Analysis

Barrister and Labour rules expert says Labour’s approach to re-admitting suspended officers ‘incredibly dangerous’ and step toward ‘removing union movement from party’

Seventy or more elected local officers of the Labour party were suspended by the party’s hierarchy simply for allowing members to discuss motions declaring solidarity with Jeremy Corbyn. Some have been allowed back into the party, but a Labour rules expert considers the circumstances a severe threat

Duncan Shipley-Dalton is a barrister and expert on Labour’s rules. He has written about the recent readmission of some of the local elected officers who were suspended by the party for allowing their members to debate and vote on expressions of solidarity with former party leader Jeremy Corbyn:

Labour’s ploy in is incredibly dangerous and accepting it or painting it as a victory would be major tactical error. The description of CLPs as subordinate to the party machine is a very different approach. There is a hierarchical relationship between the NEC and CLPs but not one of complete subordination and control.

The end of any semblance of local democracy in the Party

If this approach combined with the GS directing CLPs and CLP officers and members to do whatever he instructs without question and on pain of punishment for breaching rule 2.I.8 then it is the end of any semblance of local democracy in the Party.

What would stop the General Secretary (GS) stopping all discussion or motions on any subject other than those in his ‘approved’ areas?

So the Party adopts a policy e.g. to no longer support increased Council House Buildings and CLPs are directed by the GS they may not discuss it or contradict the policy.

Or the party leadership supports a policy of supporting a US-led military invasion somewhere and the GS directs no discussion or criticism of his policy. A CLP wants to make donation to a food bank or local charity and the GS says NO.

This is a slippery slope to the complete removal of any local democracy or freedom of expression for members. It is an attempt to remove the power of the members and push power and control to the centre. Members won’t be a co equal bloc; they will be pawns to be pushed about as the Party dictator sees fit.

A blatant defenestration of the NEC

The other point to note is the assertion by Evans that the GS has all day to day control delegated to him by the NEC. Is he asserting he has full budget control? That all administrative decisions are to be made by the GS? Once you take into account the power to pick and choose candidates that has been handed to the GS, this is a blatant defenestration of the NEC.

A history of centralising control and of circumventing democratic checks and balances

All this is exactly what I had expected and warned about some time ago. Starmer has a history of centralising control and of circumventing democratic checks and balances when it doesn’t suit his objectives. In my view the objective Starmer and Evans are pursuing is to turn the Labour Party into a ‘normal’ political party – and to remove the union movement from any influence or control. It is a fundamental re-envisaging of the Labour Party as something different to its past and history. It would no longer be the political arm of the union/labour movement.

This is being done by slowly tearing the heart out of the NEC and therefore removing the direct power and control that the unions currently exercise through their NEC Reps. They all need to wake up or they will soon find they are not in control of the movement they started. Those on the left who think we can wait until Starmer fails in 2024 and then have another go at electing a left leader seem to missing the fact that by 2024 the candidates running will be hand-picked and controlled by Evans and the right wing.

Even if a leadership contest opens up in 2024 after a general election, there won’t be enough left members of the parliamentary party to get a left choice on the ballot. And that’s even assuming that the OMOV (one member one vote) system survives.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support 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 to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.

48 comments

  1. Has the NEC actually delegated any powers to the Acting GS, I’ve seen no evidence of this.

    1. ‘m not the least bit surprised or disappointed by Starmer & Co., as I’ve posted before. They are doing what they have always done. One year is MORE than enough to have seen the pattern. But FOUR YEARS??? to reflect and not learn??? There is precious little of ANY learning. As a newbie, I find this to be extraordinary. The Left supplies weapons to the Right … WITH LOVE then whine that the Right has betrayed them by abusing them. That is the grief, the frustration, THE disappointment.🚨🚨🚨

  2. Say the plan IS to detach the union movement from Labour – what do the dickheads imagine the unions will do then – roll over and say “sorry you feel like that” or form stronger alliances with each other and maybe form a new party with 20-30 ready-made MPs from the Socialist Campaign Group?

    Starmorrhoid could end up with just the Labour name, a Southside riddled with debt, no activists to campaign for them and a bunch of MPs close to their expiry dates.
    He and the rest of the “centrists” could end up less relevant than Umunna. (I just looked him up… “Chuka Umunna is a strategic corporate advisor to companies on business-critical issues that impact on long term value, reputation and narrative” Pfft)

    Right now the halfwits are convinced the Labour Party is bigger than socialism.
    Soon they’re going to find out it’s the other way round – more than anything I want to watch Karma bite them on the arse.

  3. The above is like reading about a domestic violence case.

    The abuser gains the trust and confidence of their prospective partner by saying the words they want to hear- their ideal mate (Bait; Starmer did this with the members).

    Once gained, the abuser starts their reign of imposed power (Switch). Removing any access to finances & imposing what their abused partner should say/ believe/ behave ( Evans’ dictator style over CLP’s). When the abused partner speaks out about this negative behavior, the abuser then gaslights their partner into thinking that they are bad and in the wrong ( Suspend CLP Chairs and Secretaries etc for their freedom of speech motions). The abuser then imposes stiffer punishment to keep their abused partner subdued, thus less likely to object to further poor and negative treatment.

    The abuser then moves on to exclude supportive relationships from their partners life ( Purge of socialists, Community campaigners sacked & The Unions disregarded).

    It’s nauseating to read the comparison.

    Mays’ elections should be the ‘Make or break’ of this relationship but I can only see a break to this toxicity, and it’s upsetting to see this.

    1. The party members should down tools. Every constituency member just leave them to run things. Could cause a bit of a stir.

  4. What is absolutely clear, to me at least, is there can be no compromising with these people. Either they are removed from the LP or the LP will become something totally different from its historical identity, which was an often uneasy coalition between liberal and Left. Since Blair and New Labour (the clue was in the name) the Right has had zero tolerance of the Left and its ideas, and it really is a simple matter of us or them. The only question is, does the “Soft Left”, which has a wide constituency in the party yet understand what is going on. I have seen nothing to suggest they do.

    1. john thatcher and Foggy, sadly there are STILL well-meaning people satisfied with a label. They are hoodwinked that label “Labour” is enough to give their services to the likes of Starmer, Phillips, Hodge, Ashworth, Streeting, Rayner, even Berger and Ummuna if the trash were brought back from oblivion by Starmer… You can detect that in the words of some of the sincere well meaning posts. There is a sad odd ingrown defeatist battered victim culture. I.E. a little mouldy rancid stale crumb is enough because it was thrown down on high from a self-serving Status Quo tool. Why??? Because the tools claim to be Labour. 🚨🚨🚨

  5. Steve H betrayed his membership of the Labour party along with the rest of the knight and his misfits when he told me how my participation in the Labour party could not possibly make any difference.And that is the root of the problem within the Labour leader and thePLP.These elitist see no value or reason for a working-class movement to come together and work together for the society we are part of. The whole idea of working together is a totally alian concept to these misfits just as much as dear Margaret Thatcher ‘s comments”There is no such thing as society,only individuals “IN a nutshell we are totally opposed in not only the veiw of morality but also the value we have as humans struggling to exist working has a “collective group for the benefit of us all..We must work together as human beings of any race ,colour or creed We could never have got out of the caves if we followed the theory of evolution Steve H and the rest of the right wing destroyers have launched on the people. The British ruling class have never quite grasped the idea of working together and never will until we clear out the archaic system of monarchy and all the corruption and perversions that encapsulates the theory of higher and lower “casts” like the present day Great Britain?.Quislings and people like Steve H have brought my democratic socialist Labour party to its knees in record time..and can never be forgiven or forgotten what they have contributed along with the conservative and unionist party to the apalling future the country now faces and most importantly the working-class people that will suffer .The position that they have brought us to goes way beyond just politics.and theories of how to rule,it shows a complete breakdown of normal behaviour in a civilised society. Smash and grab “like a thief in the night” .

  6. Joseph – As you have resigned from the Labour party and you live as an expat on the other side of the world (literally) could you please elaborate on what influence you think that you still exert in the party.

  7. The goal may be to complete Blair’s unfinished project of transforming Labour into a’Democratic Party’, with no institutional link to trade unions?

    1. And the gray thing is, that every time Joe Biden talks about the need for job creation in the U.S., he always describes them as good, well-paying union jobs. There’s no mention of the idea of tax credit supporting low-pay employment, an idea that gets the New Labour types salivating…….
      I am afraid New New Labour are too enamoured of our out of touch, inefficient and, looking at the Covid-19 deaths rate, compromised Establishment.

