Brent North to consider how Labour should decide Coalition arrangements

With most commentators expecting a hung parliament after the General Election it is not surprising that all the parties are considering who they would ally with, as a formal Coalition or on a Supply and Confidence basis.

The issue is likely to be discussed by members at the Green Party Spring Conference March 6th-9th in Liverpool. For those who remember the Harold Wilson governments just one or two votes can make a difference. Tory leader Edward Health failed to negotiate a Coalition with the Liberals in 1974 and Wilson led a minority Labour government. After Labour's numbers were hit by by-election defeats a Lib-Lab Pact was agreed in March 1977.

Brent North General Meeting on Thursday will be discussing a draft motion for consideration by Constituency Labour Parties and it is interesting, in the context of the story below about the Brent Council Tax decision, that it focuses on how, and by whom such decisions are made:

This GC recognises that, whilst we all seek and expect a majority Labour government in May, a possible outcome of the election is that it may be necessary to consider a coalition or other forms of cooperation with other parties. This GC notes that the last time Labour was involved in a coalition at Westminster between 1941 and 1945, the proposal to do so was made by the party leader for the approval of both the NEC and the party conference. This GC therefore urges the NEC to agree without delay the procedure which will be used for seeking the party`s approval which, we believe , should include both the involvement of relevant elected bodies including the NEC itself in approving any arrangement, national policy forum policy commissions in approving any policy agreements with other parties, and a half-day recall party conference to approve any recommendations of the national executive. 

Brent North last month passed a resolution questioning Ed Balls' 'austerity lite' approach to public spending LINK

At that meeting concerns were also raised over Safeguarding, recruitment of social workers, health and safety in schools, reduction in care for the elderly (especially those with mental health problems), stopping the free bulk collection and the decline in the service provided by Brent Housing Partnership with some residents waiting a long time for replacement windows.

Brent North CLP want to see rethink of Ed Balls' austerity-lite strategy

Ed Balls reacts to the Brent North motion (not really!)

As the Green Party positions itself as the only anti-austerity party in the forthcoming General Election, and recruits hundreds of  ex Labour voters, many in the Labour Party are dismayed that Ed Balls seems to be painting them into an 'austerity-lite' corner.

Locally this has emerged in a motion tabled by Labour veteran Colin Adams at Brent North Labour Constituency Party General Meeting last Thursday.

The motion claimed that Balls' approach is 'hardly designed to  win over any of our potential voters who may be wavering, as it send a message that there is not much to choose between the main parties in their approach to austerity and its impact on the welfare state.'

I couldn't have put it better myself.

This is the full text as tabled:

Brent North CLP is extremely concerned that the Coalition government`s cuts to public sector spending are causing huge damage to the fabric of the welfare state. The Coalition parties have shown that their policies are not governed by economic necessity but by ideology. They are committed to shrinking the role of the state and allowing public services to be taken over by the market. In Brent, as in other councils, impossible decisions about which services should be prioritised for cuts are being forced upon local politicians.

Labour must go into the upcoming election with policies that show clear differences with the Coalition parties, otherwise there is a grave danger we will not win an overall majority. In particular we need to show that we are prepared to fund local services adequately.

We were thus dismayed at the recent statement by the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, that the election of a Labour government would not necessarily lead to an easing of the pressure on public services. This approach is hardly designed to win over any of our potential voters who may be wavering, as it sends a message that there is not much to choose between the main parties in their approach to austerity and its impact on the welfare state. It is electorally damaging to say we are going to stick with the existing government`s spending plans.

We call on the Labour leadership to rethink this strategy and state that, upon  the election of a Labour government, a new budget will be drawn up for immediate implementation with the aim of reflating the economy and protecting public services.                   

Natalie Bennett: The trouble with Labour... public sector pay freeze, NHS privatisation, green economy

Natalie Bennett on Huffington Post

As October begins, and the Labour Party conference is in the headlines, people across the country are preparing to unite for a march in London to stop austerity's attack on the UK.

And while the two are in the news, the obvious question is: 'Will Ed Miliband, Ed Balls and other shadow cabinet members express unequivocal support for the March for a Future That Works?'

The march, which takes place on 20 October, has been organised by the trades union movement and will see thousands of members of the public, union members, political organisations and campaign groups show their opposition to the Coalition's heartless, failed, false economies.

The government's cuts have not only failed the most vulnerable, who are forced to watch as the services on which they rely are taken from them, or even those who have lost their jobs as the government sets about trying to make the economy grow by removing money from it.

They have failed everyone. Even those of us fortunate enough not to have lost our job, or a benefit on which we relied, must face the fact that the coalition's policies have not even achieved what Osborne promised.
In June 2010, he told us that the cuts would hurt. They have. He told us that they were necessary. The Green Party disagrees, but if the chancellor lacks the imagination even to consider a 'plan B', he can perhaps be forgiven for thinking that they were.

But he also told us that his cuts would reduce the deficit. They have done the opposite. Instead of reducing the deficit by 4.6%, as the Chancellor promised, his economic illiteracy has instead forced it to grow by 22%t between April and August.

The Coalition promised 'change'. Instead, the government has given us more of the same privatisation, casualisation, and demonisation of the poor, people with disabilities, and public sector workers.
So much for the Coalition. But isn't this where we would expect the Labour Party to step in?

To take care of its traditional supporters, those who work, or want to but cannot, to build a better future for us all?

The opposition is in the middle of a 'policy review'. So far, it has taken since February 2011.

Nobody expects rebalancing the national finances to be straightforward. And nobody believes it's in Labour's interests to reveal policies which could be 'stolen' from them - even though it could be in the nation's interests to hear them.

But the problem with Labour at the moment is not what it is NOT saying: it's with what it IS.

Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls was RIGHT to warn that the coalition's austerity plans would crush any chance of a 'recovery'. But he has recently told us he would stick to public sector pay freezes, which will leave thousands of workers worse off, year on year, in the face of inflation.

And while Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham tells us he will 'repeal the Health and Social Care Act. Full stop,' the party's leader seems not yet to have made up his mind whether to reverse the effective privatisation of almost half of the NHS.

Perhaps he doesn't know. Maybe his Party hasn't yet made up its mind. But on 20 October, I and other members of my Party will be out on London's streets, supporting working people and making it clear that we understand you cannot put an economy back on its feet by throwing people out of work and undermining the public services that keep society ticking.

We believe that the green economy - vital in any case to avert international climate disaster - holds one key to tackling the deficit. The government's own figures show green business is the only sector bucking the recession, with 4.7% growth from 2010-11, providing an extra £5.4bn of economic activity.

We must get serious about reviving our manufacturing industries and bringing food production back to Britain. That's essential - environmentally and economically. And we need workers to be able to buy the goods and services they need. The Labour Party may not agree, although we hope it does. But whatever its view is, now is the time its traditional backers - and the country as a whole - need help.

We will be marching on 20 October. Will the Labour Party?