear.
Some will press for conference motions from constituency parties to have real, serious weight once again. But are these truly representative of the grassroots? Generally, with poorly attended meetings, it may be no more than a few people with their own particular axes to grind who are involved in discussions.
In 1997 election, the Labour into Power document stressed that meetings ought to be “warm, welcoming and inclusive”. In reality, many remain cold, hostile and exclusive.
Local policy forums were one of New Labour’s good ideas. Sadly, in practice, New Labour’s manipulation did not allow them to function properly. However, if they were run properly by a neutral facilitator, they could still have an important role. The facilitator must be a conduit for grassroots members to express their views on party policy and direction in a transparent process.
If it is to run effective policy forums at local level, Labour needs a network of facilitators who are independent-minded and not in hock to any hierarchy. Teacher trainers, for instance, would be well suited. Aspiring career politicians and party officials might not be best placed for this role, as they may be perceived as biased towards the leadership.
Many Labour members probably have experience of attending a party meeting where it appeared the outcome had been decided in advance or where the person in charge of the proceedings stuck far too closely to the party line or their own prejudices. This is precisely the sort of thing Labour needs to get away from.
Some on the left may oppose local policy forums because they are identified with New Labour. Yet, if efficiently and independently run, they could be just as important for expounding left views as discussing those from the right and centre. There is also animosity towards them among traditionalist members, who fear they could undermine their powerbases on executive and general committees. However, local policy forums could be run in tandem with constituency parties.
There is a consensus that rebuilding the Labour Party must include reaching out to former members. Local policy forums could play a key part in that process. If Ed Miliband’s rhetoric is not empty, he will see that local policy forums can be a positive way of ensuring policymaking from the grassroots. But it will also be necessary for the stain on the credibility of local policy forums in recent years to be expunged.
Vic Parks is vice-chair of the National Federation of Progressive Co-operators