  8. “If this approach combined with the GS directing CLPs and CLP officers and members to do whatever he instructs without question and on pain of punishment for breaching rule 2.I.8 then it is the end of any semblance of local democracy in the Party.”

    The key words in this argument relate to a particular ‘approach.’ In this instance the ‘approach’ is focused on that of an individual. However, implicit in the narrative is the recognition that the ‘approach” is not limited to an individual – in this case the Acting (in every sense) General Secretary – but is adopted via specific collectively organised social agents acting on a particular agenda.

    The point being that in order to credibly oppose this ‘approach’ – which the author of this blog site makes explicit – it is necessary for those who claim to favour democracy and free speech etc not to engage in the same kind of ‘approach.’ To do so undermines the stance taken, provides ammunition to the bullies and authoritarians, and is frankly rank hypocrisy.

    Unfortunately, this is already the case.

    One of the original speakers at the planned February 7th ‘Save our Socialists’ ‘Stop the Labour Lockout’ rally – who is currently suspended by the Party from their three elected local Party Unit posts (CLP, Branch, LCF) was contacted before the event to be advised that some speakers were threatening to withdraw if she was allowed to speak.

    Her crime? Defending the free speech rights of another comrade and member several years ago.

    You couldn’t make this stuff up really. A suspended from the Party socialist who has put their neck on the line de-platformed and prevented from speaking at a free speech event for defending the free speech of another member by others who claim to champion free speech.

    Yeah. That’s going to work isn’t it “comrades?” Let’s champion free speech and democracy by deplatforming suspended members at a free speech event.

    If we are going to be serious about tackling this we have to be and act consistently. Opposing the cowardly bullying taking place in the Party and the wider movement is undermined and not advanced a single millimetre by people acting in the same cowardly and bullying manner.

    1. I guess you’re referring to the insoluble dispute between feminist activists and trans activists regarding access to female toilets?
      From previous comments (unless it wasn’t you?) you appear to believe one side has all the wrong and the other has all the right – no doubt, no nuance, one saint, one devil – I don’t even remember which side you support so no accusations of partiality please.

      For myself I can absolutely see why women would fear genetic males in female toilets – I can also absolutely see why males living as females would fear using male toilets.

      The only fair solution I can think of is individual electronic auto-flushing gender-neutral toilets with only the cubicle door between it and an open, well-lit public area well-covered by live-monitored police CCTV, such as exist in some busy town centres.
      Absent such facilities I favour allowing women exclusive use of women’s toilets for one reason only – their frames are less robust than men’s and suffer far greater injury when attacked by men than mens’ bodies suffer from the same attack.
      I believe I’ve heard and understood the contrary arguments, but for me none outweigh the comparative fragility of women’s bodies.
      I’ll probably survive my embarrassment if you were alluding to something completely different 🙂

  9. Thank you Duncan Shipley- Dalton this is an excellent analysis, just as your earlier piece was concerning the critical difference between ‘conduct’ and ‘content’, I posted your analysis at the end of another thread which may not have been seen by many, do hope I can remind readers by posting it again because it is so important to free speech. Here it is…

    “The officers were suspended for allowing debate and votes on motions of solidarity with former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, in a clear breach of human rights laws governing freedom of speech and the party was expected to lose the case brought by those wrongfully suspended”.
    This is a disgraceful letter and should be met with further motions from CLP’s supporting Corbyn, for the good reason that Evans cannot determine the Content’ of a meeting only the ‘CONDUCT’ as explained by Duncan Shipley Dalton.
    Here is an opinion from him, a left wing Barrister.
    The NEC and therefore the GS has no authority in the rules to dictate what is ‘competent business’ for a CLP to discuss. The only authority is in Chap 1, VIII, 3.E-“The NEC shall from time to time, issue guidance and instructions on the conduct of meetings…” CONDUCT not CONTENT Conduct is a noun meaning ‘the manner in which an activity is managed or directed.’ That is not the same as the content or subject the meeting deals with. The NEC can issue guidance on how a meeting can be run/organised but not dictate what motions are competent business.
    Secondly, the idea discussing the IHRA will “…undermine Labour’s ability to campaign against any form of racism…” is so absurd as to be in the realms of irrationality. As previously stated the NEC/GS has no authority in the rules to dictate this. If what is being threatened.
    is disciplinary punishment for breaching the code of conduct in Appendix 9, this is incorrect. The codes are not part of the rules, they are not directly enforceable.
    https://twitter.com/baronvonduncs/status/1293651998886199296?s=21

