Smith’s response to CLP no-confidence vote as sour as Ryan’s – and as telling

Comment

asmith.png

Angela Smith

Penistone and Stocksbridge MP Angela Smith last night suffered defeat in a no-confidence vote by her local CLP (constituency Labour party, by a margin of 27 votes to 20.

Smith’s response was sour and completely dismissive of local members’ views:

smith response.png

Smith has been vocal in criticism of the Labour Party over alleged antisemitism, including an ill-judged tweet attacking comments by what proved to be a fake account, and regularly shares tweets by the Tony Blair Institute.

Interestingly, since she mentioned the ‘biggest crisis since Suez’ faced by the UK, she also shared a tweet by Tory commentator Dan Hodges praising Theresa May’s ‘dignity, courage and resilience‘:

smith hodges.png

Smith, who has received donations in kind from the water-related companies and chairs an All-Party Parliamentary Group largely funded by the water industry, has also attacked Labour’s plans to re-nationalise it.

She was also one of four Labour MPs who abstained on a Labour amendment to Philip Hammond’s budget to increase taxes on the wealthiest.

In spite of there being no shortage of reasons why Penistone and Stocksbridge members might be less than satisfied with her performance, Ms Smith’s instant reaction was to dismiss the vote of no confidence by attacking a ‘cabal of hard left members’ supposedly responsible for it.

This reaction bore a striking resemblance to that of another unpopular right-wing MP, Enfield North’s Joan Ryan, who attackedTrots Stalinists Communists and assorted hard left‘ when she suffered a similar reverse in September:

ryan reac

Smith’s defeat was subsequently lamented by an array of the usual suspects on Labour’s parliamentary right, some of whom have also recently been on the receiving end of no-confidence votes.

It seems denial is not just a river in Egypt, as the old saying goes.

But Labour’s new rules make it far easier for Labour members to deselect MPs they feel are failing to represent them or are positively undermining the party. Have these MPs simply learned nothing from the last three years, or it is merely that Blairite die-hards have decided there’s no mileage in trying to build bridges with local members.

Angela Smith was contacted for comment.

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.

15 responses to “Smith’s response to CLP no-confidence vote as sour as Ryan’s – and as telling

    • I would never incite anyone to copy the Times and paste the whole thing on the dark web every day – that would be very, very wrong.
      Wouldn’t take more than about six months to kill it stone dead though…

  1. The key issue for me is the sense of *entitlement* that these right-wing placeholders have. They seem to have absorbed the democratic instincts of the aristocracy. Many of us will have been at some time on the wrong end of a vote … but you don’t go whining to outsiders. Basic principle.

    So – they see what is a quite ordinary part of process at the local level – a new selection before every election – as an infringement of their civil liberties! Or being called to account by the responsible body as an insult!

    It is notable that the Blairites benefited from years of discipline from massively disgruntled progressives in the Party, but can’t display the basics of good behaviour when the boot is on the other foot.

    Worse, they will grovel in sewage to get their own way – as seen in the ‘antisemitism’ scam – promoted by both Ryan and Smith. I can think of few greater examples of political corruption than exploiting the memory of WWII horrors as an emotional lever for political advancement.

    … which probably indicates the sincerity of their careerist politics. It’s an acid test when selection time comes round.

  2. It is actually striking how these self centered egos are predictible. They are equaly detached and dismisive of anything or anyone they don’t agree with, defensive and unsensitive to other perspective because they are totaly unable to see the world from an other lens then their own because of their immense priviledges and arrogance. Insificant toward history, small minded and self interested human beings that they are, we still have to accept that somehow they are also part of our human heritage. We now need to trancend our collective and individual fears and these kind of public figures will simply fade away to inexistance.

  3. Pretty sure some of them enter the race in hopes of a job for life, followed by elevation and a comfortable retirement snoozing and schmoozing in the lords – with maybe a couple of nice directorships to pay for the upkeep of the mansion.

    Just the hint of having their feet unceremoniously dragged from under the table of one of the gravy train’s many well-appointed, civilised and subsidised dining cars must be a terrible shock to the system.

    Or would be if their futures weren’t so generously provided for.
    By the rest of us.

  4. Most “Moderates” just seem nasty! They churn out endless expletives of hate towards Labour Party members whilst trying to claim that the Party is a “Broad Church”. They are an absolute disgrace!

  5. Time to test out the new re-selection/de-selection process . Staggering conceit really , you’d think that she would have been pro active in trying to find out why and how she could sort this out BEFORE it got to a vote stage . Still she probably subscribes to the Jess Phillips ” couldn’t give a fuck ” school of mentality.

    • Yes, absolutely.

      I would imagine that there would be a need to ensure some successes in order to give the new system credibility and head off demands for proper open selection.

      I find it rather shocking though that 20 people do have confidence in Angela Smith. Perhaps her arrogance will have turned some of them against her.

  6. Its been telling that most MP’s who are mostly on the right thanks to Tony have realised that members are the bedrock of the party and have acknowledged things have changed and they have also to various extents. Bogus accusations by MP’s against their members should be addressed by the NEC as they damage the party.

    • “Bogus accusations by MP’s against their members should be addressed by the NEC as they damage the party.”

      Interesting thought, since they have been so active in trying to initiate disciplinary action by faking accustions of ‘antisemitism’ – which, because of their unsustainability tend to get watered down to ‘bringing the Party into disrepute’ (see Marc Wadsworth et al.).

      Perhaps their clearly evidenced actions in the ‘disrepute’ field should suffer the justified consequences. Tolerance and the ‘broad church’ idea shouldn’t extend to active underminers of the Party who are willing to confect stories that exploit the horrors of real prejudice for narrow sectarian ends.

      Just as there should be no room in the party for antisemites, so there should be no room for those who exploit and demean the memory of holocaust victims.

  7. Absolutely disgusting of her, when your boss calls you in to be disciplined only an idiot reoluws with an insult

Leave a Reply