Breaking comment Exclusive

Exclusive: Labour email rebuking candidates for leaking email about party removing left-wing votes… gets leaked

Labour apparently didn’t want members or public knowing what it was doing

Yesterday, the SKWAWKBOX covered the news that candidates in Labour’s National Executive Committee elections had been told by email that the party – despite earlier denials – is removing the votes of overwhelmingly left-wing members who resigned after casting their vote because of the conduct of Keir Starmer and the conduct of the party’s new leadership.

Now, in an irony that would almost be humorous were it not for the Stalinism it reflects, candidates have been rebuked by the party for leaking that email to members.

And that email has leaked.

And the SKWAWKBOX can reveal its wording and its chilling undertone:

Dear all,

You may have seen that the email below was leaked to LabourList last night.

We hope you will understand that if we cannot trust candidates to treat communications from the Party confidentially, we may need to rethink what level of information we share with you in the future.


Ballots Team

‘We may need to rethink what level of information we share with you in the future’ – so the party doesn’t want Labour members, whose representatives are being elected in this contest, to know what it’s doing and how it is influencing the result.

It’s worth underlining that there is nothing in the rules for the election that says those eligible to receive and cast a ballot will have their votes disqualified if they resign before the day of the result (today) – and it is anything but normal for the register of eligible voters to be amended for something those voters did during the election period, as writer Ronan Burtenshaw rightly observed.

Yet the party has even delayed the announcement of today’s result by around five hours to allow extra time for more left-wing votes to be removed.

This is Keir Starmer’s ‘unity’.


    1. BTW what’s this. YOU MIGHT WANT to go and see what they’re saying about you remark.
      I get every time I get a notification of a liked remark e mail?

  1. Inundate them with complaints. Anyone care to set up an online petition?

  2. The Blairites haven’t quite got the Stasi up & running yet. Give them time & all members will be snitching on each other right, right & centre (nearly said left, right & centre). Where are they going to locate their gulags?

    1. Curious no one equivalently investigated the repeated claims that Starmer only won the leadership because of the votes of LibDem entryists who subsequently left the Party after doing their damage.
      Nor was Starmer investigated over the $62,000 donation that the Electronic Intifada revealed he accepted from a Pro-Israel lobbyist.
      The fact the sum is in dollars suggest the money came in from abroad.

  3. They really are trashing the reputation of the Labour Party.
    The rule’s were clear if someone was a member before the Freeze data and were still a member when the voting began they had a vote which they could use until voting ended.
    Nothing about remining a member during this period.

    New Rules cannot be made up and applied retrospectively.
    Human rights legislation identifies this as a principle of natural justice.

    Also not clear if they are going to treat members behind with subscriptions as having “resigned” for this purpose.

    The party will end up on this list at this rate.

    1. Ian Crawford, members in arrears don’t received ballots to start with, they are automatically excluded. However, they are still counted officially as members for six months in the hope that they will covert their arrears, but they cannot vote in any Party election.
      What concerned former members that participated in the ballot can do is to contact the company that run the ballot and ask if their vote was counted or no. Hence, we will have a better idea as to how many ballots were excluded.

  4. Transparency,Integrity, honesty,egalatarian, fraternity when did this disappear from the Labour Party.The general public will decided that, if a party has become devoid of basic democratic beliefs whether they deserve their vote’s, if they turn on their own members and are imploding.

    1. Yes, but Sir Keir is the man who caused the Respecting the Referendum GE2019 U Turn, so it will surprise no-one and convince millions more voters that Siir Keir is bad news. It will cost our party votes and seats.

    2. SM, the only problem is that the general public are unlikely to hear about it, as I assume the MSM have completely blanked it. As with the repression of freedom of speech etc.

  5. Rules are put to conference and then agreed or not , or did I miss the alternative rule book that runs beside this.

  6. t’s not just the Rule of Law and spycops that Starmer and Evan’s don’t want to understand, it’s also the “Law of Holes”. Evans’ wretched antidemocratic hole gets deeper by the second. They really should stop digging.

  7. Just about every evil thing we as socialists are opposed to relies on secrecy to succeed in cheating us.
    Until we accept that everything about our own lives must be as transparent as it would be in, say, a small tribe or village, we can’t reasonably demand the same transparency from our leaders.
    Our finances, criminal records, qualifications and everything else – available to anyone who cares to look.
    If you’re not willing to accept that you’re no socialist, Bruv.

    1. A-ha. The Blairite demand for a surveillance state is sneaked out again. Next will be the similar demand for mandatory ID cards – an intrusion that no one in the grassroots has ever asked for.

    2. Working class communities used to be exactly as I described in the days when front steps were scrubbed every day. Everybody knew everybody else’s business, nobody was better than anyone else and solidarity with neighbours against tallymen and bailiffs was taken for granted. Hard times but socialism was real then within communities.
      I saw the very end of it, and then it was gone.
      If you’re not climbing on the backs of others and cheating them to get rich why would you want the banking secrecy that’s essential to the cheats?
      Did you expect socialism without sacrifices?
      And a sacrifice that exposes the Tories’ secrets is hardly a sacrifice at all.

  8. Skwawk, stick your pejorative use of the word Stalinism and don’t send me any more of your emails – you’ve proved yourself enough of a political pigmy. Thanks.

    1. It’s up to you to change your WordPress notification settings if you don’t want any more emails.
      Unlike Alibaba where no matter what you do they just keep on coming.

  9. And some still say we must “unify” with forces who have done and do everything to undermine us. No thanks. Never. I hope every one of us will return to Starmer the type of “unity” he and his coup plotters gave to Jeremy. It is illogical to suggest we can have any unity with them. They oppose our vision to transform our country. They have no vision of their own except to get their turn at gorging on plunder of the TRUE workers. To think any good will come of Starmer will result in worse that we are experiencing now. We must be organised and remain determined to get our party back🌹🌹🌹

    1. Yes signpost, I think everyone is aware of THAT – ie what you said about unity – so you don’t have to keep repeating it over and over and over again. As I said in response to a post in which you said the same yesterday, saying such things is for public consumption. And obviously everyone on the left is well aware of what the right of the party and their insiders have done during Jeremy’s tenure as leader, and how they conspied against him.

      1. more people read Skwawkbox than you may realise. these points MUST be repeated. We cannot complain about the MSM repeating stuff to maintain the status quo, pine for our own media, then fail to use it effectively. Why do you think companies spend millions to repeat messages (adverts)?
        And why do YOU repeat yourself❓❓❓

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: