Breaking: CLPD/JVL/LCND first out of traps with a left slate. Momentum to follow?

clpd logo

The deadlock over the candidates for the left slate in the important NCC (National Constitutional Committee) elections has been broken by an email sent out this morning by CLPD (Campaign for Labour Party Democracy) with the six candidates they have chosen.

The list includes Stephen Marks, who is the JVL (Jewish Voice for Labour) member that Momentum representatives at this week’s grassroots Labour meeting of numerous left organisations attempted to veto.

The slate is also backed by JVL and the Labour Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (LCND):

Nominations are now open for six new CLP places on the NCC. These are the additional seats that Labour Conference agreed to last month. The NCC is an important committee dealing with disciplinary cases regarding members of the Labour Party.

This is a snap election in which CLP nominations will play a key role in the election process. Unfortunately the NEC agreed a very short timetable for this election, so CLPS need to nominate now.

The deadline for CLP nominations is 28 October. Following that CLPs will cast their votes in a ballot that will probably be sent to CLP Secretaries. Voting will take place from 12 November to 25 November.

Each CLP can nominate up to six candidates. The nominations can be made at a General Meeting or if there is not time to hold one, at a CLP Executive Committee or by CLP officers.

Please ask your CLP to nominate and vote for all six of the following candidates:

Kaneez Akthar
CLP: Keighley & Ilkley CLP
Membership Number: B040015
Kaneez is a Labour Councillor in Keighley and has held party positions including Women’s Officer

Annabelle Harle
CLP: Cardiff West
Membership number: A002070
Annabelle has previously served as a Welsh Labour Executive Committee member, National Policy Forum member and CLP Secretary

Gary Heather
CLP: Islington North
Membership number: A006966
Gary is a Labour Councillor, has previously stood for Parliament and held positions including CLP Chair

Stephen Marks
CLP: Oxford East
Membership number: A241053
Stephen has previously served as a Labour County Councillor and held positions including Vice-chair of the District Labour Party

Khaled Moyeed
CLP: Tottenham
Membership number: L0128862
Khaleed is a Labour Councillor, who has held positions including CLP BAME Officer. He is Vice Chair of Young Labour Lawyers

Cecile Wright
CLP: Derby North
Membership number: A481680
Cecile is a former member of the TUC Race Relations Committee, has served on a Mental Health Trust, acted as a Trustee of the National Children’s Bureau and chaired a Women’s Refuge. She has held positions including CLP Vice-chair

The above candidates are committed to securing a Jeremy Corbyn led Labour government and, if elected to the NCC, would act impartially, insist on natural justice and fairness to all and seek to improve the integrity of Labour’s internal disciplinary processes.

As the Labour Party fights for a more democratic and equal society, it is important that our internal disciplinary procedures also reflect these principles. It will aid the party’s campaign to win elections.

The composition of the current membership of the NCC does not remotely reflect the diversity of our society, so please ask your CLP to nominate and vote for all six of these candidates, to ensure an effective NCC which is more inclusive.

These candidates are backed by: the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy (CLPD), Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL) and the Labour Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (LCND).

It’s not yet known whether Momentum and LRC (Labour Representation Committee) will swing behind this slate or issue one or more alternatives, but Labour members meeting to decide their nominations now have a set of left candidates to support against the right-wing slate published last week.

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.


  1. JVL is providing a great model of how to deal with the “Jewish” issue in Labour – appreciating that not all Jews are Zionists AND that educating people about antisemitism is much better than simply expelling them. JVL has taught me respect for Jewish people, but LFOI and JLM have really put me off having respect, when people are so prepared to support the Israeli Regime.

    1. I agree, and would add that wheras JVL members fight antisemitism and advocate legitimate free speech on Israeli racist policies, they also defend the rights of all Jewish people living in Britain.

      Importantly, they also work to make our country a better place for all its citizens, whatever their race or religion, based on coherent socialist principles.

      Stephen Marks is an excellent candidate.

