Friday, December 7, 2018

Proposed Changes to the Conservative Party Constitution


Proposed Changes to the Conservative Party Constitution – December 8th 2018

The following changes to the Party’s Constitution are being proposed at a meeting of the National Convention on Saturday December 8th 2018:
1)      “Candidates Committee to establish Approved Lists for Welsh and Northern Irish Assembly Members, Police & Crime Commissioners and Elected Mayors.”

The Candidates Committee is wholly appointed, unelected and unaccountable to party members. This is a further tightening of central control of the Conservative Party.   Since this central control was established after the new Constitution of the Party was `one with an overall majority.   In the same period before this centralisation there were five General Elections of which the Party won four. Q.E.D.

2)      Removal of Past Area and Regional Chairmen from National Convention.

Historical knowledge of the Convention will be lost.   Why reduce the size of the Convention?

3)      “A Volunteer to be known as “The Voluntary Political Director of the Conservative policy Forum” shall be elected by the National Conservative Convention, for a term of three years.   Their responsibilities shall include co-ordination of the policy-related activities of the Associations, Areas and Regions.”

A power grab by the Convention.   Why isn’t the Director elected by the Party membership?   Why is the election for three years?   Where is accountability if the person elected does nothing?   Who determines which candidates can stand for election?   An opportunity  to make the Party more democratic has been lost.

4)      “A Vice-Chairman to be appointed by the board on the recommendation of the chairman of the National Convention whose responsibilities shall include reporting to the board on the work of the CPF.”

More power of patronage given to the Chairman of the Convention!

5)      Schedule 3 Article 5 Nominees for officers of the National Convention to have been Convention members for the two preceding years.
Schedule 3 Article 6 Nominees for President must have been a current member of the Board at the time of nomination.

These enshrine “Gubbins Turn” into the Constitution. Why do they not trust the members of the Convention to take these matters into account when voting?

6)      Schedule 5 Article 14 Removal of the right to stand for more than one regional post as it can leave unfilled positions when using postal or online ballots.

Why is that?   So now if you stand as Regional Co-ordinator and lose you cannot also stand as Deputy Regional Co-ordinator?

7)      Schedule 6 Article 14 If an Association officer is removed by the Board, the replacement does not have to be a member of the Association or Area management Executive if the Board so decides.

More power to the Board, so they can just fly in a CCHQ apparatchik to take control!

8)      Rule 5.7 Removal of the right of Association Officers to be voting members of all committees and branches.

This reduces the powers of Association officers.   Bad move.

9)      Rule 13.3 Removal of Chairman’s casting vote to bring into line with selection rules.

???

10)  Schedule 1 Article 1.2 Clarify Definition of 1922 Committee

No information given as to what this definition will be?

11)  Schedule 6 Article 6 The Chairman of the Committee on Candidates (sub Committee of the Board) shall be nominated by the Chairman of the National Conservative Convention.

More patronage for the Chairman.   Why isn’t this position elected by and accountable to Party members?







Wednesday, November 28, 2018

Tuesday, November 13, 2018

Confidence Vote in Tory Party Leader - Time for Party members to have a say!


Last week I wrote to the Conservative Party Chairman.   I have not yet received a reply.
The letter is as follows:



Rt. Hon. Brandon Lewis, MP                                                                     5th November 2018
Chairman, The Party Board,
Conservative Campaign Headquarters,
4 Matthew Parker Street,
London
SW1H 9HQ


 Dear Brandon

Re: Election and De-Selection of the Conservative Party Leader

With reference to my letter of 20th August 2018 relating to the election of the Conservative Party Leader there has been continued speculation in the press about Conservative Members of Parliament triggering a vote of no confidence in the Party Leader.   In addition to the point I made in the letter that all candidates who have more than 20 MPs nominating them should be put to the members in a ballot, there are two further points which need consideration and action:

(1) The first point which arises relating to the election of the Leader is that on two occasions, i.e. Michael Howard and Theresa May the voluntary Party did not get a vote on the matter as there was only one candidate.   Under the present Party constitution Schedule 2 para.7 it states:

“In the event of there being only one valid nomination at the close of nominations prior to the first ballot being held by the Parliamentary Party for the election of the new Leader, the election of the nominee may if so ordered by the Board be ratified by a ballot of the Party Members and Scottish Party Members to be held within one month of the close of nomination”.

