Labour's `luvvie' tendency tries Clause for thought
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Labour "luvvies" yesterday entered the wrangle over rewriting Clause IV of the party's constitution, unveiling no fewer than five suggested drafts.
The contributions, commissioned by the Labour-affiliated Fabian Society, come from the writers Fay Weldon, Michael Frayn, Zoe Fairbairns and the husband and wife team of Margaret Drabble and Michael Holroyd.
Lord Alf Dubs, the society's chairman, said it had asked the five to come up with their own versions because "too much of the debate about Clause IV has involved swapping dry and unexciting alternatives to an original series of words beyond their literalmeaning".
Evidently undeterred by the growing bad press accorded to Labour celebrities, Ms Weldon has offered two versions, both evoking the existing clause by calling for equitable distribution of the nation's wealth for everyone who "by hand or brain" contributes to it.
But only tangential reference is made to the hallowed principle of common ownership in the 1918 clause.
"Whether this end be best obtained by common ownership, or by effective organisation, that wealth should belong, and be seen to belong, to the generality of the people who create it," Ms Weldon writes in the first alternative.
Mr Frayn, perhaps mindful of the need for something neat to fit on a Labour Party membership card, has produced a mere 10 words: "To set some bounds to the tyranny of the fortunate."
The society, once the haven of Labour's statist middle-class tendency but now trying to re-invent itself, has votes worth about 0.5 per cent of the total at the 29 April special conference on the clause. Its executive has yet to decide whether to exercise them.
Ms Drabble and Mr Holroyd aver in their 136-word version that Labour is a "socialist" party, working for equal opportunities, redistribution of wealth, a peaceful world, trade union rights, a robust democracy and personal liberty.
Ms Fairbairns recognises the rights of the unwaged to fair reward and to ensure that the "means of production, distribution and exchange" - to quote the current clause - "whether privately or publicly owned, are controlled and managed with due regard forthe human labour and ingenuity that make their activities possible ..."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments