With these backgrounds, whyever would the ‘letter peers’ possibly want to attack Corbyn?

Letter published today in Guardian attacks Jeremy Corbyn – but the background of its signatories suggests alternative motives
Lord Mandelson, left – who said he tries to find ways to undermine Corbyn every day – and former general secretary Iain McNicol, two of todays signatories

Today, some 64 Labour peers – unelected members of the House of Lords, which Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has promised to abolish as PM – placed a paid, full-page advert in the Guardian’s print edition attacking Jeremy Corbyn over antisemitism.

One of the signatories, Lord Winston, admitted today:

Ultimately I don’t think it’s about antisemitism.

It’s not hard to see what he means.

Labour activists on social media have pointed out that the list of signatories reads like a ‘Who’s Who’ of Blairite leftovers:

The considerably less than spotless record of some signatories on race has also been highlighted:

Others have pointed out that most of the signatories have been incessant critics of Corbyn:

But one of the most telling – and perhaps shocking – hints can be found in the parliamentary register of members interests, which one Labour insider described as reading “more like it’s from the days of the British East India Company than something from the 21st century .

Of the 64 Lords who have signed the letter, at least twenty-four are corporate lobbyists or on boards of hedge funds, banks, ‘global security consultancies’ and, particularly, private health firms. Others have family links to similar enterprises.

On example pointed out on social media of peers’ substantial private health links

SKWAWKBOX view:

Jeremy Corbyn plans to renationalise the NHS, rail and utilities, opposes needless wars and has reconfirmed his intention to abolish a House of unelected Lords who can draw £300 a day just for turning up.

Why on earth would unelected peers sign a letter attacking him – and just at the right time to allow their cowardly colleagues in the Commons to take cover?

It’s a real conundrum.

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 or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. 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.

27 responses to “With these backgrounds, whyever would the ‘letter peers’ possibly want to attack Corbyn?

  1. God I bet Weesley Screeching is wetting his underpants over this , probably throwing a tantrum fit cos he can’t get to sign it , not being a Lord yet … but sure that’ll come in time .

  2. Perhaps a forensic examination of all the signatories’ backgrounds is in order: their origins, their interests and their profits.

    My guess is that it will not read as a documentation of disinterested righteousness.

    • Irish sean good one!Difficult to believe the corruption inside of the party.Whatever happens we need these war lords out of the party

  3. They had joan bakewell on ch4 news before.

    Essentially, her excuse for being a signatory was her mates told her that there was someone antisemitic in the party…Honestly, it was fucking cringe-inducing. She even went on about maureen lipman ‘leaving the party’ (At least the second time lipman’s done so – kaliczaszk’s got some catching up to do) and said it was: ‘horrendous* that the party should be losing someone so intelligent’.

    *might not have been horrendous but something along those lines, couldn’t hear it for cursing at the screen so much from her previous senile ramblings.

    Watch the repeat on ch4+1 inabit….It’s beyond belief. 😵

  4. Oh another thing about that interview….bakewell actually said that Corby MUST come out and condemn antisemitism…

    Yes, honestly.

    • I might have misheard that because as I typed I’d just switched to +1 and caught the tail end of bakewell’s sentence but I THINK that;s what she said…

    • Bakewell,got to be kidding and even do posh.Inteligent as well. By their actions today they condem the whole corrupt system and most of themselves by these treacherous lies.The reasons for abolition of the Lords they serve on a plate.They are almost a caricature of the senile old drunk on FR Ted comedy on tv.I feel embarrassed for them!

  5. She doesn’t think Corbyn is a strong leader and she’s a remainer…

    A remainer, eh? Hmmm…..

    Oh, and ‘Palestinian/israeli issues have NEVER been talked about’ (Within the party) according to the silly arld bat.

    I wonder WHY, joan?

    • Toffee…. You know she can’t remember……whats beardy leftys name……..can’t remember? ……Time to go Joan and collect your winnings old girl…..tally ho!

      • Whadda we want?

        ‘EQUAL RIGHTS FOR SENILE OLD BASTARDS IN THE LORDS’

        When do we want it?

        ‘WANT WHAT?’

        (I’ll get me coat 🚕)

      • Toffee

        Did you nick that off a birthday card? The same joke (minus “in the lords”) was on one I bought recently! 😀

  6. Wise up, Skwarkie. Corbyn CANNOT nationalise rail and utilities inside the EU because the unrepealable Liberalisation Directives dictate a market system in rail, mail, gas, electricity, telecommunications.

    Accordingly now that Corbyn + McDonnell + Abbott have embraced Second Referendum plus Remain they are just as neoliberal as these House of Lords ghastlies.

    Whereas the Blairites are quite open about their neoliberalism the fake left has embraced privatisation in a cowardly fashion, by hiding under the petticoats of the entirely neoliberal EU.

  7. Breaking news George Galloway to stand against Watson’s on support corbyn ticket……tricky one?

  8. Danny the position is that labour will support a second referendum and campaign to remain on a no deal or bad deal. Its first options is an alternative al Brexit deal or GE. Labours position hasnt changed.

    • But Labours position on Brexit as passed by Conference 2018, was always a fudge, destined to confuse and ultimately lead to ….. Well you tell me.

  9. We should not loose sight of the fact that c66% of Labour’s contingent in the House of Lords did not sign this letter.

Leave a Reply