Campaign for Labour Party Democracy activists should be congratulated not only for their perseverance in the face of lengthening odds. At their conference on the weekend, they also engaged in some imaginative thinking about the future of the Labour Party.

As austerity cuts bite deeper into the social fabric of many communities across Britain and as the cruelties of Tory-Lib Dem attacks on the unemployed and people with disabilities are exposed almost daily, Labour should have a large and solid lead in the opinion polls.

Millions of citizens are furious that the banking and energy fat cats are grinning all the way to the bank.

The Labour leadership’s response has been feeble and cowardly.

Instead of challenging the austerity and privatisation drive root and branch, they have merely pleaded for it to proceed a little more slowly.

They support the freeze on public-sector wages. They support the Tory cap on welfare spending which would arbitrarily deny help to people in need and pledge to perpetuate it through the next parliament.

Yet Her Majesty’s far too loyal “opposition” also agrees that hundreds of billions of pounds can be found to renew Britain’s nuclear weapons system and grease City of London roulette wheels in the form of “quantitative easing.”

Fortunately, as CPLD speakers pointed out, it’s not too late for Labour to adopt the kind of policies that would inspire and energise millions of electors.

A massive council-housebuilding programme would give hope to many families and young people desperate for a home of their own, as well as creating up to a million new jobs.

Rent, fare and selective price controls would bring relief to hard-pressed low-paid workers as well as the millions subsisting on state benefits and pensions.

The man and woman on the crowded St Pancras train with left MP Kelvin Hopkins would rejoice at Labour’s embrace of public ownership of the rail, gas, electricity and water industries.

How could such an ambitious general election manifesto be financed?

Abolishing Britain’s useless but expensive nuclear weapons would be a start.

A more progressive taxation system would ensure that the rich and big business pay their fair share — once the tax loopholes were closed and the tax haven status of overseas territories under British jurisdiction is abolished.

A levy on City financial transactions would likewise be a fruitful fundraiser.

Unfortunately, the Labour leadership will not adopt such popular, progressive policies without an enormous struggle. And their resistance will be fortified by the constriction of inner-party democracy over recent decades.

The capitulation of most affiliated trade unions to the latest assault on their influence within the Labour Party makes it all the more unlikely that Ed Miliband, Ed Balls and co will change course any time soon.

While this does not invalidate the need to replace the current unelected Tory-Lib Dem coalition with the only realistic alternative — a Labour government — it calls into question the future of the

Labour Party as a vehicle for progress and fundamental change.

The proposal at the CLPD that the trade unions should establish their own party, whether affiliated to Labour or not, is worthy of much wider consideration.

This could become all the more important should Labour go into next year’s general election with a “Tory-lite” manifesto and should a subsequent Labour government fail to enact policies for the millions and not the millionaires.