Cameron's Conservative Co-operative Movement

[ChrisCook]

Just to nail my colours to the mast, I'm working out of Linlithgow, Scotland these days (having got nowhere "down South" !) in partnership with a Scottish charity, the Nordic Enterprise Trust ("NET").

We are getting a lot of interest up here (particularly from the new government - and at the highest levels) in the partnership-based solutions we have developed within the context of the "Hanseatic Microfinance Initiative" (part funded until recently by Innovation Norway - a Norewegian government body).

These solutions are not limited to "micro" enterprises of course, but will, we believe "scale" to any size.

I know Jo White at Co-operative Futures and Chris Funnell at CAN (I was on a South East Coops committee with them for a couple of years) and have great respect for both.

Whatever the problem is with LLP's it does not originate with local initiatives like theirs but has deeper roots in the central Coop bureaucracy and the professionals who provide services to them.

LLP's enable "bottom up" development in a simple but radical way, and it goes without saying that if my costs are covered I would be only too pleased to explain (say at the event in January, or any other) exactly how the Co-operative movement could take Social Enterprise by the scruff of the neck and make it into "Co-operative Enterprise".

[MJR]

(say at the event in January, or any other)

<dim>Which event in January?</dim>

[ChrisCook]

To be found here

http://www.co-opnet.coop/viewtopic.php?t=709

[MJR]

http://www.co-opnet.coop/viewtopic.php?t=709

So you think CF are giving incorrect info, but you're still willing to support their information event? Excuse me while I boggle a bit.

Anyway, your offer seems safe, given it says "we are not able to pay for people to run workshop sessions nor can we offer reduced price attendance."

[ChrisCook]

Indeed.

Some of us don't have comfortable budgets to attend and take part in events like this.

[dan]

I know they have done a lot of work in reducing the cost of this event (having heard an estimate a few months ago on what it would cost without sponsorship!).

However, I also know the constraints of budgets and that not everyone can make it. It would be good for those who can attend to bring back items for discussion on this site after the event.

My knowledge of LLP's is somewhat sketchy, and it would be good to have the discussion on how the Co-operative movement can take things forward with LLP's.

Can we do this on here, or would we have to find another way of doing it?

[MJR]

My knowledge of LLP's is somewhat sketchy, and it would be good to have the discussion on how the Co-operative movement can take things forward with LLP's.

Can we do this on here, or would we have to find another way of doing it?

I don't see why we can't do it on here - maybe start a new topic for it?

[Dave]

In response to MJR question about the link between the Labour Party and The Cpo-Opeartive Party. That is still there and is very very strong now. I am the secretary of both a branch party and also of a party council. You would have seen that Peter Hunt the General Secretary of the Party included the strength of the link in the article that was in The Co-Op News a couple of weeks ago. Incidently we are the only Political Party that adhears to a set of values and principals.

What dismays me, is the number of people who say that they support the support the co-operative movement, but when you say well your a member of the a co-opeartive why not come and join the party and push for even more co-opeartive society, and they say "Oh I cant I dont like the link with Labour". Perhaps they should look at a few things before saying that, if the link did not exist, what would the Co-Op Party be, quite possibly only a pressure group, that no one would take any notice of. We would not have achieved the success that we have had recently, ie Private Members Bills being guided through the HoC and the HoL which are based on Co-Operative Princicples and Ideas.

We would not have the influence in Ministry for Education, with Ed Balls, or in the Whips Offices with Tommie McAvoy. To cap it all we would not have a Co-Op Party member in the highest postion in politics in the country ie First Lord of the Treasury, ie Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Through the Co-Opearators being members of the party and being active in it, it is a chance for them to influence councils policies locally with co-opeartive ideas. The only way again that we stand a chance of getting elected here is to work with Labour. How can we work with the Conservatives do they know what co-opeartive ideas are, if they were to see them, the Liberal Democrates, I am afraid to say are different all over the country, see them in rural areas and you could say they were the Conservative Party, see them in the urban areas and they could say they were Labour. I know for a fact that alot of the early members of the Liberal Democrat party were disgrunted Labour Party members. In fact Mike Hancock MP for Portsmouth South who is a Liberal Democrat MP, use to be a Labour Party Member.

