Back to NEC Reports Directory National Executive Committee, 30 January 2007 The prime minister opened the meeting by stressing that despite current difficulties, the decisions being taken now would strengthen us for the future.  The home office was actually in better shape than in 1997, and NHS waiting lists were the shortest since records began.  We had to keep the aspirant classes on board and maintain a broad coalition.  Just as the Tories won general elections in the 1980s after being 15% adrift in mid-term polls, Labour could win again on strategic vision and experience.     NEC members were pleased that adoption agencies would not be exempt from laws against anti-gay discrimination, and some even wondered if we could revisit concessions on faith schools.  Tony Blair thought not, but he promised to meet the postal unions, worried about maintaining a universal service, and to safeguard British Waterways against budget cuts.  New rules for lone parents were intended to provide opportunities, not to bully them.  Others praised extra paid bank holidays, but raised concerns about corporate manslaughter and equal pay in the public sector.  On David Cameron’s comments about the Muslim Council of Britain, Tony Blair felt that Britain was basically a tolerant and non-racist society, and had to maintain that without pandering to extremism.  (Later Gary Titley reported that LibDem MEP Emma Nicholson has produced a controversial report on Kashmir.  Labour MEPs were working to make it more even-handed and to avoid tension among ethnic minority communities.)   Foreign Affairs Dennis Skinner argued that Iraq overshadowed all Labour’s achievements, and with the ground shifting in the United States, now was the time to plan an exit strategy.  Tony Blair said the situation could be reviewed after Basra was resolved, and the heat would die down under a new leader.  However he cited Britain’s influence with America as crucial in talks on climate change, on trade negotiations which could treble aid to Africa, and on the Middle East peace process.  On the stalled European constitution, he felt that practical rules allowing the enlarged union to work effectively would be more sensible than a grand relaunch which would simply lead back into impasse.  Members reported from Colombia that trade unionists imprisoned without trial and farmers displaced from their land blamed the army, and Britain for supplying them with weapons.  Tony Blair would look into this, as he believed that military assistance was for use against FARC rebels and drug traffickers.  I asked whether democracy was in itself a guarantee of progress.  Palestine was being punished financially for electing Hamas, and the Iranian president Ahmedinajad, repellent though his views were, was also elected.  Tony Blair said Britain was trying to get money to the Palestinian people, but Israel would not negotiate with parties which denied their right to exist.  He would prefer a government of national unity, or else Fatah would have to take Hamas on.  However this still did not explain what to do when democracy gives the wrong answer.  He told Pete Willsman that no attack on Iran was planned, but they must never be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.  United Nations sanctions must be implemented.   Deterrence Revisited, Again   Foreign secretary Margaret Beckett explained why the government would replace Britain’s nuclear weapons.  The current submarines would reach the end of their life by 2024, with 17 years needed to build successors.  Decisions must also be made on participation in redesigning the missiles and, within two years, on new warheads.  No money would be spent until 2012 and the cost would then be £1 billion a year for 20 years, perhaps saving £2 billion by deploying three instead of four submarines.   As Ian McCartney said, the party has discussed all this before, and the usual suspects took their usual positions.  It was in our manifesto; but then, MPs voted against a manifesto commitment when they banned smoking in all pubs and clubs.  People would not understand giving up nuclear weapons if Iran, North Korea, India and Pakistan had them; but how could we tell others to forgo something so essential to security?  Replacing Trident would tie us more tightly to the US through technology; or it would free us from reliance on the US nuclear umbrella, and the French.  If Britain is in breach of the non- proliferation treaty, the other authorised nuclear powers are far more so.  We need nukes because terrorists do not abide by international laws;  but how do they deter this new kind of enemy?  However when the Financial Times questions this rushed decision, we are clearly no longer in the 1980s.   Margaret Beckett recognised this was a genuinely difficult issue and an invidious choice.  However, the end of the Cold War did not mean that a new major enemy power might not arise in future.  On concerns that the money would be better spent on decent accommodation and protection for our troops in the field, she said it was the Tories who neglected our armed forces and they were infinitely better off under Labour.  She assured Pete Willsman that there was no link whatsoever between possessing nuclear weapons and great power status.  And she ended by saying that in contrast to this open discussion, Labour’s past decisions on nuclear weapons were kept secret even from the cabinet.   No Votes Please, we’re Labour Continuing with Trident, Christine Shawcroft, Pete Willsman and Walter Wolfgang had submitted three motions calling for a free vote by MPs, wide debate, and a vote at the national policy forum.  Ian McCartney rejected the last as against the procedural guidelines.  I disputed this, though was not over- keen to repeat the 2004 NPF when my attempt to phase out Trident was defeated by the unions, anxious to protect more concrete workplace gains.  The NEC voted not to allow a vote, with myself, Christine Shawcroft, Dennis Skinner, Dave Ward, Pete Willsman and Walter Wolfgang dissenting.  More generally I regretted continuing lack of communication between the policy commissions and the rest of the NPF, who are supposed to be ambassadors for Partnership in Power but are told little about developments.  In addition NEC members had expressed concern about the cabinet forward-looking policy groups and the apparent emergence of two parallel policy-making processes.   Back to Basics   General secretary Peter Watt presented Labour’s strategy for the May elections.  In Scotland voters would have to weigh up the economic costs of separation, in Wales the alternative was a rag-bag collection of minor parties, and in England the issues varied with the area.  He also updated the NEC on finances and party funding.  Hayden Phillips now had a better understanding of Labour’s proposals for a voluntary donation cap and links between the labour movement and the party, and was expected to report at the end of February.  Members were concerned that the Tories have a vested interest in spinning things out so their rich donors can keep pouring money into marginal seats.  Peter also reported that the spring events were recruiting well.  I asked for more information to be displayed on the website, with advice for registering non-internet users.  As only myself and Harriet Yeo, of those present, had accessed our personal party web page, this is needed by the NEC as much as anyone.   John Prescott said he had opened discussion on the relationship between the party Chair and the Chair of the NEC, and this would come to a future meeting.  Constituencies would soon receive information about the forthcoming leadership election, and membership seemed to be rising.  A code of conduct for party employees was approved, and Peter assured us that the staff named in a leaked document allegedly from the Peter Hain camp had absolutely no involvement.    Constitutional Matters   In seats where MPs are retiring, the organisation committee agreed open shortlists for Bristol West (on the Chair’s authority) and Bristol North West, Bolton South East, Easington, Swansea West and Brighton Kemptown.  A decision on Ealing Southall was deferred, and Selby, Sunderland North and Brighton Pavilion were designated as all-women shortlists.  The NEC confirmed these decisions, with two against because of concerns about Pavilion and wider diversity issues.  Though I partly shared them I voted with the majority, accepting that one Brighton seat should be an all-women shortlist with the other open to all-comers.  The Black Socialist Society has been revived, with more than 4,000 members and elections in progress for officers and representatives, including an NEC member, and the Birmingham local government committee has also risen from the ashes.  And there is a commitment to establish a Northern Ireland Forum when their membership, currently about 100, reaches 200.    Questions and comments are welcome, and I am happy for this to be circulated to members – and supporters - as a personal account, not an official record.  Past reports are at www.annblack.com  .