 I propose that in the above the following be deleted: “at the close of nominations prior to the first ballot being held by the Parliamentary Party” and “may if so ordered by the Board”
And insert after nominee “will

The effect of this change would be to ensure that in the event of only one nominee being put forward as Party Leader the Party members would be invited to endorse the nomination.   This process was used when William Hague was Leader.   It ensures that the Party as a whole is supporting the new Leader and acts as a unifying force.

(2) The second point is when the Chairman of the 1922 Committee receives the requisite number of letters expressing “no confidence” in the Leader.   At the moment this triggers a vote of the Parliamentary Party on the question of “confidence” in the Party Leader.

 The last time this happened was when Iain Duncan-Smith was Leader and he lost a vote of confidence by the Parliamentary Party.   There was considerable dissatisfaction at the time, in the voluntary Party, that the MPs had got rid of the Leader whom the voluntary Party had elected.   This was done on the grounds that the Leader could no longer count on the support of his parliamentary colleagues so his position was not sustainable.   We now know from the example of Jeremy Corbyn in the Labour Party that it is perfectly possible to act as Leader of a Party even without the majority support of your fellow MPs.

It is quite clear from the Party’s constitution that the intention is for the members of the Party to elect the Leader.   It is therefore quite bizarre that the Leader can be dismissed by a vote of just the parliamentary Party.   I therefore propose that in the event of the Chairman of the 1922 Committee receiving the requisite number of letters expressing “no confidence “ in the Leader there should be a ballot of all party members asking them for a vote of confidence in the Leader. In the event that the Leader receives less than 50% votes in the ballot there should then be a Leadership election.

Now that we have centrally organised membership it should be relatively easy and inexpensive for members to be balloted on these issues by use of the internet. 

I reiterate the point I made in my letter of 20th August 2018 that it is time for the Party to embrace democracy and allow full participation by the membership.   Only by doing this can we look forward to our membership growing. Could you please put these proposals to the Party Board for action.

Finally, I would emphasize the point I made to you at the Party Conference.   In 1998 with the new constitution all power in the Party was centralised into CCHQ.   In the 20 years prior to 1998 there were five General Elections and we won four.   In the 20 years post 1998 there have been five General Elections and we have won one.   There has to be a lesson here!

Yours sincerely  

 John E. Strafford

Chairman




Copy: Sir Graham Brady (Chairman 1922 Committee)


                                                                          20th August 2018


Rt. Hon. Brandon Lewis, MP
Chairman, The Party Board,
Conservative Campaign Headquarters,
4 Matthew Parker Street,
London
SW1H 9HQ


 Dear Brandon

Re: Proposed Changes to the Election of the Conservative Party Leader

There is much speculation that there will be a Leadership Election in the Conservative Party before the end of this Parliament.  One of the reasons for people to become members of the Party is that they can then participate in a Leadership election and yet in two out of the last four Leadership contests the members did not get a vote.   The Members of Parliament arranged that only one candidate was left to fight the election in 2003.   In 2016 we ended up with only one candidate and even in 2001 when the members got to vote the front runner was eliminated by one vote by the MPs.   In a modern political Party this is not acceptable.   The 1922 Committee should now change the rules so that all candidates who have more than 20 MPs nominating them will be put to the members in a ballot conducted on the Preferential Vote system of election, so that the winner will be the first candidate to get over 50% of the vote.

             This is the fair way to proceed and one advantage is that as all members participate there can be no division between the Parliamentary Party and the rest of the members as the figures as to how each part voted would not be known.

I am aware that under the Party Constitution the 1922 Committee is obliged to put two candidates forward for the members to vote on, but the Party Board has the power under Part IV section 17 of the Constitution “to do anything which in its opinion relates to the management and administration of the Party.”   It was under this clause that the entire section of the Constitution on the selection of parliamentary candidates was ignored at the General Election in 2017 so that CCHQ could impose candidates on the constituencies.                                                     

In 2016, when David Cameron resigned as Party Leader some 10,000 people joined the Party because they thought they would be able to vote in the subsequent Leadership election.   It is said that people are now joining the Party in anticipation of being able to participate in the next Leadership election.   I fear there will be mass resignations from the Party of its members if the MPs only put forward one candidate or stop a candidate who is popular with the members of the Party from b  eing included in the ballot.