    1. This Skwawkbox.org article describes with clarity some of Starmer’s doings, the seriousness… the urgency and implications. There is NONE of this on the Left in my CLP. Maybe it is kept secret. What IS on display, DAILY, are willy and fanny waving of theory… books read or hoping to read and films watched and hoping to watch… AND urging others to read / watch and meet to discuss. Not a jot of what we need to improve. WHY??? Because they are right and perfect, above that, virtuous and openly say they want to be distracted from Starmer’s doings. Moreover they are comfortable and don’t really care about the many. They claim they care but don’t. If they cared they would not be as they are🚨🚨🚨

  10. Excellent analysis by the union+++ esp the Illegal Iraq Invasion reference. The acutely distressing issue for me is not the behaviour of Starmer and his Right Wing gang. The puzzling and heartbreaking thing is this. ALL that we see was predicted, predictable and inevitable. ALL of it, yet still … STILL eg in my CLP Left group, those who hog control are pleasuring themselves as they have done since i met them, almost TOTALLY WITH READING – theory and now LOTS of science fiction. I kid you not🚨🚨🚨

    1. Well, I read Sci Fi for relaxation, but I don’t bring it to political discussion. It is important to take a break from thinking about politics, otherwise you can get stale. However, that clearly not what we are talking about here. These are some of the Soft Left who are quite numerous in the LP though not obviously all of a single mind. They are part of the “Broad Church” we have to work with, though they don’t think as one, they appear to have one thing in common, they don’t understand the nature of the far Right of the party and what their plans are. I read an account of Evans attitude to Unions and the membership written back in 2012 I believe. He believes the LP should get rid of the Unions, and have a greatly reduced membership with no influence on policy, just like the Democrats in the USA in fact.

      1. Yes john thatcher, i’m not speaking of Sci Fi or anything for relaxation, it is THE activity. Seriously THE MAIN activity. And get this, they call it “education”. The Right are ruthlessly organised here. In the meetings to plan, ANY and ALL suggestions to deal with the threat that was obvious were shut down. Only the tamest limpest stuff is then presented. The total and sustained EXPRESSED aim is to “convert” the Right.

        Also openly expressed is “thanks for suggesting that…” book or film “i need to be distracted from Starmer” or distracted from X’s and the Right’s latest stamp on justice or Labour ethos. There has been no change, no learning, no will. So much so, i often think are they infiltrators??? If so, they are VERY effective. If not, then the Status Quo guards need not spend one pence to neuter the “Left” 🥀🥀🥀

      2. ie the very very few meetings of the “Left” to plan a response to the Right🚨🚨🚨

  11. Duncan, your day’s as a member are numbered possibly under rule 2.1.8 bringing Starmer and Evans into disrepute by telling members the truth about the rule book and their [Starmer/Evans] devious and dictatorial machinations

  12. I’d like to see stammer try it. I rather think Duncan, being a proper lawyer himself, would take the second rate lawyer to the cleaners all too easily.

  13. Since we haven’t had an opposition in parlaiment re the Tory mishandlong of the pandemic, readers might be interested in this –
    https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/covid-19-getting-to-the-truth/?utm_source=CrowdJustice&utm_campaign=c113405ad7-COVANSFEB2021&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_7304756a43-c113405ad7-167144897
    ‘As UK Covid-19 deaths exceed 100,000 former Chief Crown Prosecutor, Nazir Afzal OBE seeks support and funding to get to the truth behind Government failures and campaign with other bereaved citizens and families to gain full public account for failures and ensure steps are taken now to stop more unnecessary deaths.’

  14. There has been total control for years yes under JC CLP’s could debate what they wanted but it’s no difference to the Blair BS just a rehash of the cult of new labour 2.0 I see no purpose of membership as it’s not respected.

    Oh, they want your help your money but any tiny power the clp has had has disappeared yet again. It’s sad we’re even discussing this instead we should be forming a socialist party and leave this cult to rot. Let them go be Tory-lite if they want they walked away from us remember!

    Why should we be running after them and wasting our lives trying to change Labour back it’s a waste of time. Start again with no right-wing start small and grow.

