Brent Labour to discuss leadership election changes

Following controversy over Muhammed Butt's bid to restrict Labour leadership elections  to every four years, Brent Labour is to hold a special meeting on amendments to Standing Orders on Tuesday 16th September.

Among the proposals, which also includes elections/appointment by the leader to council positions, is this:

The group leadership is not proposing that leadership elections shouldn’t be held at AGMs other than the first of the council term if substantial number of members (a third or more) feel there is a need for this to occur- see paragraph 2 of this section, discussed below. Rather, the suggestion is that a leadership election shouldn’t be held rigidly every year if members see no need for one. Following the recent AGM, it is clear that a number of members wish for this matter to be reviewed, and a full report on it will follow in the coming weeks. 

2. ‘An election for the post of Leader may be called at any AGM if a third or more of the group’s members write to the group Secretary to request that this occur not less than seven days in advance of the meeting. Any election resulting from this trigger mechanism will be conducted by secret ballot. Under no circumstances will the Secretary reveal the name of any member requesting that a contest take place until the threshold of 50% is reached. If this occurs, the Secretary will verify with the Chairs of both the group and the LCF that an election should be called and proceed accordingly.’ 

This paragraph has been substantially altered from that included in the group standing orderscirculated prior to the recent AGM. It was inserted in order to compliment paragraph 1 of this section, ensuring that leadership elections at AGMs will go ahead if a sizable number of members feel this should occur, and that members will feel confident expressing their preference for such an election.

As  I read it, rather than the election of leader being routinely on the agenda of the AGM a group of members will have to ask for such an election. This could be a disincentive as it might be seen as disloyalty or splitting to make such a request.