That Starmer fella...

I've said this somewhere on this thread (or a similar one). I think, as nice as it is, the member democracy is a hurdle to being elected. Their concerns often don't seem to match the general electorate's and it sometimes pushes the party in difficult directions.

Agreed. I think the same argument applies to the question about who's going to door knock and volunteer and phone bank and the like - don't get me wrong, those things are important, but members tend to overestimate their input into a win. For the average voter, the leadership and policies are much more important. A large and active membership does not translate into election success, and sometimes actively harms it.

And that argument also applies to the unions. I am still in favour of collective action and I still think worker solidarity has a place in the world. I also recognise that people like Len McClusky are utterly toxic to the electorate, and that our association with people like him cost us votes. I also further recognise that union membership is at an all time low and excludes a significant number of precarious / zero hours workers.

I think unions have done some great things. I also think they have done some terrible things. I want a new model.

EDIT - Blair's Labour was not in hock to the unions. Other funding models are clearly possible.