It is time for the Party to embrace democracy and allow full participation by the membership.   Could you please put this proposal to the Party Board for their approval?

Yours sincerely

 John E. Strafford

Chairman




Copy: Sir Graham Brady (Chairman 1922Committee)


Wednesday, October 31, 2018

Friday, October 26, 2018

Ben Bradley MP - Brexit and Party Reform

A speech by Ben Bradley MP at a fringe meeting of the Campaign for Conservative Democracy at the Tory Party Conference on 1st October 2018.   Ben is a former Vice Chairman of the Conservative Party. His speech was followed by the result of a vote to "Chuck Chequers"

Wednesday, October 17, 2018

Could the United Kingdom become a Dictatorship and nobody notice?

Essential viewing for all those concerned about democracy in the Conservative Party and the United Kingdom.   A speech by John Strafford at a fringe meeting of the Conservative Party Conference - 1st October 2018

Tuesday, September 25, 2018

Copov Forum 6th October

For details of the COPOV Forum see Events   Do come to this post mortem on the Conservative Conference.   Lots to discuss!

Thursday, September 20, 2018

Conservative Grass Roots views on Chequers!

At the COPOV barbecue in August Conservative members were asked their views on the "Chequers" proposals.   Here are their views.

Wednesday, September 19, 2018

Event: Why "Chequers" shows we need Conservative Party Reform!


Tel. No.           (h) 01494 730599                                                Beech Cottage

                                                15 North Drive

E mail              johnstrafford@btinternet.com                         Beaconsfield

                                                                                                    Bucks HP9 1TZ


                                                                                     19th September 2018


Fringe Meeting at Conservative Party Conference at 9 am on Monday 1st October


Speakers will include:

David Campbell-Bannerman MEP

John Strafford


Venue: Lyttelton Lecture Theatre,
             Birmingham & Midlands Institute,
             Margaret Street,
             Birmingham.
             B3 3BS

Come along and let us know your views on Party Reform.

Friday, August 24, 2018

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Letter to Tory Party Chairman re. Leadership Election


                                                                                                    20th August 2018

Rt. Hon. Brandon Lewis, MP
Chairman, The Party Board,
Conservative Campaign Headquarters,
4 Matthew Parker Street,
London
SW1H 9HQ



 Dear Brandon,

Re: Proposed Changes to the Election of the Conservative Party Leader

There is much speculation that there will be a Leadership Election in the Conservative Party before the end of this Parliament.  One of the reasons for people to become members of the Party is that they can then participate in a Leadership election and yet in two out of the last four Leadership contests the members did not get a vote.   The Members of Parliament arranged that only one candidate was left to fight the election in 2003.   In 2016 we ended up with only one candidate and even in 2001 when the members got to vote the front runner was eliminated by one vote by the MPs.   In a modern political Party this is not acceptable.   The 1922 Committee should now change the rules so that all candidates who have more than 20 MPs nominating them will be put to the members in a ballot conducted on the Preferential Vote system of election, so that the winner will be the first candidate to get over 50% of the vote.

             This is the fair way to proceed and one advantage is that as all members participate there can be no division between the Parliamentary Party and the rest of the members as the figures as to how each part voted would not be known.

I am aware that under the Party Constitution the 1922 Committee is obliged to put two candidates forward for the members to vote on, but the Party Board has the power under Part IV section 17 of the Constitution “to do anything which in its opinion relates to the management and administration of the Party.”   It was under this clause that the entire section of the Constitution on the selection of parliamentary candidates was ignored at the General Election in 2017 so that CCHQ could impose candidates on the constituencies.                                                             

In 2016, when David Cameron resigned as Party Leader some 10,000 people joined the Party because they thought they would be able to vote in the subsequent Leadership election.   It is said that people are now joining the Party in anticipation of being able to participate in the next Leadership election.   I fear there will be mass resignations from the Party of its members if the MPs only put forward one candidate or stop a candidate who is popular with the members of the Party from b  eing included in the ballot.

It is time for the Party to embrace democracy and allow full participation by the membership.   Could you please put this proposal to the Party Board for their approval?

