Analysis comment

Video: Butler, Burgon bring house down at deputy hustings – by standing up for members and all Jewish people

Huge reaction from audience for simple pledges from deputy leader candidates

Labour deputy leader hopefuls Dawn Butler and Richard Burgon stood out from their rivals – and from the leadership candidates – at yesterday’s hustings in Liverpool with their thoughtful and impassioned responses on a number of topics.

And on the issue of antisemitism in the Labour Party, they brought the house down by their measured answers.

After the other candidates had made rote responses on the issue, Butler and Burgon stood up for Labour members against claims that any form of racism is rampant in the party. Both reaffirmed their absolute determination to deal with antisemitism where it exists – as it surely does.

And both said they would not sign up to the ten demands issued by the Board of Deputies (BOD), as their deputy rivals and all the leadership candidates have.

Butler said that she wanted to wait until she had seen the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) report on antisemitism in the party – and that getting the response right is too important to be rushed.

Burgon added that he had concerns about some of the demands; that it would not be right for Labour to ‘outsource’ its handling of the issue; that he wanted to ensure that all Jewish groups have a voice – the BOD has demanded that only organisations of which it approves should be consulted; and he said he wanted to talk to the BOD about how the IHRA working definition of antisemitism could be implented in the Labour Party without compromising freedom of expression or the rights of Palestinians:

The response of the audience to both speakers suggested that the vast majority of those present welcomed their commitment to deal with this serious issue in a way that respects and involves all Jewish groups and protects the rights of Palestinians.

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.


  1. Will any of the candidates for Leadership trim their capitulation to ridiculous demands from the Jewish TORY organisation BoD. No doubt they’d deem that an anti Semitic remark liking them to the Tories; any rudeness or failure to grovel will be punished. How can you vote for somebody who wants to tie the Party to an aggressive foreign policy like Israel’s? The first candidate to crack wins my vote (unless it was The Mouth of course!

    1. I wonder if the EHRC have seen this video?
      Joe Glassman keeps trying to hide this video of himself, I wonder why?
      Glassman is the head of the self styled CAA who’s complaints instigated the EHRC investigation into the Labour Party.

      Well and truly exposed by his own words.

      VIDEO We “slaughtered” Jeremy Corbyn, says Israel lobbyist
      Asa Winstanley

    2. I saw the BBC Parliament press conference statement by Ian Murray.
      He appeared to be advocating the taking over of the Labour Party disciplinary procedures if he becomes deputy leader.

      No questions were broadcast and so he was not asked about what looks like a blatant power grab.

  2. I don’t want to take anything away from the fact that the two of them did indeed stand out against the shameful cowardice of the rest. I mean – what sort of courage does it take to call out flagrant smears and lies for what they are?

    But the caution of Burgon’s and Butler’s responses is an illustration of how far down the road of retreat we have gone in this instead of stading up for honesty and principle.

    “Butler said that she wanted to wait until she had seen the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) report”

    … and if that report fails to expose the falsity??? – or, worse, becomes as complicit as it’s decision to undertake an investigation solely into the Labour Party might have suggested?

    1. Blundering into these machinations of an active War Machine backed by a fully corrupt press wont get very far. The instinct to leave it alone in the belief that only a handful of people take it seriously and would vote Tory anyway is a fairly sound one. The alternative is to have a dig at the hornet’s nest and Er, see what happens?

      1. Yes – I’d dig at the nest – with a spray of reality and evidence at hand. 🙂

      2. I agree that we need to dig into the hornets nest and fully investigate the whole antisemetism issue. We then need to establish and publish facts and figures e.g.
        number of complaints received, number of complaints we can investigate i.e. involving Labour members , Number of these which are genuine substantive complaints , number of frivolous or vexatious complaints, number of malicious complaints.
        We then need to publish the action we took in respect of genuine complaints against Labour members up to and including expulsion of the member concerned- reprimand, formal verbal or written warning, suspension from holding office for a fixed period ( specified) compulsorry training etc ,
        Then we should look at the complaints which were not genuine and decide if they we made in good faith or not. We need then to establish and publish the action we took up to an including expulsion -see above- those making frivolous vexatious or malicious complaints.
        We must grasp the nettle and publish the truth without fear or and we must put the burden of proof on the balance of proof on the complainant.
        It is important to note that in civil cases the burden of proof is on the “balance of probabilities” . This burden of proof is very useful in the case of antisemitism as it enables us to take past behaviour into account when deciding what if any action to take against an offending member. For instance It is reasonable to assume that an antisemitic tweet made by someone who is 50 years old,labour member of say 30 years standing who has never previously said or done anything antisemitic tweeted in ignorance. The remedy therefore could be a reprimand and compulsory training,
        As a lifelong (lay)Trade Unionist it really disturbs that most people seem to expect the penalty for every transgression whether intended or not such as a comment open to interpretation or stupidly or carelessly phrased to be expulsion. This is an absurd and unjust position as the penalty should be proportional to the offence.

  3. Yesterday I stood outside the entrance to the hustings. I wasn’t one of those members invited to attend, I wonder why?

    I managed to speak to David Lammy who was addressing the Kier Starmer supporters group outside and asked him what he and others are going to do to prevent further take-over of the Party by the Zionist JLM, he point blank refused to discuss it. I put the same point to Kier Starmer when he arrived and he was even less talkative, he just turned his back on me and made for the entrance.

    I’m sure if I’d have said I was from the JLM I would have had more of a response from both of them!

    1. Oh right Jack, did you think they would stop and have a lengthy conversation about the issue with a complete stranger! As if! And when you say ‘I wonder why’ you weren’t invited, could you elaborate.

      1. Allan Howard, as the resident Skwawkbox ‘white flag man’ we know you wouldn’t have even tried!

      2. Yeah, sure Jack, I think most people who follow skwawkbox have figured out you’re a paid shill!

        And I couldn’t help but notice that you avoided answering my question. I wonder why…… probably because it’s all fabrication and you’re lying through your black propagandist teeth!

        The implication of what you say is that you’re well known to the party and regarded as a trouble maker, and THAT’s why you weren’t invited. Is THAT what you’re saying?

      3. You’re both right. But that doesn’t solve the problem of a false Tory/Israeli prospectus masquerading as the Labour Party.

        Clearly, any candidate will be wary of being trapped and misquoted by a JLM or other Zionist organisation shill.

        But, that doesn’t excuse the patent pathetic failure to grasp the nettle of lies and distortion.

        Ubfortunately, Allan – this is where three or so years of cowardice and accomodation gets you – right up shit creek, because the liar’s narrative has been endorsed. Contrary to your well-meant naivety, as the true anti-racists well know, you can’t accomodate and negotiate with racist bullies without getting contaminated with their shit.

      4. Allan Howard, you are a little too dense to realise that whether or not an answer is obtained from politicians, it is important to ask the questions and put them on the spot. Who or what do you think I am shilling for? It seems that whenever I mention the evils of Zionism it upsets you, shill?

        Correct, there are those in the Party who regard me as a ‘trouble maker’. There again, the executive regards anyone who asks them awkward questions as trouble makers. You of course, waving your white flag, would never come into that category.

      5. Oh right RH, and perhaps you can remind me what happened to Chris Williamson AND Pete Willsman when they defended the LP and members and those who had been falsely accused.of AS AND what happened each and every time Ken Livingstone attempted to explain that he was alluding to an historical fact – ie The Haavara Agreement, or what happened when the LP condemned the Panorama hatchet job?

        On the one hand you say:

        ‘Clearly, any candidate will be wary of being trapped and misquoted by a JLM or other Zionist organisation shill.’

        And on the other hand you say:

        ‘But, that doesn’t excuse the patent pathetic failure to grasp the nettle of lies and distortion.’