    The sooner you work out their game is rigged and not play it anymore the better you will be…

    1. Couldn’t agree more. Not only are they using our money to stifle opposition, they have also cut off their grassroots activist….can’t see too many members doing the doorknocking in local and Welsh and Scottish elections coming up.

  15. The tribunemag published an excellent and interesting article a few days ago – ‘The Marxist Rupert Murdoch’. Essentially saying the left should stop winging about the Guardian not representing them and spend our energies forming our own powerful socialist media as has happened before. I couldn’t agree more. Novara media praised and retweeted this article also. What I find infuriating is that they also utterly refuse to accept any possibility of taking the same approach to the now right of centre labour party. Why not form our own party. Why is that so hopeless to believe could win. I mean the labour party didnb’t exist once either, then did and won elections. And then I keep asking why Novara have Owen Jones on all the bloody time, a man who attacked corbyn and refuses to confront the anti-Semitism smears issue. Also they never talk about jackie walker, or anti-Semitism lies. I used to support them but I’ve come to the conclusion they are the centrists damage limitation project. This seemed especially obvious when they started attacking Glen Greenwald last week (who is extremely anti – neoliberal) simply because he criticised AOC for not using her position to fight wall street when she had the opportunity. Their position seems to be that it would help republicans to critisise soft left . Similarly there is no honest assessment of the fact that Labour nor the democrats are ever going to be a route to socialism. They just won’t contemplate it the same way they DO contemplate challenging the ever so powerful MSM/Murdoch press. Why not? To me it seems plain as day that the neoliberal Labour party and the US democrat party have the means and resourses, more absolute power over their voters and members than ever before. They have powers like mass data surveillance via cozy relations with silicon valley. They have access to murdoch and now shady fake left media organisations as they always did, but the high tech propaganda wars ensure the socialists are fucked and completely out of the picture now in those parties – except as a fake attempt to make it look like we have a say but our ideas are unpopular. Until the socialist left form a new party from trusted and well respected actual socialists nothing will change. We need the fight of our lives now! Novara are becoming the new guardian to quell the anger of solcialists and tame them into accepting the technocratic old ways and hoping someday a socialist will take hold. They know its bullshit. I’m utterly incensed at the idea we should still try and save labour, and I think anyone who tries to peddle this is either a bad actor or utterly insane. Including the socialist MPs without the guts to leave and fight from the outside. Mediocre and mealy mouthed politics won’t get us anywhere . Its such a wasted effort. Anyone who encourages people to stay and support labour rather than fight a fresh from our own party and yet still expect independent media to be able to win against murdoch (they could) is either confused or disingenuous or hopeless or all three. If you don’t believe you can win you CAN’T win.

    1. Novara Media is indeed more an irritation than a help at times, and I can’t stand Walker. However, they do have some interesting discussions there.

    2. You make all these criticisms of Novara Media in a long rant M, saying they haven’t covered the anti-semitism smear campaign, and they don’t challenge the MSM, and yet when I did a simple search on their website just now re >labour party corbyn anti-semitism<, a number of results came up, the very FIRST of which contradicts your two above assumptions. Do you not check things out before you go mouthing off what are in effect falsehoods! I mean how can anyone condemn a left-wing media outlet for this and for that and *NOT* do a search first on their website! It doesn't make sense M, does it? Do you have an explanation as for why you disseminate disinformation on a left-wing blog without checking first?

      The McCarthyist Campaign Against Jeremy Corbyn Is the Real ‘Cancel Culture’

      The following day Times columnist Philip Collins wrote that Labour must “expel him [Corbyn] from the party”, and “point the way out for his nasty band of facilitators”. Precisely what offence Corbyn would be expelled for is unclear, but that appears a technical detail for the former speechwriter to Tony Blair. Collins wants those wedded to higher taxation for the rich, public ownership and enhanced accountability removed from Labour – and in so doing placed beyond the parameters of political acceptability.

      https://novaramedia.com/2020/07/28/the-mccarthyist-campaign-against-jeremy-corbyn-is-the-real-cancel-culture/