Yours sincerely 

 John E. Strafford

Chairman

  

Copy: Sir Graham Brady (Chairman 1922Committee)

Monday, August 13, 2018

What do Party members think of Boris?

Listen to "The World This Weekend"   11 minutes 30 seconds in, broadcast on 12th July and recorded at the COPOV barbecue. The members views can be heard 19 minutes in.

Wednesday, July 25, 2018

COPOV Barbecue 11th August

Do come and join us at the Annual COPOV Barbecue.   Further details are shown at Events  It is always a fun evening.   Look forward to seeing you.

Monday, July 9, 2018

Conservative Party Leadership Election - The Vote

There is a strong possibility that there will shortly be a Leadership Election in the Conservative Party.  One of the reasons for people to become members of the Party is that they can then participate in a Leadership election and yet in two out of the last four Leadership contests the members did not get a vote.   The Members of Parliament arranged that only one candidate was left to fight the election.   This is not acceptable.   The 1922 Committee should now change the rules so that all candidates which have more than twenty MPs nominating them will be put to the members in a ballot conducted on the Preferential Vote system of election so that the winner will be the first candidate to get over 50% of the vote.
This is the fair way to proceed and one advantage is that as all members participate there can be no division between the parliamentary Party and the rest of the members as the figures as to how each part voted would not be known.

Monday, July 2, 2018

COPOV Forum 14th July with David Campbell Bannerman MEP

Do come to the COPOV Forum on 14th July when we are delighted that David Campbell Bannerman will address us on a)Reforms to the Conservative Party Constitution and b)Brexit - What now?   For further details see Events on the right.

Tuesday, June 12, 2018

An Interview with the Party Chairman with comments.


