Why?
Another day brings another bizarre email piece of muppetry from Compass.
Why are they running a "Labour Leadership Ballot"?
They are not an affiliate so have no nomination rights.
I presume that like all the other campaigning groups within the Party they have supporters of different leadership candidates in their ranks - in Compass' case quite likely all five. What does measuring the support do? Will they be issuing a line to their members demanding they back the winner of this internal ballot?
And why make a big deal of encouraging people to join Compass to take part in this ballot which has not a lot of impact or meaning? ("You have until 6pm today (Thursday 29 July) to become a member in order to take part in these important elections.")
If they wanted to maximise their influence in the party wouldn't they be better off emailing their list recommending people who aren't party members yet join the Labour Party so they can vote in the real leadership ballot not a mickey mouse one?
As Compass may be unfamiliar with the Labour Party website, here's the link: https://secure2.labour.org.uk/join/
I live in hope that someone on planet Compass actually understands that getting involved in the Labour Party and its "actually existing" structures is more important than getting involved in their own think-tank/faction/parallel party.
posted by Luke Akehurst at 11:01 am
4 Comments:
As a public service, I will be aggregating the leadership preferences of everyone who gives me £5, then informing everyone who gave me £5 what the aggregate result was.
11:27 am, July 29, 2010
Very misleading. I fell for it, and was going to join so I could vote for Abbott or Balls for a quid.
Thanks Luke for the tip-off.
12:00 pm, July 29, 2010
It's just a move for greater influence. They want to take advantage of the leadership buzz to increase membership and act like they're figures of real influence in the grassroots.
Slightly misleading, but good strategy nevertheless. Shouldn't the correct response for those in the centre be to do the same with Progress?
3:01 pm, July 29, 2010
The problem with all the special interest groups is that they are just that - I do actually think they provide a useful purpose for generating ideas, and that is partially the fault of the last party reforms which I think we must be honest about - they didn't work. Getting rid of resolutions was fine, but what replaced it turned out to be far too stage managed to mean anything to the average member in terms of enabling them to feel they could have their say . And I should know, I was political education officer of two CLP's and had to try and put them in to practice.
I just wish the party would take that role more seriously, then perhaps we wouldn't need Compass, Progress et al
8:21 pm, July 29, 2010
Post a Comment
<< Home