        The point is that it ISN’T just the JLM or the CAA etc, but the WHOLE of the corporate media AND the BBC who dissemble the lies and falsehoods and smears. As Justin Schlosberg points out in Chapter 4 of Bad News For Labour::

        “In contrast to other contexts, the antisemitism issue by its very nature inhibits the development of a counter-narrative. This is because much of the discursive framing serves to pre-emptively delegitimise any defensive response as ‘part of the problem’”.

        In other words, it’s a no-win situation.

        And as Malcolm X said:

        “The media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses.”

      6. In Jack’s ‘reply’ to me he tells a massive Big Whopper, like the despicable little black propagandist he is. He says the following:

        It seems that whenever I mention the evils of Zionism it upsets you…’

        Well anyone who follows skwawkbox to some degree will be aware that Jack has posted numerous times during the past year or two about Zionists, but the reality is – and Jack knows it of course – that I have never-ever said a dickybird about him doing so, and it is of course a Big Lie – ie a Big Lie that he has invented so that he can then – like the vile little black propagandist he is – try to impugn me as being a Zionist shill.

        Anyway, Jack then says that there are those in the LP who regard him as a trouble-maker……. Well if you’re so well known within the LP Jack, why do not post on here under your full name (not that I believe for one millisecond that your name is ‘Jack’ anyway). I mean WHY wouldn’t you?

        PS Oh, and the usual MO of the shills is for one (or more) of their ‘personas’ to reply to my comment as well (cos they are ALWAYS monitoring skwawkbox all day long) to add weight and endorse what the other ‘persona’ I was questioning said.

        As I keep saying, what ordinary person monitors and posts comments all day long in practically EVERY thread day after day after day for months and months and months on end???

      7. Allan – It’s more than a little odd that someone like yourself seems to have developed such a weird obsession with monitoring the frequency of everyone else’s comments. FFS you must have the highest cumulative word count on this site.

      8. Allan Howard, 🙂🙂 apologies, that must be one of your most hilarious, rambling responses to date.

      9. Ah, and as per usual, SteveH has now appeared and joined in, which he does practically every time (because he just happens to be monitoring the comments ALL day long, every single day!).

        Earlier on today I checked out an article skwawkbox posted yesterday (having not read it yet) and out of the 41 comments that had been posted at the time, *21* of them were by SteveH, RH and Joseph O’Keefe (I just brought it up again to copy and post a link to it here, and now there are 46 comments, 23 of which were posted by the above ‘personas’).

        And needless to say, SteveH is ALSO dissembling a Big Lie, and each of THEM posts, on average, about THREE times as much as I do. On average, the three of them account for about a THIRD of the comments in any given thread AND if you check out the articles posted by skwawkbox on any given day, you will find that they are posting ALL day long, from morning ’til late at night, and sometimes even in the early hours of the morning (one or more of them ALWAYS seems to be up and about when *I* am posting in the early hours!).

        And being a propagandist shill as he is, SteveH ‘transforms’ my PROOF that they are shills – cos who but shills would be posting all day long every single day – with me being ‘obsessed’ etc. And if you didn’t see it, about three weeks ago when I was drawing attention to the fact (that they are shills and monitor and post all day long), SteveH came out with a classic black propaganda line about me ‘hunting people down and attacking them’. Now what newspapers does that sort of rhetoric/hyperbole remind you of??? Yes, those so-called newspapers that play to peoples emotions!

      10. 🥱 Oh deary, deary me Allan, you’re getting boring again.

  4. Burgon still wants to implement the full IHRA definition of anti-Semitism. Labour MPs need to grow a spine if they want to stand up straight & true, but none of them will defend Palestinian human rights nor protect our right to Freedom of Speech. No backbone; no integrity; no cajones.

    1. Sad. To endorse the IHRA definition (given that you’re not a devious or self-seekingvenal bastard) is to display a gormlessness lack of nous that isn’t suited to a parliamentary career.

