Yesterday I received an email in my inbox asking whether the Grimond Society, a pressure group supporting cooperatives within the Liberal Democrats, should become an Associated Organisation to the Party. I had presumed this had been a long-term goal anyway based on meetings held, but I appreciate it has been put to vote to let us have our say, which feels very much in the spirit of co-operative organisation, and as such I felt it would only be fair to make clear my own thoughts on the matter.
The benefits of becoming an Associated Organisation are perhaps somewhat obvious; the ability to sponsor Motions and Amendments at Conference is a real strength, particularly as the leadership is attempting to shift the Party to better serve their own goals of appealing to One-Nation Conservatives and the Middle Class, usually through bypassing the Constitution itself, so having a way to prioritise policy that stands in contrast to their vision will no doubt be an asset. In addition to this, the status that comes from being an Associated Organisation is potentially a strength in the press as it will mean our comments hold some level of added authority.
But what about the less travelled path? Organisational independence is one thing mentioned in the email, but I think the argument for this is weak, while we would be forced to adopt membership and voting rules consistent with the Constitution, this is hardly much of an ask in my opinion and makes perfect sense to ensure cohesion within the Party. What would be concerning is the potential loss of a voice in internal Party matters as we (as an organisation) would be committed to public-facing neutrality in elections. This would realistically be fine if we were to remain wholly dedicated to pursuing policy dedicated to promoting Co-Operatives in Party Policy as most motions that go through Conference tend to get passed, which would mean being outside the Party would only be to our disadvantage.
While this does seem like a slam dunk in favour of becoming an Associated Organisation, I would like to at least consider the alternative for a minute; the thing the Radical Association, Social Liberal Forum and Liberal Reform all have in common is that they are much broader tents than most Associated Organisations, which are mostly focused on single-issues such as environmentalism or electoral reform, or for clearly representing a group of people, such as women or Christians. If the Grimond Society wishes to go down the path of focusing solely on cooperatives then Associated Organisation status would obviously fit best, but if it seeks to promote a more broad view of Grimond's Liberalism, opposing concentrations of power in the State, Trade Unions, Corporations and wherever else they may appear in favour of mutual aid, profit-sharing and individual initiative, it may do better divorced from Party politics, where it can freely promote it's agenda without regards to partisanship, as the Social Liberal Forum did when it chose to back Corbyn's 2017 Manifesto for closely aligning with their values.
Ultimately, the question is whether we want to promote something small in a wider group, or promote our own vision independently. I personally believe that the direction of travel in the Liberal Democrats towards electoralism as a means to power rather than to convince the public of the merits of Liberalism has meant there is a sore need for a force outside of party politics to restate the case for it, and indeed promote it among the public. I feel no other organisation is doing this at the minute, and it is something that has the potential to benefit the communities left behind by the Government altogether, which I'm sure Grimond himself would be behind us on. As such I believe we would be better to maintain our independence, at least for now.
