Self-indulgent ‘moderates’ planning to disrupt Labour conference

Anti-Brexit campaigners are planning a series of protests at each of the main parties’ annual conferences this autumn. No problem with that, as the right to protest is an important aspect of a democracy. Here is the poster for the protest in Manchester:

manch protest

Significantly, the October protest is in Manchester ‘to coincide with‘ the Tory conference, while the Labour one is at Labour’s Conference venue:

brighton protest

The SKWAWKBOX can reveal that a move is planned inside Conference by ‘moderates’ desperate to disrupt Jeremy Corbyn’s surging popularity to disrupt Labour’s Conference by means of either a ‘mirror’ protest inside the hall or a ‘walk-out’ to join protesters outside, which of course makes an even bigger mockery of the term ‘moderate’ than it already is.

Many of those protesting outside the venue will, no doubt, be doing so because they genuinely think they have a duty to prevent the UK leaving the EU – but those planning the move inside the hall appear to be motivated by a wish to damage the party and its leader by handing easy propaganda to Establishment politicians and media at a time when discipline is vital to accelerate the downfall of the Tories.

A relatively small cadre of Labour members and potentially a few MPs are therefore prepared to abuse the trust of members and of the country that desperately needs the end of Tory government, just to try to revive their vanishing prestige and relevance.

The vast majority of Labour members – already bristling at the increase in ‘noise’ about Brexit and freedom of movement by some of the usual undermining suspects as Conference draws closer – will have no tolerance for this ridiculous, self-indulgent stunt and will back any and all measures the party’s leadership takes to block the infantile behaviour.

The SKWAWKBOX encourages all Labour members to make clear to their MP and/or delegates that there is no room or appetite for such self-promoting grandstanding when Labour has a government to bring down and a country to rescue from Tory predations.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.


    1. If we can get some friendlies onto the NCC it might just lead to meaningful disciplinary action but your point is well made.

      McNicol will continue to sit on his hands, except for when he stands up to indulge in a bout of misconduct himself. It’s what passes for integrity in ‘moderate’ circles.

  1. I think we need to address head on the freedom of movement canard that the ill-disciplined and divisive right wing plotters in the PLP are hiding behind.

    The argument for freedom of movement, under current economic conditions, is essentially specious.

    I agree that the 3 million EU citizens living in the UK should retain the full rights they have now, as should UK citizens living in the EU. I agree that immigration has benefited the UK in many ways. I agree it has made the UK stronger.

    But where there are winners there are losers. So let’s look at the numbers:

    Out of all the EU’s member states, there are only 5 EU states which have average wage levels in the 50th percentile and above. The rest of the EU member states are positioned in the 49th percentile and below. Data shows a trend of increasing levels of uneven distribution of income across the EU states. It is questionable whether this severe plasticity is sustainable. This should be of grave concern to both the European Union Member States and particularly to the EU’s dominant states.

    The wage data demonstrates an alignment with emigration and immigration data. In purely human terms, people are effectively coerced to emigrate due to inadequate wages and working in a poorly performing national or local economy.

    The numbers tell the story. The beneficiaries of immigration are the stronger and richer states, e.g. Germany, France, the UK, Italy.

    Poorer countries in the EU are losing hundreds of thousands of their brightest and best educated workers every year, who are leaving their home country in search of adequate wages. Immigration may make us stronger, but it comes at a cost to another country: it makes an economically weak EU member state even weaker. Our gain is their accumulated loss.

    The argument made for free movement by the right wing anti-Corbyn PLP plotters is, in my view, rather nationalist. It is arguably on the verge of being a parochial position to take.

    I am in favour of the concept of the freedom of movement. It is possible to achieve but that success is entirely dependent upon certain economic factors. Freedom of movement will only work if there is an approximate parity of average wage levels across the EU.

    In EU terms that means steps must be taken to achieve far, far closer harmonisation of average wage levels across the EU. It is only after that has been achieved that freedom of movement will become a sustainable policy.

    The decline of the EU could be reversed, but for that to happen would require the handful of powerful EU states would have to acknowledge the economic damage freedom of movement causes to the economies of the majority of member states.

    The EU would also need to scale up and apply the Labour Manifesto investment strategy across the EU. At the same time as upgrading the infrastructure, the key to the programme is to invest heavily in education and training, in housing, health and public services.

    The EU is an organised, competent and extensively large organisation. It would certainly have the resource to carry out a pan-European infrastructure upgrade programme.

    The cost of Labour’s UK investment plan is £250 billion over five years. I would say on a conservative estimate, the EU’s investment in a pan-European upgrade programme would need to be somewhere in the region of €3 trillion. €3-5 trillion would probably be a more realistic range.

    The question is this: are there any visionary leaders in Europe, leaders ready to change history to make EU citizens’ lives better instead of worse all the time? Are there any leaders in the EU with the courage, grit and the intelligence to become the FDR of Europe? A leader brave enough to offer this Great Deal?

    We’ve got Corbyn, so we’ll be okay. He’s the FDR of the UK. The Attlee of our time.

    Last long post.


  2. If they walk out, they shouldn’t be allowed back in. Passes should be revoked (Along with membership, if need be)

    Give them a taste of the mcnicol medicine. Only make it stick. Walk out = get out.

  3. Would it not be possible to make sure that there is a more than adequate number of security personnel available to deal with protesters and troublemaker, with a pre-publicised warning that anyone causing an inappropriate disturbance will be expelled from the party.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: