Discussion Thread: Require political parties to be internally democratic

This is an archived discussion thread for the "Require political parties to be internally democratic" voting page. Voting, and this discussion thread, have now closed.   

James Binns 1 month ago

6 people liked this.
Once the political parties were, in a big way, run by the voluntary party, but unfortunately this is no longer the case. When an election is called it is we volunteers, of whichever party, that have raised our election finances through fund raising to ensure our candidate wins! That money does not come from central office, yet without it the local party and the national party could simply not function! My point, give power back to all members! Do not centralise everything! 

Furthermore I personally reject the idea that political parties on a local level must have candidates imposed on them! There have been many cases whereby all political parties have almost forced candidates on the local associations. This is totally undemocratic and goes against everything we as a democracy should believe in. Moreover, under the current system if there is a local candidate, who would wish to be PPC, etc, for your local area, they may not even make it onto the short list for the constituency! This can and will change with this proposal! 

Trying to gain more members alone is a nightmare as many people do not know what they will get in return for membership. As someone who tries to gain more members within my particular political party I find it to be a total upward slope, with no end in sight. This proposal I personally believe and I know, would make individuals far more willing to join political parties as they would actually feel and recognise that they had some authority within the party. This is what people want as I am constantly told.

From whichever political background you are from, to which ever party you support within our nation, please vote for this proposal. It will benefit every member of every political party - these are the people who support us through thick and thin, do they not deserve some authority? Hopefully this proposal may change the current situation!

Ubiquitous 1 month ago
I particularly like the idea of open primaries for the PPC - although only if we had central funding and an absolute ban on any private funding of individuals - to avoid the situation where a candidate is essentially bought by a moneyed interest - oil, pharmaceuticals, military hardware, whatever. 

If we have a cap on funding, then primaries - with STV become a way for people to begin actually to have the representation they want, with their MP genuinely accountable. Which in turn, would loosen the hold of the party whips over the Commons. If they can no longer say 'your voters voted for the party, not for you' then they have no more power.

Caroline Strafford 1 week ago
 
1 person liked this.
If we really live in a democracy, power belongs to the grassroots, and not the party hierarchy. The hierarchy should be listening to the members, and reflecting members' views, and should NEVER be imposing their wishes on us. This is particularly important in the selection of candidates who are there to represent the electorate, not primarily the Party - although obviously candidates do support Parties. It is a question of balance, and the constituents views are paramount. Imposing candidates on a constituency should be out of the question.
It is ridiculous that a Party hands down their political thoughts without listening first to their members. What is the point of being a member if the Party hierarchy disregard members' views.

Jim Halcrow 1 day ago
Party Establishments, Hierarchies and Executives should be prevented by law from overruling Party Conferences unless that decision is backed by at least a three fourths majority

John Strafford 1 day ago in reply to Jim Halcrow
Jim, 
If the members can control the Party Constitution on the basis of one member one vote they can introduce such a provision if they want to.

Jim Halcrow 1 day ago in reply to John Strafford
Hierarchies that overrule Party Conferences also overrule Party Constitutions.

mattgbwf1 6 hours ago
Fatuous Idea really, an idea that you seek state control of how political parties function in order to democratise them, to make them legitimate parties who then act in the voters interests?. If you choose to be a member of a political party because of their policies you have to put up with the way the policies are formulated including internal decision making. Yes all four mainstream parties in the UK have less than fully functioning decision making processes which exclude members, but insist that their policies have broad appeal never the less, and they all try to be the same. If you dont agree with the policies why join them? In any event broad appeal policies mostly appeal to the lowest common denominator and do not result in good democratic governance. 

A political party was recently told by the court that it had to change its membership policy to be thought "legitimate" . This did not mean that its core constitution or policies had to be changed to be thought "legitimate" by the court however. So a court ordering a party to be internally democratic is meaningless.