NEC Consultation

As a constituency member of the National Executive Committee I want to ask Southern Front readers for their views about some proposed changes to membership rates and local party finances.

Membership rates

Many members have raised with me the need for the membership subscription system to be fairer.

Some suggestions for change include a lower joining rate, a local joining rate as an incentive to those who join on the doorstep, a lower rate for those on low wages and the unemployed, a system where those who earn more pay more, a lower joining rate for registered supporters, extending the parliamentary rate to all elected representatives, a more gradual increase for members who come off a reduced membership rate.

We also need to find a way to make the on-line joining process easier, with clearer information about rates and we need to find new ways to encourage payment by direct debit.
I would welcome your views on how you think membership rates could be reformed so that we are more inclusive party that attracts and retains members but at the same time maintains steady finances for the party.

Local Party finances

Currently, CLPs receive an amount of money based on the number of individuals who are paid up members within their CLP. Therefore, CLPs with large memberships therefore receive greater levels of membership subscriptions than those with a low membership. Membership subscriptions should reflect actual membership, not least because this serves as an incentive to recruitment. However, some CLPs struggle to recruit, despite their best efforts, due to demography and geography.

Too many CLPs have ended up in a situation where they cannot pay the European Levy or Election insurance and get more and more into debt each year. Many CLPs do not have the funds to buy Contact Creator. Other CLPs have not sent a delegate to conference for years as they cannot meet the cost.

Current proposals include a system where all membership subscriptions go into a national pot. Out of that pot the party nationally would cover the cost of the European Levy and Election Insurance.

With the remaining money in the pot, some would go to a democracy and diversity fund, to help the poorest CLPs with sending delegates to conferences and encouraging diversity at local level. Some would go into a fund to support local campaign activity, innovation, fund-raising and party renewal, which would allow CLPs to apply for money for organisers, community campaigning and other projects.

The remainder would be distributed to CLPs based on total national membership. However, each CLP would receive the same amount irrespective of how many members they have as this would be based on national rather than local membership numbers.

Further, every CLP would be given Contact Creator for free and all existing debt would be written off.

This is a difficult area for reform and I would welcome your views on these proposals ahead of the NEC meeting in September. It is important that we have a system that is fair, enables CLPs to get out of debt and encourages participation and activity. The question is how you think that can be best that can be achieved?

Please do let me have your views. I can be contacted at eleanorreeves@aol.com

Ellie Reeves is an elected constituency representative on the Labour Party National Executive Committee