FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The “Dogs” of Democracy: Chuka Umunna Versus the Labour Membership

For the Labour Party to be able to represent its hundreds of thousands of members, these members must be able to exert some form of democratic influence over the selection of elected Labour officials. At select times (not now), even Blairites like Chuka Umunna agree with such sentiments.

Thus, during the 2015 Labour leadership election Umunna explained that: “The Labour Party’s greatest strength has always been our commitment to a society that is fairer and freer, more equal and more democratic… Today… that task is … more pressing, than ever.”

Although Umunna’s call for democracy was made within a New Statesmanarticle titled “Why we are endorsing Liz Kendall for the Labour leadership” (26 May 2015), he talked about the need to “lead the charge in transforming the institutions of our country to keep up with evolving realities.” Here he wasn’t referring the Labour Party as such, but to the state. He argued that “Labour must lead the charge in devolving power… to cities and regions, reforming our electoral system and political bodies to reflect the more open and pluralistic country they represent.”

But these ideas should apply just as much to the Labour Party as they do to the state. The Labour Party should lead the charge in transforming its own internal structures to make good on the party’s commitment to democracy. It is correct that the party should devolve more power to local members to hold their local political representatives democratically accountable to ensure that they truly represent the diverse nature of the concerns of ordinary Labour Party members.

Of course, there is nothing more that Umunna and his fellow Blairites who dominate the Parliamentary Labour Party fear more than democratic accountability. This is why in response to rank and file calls for the reintroduction of mandatory reselection (now called open selection), Umunna made the ridiculous demand that Jeremy Corbyn “call off the dogs”!

The dogs that Umunna was referring to were those like the members of the Labour International CLPwho late last year “submitted a Labour Party rule changeto democratise the selection of Labour Candidates for the UK Parliament.” As explained on the web site promoting this “open selection” motion: http://www.openselection.org/

“If it passes, the rule-change motion will mean Labour Party members in Constituency Labour Parties will get to select their Labour Party parliamentary candidates by regular open democratic selection, regardless of whether they are sitting MPs or not. The selections will be by One Member One Vote.”

In promoting such a motion, no one is forcing anyone out of the Labour Party, as adoption of this critical motion will merely mean that parliamentary representatives who do not represent the democratic interests of their local members will be able to be replaced by other Labour members who do. Any existing parliamentary representatives who are replaced through such processes will of course then be freed up to join Labour’s hundreds of thousands of ordinary democratic members in campaigning to get a Labour government elected. And no-one would stop such individuals from attempting to seek other leadership positions within the Labour Party.

On Sunday the Blairite fears of democracy led to a destructive headline in the Observernewspaper (September 9) which read “Labour MPs in fresh challenge to Corbyn over purge fears.” The implication being that the introduction of democratic processes like open selection represented a purge, not democratic accountability. “It is time for Jeremy to show some leadership by making it clear he will not support measures to deselect Labour MPs,” demanded Angela Smith, the Blairite MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge.

After today’s House of Commons debate on this divisive issue about the Blairites longstanding opposition to democracy, the Guardian (September 10) with no sense of irony referred to the Blairite chair of the Parliamentary Labour Party, John Cryer, as warning that the reintroduction of open selection would be deeply divisive. Although the article was at least able to acknowledge how “Corbyn, a longtime champion of party democracy, believes it is not for the leadership to interfere in the affairs of grassroots Labour parties.”

Quite right! Internal Labour Party democracy should be the remit of Labour Party members, and why shouldn’t these members get to decide which one of their many capable socialist members represents them?

 

More articles by:

Michael Barker is the author of Under the Mask of Philanthropy (2017).

Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
Jonathan Cook
Palestine: The Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear up the Rules-Based International Order
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Chickenhawks Have Finally Come Back Home to Roost!
David Rosen
As the Capitalist World Turns: From Empire to Imperialism to Globalization?
Jonah Raskin
Green Capitalism Rears Its Head at Global Climate Action Summit
James Munson
On Climate, the Centrists are the Deplorables
Robert Hunziker
Is Paris 2015 Already Underwater?
Arshad Khan
Will Their Ever be Justice for Rohingya Muslims?
Jill Richardson
Why Women Don’t Report Sexual Assault
Dave Clennon
A Victory for Historical Accuracy and the Peace Movement: Not One Emmy for Ken Burns and “The Vietnam War”
W. T. Whitney
US Harasses Cuba Amid Mysterious Circumstances
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
Things That Make Sports Fans Uncomfortable
George Capaccio
Iran: “Snapping Back” Sanctions and the Threat of War
Kenneth Surin
Brexit is Coming, But Which Will It Be?
Louis Proyect
Moore’s “Fahrenheit 11/9”: Entertaining Film, Crappy Politics
Ramzy Baroud
Why Israel Demolishes: Khan Al-Ahmar as Representation of Greater Genocide
Ben Dangl
The Zapatistas’ Dignified Rage: Revolutionary Theories and Anticapitalist Dreams of Subcommandante Marcos
Ron Jacobs
Faith, Madness, or Death
Bill Glahn
Crime Comes Knocking
Terry Heaton
Pat Robertson’s Hurricane “Miracle”
Dave Lindorff
In Montgomery County PA, It’s Often a Jury of White People
Louis Yako
From Citizens to Customers: the Corporate Customer Service Culture in America 
William Boardman
The Shame of Dianne Feinstein, the Courage of Christine Blasey Ford 
Ernie Niemi
Logging and Climate Change: Oregon is Appalachia and Timber is Our Coal
Jessicah Pierre
Nike Says “Believe in Something,” But Can It Sacrifice Something, Too?
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
Weaponized Dreams? The Curious Case of Robert Moss
Olivia Alperstein
An Environmental 9/11: the EPA’s Gutting of Methane Regulations
Ted Rall
Why Christine Ford vs. Brett Kavanaugh is a Train Wreck You Can’t Look Away From
Lauren Regan
The Day the Valves Turned: Defending the Pipeline Protesters
Ralph Nader
Questions, Questions Where are the Answers?
Binoy Kampmark
Deplatforming Germaine Greer
Raouf Halaby
It Should Not Be A He Said She Said Verdict
Robert Koehler
The Accusation That Wouldn’t Go Away
Jim Hightower
Amazon is Making Workers Tweet About How Great It is to Work There
Robby Sherwin
Rabbi, Rabbi, Where For Art Thou Rabbi?
Vern Loomis
Has Something Evil This Way Come?
Steve Baggarly
Disarm Trident Walk Ends in Georgia
Graham Peebles
Priorities of the Time: Peace
Michael Doliner
The Department of Demonization
David Yearsley
Bollocks to Brexit: the Plumber Sings
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail