How Labour Makes Policy

 A Constitutional View

It is often said that the Annual Conference is the Labour Party’s supreme policy making body. This is true for the party in the country. Conference is the party’s “parliament” where issues are debated by delegates appointed by CLPs, trade unions and socialist societies. It binds the NEC and party officials but not, of course, individual members who can continue to dissent.

However, MPs are accountable to a wider electorate as well as to the party membership. The party cannot mandate MPs or the PLP in the performance of their duties. On selection Labour candidates sign an agreement to take the Labour whip and to support the manifesto. This means that the PLP has some freedom of manoeuvre in policymaking. In practice, the Shadow Cabinet play a major role which is formalised in the rule book through the Clause V committee.

Clause V sets out how the manifesto is decided. The Cabinet (or shadow cabinet) meets with the NEC and representatives of the PLP, trade unions and other stakeholders to select from the party programme the items for inclusion in the manifesto and may decide policy on issues not in the programme.

The policy programme includes all the resolutions from conference which passed with a two thirds majority and so also includes the NPF report agreed by conference. The NPF consists of some 200 members including the shadow cabinet, NEC and representatives of trade unions, CLPs, MPs and councillors. It reports to conference each year and works under the supervision of a joint policy committee of the NEC.

A Policy Analysis View

The constitutional view does not tell us where power really lies, who is influential, which ideas get a hearing or how conflicts are resolved. For example, the leader’s office plays a role mostly ignored in the rule book. The first draft of the manifesto is usually written by the leader’s team and so key decisions are made even before the Clause V meeting happens.

Nor does it take account of the ecosystem of think tanks (IPPR, CLASS, Fabians), academics, lobbyists (SMMT, War on Want), campaign groups and other interests. These seek to influence policy through direct contact with MPs and often with fringe meetings and stands at conference. CLPs frequently pick up ideas from campaigning groups, for example, the green new deal or MMT. Corporate lobbyists are more likely to target the shadow cabinet.

As I see it the party has two strands of policymaking. One is through CLPs and unions submitting resolutions, responding to NPF consultations, and ultimately voting at conference. The second strand runs through the shadow cabinet. Each member is engaged in policy development in their area, drawing on advisors, consulting specialists and commissioning research.

Where shadow ministers have time to consult and deliberate, most CLP discussions are limited by the time available. So, we tend to stick to broad principles or seek to demonstrate a strength of feeling by passing similar resolutions across the grass roots. This leaves the shadow cabinet with the space to develop the details.

The potential strength of the NPF is that it involves CLP representatives in a more deliberative type of policy-making and it gives CLPs the chance to react to drafts of more detailed policy positions. It can bring together these two strands through the policy commissions where CLP and trade union reps can debate directly with shadow ministers. In addition, through holding hearings CLP reps have an opportunity to hear industry lobbyists, academics, think tankers and campaigners directly and put their claims to the test.