Leader of the PLP
Dear Christine Shawcroft,
I heard you on the radio this morning, and I looked up your website. I approve all your attitudes, and applaud your massive efforts in support of those attitudes. But I come to a different conclusion.
You were advocating lowering the requirement for MP endorsement for the selection of a future Leader of the Labour Party (LLP). It seems to be a matter of observable fact that the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) will not follow Jeremy Corbyn. And that the Membership will not follow anyone else. So, we are at an impasse.
Why not scrap completely the requirement for MP endorsement? Let Congress/NEC/Membership/Affiliated unions select a Chairman/President/Leader. You may see no reason why 229 MPs should frustrate the democratic wishes of the 515,000 Party members, merely on the grounds that they have won a parliamentary election?
But the team in Parliament needs to be a team. I would like the PLP to get their act together, and to put their best parliamentarians forward to advocate effective opposition. They need to create the semblance of a Government in Waiting. Let the PLP select their own leader, unanimously — a shadow Prime Minister, if you like.
If you question the democratic authority of the PLP, bear in mind that 229 MPs represent 229 x 75,000 = 17.2 million constituents; and are therefore voted for by 229 x 37,500 voters; i.e. approximately 8.6 million voters. That makes the Party Membership seem almost irrelevant.
Yours sincerely, Cawstein