I was re-elected this evening as, get this, Branch Political Education Officer, having given up my two other posts. I won’t say exactly which branch, or how many votes I won, for fear of giving succour to the enemy, but it could be construed – somewhat appropriately given my new role – as a Soviet-style election result.
Let’s just say that there was some doubt about the value of a Political Education Officer to the local branch (two wards, that is), given the likelihood that I won’t be called upon to don a KGB uniform and read aloud from the 18th Brumaire to a gymnasium full of shaven-headed Red Army cadets – and the post was very nearly discontinued.
Seriously, what should a Political Education Officer do in today’s CLP? Does anyone else have one? There’s this blog, of course, but that’s not very focussed. There was a local blog too, but it lacked the official backing needed to get it properly promoted to ordinary members.
Well, I’ll think about it, but in the meantime, any ideas would be appreciated.
There must be lots of campaigning education needs. New members and activists always need clear information on the purpose of different activities.
Political education officer is a tricky one. In reality, it should be a post geared to stimulating debate. What are both sides of the Education Bill argument? What does the branch/CLP think about the war in Iraq or how we can construct an ethical and effective foreign policy? What do we think of the party’s consultation procedures?
However, and I speak from the experience of a CLP where we were lucky enough to have a Labour MP until 2005, most CLPs see this kind of debate as merely letting certain “usual suspects” get on their high horse. Moreover, such discussion inevitably leads to criticism of the government in some way, which is deemed unhelpful in the run-up to elections, when CLP branches are most active.
The trick is to keep CLPs active between elections. And to allow a more transparent policy making process. Then the PE officer has a real chance to stimulate genuine debate – which is necessary for new ideas to arise. How many government initiatives have really come from the members, or had their unqualified support?
The PE officer should be there to ensure such consultation between government and party is honest and genuine.
I confess that this isn’t easy, and that without an open-minded CLP chair, an active PE officer such as the type I’ve described would be seen as either a Trot radical or, more likely, a threat to the stbility to the group. In fact, the feeling of disengagement a lot of Labour members feel is more damaging.
To end, I note the success in Thurrock CLP of their new members’ quarterly “Red Letter”, edited by an old friend of mine, which celebrates government achievements, but also carries articles critial of curtailments of civil liberties and the Education Bill. Such honesty is refreshing and welcomed by members and tends to get them out in numbers.
I agree they could chnge the name though, it does sound a little too “politburo”!
Just some thoughts…
Our (CLP) officer mainly organises speakers for the discussion part of GC meetings. We have recently had speakers on the Education White Paper and on local transport issues as well a talk on modern campaigning methods from a member of the Labour Party regional staff.
They (to me) are not the most engaging speakers in the world as I have access to a lot of polical information online and the chance to listen to and talk to politicians fairly regularly, however normal members who only attend the GC and are not as politically obsessed as me really seem to like them and value the contribution that they make.
This is not usually seen as underming or a problem with the “usual suspects” for a couple of reasons, firstly we are not debating a divisive resolution but just allowing everyone to air their views and ask questions to get more information. Secondly most disagreements in the Party tend to focus on personality, candidate selection, procedures, Council issues and so on, so these talks offer a welcome break from disagreement and provide something engaging for new member who attend.
However I don’t really know how this helps you at a branch level but I suppose that really depends on how big your branch is. I would suggest that perhaps you organise a policy forum on a topical issue and also invite one of your regional NPF reps along to talk about the Policy Forum process so people can see how (hopefully!) their views will feed in to the process.
Given which party you belong to, isn’t the role of “Political Education Officer” intended as a means of indoctrinating the Blair youth? Of course, i’m only guessing here.
I, however, am more confident in my judgement – you’re an idiot, Truth Seeker. Don’t waste everyone’s time.
Of course, no real response, merely a personal insult. Now isn’t that just the “New Labourite” style. When your lot aren’t busy trying to clamp down on Blair dissenters, you are busily scurrying about trying to find something to, for example, libel NHS pateints with.
Does your “Political education officer” role entail you informing your subjects of the number of deaths because of the privatisation of the NHS home oxygen supply programme? Does the role involve informing people that between 1 and six people are held at Luton every day under so called “anti terror laws” by your lots hit squads. (See the holding of “The Road to Guantanamo” stars for guidance).
It appears to be you who is the idiot, and in the minority it seems, given that your party received just over 20% of all elligible votes cast at the last election, yet feel that you have the moral authority to lecture others. You can remain on your ivory tower as long as you like, you’ll find out on the 4th May exactly what the country thinks of your lot.