Accused senior Sandwell Labour figure referred to NCC – but most senior still not suspended

sandwell dudley

The SKWAWKBOX has covered the ongoing controversy in the West Midlands borough of Sandwell at some length, where the local Labour Party has been riven by allegations over the behaviour of senior Labour figures – and that those senior figures have been protected by Labour’s West Midlands regional office.

Those allegations were discussed last month by an informal meeting of members of Labour’s NEC (National Executive Committee), with a view to suspending the Sandwell ‘Local Campaign Forum’ (LCF), in which two of the main accused figures play a senior role.

Last Tuesday, the ‘Disputes Panel’ of the NEC met to decide which cases would be referred to Labour’s most heavyweight disciplinary body, the NCC (National Constitutional Committee) – a meeting that erupted in its own controversy after its chair took to social media to criticise the results, after cases she felt should have been dismissed were referred to the NCC and the members involved were suspended.

Among the other cases discussed at that meeting was that of the less senior of the two main Sandwell figures accused of serious sexual and financial misconduct.

That person was – at last – suspended and referred to the NCC.

The most senior was not – and has still not been suspended, in spite of the serious nature of the allegations and the involvement of police – but is now ‘in play’ for concrete action and is likely to face severe criticism in the local press for poor judgment in appointing his colleague who now faces the risk of expulsion by the NCC.

A detailed Sandwell dossier will now be presented to the next full meeting of the NEC on 20 March, with the suspension of the whole Sandwell LCF likely to result – and send shockwaves through the centrist establishment in the whole West Midlands.

A local source familiar with all the events and personalities involved told the SKWAWKBOX that panic will be spreading among the entrenched old guard and described the remaining senior figure as ‘a dead man walking‘ because of the focused attention of the NEC.

The West Midlands has long been the bastion of the Labour right, to the detriment of local members and the reputation of the party. At long last, the cracks in that bastion are widening and its collapse could be imminent – which will be a huge relief to the majority of local members who are behind the party’s new direction and eager to push forward.

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.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.

7 responses to “Accused senior Sandwell Labour figure referred to NCC – but most senior still not suspended

  1. Because the police have been called in, it seems there is more than enough cause for a suspension but nothing is done. Yet, Glyn Secker a Jewish member gets suspended because something he said MIGHT be anti-semitic!

    MIKO PELED Jewish Israeli writer, peace campaigner, anti-Zionist and Jeremy Corbyn supporter is giving a talk tonight – Saturday 6.30pm at the Quaker Meeting House in Liverpool, all are welcome.

  2. Pingback: Accused senior Sandwell Labour figure referred to NCC – but most senior still not suspended | The SKWAWKBOX – leftwingnobody·

  3. If the NEC will see a detailed report on the Sandwell case, it seems they will at least get fairer consideration than some of us. The NEC didn’t even get to see the evidence against me when they decided to suspend me last Tuesday, only the massively biased report by the massively biased investigating officer.

  4. Pingback: Accused senior Sandwell Labour figure referred to NCC – but most senior still not suspended | Rotherham Politics·

Leave a Reply