      1. Woah. Hold your horses alan. My point was about specific people. They shat on Jackie walker and Williamson in the early days. I have been watching tysky religiously since 2017 and they refuse to talk about them now. But they were the original which hunts that they never defended. I could forgive them if they admitted they made a mistake and hadn’t encouraged the pile on at the time. They are doing the same with Glenn grrenwald. There’s good people on the left that they attack because they are genuine socialists. I think there’s a lot of good output from Novara but that is also true of the guardian. My point is that for a while now things font add up. Their funding model and suoerchats on YouTube is probably a concern for them now that YouTube is now demonetising or banning left wing content . as greenwald and matt taibi have pointed out if they critisise too much they will be banned and demonetised. This must have an impact on their output and its concerning. They are a business. They aren’t grass roots socialists who can afford to say what they like. Walker and sarker are frequently invited onto BBC. They are often good at what they say but there is certainly an amount of self censoring that doesn’t sit right. In the same way ‘left wing’ Owen Jones does at the guardian. Some important issues and conflict of interests that lead to misinformation and propaganda by will or by force that doesn’t take on the root of the problem. Media and labour are as one machine in an eternal battle against socialism. Novara can’t step too far away from labour soft left. And that’s the issue. Attacking greenwald was totally unnecessary and manipulative. Yeah, it pissed me off into a rant. I make no apologies for it.

      2. M, in your post at 12.10am you say that Chris Williamson ‘was smeared as an anti Semite by labour and Novara media’. Well I just did a search on their website and nothing to that effect came up in the results, so could you provide a link to any such article in which NM did so.

        The first item that came up in the results was in fact a video of Chris Williamson entitled ‘The Fix Live – 260617 W/ Chris Williamson MP’, along with the sub-headline ‘Derby North’s finest joins Michael and Aaron on The Fix Live’.

        So anyway, can you provide a link to the article (or articles) in which NM smeared Chris as an anti-semite? Cheers.

        As for Okeefe’s smearing of ME in his above post, please check out the following sequence of posts:

        https://skwawkbox.org/2021/02/08/exclusive-after-nec-bans-councillor-involvement-in-enfield-candidate-selection-right-wing-councillors-bypass-lcf-to-appoint-councillor-to-oversee-selections/#comment-174799

      3. Oops, posted my comment in the wrong place….. see M’s reply and Okeefes smear below.

    3. M, I just finished reading your post, having only got so far before doing a search on Novara Media etc, and I see that you TOO are spouting the falsehood about socialist MPs not having the guts to leave the party ‘and fight from the outside’. If you are suggesting that they sit as Independents, I don’t suppose it escaped their notice that when Chris Williamson stood as an Independent in the 2019 general election, he got the massive total of 635 votes (1.35% of the vote). As for ‘fighting afresh from our own party’, well given that they haven’t got the ‘guts’ to leave and do so – and given that a number of regular every-day posters have been slagging them off practically every single day in practically every single thread for the past two or three months – why don’t you all spend your time doing something constructive instead of forever whinging and moaning, and get your OWN socialist party together, because if you REALLY wanted to try and change society for the better, then you wouldn’t waste your time on here forever complaining, you would ACT and put your money where your mouths are. It’s easy to criticise, so come on then, show us all how it’s done!

      But you WON’T of course!

      1. They the socialist group are being paid you clown.And who are you white flag man Allan Howard to criticise a poster before youve even read it .Get to bed and step up the medication 💊 whilst its free,but not for long if nasty sick individuals like yourself are allowed to put off any new posters with your cowardly rants.

      2. Chris Williamson was smeared as an anti Semite by labour and Novara media. . That’s why he got no votes. That’s MY point. Thanks.

      3. Also alan I don’t have any time or financial means or skill to do anything constructive in setting up a new party. I wish I did. That’s why I’m begging for others who can to. Eg socialist labour MPs. It’s a tired and irritating and stupid argument to tell people to stop complaining or criticising or analysing or asking or wondering about the state if politics if they aren’t running for PM.

      4. Yeah M, and no doubt all the other people on here who trash the left on a daily basis don’t have the time or financial means or skills etc! Oh, but they have the time to post forty or fifty or more comments on this site every single day between them! And needless to say, the obvious solution to ‘finances’ – given that there are over three hundred thousand left-wing members or ex-members – would be to crowdfund, so THAT is no excuse for inaction.

        Anyway, can you post a link to the article(s) in which you claim NM smeared Chris Williamson as an anti-semite.

