This is a ‘Clause 1’ Moment for the Labour Party

CLAUSE 1: “This organisation shall be known as ‘The Labour Party’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the party’). Its purpose is to organise and maintain in Parliament and in the country a political Labour Party.”

In February 1900 the founders of the Labour Party met to agree how to change the system which had people trapped. They recognised that if you are not privileged there are some things in your life that can only be changed by changing the system itself. If you can’t house your family properly, if you can’t afford the drugs your sick child needs or if you aren’t in a position to negotiate your own wages, then a Government run by an elite establishment will not help you.

To change the system they wrote Clause 1 — the first and most important clause in the Party’s constitution. The reason for the new party was “…to organise and maintain in Parliament….a political Labour Party”. In the 116 years since Clause 1 was written there have been many set-backs and disappointments with the Labour Party in Parliament. It wasn’t easy for many in the Labour family to stomach Jim Callaghan’s monetarism, Gordon Brown’s 10p tax debacle, Tony Blair’s aggressive foreign policy and Clement Atlee’s introduction of prescription charges. But the gains we made by pursuing the Parliamentary route to Government were enormous, and even the most mean spirited must surely recognise that the gains out-weigh the setbacks and disappointments. People’s lives improved because the Labour Party maintained a political party in Parliament that passed laws which met the housing needs of those who couldn’t afford to ‘move upmarket’; it provided free heath care — and removed the devilish spectre of fear — from those who knew they would never be able to afford medical treatment if they or their loved ones fell ill; the Party in Parliament enshrined the rights of Trades Unions in law so that they could negotiate collectively with employers; and more recently it was a Labour Government which established the protection of a basic minimum wage for all those in employment.

This is not yet another post on why Corbyn should not lead the party because he ‘can’t win’. If you are a socialist or a social democrat you will be used to losing General Elections in this country. Since 1900 we have only been in Government about 30 or so years since Clause 1 was written, and it took 24 years after 1900 before we were ever even close to it. But in all those years we never abandoned Clause 1, and on those occasions where we have been able to be the party of labour in Government — representing the interests of those outside the elite — we have done far more to change people’s lives for the better than any protest movement. The Labour Party in Parliament gave genuine freedom and opportunity to people who were trapped by a system run by an elite establishment. The Tories and old Liberal party were never scared of social movements, trades unions or protesters on the streets — there is no revolutionary political tradition in this country and when the founders met in 1900 they had come realise this. It has only been when Labour has been in Government or looked like forming a Government that the establishment has been truly shaken and forced to adopt some of our policies, which is why Clause 1 is so important.

I have learnt much from the last 12 months and Jeremy Corbyn continues to show why he is so popular with politically charged activists who sincerely want to change society for the benefit of the many. His approach of stating our values and identity as a socialist party, rather than saying “what we have to do to win is……” has been refreshing and a humbling lesson for those of us who did not support him in 2015. Most impressive of all has been the astonishing increase in membership and the birth of a new social movement outside Parliament.

This is a pure appeal to everyone who can vote in the leadership election not to abandon Clause 1. If 80% of Labour Parliamentarians have split from the leader in Parliament, and we can’t fill shadow cabinet positions, we are not organising a Labour Party in Parliament, we are splitting it — regardless of who is to blame. If we go into a General Election in which we know there will be another 1931 style result — reducing our representation to around 50 MPs — we are not maintaining a Party in Parliament, we are destroying it, regardless of how many members are part of our social movement. We are abandoning Clause 1 and forsaking the very reason for the Party’s existence.

People say this leadership election is a fight for the heart and soul of the Labour Party. I say it’s even more important than that — it’s a Clause 1 moment. It’s a decision on whether we want to vote to re-elect a leader in Jeremy Corbyn who cannot — or does not want to — organise and maintain a political Labour Party in Parliament, or whether we want to continue the work started 116 years ago.