So fellow co-operators The Co-Operative Party is alive, could do with some strengthening, and doing some good work, both nationally and locally. So why not consider joining it, just so long as your not a member of either the Conservative Party, Liberal Democrats, or The Green Party, and start to create the co-opeartive commonwealth.

http://party.coop

[michael harriott]

One of the principles of the Co-operative Movement is open and voluntary membership. If members happen to be members of another party they can not join our co-operative party. So how can a political party that does not allow fellow co-operators join, honestly call it self co-operative ?

As for influence, over the last ten years we have had a number of Private members bills, but no Government legislation. Is that a good achievement. After all we manage to update company law every few years and that is without any political party campaigning for it.

My view is that the Labour Party uses the Co-operative Party as a cash cow and pays lip service to our Values and Principles. The MPs act as Labour MPs firstly then and only then will they think about their Co-operative values. Thus there is no concerted pressure on the Labour Government to introduce a co-operative act or to insist that Co-operative models of ownership are considered when services such as housing , are taken out of the public sector.

For the record I am a member of both the Labour and Co-operative Party. I recognise that without he link to Labour we would only be a pressure group, but at least we would be able to critisise a Labour Government when it fails to act in a co-operative manner. We would also be able to work with the Government in Scotland to promote Co-operative Values and parties like the Lib Dems and Greens who also support the concepts of Co-operation.

[MJR]

In response to MJR question about the link between the Labour Party and The Cpo-Opeartive Party.

My question was about the link between Cooperatives-UK and The Cooperative Party. I don't see what your reply had to do with it.

What dismays me, is the number of people who say that they support the support the co-operative movement, but when you say well your a member of the a co-opeartive why not come and join the party and push for even more co-opeartive society, and they say "Oh I cant I dont like the link with Labour".

Well, I say "I don't think the Labour Party is cooperative recently". I'll wait and see what the new leadership does before deciding whether to change my support.

I accept that the link is near-unbreakable now for tactical reasons, but I sometimes wonder whether it was a strategic blunder for it to have been made so strongly in the first place. What's done is done, though. It seems a massive tactical blunder for The Cooperative Party to be quite so offensive to Conservative and Liberal Democrat politicians (aside: weren't a lot of the early Liberal Democrat members pre-merger SDP and Liberal members?) who are in power in many places that cooperatives are working. Shouldn't it be more, well, cooperative?

[joeturner]

As I understand it, some MPs are members of two political parties: the Labour Party and the Co-operative Party.

According to Mark Lazarowicz, Labour and Co-op Member of Parliament for Edinburgh North & Leith:

In effect, the Co-operative Party acts as a pressure group within the Labour Party.

That'd be like the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy or the Christian Socialist Movement.

There are two obvious problems here.

First, being a member of two parties with different agendas, is an anathema to democracy. In fact, I would go as far to say that is it undemocratic.

Second, if it is just a pressure group within the Labour Party, it cannot be called a political party at all.

So either a) it is a trade descriptions infringement, alleging that the Co-op Party is a political party whereas in fact a single-issue agenda campaign within the Labour Party or b) it is profoundly undemocratic.

Dave: I have news for you. The Labour Party picks up and puts down issues whenever it feels like it. They do it with NGOs, pressure groups, religious groups and sometimes even individuals. You'll get made to feel special, meet the cabinet minister, attend a few lunches and be made to feel listened to. Sometimes they'll feed you a little titbit of legislation when they feel there might be some votes in it. Mostly they just hope you'll go away glowing and shut up.

Brown doesn't give a monkeys about either Co-operatives or the Co-op Party. Why should he? Your constituency and political power are negligible compared to the Labour Party and the Trade Unions.

Get off of your high horse. Stop pretending that you have earned influence with those in power, recognise that the cost has been almost total castration of the Co-op movement and most of all kindly stop assuming that because I am a co-operator I should vote Co-op Party, which I find highly offensive. Get some policies and independent ideas and I might consider it.

[Phil Gaskin]

I surely can't be the only one who found it amusing that Joe could go on such an hysterical and uninformed rant - then closes by telling someone else to get off their high horse.

It strikes me that whatever way you look at - Joe would never accept the Labour/Co-operative relationship - he sights that it's either a trades descriptions infringement or it's undemocratic - when what he really means is he just doesn't like it. I have no problem with Joe being opposed to the relationship - I just wish he wouldn't try and dress it up as some high principled co-operative stand - which it clearly ain't.

The Labour/Co-op Party link is voted on and supported at countless co-op society meetings, by members of the co-op society who are not necessarily members of the party. Decisions are made by people who turn up Joe - that's not a trades descriptions infringement, nor is it undemocratic - so turn up, make an alternative proposal - but please spare us all the high principled whining and moaning - it's very, very tiresome.

Phil.

[michael harriott]

Phil
Your wrong

The Co-op Party link is never voted upon. Not at any level I can think off in the last five years at least. I doubt if many members would support such a link, given that a majority of voters at the last election voted against the Labour party.

If members belong to other political parties other than Labour can not join the Co-operative party, can the Co-operative Party be truly a Co-operative. Doesn't this abuse one of our valued principles of open and vo;untary membership ?

Just because the Co-operative Party is dominated by Labour is doen;t make it right that we should accpet the status quo with out thinking.

My question is - if the Co-operative party does not allow open and voluntary membership - can it be allowed to call it self a co0opeative?

Ot is it more akin to a closed shop ???

[joeturner]

I surely can't be the only one who found it amusing that Joe could go on such an hysterical and uninformed rant - then closes by telling someone else to get off their high horse.

It strikes me that whatever way you look at - Joe would never accept the Labour/Co-operative relationship - he sights that it's either a trades descriptions infringement or it's undemocratic - when what he really means is he just doesn't like it. I have no problem with Joe being opposed to the relationship - I just wish he wouldn't try and dress it up as some high principled co-operative stand - which it clearly ain't.

OK. Inform me. Educate me. Explain how the Co-op party in any way supports the principles of Co-operation embodied by the ICA principles. For a start, you've set up and organisation which allows members to belong to more than one political party - as long as it is the Labour party - which is in violation of principles 1,2 and 4.

Actually, the truth is I am really not bothered about the Co-op Party, it having no policies worth speaking of.

The Labour/Co-op Party link is voted on and supported at countless co-op society meetings, by members of the co-op society who are not necessarily members of the party. Decisions are made by people who turn up Joe - that's not a trades descriptions infringement, nor is it undemocratic - so turn up, make an alternative proposal - but please spare us all the high principled whining and moaning - it's very, very tiresome.

Phil.

Hang on a minute, let us read that again:

The Labour/Co-op Party link is voted on and supported at countless co-op society meetings, by members of the co-op society who are not necessarily members of the party.

Which 'co-op society'? Are you telling me that the Co-op Group, a consumer co-op containing 4.5 million members of wildly differing political viewpoints, dictates to your political party about the most important issue in your existence? Have you ever heard of the ICA principles? How about Principle 2? Clearly some decisions are not made only by members who turn up to Co-op Party meetings.

And for your information, I cannot turn up and make an alternative proposal, given that Dave's final paragraph excludes me. Unless you make policy at the Co-op Group AGM, of course, which I can attend as a member.

[joeturner]

Phil
Your wrong

The Co-op Party link is never voted upon. Not at any level I can think off in the last five years at least. I doubt if many members would support such a link, given that a majority of voters at the last election voted against the Labour party.

I don't understand, michael. How can anyone be a member of the Co-op Party and then not vote for the Labour Party - or is that not required when a Co-op candidate is not standing in the constituency?