Labour won’t issue papers to re-nominate Brown… I think

Further to stories such as this one, I’m trying to work out how Labour’s National Executive Committee could split on the subject of issuing nomination papers.

One of the people behind this move, Peter Kenyon, is an NEC member and I know him – but he’s a new member, replacing Walter Wolfgang in the ‘Centre-Left Grassroots Alliance’ group of NEC members.

Most if not all of the CLGA members – six people out of 33 – will probably vote to issue the papers; they like to stick to procedure. Others might join in. But I can currently count more definite Brown supporters than rebels. The unions will have the casting vote, and I don’t think any of them will ask for papers. In which case Brown is safe, for now.

Update: Brown is safe all right. Further to a phone chat with Peter, neither he nor his CLGA colleaguesare seeking to have papers distributed at conference – he says that’d be too messy and precipitate. But they want to establish what the rules are, and they are certain the rules are on their side, i.e. the party does have to issue papers every year, like it or not.


Tags: , ,

5 Responses to “Labour won’t issue papers to re-nominate Brown… I think”

  1. Peter Kenyon Says:

    Dear Rene

    You are getting ahead fo yourself. I am not allowed to attend the NEC until after the Tuesday pm session at Conference – 23 September. You can read about my thoughts on that first encounter here:

    If I were at tomorrow’s meeting, I would happy to support the rising tide of indignation and chorus of laughter about the sister of a former general secretary who failed to uphold the Rules as set out leading the charge for nomination papers to be circulated ahead of Conference.

    My small voice would, however, argue against any snap decisions to change the Rules at the 2008 Annual Conference which could diminish further the scope for members to have a say in the running of the Party.

    You can read my exchange of correspondence with Ray Collins, the new general secretary elect here:


  2. Enoch Was Right Says:


    Can you please explain the rules or show me a link to them?

    Was Blair actually renominated every year?

    I read that Brown is at least afraid of not receiving as many nominations as last year. On thing that struck me was how inept the Brown management team was last year when they arrange their Napoloeonic coronation. Could it not be forseen that a year in he would have lost some supporters, even if they could not predict that thinsg would get this bad.

    As I said my post is coming from a position of relative (you’ll rarely hear me say that) ignorance with no understanding of the rules.

  3. lastreporter Says:

    A mention of the relevant rules is available on the Save the Labour Party website, in the correspondence between Peter Kenyon (q.v.) and general secretary Ray Collins.

    Blair was not re-nominated, ever. Annual nominations ended in 1997. Defenders of current practice point to the 11-year precendent; opponents say precedent should overrule the rule book.

  4. Rusty Wood Says:

    “The unions will have the casting vote”. I think that sums up the whole leadership situation. They have a critical mass that will either kill him off or not. My money is on not.

  5. Enoch Was Right Says:

    LastReporter – thanks.
    I did find out on my lonesome about Blair not being renominated every year and I am sure you know whose sister that was.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: