The comment about the GC appeared to be tongue-in-cheek and was intended to show that that isn’t people’s motivation to join the party. Through the relational culture that the Movement for Change seeks to bring in (which I hear you know all about Sunny), people have begun to understand each other’s motivations for joining. When the party begins to understand why people join, maybe it can then adapt and build a much stronger movement where people are bound by their shared understanding and their common goals rather than just the colour of their card.

The comment about the GC wasn’t intended to say that there are alternatives to that, just that there is more we can do than that.

Not got much more to add than Sam.

Looks like you’ve been done by a Future Leader Sunny.

“When the party begins to understand why people join, maybe it can then adapt and build a much stronger movement where people are bound by their shared understanding and their common goals rather than just the colour of their card.”

I understand all of that, but how would Movement for Change contribute to the development of Labour’s policies? That’s the bit which is missing.

Excellent points Don. UK citizens’ great strength is building well-disciplined, single issue coalitions focused on specific outcomes. It’s almost a social movement approach, albeit one that seeks to maintain, rather than disband, alliances after the specific outcome has been achieved. I’m not sure how you institutionalise this into a formal political party structure with competing policy demands at local/regional/ national level.

“a cap on interest rates ……..political opponents would claim show Labour ‘lurching to the left‘.”

Or lurching to insanity. Unless Labour actually do want to drive people into the arms of real loan sharks? Ah the joys of unintended but thoroughly forseeable consequences.

“Or lurching to insanity. Unless Labour actually do want to drive people into the arms of real loan sharks? Ah the joys of unintended but thoroughly forseeable consequences.”

Are there more loan sharks in France, Finland, Germany, Greece, Holland, and Italy than here in the UK? All of these countries cap interest rates. You may disagree with the policy, but it is hardly “insane”.

I’m completely behind the movement for change as it empowers people and makes them feel a part of something. me and my friend Liza Harding through Movement for Change have felt empowered as never before and thus David would seem to have shattered the myth that politics is inaccessable for normal people. To my knowledge, david is the only candidate to have proposed such a measure and thus, shouldnt it be commended rather than attacked all of the time?

I know its not perfect but surely the concept of the idea cannot be frowned upon. In a time where expenses scandals resulted in a lack of trust in MPs, surely a method to get them re-engaged in politics should be praised!

It’s odd that bloggers have misread a blog. That comment about the GC meeting was obviously meant to state that there is much more to being a Labour member than just ticking off minutes. That’s what David wants to tap into; the fact that people join the party for hundreds of reasons and we have to start understanding these reasons so that the party can be stronger.

You backed Ed didn’t you? What’s Ed proposing to change the party structure? Or to engage members more in party organisation?

And who are these “most influential Labour supporters” hell-bent on keeping the top-down power? People like David Sainsbury I assume? Oh no….. Can’t be him can it.

You’re turning into Iain Dale mate. Gossip.

Hi Anthony,

I’m a big supporter of the movement for change and sorry if the article came across as critical of it. What I’m saying is that the idea behind the Movement for Change needs to be taken even further, so that leaders like you and Liza get to have more influence on what the Labour Party does in the future

“You backed Ed didn’t you?”

No. That was Sunny. There’s more than one of us who writes for Liberal Conspiracy I’ve been quite critical of Ed Miliband in the past – http://liberalconspiracy.org/2010/05/15/the-unfairness-of-ed-miliband/

“What’s Ed proposing to change the party structure? Or to engage members more in party organisation?”

Dunno. But surely you would agree with the idea that the leaders trained through Movement for Change should have more of a say about the policies of the Labour Party? How is this going to be achieved?

I asked if it would be possible to hold some of M for C training in West Lancashire for a group I’d draw together, as like Don P I was interested in the ideas. I was told we could enrol individually and go off to Manchester etc.. I did all the things that were required on the website to enrol, but never got any response/invitation and in the end I gave up, none the wiser.

I couldn’t help feeling, via these and other communications with the David Miliband teaam, that the Movement for Change is not aimed at all Labour party members, however willing they may be, and that there is the contradiction to which Don alludes between a ‘leadership programme’ and grassroots community organisation training.

‘radical moderate modernising centre’.

That has to be the most meaningless sequence of words I’ve seen since I studied Derrida.

To suggest that Movement for Change will not be able to influence ideas that will formulate a new Labour policy portfolio are a bit premature! The leadership election is not over yet!

I would hope that was a central motivation behind the Movement for Change. New Labour failed to refresh & reinvigorate itself – the Movement for Change can help that become reality. There can be doubt that Labour need to move away from the command and control from the centre, and open up a bit. There can be harm in that.

