These documents have unfortunately not been published openly or distributed to all Momentum members, so we reproduce them here.
Here is the “October newsletter for groups”, which has been sent to some members of some local Momentum groups, but not others.
“If you have any queries about the documents, please contact Momentum national organiser Emma Rees via email@example.com.
1. Logistics for the NC
Date: Saturday 5th November
Time: 10.30am (for an 11am start) – 4.30pm
Location: BVSC, 138 Digbeth, Birmingham B5 6DR (fully accessible)
[Logistical details redacted]
2. Discussion papers
All regional networks should meet between now and 30th October. Organisers should inform firstname.lastname@example.org (and CC email@example.com) of the details of the meeting, so they can ensure that delegates from all groups in the region are invited.
The regional network meeting may wish to:
a) Discuss the paper attached (agreed to be circulated by the Officers of the Steering Group)
b) Elect delegates to the National Committee (this is the choice of the region)
c) Submit any other motions or amendments. All motions must be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org. If you have not received a confirmation of receipt email within 48 hours, please send again. The deadline for submitting motions is Monday 31st October.
Final papers will be circulated on Saturday 29th October.
Paper 1 – Process for deciding Momentum’s new structures
Rather than attempting to decide Momentum’s structures at the National Committee, a body which is now technically running beyond its mandate and is not fully elected, the Steering Committee is proposing that Momentum’s permanent structures be debated at a national conference, and voted on either by delegates at that conference or by all members. This conference will take place in February (there is a separate paper on its composition). The proposals we need to generate to go to that conference are not just about structures – they are also about what Momentum stands for and how we conduct ourselves.
So there are 3 kinds of documents that can be submitted:
- Momentum’s core politics and guiding principles – what we stand for
- Momentum’s ethics and code of conduct – how we behave
- Momentum’s democratic structures – how we make decisions
The process that the Steering Committee is proposing is designed to be as open as possible – proposals can come directly from members, unmediated by the National Committee or any other parts of Momentum’s ‘centre’.
Phase 1 Begins: November 12th
Drafts to be submitted to HQ for circulation: November 19th Comments must be received at HQ by: December 9th
Revised documents submitted: January 9th (dates assume an early Feb conference. A later conference should involve an extension of phase 1)
All members of Momentum will have the right to formulate and propose documents on the above areas. Members’ proposals attracting the support of 50 individual members will be circulated in a document (the “initial proposers”). All members and local groups will be able to submit comments or suggested amendments which will be considered by the initial proposers who may accept or reject them, and revise their documents prior to the next stage. They may also composite their documents with others In order to progress to Phase 2, proposals will then need the support of: 200 individual members of Momentum.
Documents circulated: week commencing January 9th Ends: One week before conference
This stage is an opportunity for local groups to discuss the final documents in advance of the conference and for people to declare their support, in order for favoured documents to get over the final hurdle. The numbers required to reach Phase 3 are: 1000 individual members; or 20 local groups; or 400 members and 10 local groups
The vote will take place between all proposals that make it to conference by Preferential Vote. The question of who gets to vote, and how conference is composed, is in section 2.
Questions which you should discuss:
1. Do you agree with the broad process outlined, and if not, what should be used?
2. Do you agree with the 3 categories of paper outlined above?
3. Do you agree with the numbers needed to reach each stage, or are they too high or low?
4. Do you agree with the dates and timescales outlined above?
5. Do you have any other comments or suggestions?
Paper 2 – Momentum’s conference
The National Committee has already resolved (at its last meeting in May) that Momentum will hold a democratic conference in February 2017 in order to settle the permanent structures of the organisation. The text of the motion passed at the National Committee is as follows:
“We need a widely representative Momentum conference in order to empower the membership, push forward the development of our policy and activities, and allow groups to coordinate, network and become part of a national Momentum culture. We therefore agree to convene a democratic conference [in February 2017], representing local groups directly.”
We currently do not have an agreed delegate entitlement for the conference, or a firm idea of who can vote at it, other than that it will “represent local groups directly”. The Steering Committee has commissioned a mapping exercise of Momentum’s local groups in order to determine the size of membership and health of local organisation, and to enable us to assist in supporting local activity. This process is underway, and will feed into the delegate On the Steering Committee, there are different opinions as to how the conference should be composed.
– Delegates from local groups (according to their size)
– A mixed delegate system: delegates from local groups (according to their size) and regional ‘top up’ lists elected by OMOV in order to represent people who live in areas not covered by local groups
– No delegate system – the conference should be live-streamed and all Momentum members should be allowed to vote online
Questions which you should discuss:
1. Should voting at conference be by delegates, or by an online ballot of Momentum members?
2. If voting is by delegates, how should the delegate entitlement be calculated, and is it reasonable that a national committee only created as a temporary body whose composition is not necessary representative should decide the delegate entitlement?
3. Apart from Momentum’s core documents (Politics, Ethics, Structure), what else should Momentum conference vote on, if anything?
4. What kinds of sessions should the conference include? What should the agenda look like?
5. Do you have any additional ideas and proposals for the composition of conference?