The following is an edited version of an article which appeared on the Conservativehome web site on May 22nd 2018 with comments and questions on the article in red.
Interview: Lewis -“At conference this year, I and the Prime Minister are determined that the members feel it is their conference.”
ConHome: “What’s the latest news about the membership figure? In March, it was 124,000.”
Lewis I’d read all the stories about 40,000, 70,000 and what have you, that some journalists were writing about, and as we are starting to get the centralised administration of membership, for the first time we can genuinely say, ‘This is what the membership is.’
“Previously there’s always been an element of estimation because it wasn’t centrally administered.”
Note: Under Part II Clause 9 of the Party Constitution it says “The names of Members shall be entered on the Party’s National Membership List which shall be kept, administered and up dated from day to day by the Committee on Membership of the Board”.   So what have the Committee on Membership been doing for the last twenty years?   Of course all the Committee are appointed so unaccountable to the members.
ConHome: “So how did you manage to get the 124,000?”
Lewis: “That’s how many names I know who are paid members, who I can literally print off and count the names. That project, central administration of membership, I think is a really important project. I’m determined that we will complete that work before party conference.
We agree that in view of the state of the Party membership, central administration of membership has become essential.   However the figure of 124,000 was given at the Spring Forum on March 16th.   Many members if not most have a January-December membership year and then have three months to renew so the 124,000 figure includes those who paid on 1st January 2017 even if they have not renewed.   A more accurate figure should be given after 1st April.   If Central administration of membership is introduced as from 1st August we should have an accurate figure by say the end of August.   Will the Party publish the figure then?
“Sometimes in the past members have understandably complained they’ve got four or five emails in the space of about ten days, often asking for money. And part of the reason for that is they’ll be on several different data bases. So by getting central administration of membership we end up with one clear data base.
“It also means we can free up the associations, where you’ve got an office or even a member of staff focused on doing the membership, they can restructure their time so they’re more focused on recruiting new members and campaigning, which to be blunt, as Chairman of the party, I want more people campaigning.
In freeing up the Associations by having central membership their income is being reduced at the same time, for under the new scheme the Associations will have to pay £10.00 per member instead of £5.00 per member.   This might put a strain on their finances.
“We can start helping with the renewals, and making sure that people are renewed. And if we want to do a membership drive, we know we’re not asking people who already think they’re members.”
ConHome: “So how much does having a large and indeed growing membership matter in your view?”
Lewis: “For me it’s one of the key priorities. For me as Chairman of the party expanding and strengthening our comms and digital comms is obviously important; our campaigning machine is obviously hugely important; and I want to see more diversity, including women, representing the Conservative Party at all levels.
“But absolutely key to delivering all of that is remember we are a membership-based organisation. I was a member of the Conservative Party before I was elected.”
Every Party Chairman talks about increasing Party membership and yet the last National membership drive was in 1988.   The last time the Party was able to fight a National ground campaign was in 1992 when we had approx. half a million members.   Every Chairman since then, all 20 of them has presided over falling membership and done nothing about it.   Will the current Chairman be any different?
Increasing membership for me is really important, for two reasons. One is obviously we are a membership-based organisation and we are better and stronger and bigger that membership is, and we are a broad church and always have been, and to be a broad church, the more people involved the better.
 “But secondly, if associations feel there are people who really can’t afford to join but they want them to be involved, they can, they can leaflet, they can go to their cheese and wine events. You go to any association event and I guarantee there’ll be a fair chunk of people there who are supporters but are not paid-up members.”
ConHome: “It would still be good to have them as members.”
Lewis: “I would like to convert them to members. For me the way to do that, and we do discounts for young people and the military, veterans, but for me the way to do that is to make sure the membership gives them something they value.
How about giving Party members some democratic rights such as an Annual General Meeting to which all are invited and at which they can vote on who they want as Party Chairman, Chairman of the Candidates Committee and Chairman of the Conservative Policy Forum.   That is what they would value!
“Now I think that involves, we’ve just started last week, instead of just getting emails asking for more money, they will now get a monthly e-newsletter that doesn’t ask for money, but actually gives them information.”
ConHome: “Who’s editing that?”
Lewis: “We do. It’s from the Chairman. And I’m looking at how we expand that and do more.”
Strange, why haven’t I had an email newsletter from the Chairman?.   Has any ordinary member received one other than say a Constituency Chairman?
ConHome: “Will members be gaining or regaining any democratic powers under your chairmanship?”
Lewis: “In what ways?”
ConHome: “At the conference, for example, a generation ago you did feel the Home Secretary or someone might get a really rough ride if the members were angry about something. Now you feel there’s less excitement in the actual hall.”
Lewis: “If you look at what we did at Spring Forum this year, we changed the format so it was much more interactive. That worked really well at Spring Forum. Party conference is different because 
Spring Forum was without doubt the worse Spring Forum I have ever been to.   There was no question and answer session with the Leader of the Party.  The whole Forum was truncated to Friday afternoon and Saturday morning. Although the Friday went well the Saturday session was a disaster.
Lewis: “At conference this year, I and the Prime Minister are determined that the members feel it is their conference. Things will be different at conference this year. But I’m going to resist the temptation to outline the full details of conference just yet.”
Lewis: “I would like to think that when the conference agenda comes out, and at the end of conference, your readers and our members will say that they had a really enjoyable conference and felt more involved than before.”
So will we get motions at the Party Conference with votes on them?
ConHome: Now the Pickles Review proposal, which was to select candidates in target seats by June 2018, slipped in order to allow the use of local election data in picking targets.
Lewis: “Yeah, yeah, yeah. So one of the things I wanted to have a look at this year is to make sure people on the candidates’ list get the right support and understand what campaigning means.
“And the only way you really understand what campaigning means is to go out there and campaign. So in the first week or ten days in the job, I wrote to everyone on the candidates’ list and said ‘Look, I expect you to campaign in the local elections. And after the local elections, I’m going to review what you’ve done.’
“I’ll be doing that next week. So we’re compiling everything at the moment from the field agents’ reports and all the reports. And if there are people who have not done their fair bit of campaigning, and have no good reason for not having done their campaigning, I will be doing something about that.
“Because I’m not prepared to have candidates out there who are not going to go out and do their work.”
 “So I want to make sure we get people selected early. We will be starting selections this summer. We will make the June target in terms of starting selections but we won’t finish them in June.”
Isn’t it up to the members of the Party to determine who they want to interview rather than a hierarchy at CCHQ who create a tick box list of what they want to see in a candidate?   After all Party members are perfectly capable of asking a candidate how much campaigning they have done.

Monday, May 14, 2018

Wednesday, April 25, 2018

Monday, April 23, 2018

Campaign for Conservative Democracy - New Web Site

We are pleased to announce that the Campaign for Conservative Democracy has created a new web site at www.conservativepartydemocracy.com Do please visit the site and let us have your comments.   We hope that the new site will be more interactive and lots of Conservatives will participate with their views and comments.

