663   21 March  2003  

Historically, it is the radical left that has pioneered modern institutions of “Party”, in marked differentiation from the gentlemanly norms of the 19^th century political life.  “The Party” remains a key institution of contemporary democracy – indeed, no coherent democratic system is imaginable without a coherent and properly-funded system of “party”.  For all socialists, the bonds of Party, and of Party loyalty, are visceral and enduring. 

As part of a new liberal socialist perspective, the Labour Party would however undergo significant constitutional change.  That is because the Party has been hi-jacked by its professionals, the salaried Party officers, its Members of Parliaments, MEPs, Assembly members and Cabinet Councillors, and its Lords and Ladies – that is, the new political salariat.  These now constitute a distinctive political elite whose interests and concerns are diverging disastrously from those of the rank-and-file.  That process has accelerated decisively within the last fifteen years.

A liberal socialist Labour Party would seek to reinvigorate membership participation, by changing the balance of power between the Party and its salaried representatives and managers.  There would be created an effective system of power-sharing, as between rank-and-file Party members and their salaried political representatives.  Party members, as individuals, would re-take control of their Party in the country, while recognising the constraints of modern Government and giving their salaried representatives due room for the manoeuvre, in the conduct of government business.   The "parliamentary parties" would be controlled by the salariat.  This is what such liberal socialist changes would mean. 

Constituency Labour Parties would be free at all times, without centralised constraint, to choose their constituency candidates in all circumstances, and to reselect at will, at every General Election.  There would be no “Party Lists”, no central right of nomination or imposition, even in electoral emergencies: sovereignty would remain with the CLP.  This would open up political opportunities much more widely, and avoid the generation of a salaried cadre who were simply “difficult to remove”. Every salaried MP would know that a new selection could be undertaken at every General Election, without regulatory constraint.

The Party itself would remain a federation of affiliated organisations (CLPs. Trade Unions, and socialist societies), with representatives meeting in annual or special Conference.  But the role of the individual Member would be greatly enhanced.  At Conference, the CLPs would “vote their weight” in terms of individual membership, with a single representative casting all the votes for each CLP.  In the case of other organisations, a different principle would apply: each affiliated organisation would keep a Register of signed-up Labour supporters, and that would determine its weighted vote, excluding any double-counting; for example, a trade union would vote only the numbers of their members who were registered Labour supporters. This would retain a major Conference role for the trade unions, while reducing the overall impact of the "block vote".  In Party polls, all CLP Members would have a single, individual vote; registered supporters would not be entitled to vote, and there would be no collective voting rights.

No salaried representative would be entitled to vote in or speak at any deliberations of the Party, although they would play varying roles in practice, by invitations.  A salaried representative would be automatically disqualified from participation upon the assumption of salaried office.  It would be the function of the salariat to implement the policies of the Party if possible and practicable, and to account to the Party for any failures to implement.  There would be no automaticity in the imposition of “Party policy” upon those in Government, but their accountability for the implementation of Party policy would be a running theme in their reselection as candidates for salaried office.  This would remove from the Constitution an ambiguity which has bedevilled Party politics since the foundation of the Party in 1918.

The NEC of the Party would therefore consist solely of ordinary Members elected by the Conference, without any admixture from the salariat.  The Leaders of the Labour Party (national, regional) would not be chosen by the Party membership (i.e. reversing present arrangements ) but by the relevant salariat, as a matter intimately connected with the exercise of Government power.  This would remove a further ambiguity from the present Constitution: the Party Leader would be chosen by the salariat, and not by the wider body of Party Members or registered supporters.

Much more extensive use would be made of one-member one-vote polls of Party members; if a “Labour supporter” wished to take part in a poll (whether on a policy or any other matter), full Party membership would have to be taken out.  And new rules would be introduced to regulate the right of Party members to requisition a poll. 

Party employees would be debarred from seeking candidature for elective office, and would be required to make their career as managerial employees of the Party: this would reinstate a practice which prevailed until c 1975, and which was sound in principle and in practice.