Do we need to change Labour? Yes.

In the wake of a heavy defeat and the election of a brilliant new leadership team, it would be very tempting for Labour to say:

"We have fixed the problem. New team, global crisis and the political cycle will see us through."

That would be a temptation similar to a drowning person in cold water deciding drowning isn't that bad after all.

It's not easy to face the problems we have, but the first step to fixing them is acknowledging them.

Here's my short list for starters, of a few problems we really need to face.

• a record low vote, lowest since the 1920s
• low and static membership in the past three years
• over centralisation of control over policy and strategy, with too little power for members
• an inward focused 'divide the pie' approach by too many party units
• a cultural acceptance of low to no organisation in too many places, and a related culture of federalism divided between electorates rather than a sense of a nation-wide, cooperating organisation
• too much belief that our connections with a wide range of Kiwis are strong, when they are weak
• a sense that we 'own' the voters that went to the greens and nzf, and that they are bound to return to us
• a perception among some parts of the electorate that we are out of touch with their hopes and dreams
• a structure that incentivises our inward focus

It's a long list to which I am sure you can add things, friend or foe.

Some of these are substantive problems that are hard to fix.

Some are perception problems that can be sorted out more easily.

All need tackling to get us on track to what should be our ambition: the party that is open to most Kiwis, and that a regular 45%+ can vote for.

Cosmetic change can't get us there.

That's why we need big change, based on our values, to build a modern political party (not an NGO, not a corporation) that can draw the currents of a diverse electoral coalition together, win elections, and work in communities to change New Zealand for the better.

The status quo, even with the best leadership in generations, can't get us there.

So — it's time to shake things up.

Comments

[Arthur Schenck]

I agree with you, Jordan, and I thought your points about weak connections and "owning" voters were especially on target. It seems to me that this last part goes for policy, too: There was far too much sniping between Labour and the Greens over "stealing" policies. It seems to me a good idea is a good idea and if both parties back a policy, that's twice as good. Who "owns" it only interests partisans—it bores voters.

But related to that is the notion that because a party has traditionally done a thing, it can expect the voters who like that thing to vote Labour without question. In the real world, voters ask, "so what have you done for me lately?"or "What, specifically, will you do for me in the future?"

To win back voters—and to motivate the thousands who simply stayed home—Labour has to demonstrate that it offers the better alternative. The rest of your post talks about some of the things that must be done, but I'd add something a bit stronger: That Labour (just as much as the Greens, actually) needs to stop being so precious about policies, the past or blocs of voters and just get out there with an eye toward building a centre-left consensus and, ultimately, a coalition government with the Greens.

Now, go shake things up!

[Chris Trotter]

Could you be a little more specific, Jordan?

Would you, for example, advocate changing the rules regarding affiliation? The elimination of affiliate voting rights, for example?

Would you support a greater use of the plenary sessions of Conference in order to sharpen debate and allow the rank-and-file to identify future party leaders?

Do you favour rank-and-file ordering of the Party List a la the Greens?

Which would you opt for in terms of electing the party leader: the staus quo; an electoral college; a postal ballot of the party rank-and-file - following a comprehensive "road show" similar to the exercise just conducted?

Should the Sector Groups be retained - or do you see them as a barrier to the creation of a unified, highly-motivated, political movement?

That's probably enough to be going on with ;-)

[Jordan Carter]

Thanks for the comments Arthur - doing my best!

Chris - I support an effective trade union link. At the minute it's not as effective as it should be: to me, effective means trade union members being fully involved with the party on the ground. Conference can always be improved but I don't want us to get to an ALP style situation. Party list: haven't thought about it much yet. Leadership, undecided but tending towards an electoral college. Sectors: they aren't a barrier to anything, but when the 'non-sector' bits of the party aren't functioning well they take on a profile they don't need.

Just some quick thoughts and as the party works through its review, my views on the things you have asked about may change from my initial answers here. :)

[Hulun Shearer]

a perception among some parts of the electorate that we are out of touch with their hopes and dreams

That's the problem right there: the perception on behalf of the Labour Party scum that the electorate is stupid.

The actuality is that Labour doesn't represent Kiwis' aspirations (never has, never will) and the electorate realises it.

[Shane]

I'd like to see an increase in the number of voting delegates each LEC can have. I believe the ALP did this recently. How about doubling the number? A person might be more willing to join the party, attend conferences and also generally get more involved, knowing that their attendance actually counts!

That leads me on to your third bullet point. This would probably require more work from people than what is done at present. I'd like to see more transparency from the time a remit leaves the regional conferences until it gets to national conference. I supported a remit on with a similar aim some time ago at national conference but it wasn't successful. In fact I recall you spoke against it. I doubt a lot of members would understand how the Policy Council actually operates so it would be nice to know more.