Trade unions, pensioners’ groups, community and political organisations have come together to create a “People’s London” campaign working for a democratic Greater London Authority and against a directly elected mayor. A steering committee has been set up to co-ordinate the campaign, an office is to be established and it is hoped to take on a full-time worker.
The campaign will work in direct opposition to the Government’s plans up to the publication of the White Paper early in March, after which there will be a decision taken on its stance towards the referendum: whether to call for a vote against, abstention, a write-in or some other response. The fight will continue whatever the response to the referendum, concentrating on campaigning for our vision of a people’s London: democratic, inclusive, and properly funded.
It is clear from the proposals floated during the parliamentary debate that New Labour has not listened to the responses to its consultation exercise. It has ignored the debates within London’s labour movement. Most of the powers of the new body will come from local authorities, rather than from government, leading to greater rather than less centralisation. The Greater London Authority is seen as advising and overseeing the directly elected mayor, rather than initiating and carrying out policies.
The many quangos that exist in London will be left alone or replaced by others appointed by the mayor, who will have unprecedented powers of patronage. Even some existing democratic bodies, like that which runs the fire service, are to be replaced by unelected bodies run by the mayor. The Government has also given up on any idea of gender equality on the authority, as it has in Scotland and Wales, citing spurious legal problems. Within the London Labour Party, opposition is not being allowed to be heard.
The annual conference, due to be held in February, has been postponed until after the referendum is safely out of the way. Regional Secretary Terry Ashton wrote to affiliates saying that he had taken this decision because the original venue was too small. However, when it was pointed out to him that he had no constitutional right to do this and that the new venue was actually available on the original date, he sent out new letters claiming that he had consulted with Party General Secretary Tom Sawyer, and that the reason was the need to concentrate on the forthcoming referendum and local elections. The truth is, of course, that there were resolutions from the Fire Brigade Union, MSF and others critical of the proposals.
Under the constitution, if 15 members of the Greater London Labour Party Executive call for a special meeting, then one must be held. However, Terry Ashton told one of those who did ask for such a meeting, that none would be held “even if the whole committee asks for it”.
When such contempt is shown for its own members, what does this mean for how the Party feels about the wider labour movement and, indeed, the electorate?