Date for your Diary 17th December COPOV Mulled Wine and Mince Pies Forum, Gerrards Cross

 See Events 

Forum 

11am - 2pm Saturday, 17th December 2022

(Coffee served from 10.30am) 

@ All Saints Church Hall, Oval Way, Gerrards Cross, Bucks. SL9 8PZ 

AGENDA:  Mulled Wine and Mince Pies Forum 

See Events for Detailed Agenda 

Conservative Party Chairman - John Rentoul in "The Independent"

 Extract from an article by John Rentoul in The Independent 12 November 2022

The important question now is whether either or both parties can go back to the election of leaders by MPs alone. The Conservatives seem more likely to. It is significant that Conservative Home, the activists’ website founded by Tim Montgomerie and now edited by Paul Goodman, a Tory former MP, has proposed a deal by which members give up the right to vote in leadership elections in exchange for the right to elect the party chair, who has a seat in the cabinet.

Even more significant was that this was supported this week by John Strafford, who is a junction-box in the hidden wiring of the Tory party. He runs an outfit called the Campaign for Conservative Democracy, and for decades he has been a mirror image of the Bennites in the Labour Party – except that he is no ideologue and is not promoting a faction within the party. He is a sincere advocate of members’ rights, but he can see that the idea that such rights are advanced by a vote in leadership elections is “fatally flawed”. He rightly focuses on the right to select candidates free of interference from Tory HQ, a form of party democracy that is compatible with constitutional principle.

Unfortunately, it will never be a prime minister’s priority to change the rules back. Rishi Sunak will not want to antagonise the majority of Party members who want to retain their vote in leadership elections. A rule change depends on a cluster of people, including Nadhim Zahawi, the party chair, Peter Booth, the deputy chair, and activists such as Strafford: they have to accept that it is in the party’s and the country’s interest to make the change.

Tory members "Quitting in Droves"

 Article in Daily Telegraph 8 November 2022:

Should Conservative Party members have a vote in the Leadership election - not anymore!

 

Member’s vote in the election of the Leader of the Conservative Party.

The disclosure by Sir Graham Brady, Chairman of the 1922 Committee that Boris Johnson had the required nominations for him to go forward in the Leadership election of the Conservative Party and Johnson’s subsequent withdrawal, thus depriving the Party members of a vote in the election is a further example of the debacle over the election of the Leader and has demonstrated once and for all that the process is fundamentally flawed and needs to be changed.   Conservative Members of Parliament should elect the Leader alone and no longer should the voluntary Party have a vote.   This means of course that Party members will be giving up the only democratic right that they have within the Party at a National level and for that there is a price to pay.  Members must have the right to elect the Party Chairman, Control the Party Conference including motions for debate, and the to elect or deselect their Member of Parliament without interference from CCHQ.

In 1998 the Conservative Party introduced a Constitution for the Party in which for the first time Party members were given a vote in the election of the Leader of the Party.   The process by which this was to take place was fatally flawed and it was a huge mistake for the voluntary Party to agree to it.   At that time, the organisations campaigning for democracy in the Conservative Party including the Campaign for Conservative Democracy wanted an Party Chairman elected by all the members of the Party based on One Member One Vote and for the Party Board to have a majority of voluntary Party members.   CCHQ refused to agree to this because they wanted central control of the Party, so they gave the members a sop by saying they could have a vote in the Leader’s election.   The member’s mistake was to accept this sob

The fatal flaws in the process agreed with the members were as follow:

1 The Parliamentary Party decided which two candidates were put to the members for election.   There is a fundamental problem with this.   A Prime Minister has to have a majority in the House of Commons to govern and the Leader of the Party must have a majority of their own MPs in support otherwise his/her position is unsustainable, as we have seen with Iain Duncan Smith, Theresa May, Boris Johnson, and Liz Truss.   If the party members favour a different candidate to the candidate favoured by the Parliamentary Party there is bound to be trouble.   But why should the Party members favour a different candidate to the Parliamentary Party?   Primarily it will be because the voluntary Party take a different view on the policies being pursued by the Parliamentary Party.   How can this be?   Because since 1998 the local Constituency Associations have not been able to select or deselect their MPs or even their candidates.   CCHQ has taken complete control over them.

2 The detailed rules for the election of the Leader are decided by the 1922 Committee, which has the power to change them after consultation with the Party Board and the threat of change can therefore be used against a Prime Minister or Leader who has lost the confidence of a majority of MPs.

Once the 1998 Constitution was brought in CCHQ began to demolish all lines of communication between the members and the hierarchy.   All the checks and balances which existed prior to 1998 were abolished.   Pre 1998 the Party Conference was organised and run by the National Union (the voluntary Party). It invited the Leader and other Ministers to speak at the Conference.   There were motions for debate tabled at the Conference and published in a handbook.   Votes were taken on the motions.   After CCHQ took over, 1999 was the last Conference at which we had motions for debate.

So, what else happened after 1998?

The Central Council of voluntary members met twice a year and the Party Chairman and other Ministers used to attend.   It consisted of several thousand members including representatives of the Women’s Organisation, Young Conservatives, and others and at which motions for debate on Party organisation were tabled: it was abolished.

The National Union Executive Committee which was regularly addressed by the Party Leader and had representatives elected by the membership: it was abolished.

Regional meetings for Party members used to be held four times a year, which had officers elected by the members, motions for debate etc. – they were abolished with a couple of exceptions.

Regional meetings of the Conservative Political Centre had officers elected by the members and which discussed policy issues: they were abolished, also with a couple of exceptions.

The National Committee of the Conservative Political Centre had members elected by the membership of the Party and which had meetings with the Leader: it was abolished.  A new Conservative Political Forum was set up under Oliver Letwin and for years did - nothing. 

The Annual Conference of the Conservative Political Centre which any member could attend, was addressed by Ministers: it was abolished.

In other words, all the lines of communication between the Party hierarchy and the ordinary membership of the Party were eliminated.   It was as though the hierarchy didn’t want any members!

One of the main reasons CCHQ wanted control was so that they could control the Conservative MPs.

Prior to the 1998 Constitution the Constituency Associations had effective control of their candidates in a General Election.   This issue came to a head in the General Election of 1997 when CCHQ sent Robin Hodgson (Chairman of the National Union) to Tatton to ask the Constituency Association to drop Neil Hamilton as their candidate.   They refused and Hamilton was defeated by Martin Bell.

Although the Conservative Party now has a constitution, that constitution cannot be changed without the agreement of an Electoral College consisting of Members of Parliament on the one hand and the National Convention, which consists of Constituency Chairmen and Area and Regional Officers on the other. The real power resides with the Parliamentary Party. The Leader appoints the Chairman and Treasurer of the Party, so they are unaccountable to the membership. There is no Annual General Meeting of members so there is no formal forum for members to raise questions about the Party’s organisation or policies. The Annual Accounts of the Party are not tabled for approval at an AGM. The Parliamentary candidates of the Party are controlled centrally. The Party Board can take control of any Constituency Association, which does not toe the line and has done so. When Slough wished to elect its own candidate for the 2005 General Election the Association was taken over by Central Office and effectively a candidate was imposed on them.   The Conservative Party is a self-perpetuating oligarchy.

The National Convention was set up by the 1998 reforms of the Party and is the senior body of the voluntary party. It was created to be the voice of the members and in its early days there were motions for debate and discussion of organisation. Gradually over the years it has changed and now it is a top-down organisation with no debate or meaningful discussion. It has become a rubber stamp for the party hierarchy. It should be abolished.

In the new Constitution of 1998 CCHQ were determined to take control and this came to a head just before the General Election of 2005 when Howard Flight had the Conservative Whip withdrawn by Michael Howard.   Not only was the whip withdrawn but he was not allowed to be a candidate.   The Party Chairman went to the Association and told them that unless they dropped Howard Flight they would be put into “Support Status” and CCHQ would take over.   The Association backed off and Howard Flight was dropped.   After this episode, the Parliamentary Party became very uneasy about their status and moved to improve their position by increasing the number of MPs on the Party Board and the Constitution was amended in 2009 to add two more MPs to the Board.

Key to all these changes is the Party Board for they can determine the amount of political discussion in the Party, the process for the selection of candidates and the control of CCHQ.   Get the right MPs in Parliament as selected by the Constituency Associations and you do not have to worry about the Elected Leader not having the confidence of a majority of Conservative MPs.

One further point; at Constituency level the members elect the Constituency Chairman and elect their local Councillors, but it is the Conservative Group on the Council that elects the Group Leader.   The same should apply at National Level.

Essential Reforms

1) The National Convention should be replaced by an Annual General Meeting to which all Party members are invited.

2) The Chairman of the Party Board, Deputy Chairman, Treasurer, Chairman of the Candidates Committee and Chairman of the Policy Forum should be elected by and accountable to Party members and present annual reports to the Annual General Meeting.

3) Constituency Associations should have the right to determine who their Parliamentary Candidate should be, with an advisory role for CCHQ who would conduct due diligence. There would be safeguards for Constituencies where the membership is below a certain level.

4) Motions for debate should be re-instated at the Party Conference and/or at the Spring Forum.

5) The Party Constitution should be capable of being changed at a General Meeting of the Party, by Party members based on One Member One Vote with a 60% majority.

6) The Parliamentary Party should elect the Leader of the Party.   The rules for the process for election being incorporated in the main body of the Party Constitution and not capable of being changed by the Party Board.   Voting by the Parliamentary Party should be on a preferential basis with the first candidate getting over 50% of the votes being elected Leader.   Each candidate must have at least 15% of the votes of the Parliamentary Party to be nominated. 

Election of Tory Leader by the members - how it started!

 At the Party Conference in 1997 a paper was presented by William Hague setting out a democratic Constitution for the Conservative Party. This was the first time the Party had a constitution.   Missing from it was the right for Party members to elect the Party Chairman based on One Member One Vote.   Instead, members were offered a vote in the election of the Leader of the Party.  Initially it was proposed that there be an electoral college sharing votes with the Parliamentary Party.   Jeffrey Archer suggested that the members should have 50% of the votes and the Parliamentary Party should have 50%.   I rejected this.   In the end the rules for the election of the Leader were determined by the 1922 Committee.   What a disaster.   We should have stuck to our guns and pursued the election of the Party Chairman and control over the Party Constitution.   By doing this we would have controlled the rules by which the Parliamentary Party elected the Leader and using preferential voting the Leader would be the candidate who got over 50% of the Parliamentary vote.   This would help to cut out the personal stake way in which today many MPs use their vote.   We would also determine how the Leader could be removed in a fair and democratic way.