Monday, April 16, 2018

Friday, March 23, 2018

Annual General Meeting & Forum 7th April

Do come to our next Forum!  See EVENTS   Discuss Proposed changes to the Party Constitution - Brexit - What now? Data in the Digital Economy -Political Implications! and much more

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

"Conservative Party Membership is 124,000." Discuss


I would comment on the following article which appeared on the Conservativehome web site on 19th March 2018:
Paul, within minutes of the Party Chairman announcing the figure at the Spring Forum the Chairman of the National Convention said we didn't know what the National membership figure was. Both are on the Party Board, don't they talk to each other? 
Every Party Chairman for the last twenty years has always told us that we have had so many people joining us in the last few months. They never tell us how many we have lost. 
A member paying a subscription on January 1st 2017 is still regarded as a Party member even if they have not paid this year, because they have three months in which to renew their subscription. As most members are on a calendar year subscription we will not know what the real figure is until after April 1st. 
Sadly at the Spring Forum there was not a single suggestion put forward as to how we will attract new members. The test for the party Chairman is will he give members more rights. The biggest applause on the Friday of the Forum was the suggestion that we have genuine debates at the Party conference with votes on them and for the debates to be transparent and not behind closed doors.

One further point which should be borne in mind is this: there is always an upsurge in membership just before a General Election.   The 124,000 figure will reflect this upsurge.   Unfortunately after a General Election there is a decline and the decline has always been greater than the upsurge.   This decline will not show until later this year when renewals of the new members comes up.
"Conservative Party Membership is 124,000" Discuss
by Paul Goodman
In 2013, this site saw information that supported the membership figure then declared by the Conservative Party: 134,000.  A year later, the Party said that this had risen to 149,800.  Grant Shapps drove the disclosure of both these figures.  After he left CCHQ, it clammed up again.
Brandon Lewis is too smart an operator to believe that non-disclosure was sustainable, and over the weekend he declared that membership currently stands at 124,000.  Our last guesstimate, made in September last year, was “around 100,000” – a figure that tallied with that of John Strafford.
So a 124,000 estimate sounds plausible.  But this assessment comes with qualifications.
First, it is only correct to say that Party membership is roughly “twice the size originally thought”, as the Daily Telegraph does today, if one accepts the original estimate as being 70,000, the figure it cites (which we didn’t).
Second, any comparison of figures may not be like-for-like.  On the face of it, membership has fallen by about 25,000 since 2014.  But the caculation made now may not be made on the same basis as that made then.  The drop may be smaller. Or bigger.
Finally, there is the question of how much information CCHQ actually holds – and how accurate it is.  That some Associations hold their membership numbers back is well known.  That some of the details will be out of date is surely incontestible.
So there are factors in play that both inflate and depress that 124,000 figure.
Tim Bale, who co-runs the ESRC Party Members Project, told this yesterday evening that “given the crazy patchwork that is the party’s membership ‘system’, I cannot for the life of me see how any number CCHQ comes up with can be taken as definitive.  I wouldn’t even trust the latest figure to give us an accurate idea of the trend over time.”
Lewis said that 6000 new members have joined since the Prime Minister’s December Brexit deal. One insider view is that CCHQ has simply added these to a membership total for last year (whatever that was), and that this figure will drift down again when non-renewals are next taken into account. Full credit, though, to him for getting a figure out there, and thereby enabling this discussion to take place.

Friday, March 9, 2018

Changes to the Party Constitution


The following article was published on the Conservativehome web site on 9th March. We would make the following comments:
Rob, you state that the "National Convention is about as decentralised as any decision-making body can be". Not so! Most organisations have an Annual General Meeting to which every member is invited e.g. The National Trust, which has 5 million members and which streams its AGM online to those members who cannot attend.The National Convention is not fit for purpose. It is a barrier to communication between the Party Board, CCHQ and Party members. It is based on pyramid democracy which the Conservative Party made illegal in the Trade Unions in the 1980s on the grounds that it was a distortion of democracy and could easily be manipulated.

The electoral College system of changing the Constitution should also be scrapped. Why should an MP, MEP and front bench spokesmen of the House of Lords have a vote but ordinary members of the Party do not?
You say we are making huge strides to the central administration of membership.   May I point out that under the Party Constitution brought in in 1998 it has been the Party Board's responsibility to administer a National Membership List.   Why have the Board ignored this for twenty years?   Perhaps this is another good reason why the Chairman of the Party Board should be elected by and accountable to all Party members!


Rob Semple: A progress report on changes to the Party’s constitution
  
Rob Semple is Chairman of the National Conservative Convention.
As Chairman of the National Conservative Convention, I have the responsibility of driving forward efforts across our party to make life easier for activists and members. As a member of the Pickles Review Panel, the committee reviewing the Party’s constitution and overseeing the introduction of central administration of membership, I want to take this opportunity to report on the progress we have made since the summer.
The Party’s constitution has undergone little change since it was first launched 20 years ago. Since then, we have introduced many more elected bodies such as mayors, police and crime commissioners and regional assemblies. There has also been a technological revolution in the way people communicate with each other. The internet was then in its infancy, email was only just beginning to emerge and Brexit was nowhere near the political agenda. The constitution reflected none of these things, so it is well overdue that we should look at bringing it into the twenty-first century.
It was written with a clear intention to maintain a balance between all the different strands that make up the Party. Any changes can only be made by a clear vote of an “electoral college” made up from the National Convention (a body that includes every Association Chairman, area and regional officer in the country), Members of Parliament (Westminster and Europe) and Party spokesmen in the House of Lords. It is about as decentralised as any decision-making body can be, and requires real consensus across the Party before anything can be changed.
Members of the National Conservative Convention who attended a meeting last November to discuss some ideas to update the constitution will have been surprised by speculation about alleged plans to remove the rights of Party members.   I want to reassure those who were not at that meeting that no such ideas will be forthcoming, and that there will, in fact, be proposals to strengthen the voices of our volunteers as the Party moves forward.
Every proposal that has so far appeared in our draft consultation document has originated with Party members.  After the 2015 election, the then Party Chairman, Andrew Feldman, launched a huge consultation exercise across the Country, and suggestions for improvement came via contributions from thousands of members.  Last year, Eric Pickles conducted further consultation following the general election and reported to Party members at our October Conference.
The vast majority of proposals in the “Pickles Review” do not require constitutional change, and many of these have already been actioned, including the reorganisation of our campaigning staff in the field bolstered by the recruitment and training of new campaign managers.  But where an amendment to the constitution is required or helpful, I would want to put it forward for consideration.
At the November meeting of the Convention, the majority of ideas to improve the constitution were met with enthusiasm, but there were some areas where members sent us away to look again.  A revised set of draft proposals will be published in the spring. Amongst the changes under discussion are proposals to strengthen the voice of the voluntary Party in relation to:
• The Party’s Committee on Candidates
• The production and publication of election manifestos
• The Party Board
• Youth organisations
• The rights of Associations to unfettered access to their data on the Party’s central database
• Online local and national decision-making within the Party though the use of email; and
• Numerous “tidying up” changes directly requested by our Associations in the light of their own experience.
Many of these will clarify ambiguities in the current rules of Associations.
There will be no proposals to change the right of members to select their Parliamentary candidates, and the suggestion that anyone would seek to remove Associations from our organisation is clear fantasy.  There are an increasing number of Associations that have formed by voluntarily merging with neighbours to create a stronger fighting force, but the constitution would go no further than permitting and acknowledging what is already happening.
When a ballot of the constitution is held, members of the electoral college will be free to vote on those proposals they support and against those that they do not, though I would hope we can achieve as much support as possible to bring our organisation up to date.
Finally, I want to mention the long overdue move to the central administration of Party membership.  We have made huge strides in the development of this project, and we will soon be able to roll it out across the Party, which will free up our Associations to concentrate on campaigning, membership recruitment and providing a welcoming and fulfilling experience for members locally.  We are also increasing the support we offer via CCHQ, with a new Marketing Director and an increasing number of membership staff.
As we look towards the challenging local elections in May, the feedback from many of our activists is that we have made great strides with our efforts to develop our organisation into the successful voluntary and professional fighting force that it needs to be and it is vital that the work continues. Thank you for your continued support for the Party.