The Proposed Changes

Detailed Points for Consideration

References are to "A 21^st Century Party"

Membership

a) Page 5 "Those local parties that help to support campaigning in target seats in this way (funding) will receive additional rights to those set out in Section 2". What rights? Clearly wealth now determines rights in the Conservative Party!

b) Page 6 "allowing us, if that is what members want locally, to deploy some of our property assets more effectively". Constituency Association assets (cash and property) will be more at risk of being taken by Central Office by these moves towards more centralisation and national control over local Associations.

c) Page 7 para. 2 "Local party boundaries should not, however, cross Parliamentary constituency boundaries."

Page 7 para. 3 "We envisage that in many parts of the country local government boundaries may be the natural boundaries for local parties."

This is inconsistent e.g. Beaconsfield constituency consists of South Bucks. District council and party of Wycombe District council. Constituencies cannot be broken up between different local parties.

d) Page 7 Throughout this there is a presumption of increased central control i.e. "We would be prepared to approve local parties" "We would help them" "We would grant a new franchise". Who is democratically accountable for all these decisions?

e) Page 8 "there will be a non-negotiable core agreement signed by each local party and the centre". If it is "non-negotiable" who decides what it will be? Who is "the centre"?

Central Office will take 20% of a local party’s membership income regardless of ability to pay. Are they expecting the wealthy constituencies like Aylesbury and Beaconsfield to pay less than at present or will they still be asked for "campaign subscriptions" and if so the net effect of these changes will not be neutral but an increase in the take by Central Office. There is no guarantee that the 20% Central Office take will remain at that level.

f) Page 8 Local party rights

"Intervention by the centre only if in accordance with the Party’s Constitution". That means the centre can do anything. Its power is unlimited under the Constitution.

"Training for its candidates both before and after selection to ensure that they are of sufficient quality". Who decides the "quality"? Who pays for and carries out the training?

"Support from centrally-employed professional fundraisers". Who will be unaccountable to the local party. What happens if their fund raising activities clash with the local party’s?

"A Service Agreement with CCHQ". Who decides the content of this agreement?

"Feedback on the performance of CCHQ via area/regional officer". What is he going to say other than what CCHQ tells him to say, or does this mean feedback on the performance of CCHQ to CCHQ?

"Participate in the selection of the Area Campaign Director". What does "participate" mean? Do they select him or not?

"In addition there will be a range of services on offer from the centre which can be bought by local parties". At what price? As a franchise what choice would we have?

Local party responsibilities "To provide information on performance against key indicators every six months". More bureaucracy from the Party, which promised in the General Election to cut it out of the National Health Service. Sometimes it can help to have someone monitoring a Constituency in a constructive way comparing the Constituency performance with other similar types and good practice should be shared. Constituencies need help and encouragement, not a big stick!

Insisting on all local parties having trained or qualified agents will increase costs. Experienced officers and/or organising secretary can do an equally good or better job than some qualified staff. The volunteer is often more motivated than the professional.

Grouping Associations will dilute a MPs local support and deprive him or her of a separate constituency organisation that he can relate to and depend on in times of crisis.

g) Page 10 Supported status "a local party may be placed in supported status…. Due to poor performance." Who decides on what is poor performance?

"The Board will appoint one person who will be solely responsible for all aspects of the running of the local party." So the Board can appoint one person to totally control any local party i.e. send their cash to CCO, sell their property, choose who shall be a Council candidate, choose their parliamentary candidate and unaccountable to anyone other than the Party Board that appointed him.

h) Page 10 Campaign Support. "We propose to add the provision of campaign support as a local party objective." What does this mean?

i) Page 10 Selection/de-selection of candidates "local parties will abide by the guidelines for selecting candidates as published by the Board (… the Board will shortly publish a draft)". When? If it matters, because they can change it five minutes after publishing it. "Simplifying the Constitution in this way will allow us to adapt our candidate selection procedures without having to amend the Constitution".

j) Page 12 "We hope that giving areas and regions more power will encourage more people to stand as area and regional officers." But the ordinary member has no say in these positions. They are elected under a system of pyramid democracy, which the Conservative Party made illegal in the Trade Unions in the 1980s because it was so open to manipulation and fraud.

k) Page 13 "The members of the VEC will draw up a short list from which the voluntary party members of the Convention will elect the Convention officers". Why cannot the Convention members (which includes local party chairmen) nominate candidates for office? It is extraordinary that a body cannot choose its own officers. How will the VEC draw up its short list?

l) Page 14 the National Conservative Convention

Why cannot all party members be members of the National Convention? After all, in recent years they have all been invited to attend it.

Why aren’t the members of the London Assembly on the Convention? Welsh Assembly members are.

The National Convention should consider all these proposals on an individual basis.

m) Page 15 Electing the Leader of the Party.

"First, it is wrong in principle and certainly damaging in practise for one group of people to have power to elect the Leader of the Party and a different group of people to have the power to remove him or her". Agreed. So why not confirm the Leader continuance in office annually at a National Convention of all Party members? Just like other political parties do.

n) Page 15 "Second, the current system is expensive and protracted causing maximum uncertainty and disruption". It need not be expensive if members were given pin numbers and could vote by Internet or telephone with appropriate security safeguards. We could actually make a profit (look at the profit "Big Brother" makes). It is protracted a) because the parliamentary party sifts the candidates – so let all candidates go forward for election – and b) because time is taken reconciling local lists with Central Office, but this will disappear when we have the common database.

o) Page 15 "Finally the Party’s members cannot know the candidates as well as MPs". 54 of the 197 Members of Parliament are new so are they going to be excluded from voting?

p) Page 15 " It is essential that the Leader enjoy the confidence of Conservative MPs". None of the candidates in 2001 had a majority of MPs supporting them, so whoever was chosen then would not meet these criteria.

q) Page 15 "candidates would be allowed to spend up to £25,000 from the opening of nominations." As it is only the votes of 197 that will count in this election, that works out at over £125 per elector. Are they all going to be given dinner at the Savoy by each candidate?

Under the proposals that only MPs will vote for the Leader Scotland will get one vote, Wales 3 votes, Northern Ireland no votes, Liverpool, Manchester and Newcastle no votes. Yet these are the areas we want to make gains in if we want to win a General Election.

The Board

r) Page 16. Why is Northern Ireland not represented on the Board?

s) Page 16 "the power to suspend or expel Board members, however they were appointed to the Board, if they breach the Board’s code of conduct". What is the Board’s code of conduct? If a person is elected by the National Convention it should be a decision of the Convention whether he or she should be expelled.