    1. Well done RB, DB.
      Have recently met a few Lefties who say they are going to abstain on the Leadership because of RLB’s stance.
      But perhaps they are putting their political purity ahead of their political brains?
      It’s like the Barbarians are coming to town but some won’t join the Resistance because they don’t like the Leader of the Resistance.
      Of course they are welcome to screw themselves but they screw left wing democratic socialism and all of us in the process.
      And if “Macron” Strarner wins there will be a purge with perhaps JVL being the first target.
      If the 60% + Pro-Corbyn supporters rally behind RLB and Burgon, the Dream is still alive; don’t say you weren’t warned!

      1. I disagree, as someone who plan to abstain, I believe it is safer to ensure that RB gets elected deputy leader with a substantial lead over the elected leader, whoever she/he happens to be.
        RBL came across as easily intimidated, she is not going to stop any purge any time soon. She will capitulate to the right and even encourage the right of the Party to challenge RB for the Deputy position.
        Regardless of whom is the leader with RB as deputy with the strongest mandate, we will made the position of RB unassailable and indirectly will reinforce the position of the left within the Party.

  5. The good jews who support the conservatives and Israel do not think the bad jews who support JC and Labour are real Jews
    I’m an honorary bad jew and yesterdqy Dawn and Richard saved my sanity, never mind my membership
    First candidate in leadership campaign to stand up and grow a spine, will walk the vote

    1. It is a pity neither of them are standing as leader Doug . Unfortunately all the leadership candidates have agreed to accept the 10 demands of the BOD but of course it will be up to us the membership to vote on this at Conference before it becomes policy and some of the demands such as outsourcing our complaints procedure is a non runner as far as many of us are concerned .
      However I was very disappointed in the stance the leadership candidates took . I am also concerned about what Richard referred to as a minority within a minority – Jews who are not represented by the BOD – and who are denied a voice and who aren’t actually a minority. As far as I recall the BOD represents only about 40% of Jewish people ( the number who attend synagogues and who appoint the board) so this is very worrying that they are accepted as speaking for all Jews when in fact they don’t.

      1. Smart boy
        Methinks the good jews are the real anti semites
        Keir has blown it, with his invitation to those who left party to return, jess like her former comrades is pure poison,
        Emily was OK, so its between two Rebecca and Lisa
        The only wild card will be if one moves position on AS

      2. Doug Please don’t think Lisa would make a good leader or would pursue a Socialist agenda. She resigned from the Shadow cabinet as part of the orchestrated resignation during the coup – she actually made a shameless passing reference to her former shadow cabinet position at the hustings – and she was responsible for the fiasco that was Owen Smith’s leadership campaign, continuing even when it was obvious he couldn’t win and the only people benefiting from our internal battles were the Tories. She is every bid as right wing as Jess Phillips – she just hides it better.

      3. Smart boy
        No worries
        I’m like most, dont have any confidence in all of the leadership candidates at the moment

      4. Sad to say Doug I feel much the same but I am going for RLB as she behaved decently towards Jeremy and was never disloyal to him though as I said I am not happy with her stance on the BOD demands. I am voting for Richard Burgon for deputy for much the same reasons and for his outright rejection of all the BOD demands.

  6. The nugget of information here is NOT that two candidates for Deputy Leader of the Labour Party refused to sign the BOD ransom sheet – it’s that ALL the candidates for Leader DID!
    The expression ‘the LEFT are their own worst enemies’ applies here.
    Tony Blair must be pissing himself with laughter.

  7. Now we know that the B.O.D determines Labour Party Policies, it is safe to assume that the Barbarians @ the gates & the ‘Leaders of the Resistance’ are one & the same.
    The IHRA definition of AS will forever haunt & eventually destroy The Labour Party; it is the stick that keeps beating Socialism. A self inflicted wound that is allowed to become cancerous; forever guilty of any accusation of anti-Semitism by definition. Beware acceptance by EHRC; one of Blair’s parting gifts..

    1. Steve, thanks to accomplices and cowards in the Labour Party, it is not now controlled and run from Southside, that responsibility has been delegated to Tel Aviv.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: