A blog by Luke Akehurst about politics, elections, and the Labour Party - With subtitles for the Hard of Left. Just for the record: all the views expressed here are entirely personal and do not necessarily represent the positions of any organisations I am a member of.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Conference Lessons

Lessons of this for STLP:

a) make sure contemporary resolutions are contemporary

b) the elections for CAC are important ...


Blogger fairdealphil said...

spot on Luke.

The contemporary resolution process is about policy making.

The Leadership will be a matter for the NEC, as and when there is a vacancy...

Did they say 17 leadership resolutions...out of 600-plus clps?

either the other 600 know the rules better than this lot, or it's not the burning issue they claim...

5:42 pm, September 20, 2006

Blogger fairdealphil said...

and btw, the CAC is not controlled the Leader of the Party but elected by rank and file delegates..isn't that a "democratically run membership organisation" they purport to campaign for?

5:55 pm, September 20, 2006

Anonymous Andrea said...

I suppose that if they had reached the conference floor, they would have been defeated by a big margin (he said he'll go within a year, so no point to start a new row now).
So it's almost better for StLP that they were ruled not in order: they can suggest it was just the evil CAC's fault

6:33 pm, September 20, 2006

Anonymous Antonia said...

I'm less happy that the child poverty one you linked to a few months ago and which was submitted by Oxford East CLP has been ruled non-contemporary (even with mentions of Blair SE speech in early Sept) by CAC... any tips?

10:36 am, September 21, 2006

Blogger Luke Akehurst said...

Antonia I agree. Hackney North passed that one too but also passed one on Lebanon which is what was submitted. The Briefing people in our CLP seem to have a good handle on how to ensure contemporary resolutions are contemporary - they correctly said both the poverty and leadership ones would be ruled out (it was them pushing the Lebanon one).

Pete Willsman's advice on the CLPD website is:

" Contemporary motions (CMs) from CLPs/affiliated organisations
The closing date for motions on “contemporary issues” is 15th September. Emergency Resolutions cover an event that occurs after this date. Each CLP can send one CM provided that they have not already submitted a rule amendment in 2006. Head Office usually issues guidance (later August) on writing CMs and the criteria are very tight. CLPs need to ensure that the subject of their motion is not substantively addressed by the NPF/NEC Reports. Usually this means that the CM must relate in some way to something occurring after the end of July. The CM must be on one subject only. When assessing whether a CM is valid, the Conference Arrangements Committee (ie. Standing Orders Committee) will ask, “Could this have been sent to the NPF or NEC for inclusion in their reports?” An issue will be deemed to be contemporary, therefore, if it arises after the publication of the NPF and/or NEC Reports or is not substantively addressed by the NPF/NEC Reports."

Alternatively I guess one could ask Stephen Twigg or another CAC member for a view on a draft before submitting it.

10:57 am, September 21, 2006

Anonymous Andrea said...

"The Briefing people in our CLP "

what do you mean with "Briefing people"? Labour Left Briefing "tendency" people?

1:02 pm, September 21, 2006

Anonymous Dan said...

Phil, I'm confused (geuninely, I'm not just being disputatious). The relevant part of the rulebook [3C2.3 for those that care] doesn't say anything about policy, just about topics not addressed in the NEC or NPF reports or which has come up since the two reports are published. Is there a protocol that says it is about policy making?

The rulebook also says nominations
shall be sought each year prior to the annual session of party conference. Surely motions asking the NEC to get the electoral ball rolling are actually attempting to get the Party complies with its own rules?

Andrea, yes it may well be defeated but that's the point - even that would clear the political air. What we're left with is just a lot of contenders, mostly for the deputy leadership jockeying for visibility. A motion passed by my CLP but not sent as our contemporary resolution referred to Hazel Blears saying that, members were being left as bystanders, which is not what anyone wants.

Luke, which Lebanon one was being pushed? The one I saw blended Lebanon and the leadership and I expected it to be ruled out on the grounds that it confused two issues.

1:14 pm, September 21, 2006

Blogger Luke Akehurst said...

Andrea - yes Labour Left Briefing, several of whose Editorial Board are members of my CLP.

Dan it would have been an LATW model on Lebanon as the same people are in both organisations.

7:17 pm, September 21, 2006

Anonymous Andrea said...

"Andrea - yes Labour Left Briefing, several of whose Editorial Board are members of my CLP."

Thanks, Luke.
I think your CLP is fascinating...it should be picked up for a case study about Labour Party wings.

8:37 pm, September 21, 2006

Blogger Peter Kenyon said...

Child Poverty would be ruled back in by the CAC if it bothered to read the resolution in full. How a speech in September by the PM and its implications could possibly have been refered to the NPF or a Policy Commission is a mystery to me and a growing number of others, apparently.

In the meantime, some suggestions for delegates to find their voice can be seen at:


2:32 am, September 23, 2006


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Free Hit Counters
OfficeDepot Discount