Labour Party Policy Consultation

[DynamicSpirit]

In case anyone is interested, the Labour Party are running a consultation seeking ideas and opinions to develop their policies on - well, pretty much everything - including transport. You don't have to be a member to submit your views , it's open to anyone. I suspect there are a few people who would have opinions about what ought to be in manifestos regarding transport issues and investment in the rail network who might want to take part Please do, if you feel so inclined. Consultation closes on 24 June, so you only have a few days.

The consultation documents and information about how to make submissions are:
here for transport
and
here for the environment (which I'm guessing would also be of interest to a fair few people here)

 

[DarloRich]

In case anyone is interested, the Labour Party are running a consultation seeking ideas and opinions to develop their policies on - well, pretty much everything - including transport. You don't have to be a member to submit your views , it's open to anyone. I suspect there are a few people who would have opinions about what ought to be in manifestos regarding transport issues and investment in the rail network who might want to take part Please do, if you feel so inclined. Consultation closes on 24 June, so you only have a few days.

The consultation documents and information about how to make submissions are:
here for transport
and
here for the environment (which I'm guessing would also be of interest to a fair few people here)

You don't have to be a member - what a surprise.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Out of curiosity, what would you say if it was restricted to members only? There are pros and cons to both approaches.

 

[takno]

Out of curiosity, what would you say if it was restricted to members only? There are pros and cons to both approaches.

I think engaging a wider audience is a good thing, although I think a more structured consultation might be more useful.

I am concerned about the motives for the exercise though. Corbyn made such a big thing about consulting the members because the MPs didn't say what he wanted to hear. Now the members have the temerity to say "we need to talk about Europe, Jez mate", the consultation has been extended out to the whole country so that the leadership can carry on ignoring the large and growing elephant in the corner.

 

[DarloRich]

Out of curiosity, what would you say if it was restricted to members only? There are pros and cons to both approaches.

I would say good. I pay my membership fees. Why should someone who doesn't pay get a say?

I think engaging a wider audience is a good thing, although I think a more structured consultation might be more useful.

I am concerned about the motives for the exercise though. Corbyn made such a big thing about consulting the members because the MPs didn't say what he wanted to hear. Now the members have the temerity to say "we need to talk about Europe, Jez mate", the consultation has been extended out to the whole country so that the leadership can carry on ignoring the large and growing elephant in the corner.

That is exactly what it is designed for - to provide validation for the views of Corbyn and his acolytes.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I would say good. I pay my membership fees. Why should someone who doesn't pay get a say?

If this was something like a direct election (such as a leadership election), I'd be inclined to agree with you. But it isn't: It's more like, a consultation in which ideas and opinions are being sought, which will be considered by the party's various policy commissions in making up detailed policy recommendations. For that kind of exercise, I would have thought that seeking the widest possible input, including non-members, would be more desirable. I don't know how the policy commissions work internally, but I think they have existed for a few years so are reasonably well established. And if they are working sensibly, then presumably they would consider each submission on its merits.

 

[takno]

If this was something like a direct election (such as a leadership election), I'd be inclined to agree with you. But it isn't: It's more like, a consultation in which ideas and opinions are being sought, which will be considered by the party's various policy commissions in making up detailed policy recommendations. For that kind of exercise, I would have thought that seeking the widest possible input, including non-members, would be more desirable. I don't know how the policy commissions work internally, but I think they have existed for a few years so are reasonably well established. And if they are working sensibly, then presumably they would consider each submission on its merits.

The National Policy Forum in itself is a good thing. With debate at conference effectively still stage managed to hell they are the probably the only effective way of engaging with the membership. The scramble to prevent discussion of Europe last year as a topic though definitely left the impression that the NPF is now as much of a puppet-show as the conference. This makes a rule change to include wider public consultation this year seem decidedly fishy, even if it's difficult to argue with reasoning given for it.