On Monday, we explained that the PLP had agreed to every request MP Dickinson had made to the Court in his original filing, including setting aside the Central Committee’s two motions of 24 August. We wanted to end the court proceedings and resolve our differences internally, through our members and our Constitution. The mounting costs, coupled with the overwhelming strain on our volunteer officers due to threats of seizing their personal property, fines, and possible imprisonment, weighed heavily in that decision.
The terms we accepted allowed ordinary membership checks and lawful changes to the Constitution. On Tuesday, MP Dickinson’s lawyers responded with further requests affecting both. Following the Party’s press statement yesterday, we want to explain what those requests would mean and why the Party will go to Court to fight them.
First, MP Dickinson asked the judge to rule the Party’s Central Committee–approved membership verification process unconstitutional and block its use. Before the August motions, the Central Committee voted that all membership applications needed to be verified and all applicants would be contacted to ensure they actually intended to join the Party. The plaintiffs have asked the judge to stop these checks. Under their proposed rule, an application containing a name, address, date of birth, and payment would establish membership without requiring a signature or personal confirmation.
Our concern is straightforward: the Party must be able to verify that the person actually applied and wants to become a member. We believe those checks can and should be carried out.
Second, MP Dickinson is now asking the Court to declare, in advance, that certain decisions about the Party’s membership can never be made, even by the Party’s delegates voting to amend the Constitution through its own proper process. MP Dickinson’s original claim said the opposite. In his own words, he said, “the delegates in Conference remain free to adopt a vetting rule lawfully under Article X. I also make clear that the relief the Plaintiffs seek does not restrain the Central Committee from deliberating upon these matters, or from placing any proposal before a Conference in accordance with the Constitution”.
That assurance is what allowed us to agree to MP Dickinson’s claim in full. Now his position has changed. He is also seeking to compel the Party to obtain the judge’s permission before constitutional amendments can even appear on an agenda, be discussed at a meeting, or be voted on. That would mean returning to Court before delegates could consider proposals at a Delegates Conference.
The Party and its members, through their delegates, must still have the right to decide their shared future. That right belongs to every PLP member. It is not ours to give away, and it should not be taken away by a court order being sought by a member after the Party has already stepped back.
We disagree with these new requests because what is now being asked threatens the PLP’s ability to govern itself. It also means more time in court, higher costs for our members, and greater uncertainty. The Party will attend Court on Thursday and Friday (10 AM, 2nd floor Gov Admin Building), and our two volunteer officers will again carry that burden on the Party’s behalf. We respect the Court, and we will set out our position there, respectfully and fully. We remain hopeful that the Court will recognise that the future of the Party belongs to its members.
Our aim remains to end this dispute and resolve our differences internally, through the Party’s own processes.
Any content which is considered unsuitable, unlawful, or offensive, includes personal details, advertises or promotes products, services or websites, or repeats previous comments will be removed.
User comments posted on this website are solely the views and opinions of the comment writer and are not a representation of or reflection of the opinions of TNN or its staff.
TNN reserves the right to remove, edit or censor any comments.
TNN accepts no liability and will not be held accountable for the comments made by users.