Community leaders trained by CitizensUK identified a cap on interest rates and amnesty for illegal immigrants as two of their top priorities. Yet these are exactly the sort of policies which powerful vested interests and political opponents would claim show Labour ‘lurching to the left‘.

Actually, a crackdown on loan sharks is supported by a broad swathe of the Conservative Party, while an amnesty has been called for by a number of prominent Tories (such as Boris Johnson) and is supported by Nick Clegg. Perhaps the best reason for Labour not to make these issues the main planks of their platform is that the Coalition will probably get round to dealing with them long before the election.

1 jackass troll

“The problem Labour faces is that its activists are socialists. And socialism destroys the country’s economy…….. The risk of listening to the base, and listening to the elite is you get an economic disaster AND benthamite authoritarian misery, which is what happened under Brown”

Yea, deregulating the banks and turning a blind eye to the destruction they were causing was real red in claw socialism.. …NOT.

Allowing non doms to pay very little tax, was real socialism,…..NOT

Bringing in more private sector in healthcare was right out old Labour…….NOT.

Starting a war for profit with the full backing of the Conservatives was real socialist policy. NOT

If you are going to troll, please increase your intellect, and knowledge because otherwise you come across as a village idiot.

To suggest that Movement for Change will not be able to influence ideas that will formulate a new Labour policy portfolio are a bit premature! The leadership election is not over yet!

The day I see David Miliband saying that he backs amnesty for illegal immigrants is the day I’ll accept he can be influenced by his own M4C.

Until then – don’t bet on it. The point made in the article is quite straightforward – any of the policies that local people would advocate would be resisted by DM’s own coterie of backers. So the chances of this actually having an impact on national Labour policy is minimal.

@Sunny Hundal “The day I see David Miliband saying that he backs amnesty for illegal immigrants is the day I’ll accept he can be influenced by his own M4C”

Sunny, do you have evidence that a majority of people in the Movement for Change support the amnesty? Do you have evidence that most people in the country support it? Have you discussed it with people?

There seems to be one BIG thing you’re missing. The Movement for Change is teaching members to put PEOPLE before PROGRAMME. This means it’s relational before it’s issue-focused. Just because there’s an issue that bugs liberals, it doesn’t mean we lead with that issue. I don’t know if you’ve been to a training session, but We aren’t taught to gather around one issue; we all talk about issues that bother us in our communities.

I don’t think you get it. And until you do, I don’t think you should pass comment.

“The Movement for Change is teaching members to put PEOPLE before PROGRAMME. This means it’s relational before it’s issue-focused.”

I understand all of that. But I’m sure you would agree that at present, local leaders have extremely few opportunities to help shape the priorities of the Labour Party, and policies are instead developed by a small clique of people at the top of the party. If David Miliband is elected leader, how will this change?

local leaders have extremely few opportunities to help shape the priorities of the Labour Party, and policies are instead developed by a small clique of people at the top of the party. If David Miliband is elected leader, how will this change?

It won’t, because, as I keep repeating ad nauseum, D’Mil is New Labour.

K.I.S.S.

Local party members meet – state what is on their minds – see if there is a solution – take it up with the person THEY put up for election ….

Local people pick the person they want to represent them. Not central HQ who puts in whom they wish to speak with and tell to sit down.

N.F.H.

Hi Sunny,

First of all, thanks very much for the mention!

I’m not sure what the problem is here, though. I recently joined the Labour Party after 20 years of voting for them because I thought it was about time I did something constructive to help and David Miliband’s campaign seemed a great way to get involved.

I’ve made sure that as well as supporting his campaign from the beginning, I am an active member of my CLP also – so I’m getting the whole experience at a local level too.

I did my Future Leader training in June along with three other members of my CLP and since then two more members have done it also.
Although we weren’t all David Miliband supporters initially, my CLP and our MP Kate Green welcomed this opportunity for free community training with open arms.
Anything to help reinforce and revive our local Labour Party regardless of where it’s come from is better than nothing. None of my fellow members see the Future Leaders campaign as a threat to their own positions. At the end of the day – we’re all one team with our values binding us together to make a stronger team, which is what the Movement For Change stands for – strength and power in numbers at every level. Also, the stronger the relationship built up between ourselves personally, the more likely we’ll support eachother and actually turn up to meetings, GCs, events whatever you want to call them!
There’s a lot of proof already that CLPs are already benefitting from the Movement For Change up and down the country – here’s one of many examples http://bit.ly/9O7bdB

What David’s done as a leader is he’s started empowering people like me at a local level which includes CLP’s and community groups working together to make change within our local areas effectively.
As far as policies are concerned, we will have a say because all of the Future Leaders have learned that as well as our own local issues, we can bring national issues such as housing problems (which is affecting me personally) to the fore and get it through to David himself.

David has said right from the beginning also that he wants local Labour leaders to have more control themselves. Without actually having to be involved in every local issue affecting communities, David can then concentrate on what we’re feeding back to him on the bigger scale issues and he can take into account our experiences/concerns at grassroots level to then shape policies.

Hope this helps,
Liza.

Hi Liza – I didn’t write the article, don Paskini did

You say: What David’s done as a leader is he’s started empowering people like me at a local level which includes CLP’s and community groups working together to make change within our local areas effectively.

Sure, but no one seems to have addressed how the dilemmas listed above could be resolved. Right now no one is campaigning against Coalition cuts. But what if that’s the biggest issue in an local area? And what if that goes against David Miliband’s own plans to cut spending drastically to reduce the deficit?

REGULARIZATION
1. The migrants have acquired the right to stay by virtue of their long association with the UK. The state’s moral right to deport them has eroded over time, just as their moral claim to legal residency has grown.

2. By not regularising, the UK is permitting a substantial sub-class of people to exist outside the law. This is bad for them, and bad for the UK. Regularising encourages more people to obey the law and to contribute financially and civically.

3. Failure to regularise allows for the existence of a shadow or parallel economy, outside the law, in which exploitation and people-trafficking thrive. Regularising, conversely, shrinks the shadow economy, and therefore discourages illegal immigration. This was the experience of Spain when it regularised in 2005. Not only were there substantial fiscal and economic benefits, but levels of immigration declined.

4. The London School of Economics estimates that regularising undocumented migrants would add approximately £3bn to the economy

Beg your pardon Sunny, to both yourself and Don then,

We are already campaigning against the coalition cuts that are affecting ALL of us locally – but the main aim of the David Miliband Campaign was to get the Future Leaders in place by the time the leader is elected regardless of whether or not it’s David who wins. That’s when the whole Party unites properly and fights the coalition altogether, as one big force.
The Movement For Change is about getting things done at a local level most of all, and then raising issues affecting people nationally bringing them to the people who can change the policies – making them aware of how badly people are affected by them and making them listen. If David or whoever the leader might be, doesn’t agree they’ll at least have to listen and take real people’s problems into consideration and act on the best way forward with them – otherwise Labour WILL fail again – they won’t be representing the people they claim they are doing!

Unless you or Don do the training yourselves, I’m not going to tell you any details – it’s no big secret admittedly, but why the hell do we want to tell the opposition in advance how we’re planning on rising up against the cuts!
All I can say is that we build our teams as our strength and have learned how to take the best possible action with the people who can make the necessary changes. Obviously there’s not going to be much room for massive change/reversal in the light of these cuts, but at least we can attempt compromise or alternatives.

Any better?
Liza.

Hi Liza,

I’ve done the five day leadership training and I mentor a community organiser – I def agree with you about its effectiveness.

Good luck in sharing what you’ve learned from your local campaigns with David, and I guess if he doesn’t listen, you can use the same campaigning techniques which work in local campaigns to “persuade” him and other MPs to pay attention to you!

p.s. I used to work with your MP, Kate Green, and I think she is also great.

Thanks, Don!

I am very honoured to have Kate’s number on my phone, she’s a great woman!

At the risk of appearing naive, if MPs and especially David Miliband, who’s had my continued support since the day he announced his leadership bid, don’t want to listen to us anymore after the election – I will kick up a major stink! However, I think they know they can’t afford to let the electorate or the public down again and turn their backs on us, otherwise we’re in opposition for ever more!

David wants new politics, one that involves taking into consideration everyone’s opinions, not just the elite few. Many people are sceptical of this but I actually believe him and believe it can be done.
I realise I am not always going to agree with everything, but so far have done so, which is why I’ve invested all my spare time into his campaign to win – I sing from the exact same song-sheet!

Labour needs to restrengthen from the roots upwards and appeal to the many not just the few (I’m starting to sound like him now!) – Movement For Change as you’ve said is an effective way in which to do this at a local-level and on a national level this must make a difference also.

Looking forward to attending the Movement For Change National Assembly in London on Monday – no doubt you’ll hear lots more about it.

Liza