      1. JVL should be the official ‘Jewish section’ of the Labour party not JLM which is little more than an Israeli proxy

      2. Mr Marks seems like an ideal candidate….pity Mr Lansman doesn’t agree. Momentum have lost it, no democracy for them.

  2. What is a ‘slate’? What is a ‘left wing’ slate? Is there a quota for a slate? What criteria left wing? Who decides, The Guardian; The BBC; The Huffingdon Post; The Independent or perhaps Channel 4? Is everyone so like-minded that everyone agrees on everything? No differences? We are the clones? California style Identity Politics changes everything.

    1. It was made quite clear it is the slate offered by JVfL,and I welcome it.As I will the LRC one when it comes.The Momentum one might get a cursory glance!

  3. It’s difficult,I fully understand the need for a united front to stop odious right wingers gaining positions of power but then I am left in the quandary I was in prior to the NEC elections where I did not want to vote for MrLansman but was persuaded by my wife that solidarity was the fundamental concern in that poll. Subsequent events have convinced me that my initial instinct was correct As long as we are given sufficient and honest information about all of the candidates I think this time I will use that as the basis for my choice .

    1. Indeed, voting for the JC9 didn’t get us very far, did it? Maybe the membership are actually more radical than Momentum or the CLPD/JVL/LCND groups.

      1. I used to be a Momentum member but left after the Pete Willsman charade. And I am vindicated in doing so, by yet another example of Mr Lansman’s autocratic behaviour.

  4. These are valid points being made by Jack T and Steve R about individuals and individuality – others have raised this issue before, about the slate for the NEC. No system is perfect, but, for now, people like me depend on the collective judgement of groups such as CLPD, LCND JVL etc. and I think collectivity matters.

    Anyway, I.m delighted to see that the candidate supported by JVL is on that slate. The JVL have a long wait yet, before they can become officially affiliated to the LP. It grieves me to think of them waiting for this recognition, whilst groups like LFI and JLM pursue their agenda. The JVL need all the support they can get.

    1. Paulo, a note of caution: If you believe as I do that Zionism is totally incompatible with Socialism please be aware that although JVL do not put Zionism at the centre of their world, unlike some other Jewish groups such as JVP, they are not anti Zionist and tailor their views accordingly.

      1. Paulo, for example, they do not oppose Israel being a ‘Jewish State’ with all the downsides it implies for Palestinians.

      2. My understanding is that JVL wanted to be inclusive for all Labour Jewish members, and are, like some Zionists, in favour of equal rights for Palestinians whatever the outcome regarding one or two states.

      3. That was how I understood it. For JVL to be effective in bringing about change, they have to keep open opportunities for dialogue and the building of bridges and most importantly they have to reach a wider audience than just me! To be in opposition to Zionism, as I am, doesn’t have to preclude empathy for Jewish history and Jewish predicaments. FWIW I am for a one state solution – a state of Israel not predicated on cultural, racial or religious divisions. I struggle to see what else there might be, but I am a very long way indeed from the knowledge and expertise that is prerequisite for a solution.

      4. I cannot even imagine a ‘one state’ solution – the one state that currently exists practices apartheid, and is not far from genocidal proclamations, if not practice.
        How can that conceivably be made to work when the Israeli majority are happy to vote for Netanyahu?
        Genuine question, I’d really like to see a blueprint.

  5. I will not vote for anyone who thought that adopting the discredited and gagging IHRA definition was acceptable, it shows a profound lack of understanding of the consequences and the motives of those who campaigned for it.

    Do we know the views of those just proposed for the slate re the IHRA?

    1. To the very last, the JVL found the IHRA definition unacceptable (though, like myself they supported the initial Formby NEC proposal as being infinitely preferable to what has followed) and put forward a massive petition to say so.The JVL have been pretty courageously outspoken about the key issues thus far – haven’t they? BTW, thanks Jack T for your flagging of JVP – and there’s the JSG too.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: