According to recent reports, the Womens Institute has 212,000 members, 18,000 of whom have joined this year. This means they have more members than the largest British Political Party and their growth in membership outstrips the growth in any of the parties including UKIP. They are unashamedly a-political but they are just as passionate about resolving issues that they consider to be a priority for their members. When I was a candidate for Police and Crime Commissioner election a year ago, I tried very hard to meet with local organisers of the WI. I reasoned that as an Independent candidate and as free of party politics as the WI are, standing for a post that I knew the WI would be interested in, that we shared common interests. However despite many efforts they made it clear they did not want to blur any sense of their integrity as being free of any bias in any election. As disappointed as I was, I fully respect their views and decision. However it would be a stupid person who would confuse that approach with any sense that the WI are not political and don’t have an interest in matters of public policy. A quick glance at their website shows that they are interested in the following issues:

• The improvement of maternity services
• The improvement of our High Streets
• A strong commitment to Green Policies
• Food Security

The final policy element on their website is their opposition to part two of the lobbying bill, a subject I wrote about yesterday. They are as opposed to this legislation as 38 degrees is and a number of other organisations, and individuals such as myself.  That is because the WI, who are scrupulous about their separation from political processes, could be treated in the same way as organisations that have been created to ensure that a given party is successful in an election, simply because they have views about matters of public policy. Our current Government are either too stupid and incompetent to realise the impact of their own legislation, or else they are so wilful that they want to shut up groups such as the WI, AgeUK, Woodland Trust, SCOPE, Churches and the National Secular Society. As a result of this Bill the tradition for local charities to organise husting meetings might whither and die, which will make local democracy even more diminished than it is at present. I know of at least one group of charities whose members are raising this as a realistic possibility.

If the Government continues along their path of promoting part two of this Bill, they could succeed in shutting up these organisations. That would certainly show the power of our Parliament. A sort of bloodless dictatorship. However there is an alternative which may not yet have occurred to this cabinet, most of whom are rather distant from our daily lives and based on my experience, show no real desire to learn from local groups on this matter. If the multitude of organisations that are primarily focused on local networking, but occasionally see the need to campaign on matters of public policy, were obliged to put up or shut up. If they had to register in a similar way to political parties, or else stay silent on matters they consider important, some might decide that perhaps it is time to change their organisational strategy. Imagine if the WI decided that their future was to be as an organisation that continued to make jam and organise local meetings, but in order to stay true to their focus on maternity services and family support, they would do this, not as a charity, but as a political party. This might change their financial arrangements, due to the loss of tax relief, but it would also mean that from time to time, if they felt that in a given constituency that the choice of candidates was so limited that they wanted to offer an alternative, they would be free to do so. This could be due to the background or gender of these candidates, or it may be where the outcome of the election is seen to be a foregone conclusion. Over half of the constituencies here in Sussex, with the current political landscape are constructed in a way that suggests there will never be a change from their usual outcome. What if the WI or some other significant charity decided in the light of the lobbying Bill that they will embrace the change being proposed by the coalition and as well as registering to lobby, that they would go to the next stage and use their popular support to change the way in which this country is governed. I for one would vote for that!