        And Joe, M claimed that NM didn’t cover the A/S smear campaign, and yet they DID. And in a later post he claimed that NM smeared Chris Williamson as an anti-semite, and yet when I then did a search on their website re >chris williamson< there was absolutely nothing to that effect. Oh, right, and what with Joe being an Establishment black propagandist posing as a left-winger, he contrives and invents a fake criticism – ie that I didn't read 'Ms' post before criticising him, and he does so knowing damn well that I read so far and then did a search on NMs website, and then posted a response to M, and THEN read the rest of his post.

        Yep, Joe the shill lying through his teeth again! But he has no problem with his buddy signpost FIRST fabricating something so that he could denigrate Jeremy Corbyn by comparison, and then DENY that he said what he said when I asked him about it AND claim that I was making it up (even though it was there in black and white), and THEN go on to finish by saying I should seek help. Needless to say, Joe knows who's 'nasty', and shills of course – being psychopaths as they undoubtedly ARE – revel in being nasty and being evil. And Joe himself tried to smear me by claiming I said he lied about being a councillor! I didn't of course, and Joe is lying through his fascist teeth again, and the reason he doesn't provide the evidence that I did so – ie copy and paste what he alleges – is because it doesn't exist, so all he can do is resort to personal abuse, as propagandists DO!

  16. Labour party members may not have to wait till the next election to remove Starmer and Evans, the upcoming Local elections may prove disastrous, then the court case against Evans as well as Corbyns case against his suspension and the Bindmans case set out briefly below should prove particularly interesting.
    Bindmans, acting on behalf of two suspended constituency party (CLP) officers and Jewish Voice for Labour (JVL), has laid out Evans’s breaches in a 20-page legal letter, including:
    • misapplication of Labour rules to justify his attempt to ban free speech
    • discriminating against the party’s left-wing Jews – and against other minorities
    • discriminating against Palestinians to protect the feelings of pro-Israel members
    • discriminating against Jews by acting as if there is only ‘one Jewish view’ – and acting as if he has the right to decide what is ‘acceptable for Jews to say’
    • banning free speech in a ‘blanket’ manner, without evidence to support his actions
    • unlawfully assuming that Labour has the right to dictate what local parties can discuss
    • wrongly treating human rights laws as if they ban anything someone might find offensive
    • acting disproportionately and outside his powers
    • misapplying and selectively applying Labour’s rules – including in the direct opposite effect of what they actually say
    • breaching Labour’s codes of conduct

    1. It will be good to watch them get hauled over the coals. But I am afraid they will just nominate a bunch of other right wingers to vote for. . Even if Starmer goes theres no chance for left wingers to replace him, and no role for them to influence his replacement just as they don’t influence Starmer now.. New party or bust. Force a coalition of anti tory / pro PR parties and force labours hand that way,

  17. When I was a child at primary school,I was beaten for using my left hand,but I still like to use my left for important jobs,and its always been that way.for me.I use my right for writing in italics and I really don’t have a problem except it draws attention to the way I write.my letters.My hatred of the right was probably formed at school,but who knows its probably down to a veiw to the morality of supporting a corrupt and archaic system.I really can’t see much changing apart from a better atmosphere in clearing out the knight,but that in many ways will continue the Labour right domination within the PLP which ultimately chooses the candidate for leadership.There will be no more Corbyns and thats for sure.

  18. You have me mixed up with someone else Mr McNiven as I have never posted on the specific matter you raise in your post on this forum.

    The one observation which does seem pertinent at this point is that the way you have framed the matter in the narrative of your post is somewhat limited in that it oversimplifies matters.

    For now, the sake of brevity and to filter matters down to their basic constituent parts, it would seem reasonable to observe, referencing a well known quote, that one is either with the Karl Rove’s of this world or a member of the reality based community.

    1. Thank you for the correction, clearly I did have you mixed up with another commenter.
      Whoever it was, that person must have made at least one direct reference to something, so gets kudos for that.
      You apparently prefer the oblique to the direct, the vague to the specific.
      That’s tedious, pretentious and cowardly but it’s my own fault for replying – I should have noticed it in your first comment and ignored you.
      I won’t make the same mistake again.

  19. A specific question was asked, Master McNiven, and the specific question was answered.

    You seem to be harbouring under the delusion that you have some kind of special entitlement to receive detailed responses to assumption based speculations on your part. The manner in which this is demanded, playing the man rather than the ball with puerile name calling, is unlikely to prove successful in inducing any grown up to pander to your tantrum like approach.

    Good day to you, young man.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: