Analysis Breaking Exclusive News

Exclusive: Starmer’s war on Liverpool continues as party moves to disenfranchise members

Forced move to less accessible meeting format breaks party rules

Keir Starmer’s war on Liverpool, the nation’s politically reddest city, has already seen:

But Starmer and his henchpeople have not finished – and are now moving to remove the vast majority of members from direct involvement in the decisions of their constituency parties.

According to officers of constituency parties (CLPs) in the city region, Labour is now forcing Liverpool CLPs to return to a branch/delegate structure, where only delegates sent by branches to the ‘general meeting’ will be able to vote on the CLP’s activities, spending and resolutions – and delegates sent by ‘affiliates’, which the right has spent years taking over, will have a voting power that they do not possess in the ‘all-member’ structure.

The branch/delegate structure is one of the meeting structures allowed in Labour’s rulebook – but the rules are clear that only CLP members can decide to change the way they meet – and that if a ‘party unit’ such as Labour’s national executive (NEC) wants to change it, they can propose it but it can only be implemented if a majority of members vote for it:

The NEC can set guidelines for the consultation, but has no authority under the rules to impose a change. But – in a manner entirely typical of the arrogance displayed by the party’s right under Keir Starmer – Labour is ignoring its own rules to force a change to a structure the right thinks it can more easily control.

One local CLP officer described the process and its impact:

This is clearly an initiative designed to emasculate the CLPs and activists in general. Branch AGMs (annual general meetings) will be held early in the new year, even though ours is normally in summer. The change will mean that in order to attend CLP you need to be delegated by your branch – assuming anyone bothers to attend. [After the change] a new CLP AGM will then be held and a new exec chosen by branch delegates.

They closed all the Liverpool CLPs in 1992 as a punishment for their years of support for the 47 [councillors who refused to implement cuts that would hurt vulnerable people in the 1980s]. They’re not brave enough to do this now so this is second best but amounts to the same thing.

Such is the level of apathy and disillusionment with Keir Starmer – even among many local right-wingers – that the party is merging some branches in an attempt to create meetings with enough attendees to be ‘quorate’.

Skwawkbox view:

Local Labour parties in Liverpool and its surrounds have voted no confidence in Keir Starmer over his actions – even before his betrayal of writing in the rag locally referred to as the ‘Scum’. It seems the party is now handing out a punishment beating, but Starmer’s cowardly war on Liverpool for being a left city has been going on almost since the Starmer regime began.

The left knew what Starmer was, but some on the right in Liverpool who fell for Starmer’s false promises during his election campaign have had a rude awakening.

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 without hardship, 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.


  1. Starmers powers have no limits,they transcend time and space.Yesterday he took the party back to 2007 and today Nandy has commented that he is moving the party not to the right or to the left, which is normal practice, but “north”.

    1. Out of 82 comments at the time of writing, 29 of them were posted by SteveH. But perish the thought that he’s a troll/shill.

      1. Allan – Did you also take note that nearly all my comments are in responce to others directly addressing me.
        According to you I’m missing out, you claim to be in the know what is the going rate

      2. Like the troll/shill that you ARE, you post comments so as to wind people up and get a response as such. You monitor the site constantly practically every single day, and have been doing so for at least four years that I know of, and NO ordinary legitimate poster does that. And I see – having just quickly checked – that you’ve posted eleven of the thirty comments (at the time of writing) in the next thread to this one, and in the thread before this one you’ve posted 27 out of 111 comments at the time of writing!

        You must post about five hundred comments a week – ie around two thousand a month, and well over twenty thousand a year – but yur not a troll/shill of course, and it’s just perfectly normal behaviour! In this thread ALONE you posted your first comment at 1.23pm (yesterday), and yur STILL posting comments (as you just DID in a reply to me) more than THIRTEEN hours later!

  2. Use it as an opportunity to drive out Red Tories, make sure it backfires on them, no room at the inn for any supporters of Temporary Embarrassment
    Good practice for the day we kick the War Criminal and Mushy Peas out of the party

  3. With any version of the Tory party its a race to the bottom, why are we surprised

  4. Unless I’ve misunderstood this article then what is actually being reported here is that there will be branch AGMs in the new year at which a proposal to return to a delegate system will be discussed and democratically voted on and ‘the left’ are panicking because they don’t think they can mobilise enough members to vote down the proposed changes.

    1. “Unless I’ve misunderstood this article”

      There’s NO ‘unless’ about it, soft ollies. Look for the key words in the OP.

      (CLUE: They’re the ones in italics and inverted commas.)

      But then again, you’re the self-professed ‘democratic expert’ , aren’t ya?

      1. Toffee – Well thanks for the silly rant but perhaps you could point out where the above article actually contradicts what I’ve said above.

      2. If you’re too stupid to realise it’s not my fault. 😕

      3. Toffee – If you are too stupid to explain yourself then that is obviously your problem

      4. Explain MYSELF?

        That’s some delusion you’re suffering from you odious wee gawp.

        It’s as plain as day where you’ve fucked up; indeed I’ve already spelled it out for ALL to see, but once again you offer a pathetic attempt to deflect and obfuscate in a piss-poor effort to hoodwink anyone that you actually know what you’re on about.

        You play dumb and then project your own failings on the one who calls you out when they won’t excuse your own balls-up and they don’t give you the answer you thought you’d be getting (because you’re all TOO easy).

        Small wonder you’re laughed at, time after time, after time.

        PS. Got any ideas about giving us a difference between smarmerism and right wing conservatism, yet?

        Thought not.

      5. Toffee – There is nothing in the above article that categorically states that the procedures in the rule book won’t be followed or that conflicts with what I said in my OP. Prove me wrong instead of ranting.
        The only real issue here is whether ‘the left’ in the most left wing city in the country can muster enough like minded members to vote down this proposed change. Judging from the panicked response on this page that’s looking like a no.

    2. SteveH
      It does beg the question why the left can’t add up
      The genuine fear is Temporary Embarrassment and his rent boy have so far pissed all over the rule book and common law
      When that doesn’t work straight forward fraud will suffice
      Cannot believe he is an ex DPP, bent as a 9 Bob note

      1. lundiel – They are not at war with me or the majority of members
        My impression is that the reality is that a small faction of Corbyn worshippers declared war on the day the leadership results were announced.
        The rule changes at this years conference were a direct consequence of you all cleverly trying to impress everyone by showing off on these and other pages about how they were going to bring Starmer down

    3. Considering it is not in the rules for Branches to make the decision it seems legitimate to complain. A motion to change from AMM to Delegate can be initiated by a Branch but the actual decision is made by the CLP at a special AMM. It is not for Branches or the NEC to decide it is discretionary decision that is wholly in the hands of the members of the CLP.

      1. Thanks for your input but it doesn’t really alter the gist of what I’ve said. There is nothing in the above article that categorically states that the procedures in the rule book won’t be followed. The only real issue here is whether ‘the left’ in the most left wing city in the country can muster enough votes to vote down this proposed change.

      2. