By Jack Ballingham

In a poll published at the beginning of April by Survation, 68% of Labour Party members surveyed said that they believed the Party was “heading in the wrong direction”. With frightening speed, government announcements like cuts to disability welfare and the Winter Fuel Allowance have badly damaged the trust and faith of our membership.

The Survation poll bears this out, showing that the most unpopular cabinet ministers among Party members are those mostly closely associated with these policy announcements. Party members are overwhelmingly (89% of respondents) in favour of a wealth tax, and 64% said the Spring Statement was worse than they had expected.

When this poll was released, it seemed a shock to sections of the Party and commentators. While it is the first piece of hard data that points to the mood of Party members, it is sadly no surprise to grassroots activists. The turn against the government is a new development, but a lack of enthusiasm has been evident in the Party for some time now.

Why, despite the clear ill feeling of members, is this not represented more in our movement?  Beyond a minority (albeit a growing one) of potential PIP cut rebels, MPs are mostly either quiet or supportive of these moves. Many are unlikely to change their minds, especially given the concerns around Parliamentary selections in 2020-2024.

Other Party bodies, such as the National Executive Committee, are also loyal to the government, while the National Policy Forum seems to have gone quiet since elections to that body in 2024. Most members of these bodies are unlikely to revolt, but the current welfare cut proposals have exposed disquiet even there.

Members have traditionally sought to make their views known at the Party’s annual Conference, Labour’s sovereign decision-making body. The Party rulebook describes the Party as being under “the direction and control” of Conference. But despite this, the position of Conference has been undermined in the last few years.

In the run-up to Labour entering government, the preceding several years’ Conferences have voted consistently for nationalisation of public services, against austerity in spending, and for an internationalist foreign policy, in spite of leadership opposition.

The leadership-supporting Labour to Win faction have been the chief pressure on delegates to support those now in government. From 2020 onwards, their candidates have won control of all of the Party’s national committees and structures. This situation is understandable in opposition, when members are reluctant to ‘rock the boat’. But now, disputes over policy are no longer theoretical: they are about what an actually-existing Labour government is doing.

In this context, it is doubly important that members are able to have their views known, through a democratically-run Party conference. Members should be aware that Labour to Win, and their candidates for internal elections, are not in agreement with the membership at large. They do not agree with the 68% who are worried about Labour’s direction, with the 89% who support a wealth tax, or with the 76% who believe the “fiscal rules” should be loosened.

In this context, debate has already been restricted to exclude these viewpoints. The criteria for Conference discussions have been greatly reined in – Conference motions submitted by CLPs must now be “contemporary” (meaning they must be on a subject which has occurred since the General Election). They must also be related to the content of the National Policy Forum’s annual report, not published until the Summer despite the fact the deadline for CLP motions is 11th September. These restrictive and stifling conditions are unprecedented in the history of Labour conferences.

These rules, however, are not written in stone. They have been formulated and enforced by members of our Party’s structures, including on bodies such as the Conference Arrangements Committee (CAC).

The CAC is next elected at this year’s Party conference. Delegates have a clear option in this ballot – candidates who will continue this restrictive atmosphere, or candidates who will fight for the majority view of Labour members to be heard.

I am standing, alongside Jean Crocker, in the CLP section in this election because I believe Labour members must have influence on our government, be able to hold our representatives accountable to the movement, and be able to challenge their decisions when necessary.

All of this must be done in a comradely and inclusive way – open debate is healthy for our movement. Delegates deserve a Conference whose atmosphere allows this, where they feel able and welcome to speak out. Recent practices have not encouraged this atmosphere, and the CAC has a duty to push back against this.

Conference 2025 is an important point in our movement’s history – a crucial chance for Party members to speak up. The only way to ensure this can happen is to support candidates who will fight for it.

Jack Ballingham is a member of Leeds North East CLP.

Image: https://thebluediamondgallery.com/keyboard02/n/nominations.html Attribution Link: Pix4free.org – link to – https://pix4free.org/ Original Author: Nick Youngson – link to – http://www.nyphotographic.com/ Licence: Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported CC BY-SA 3.0 Deed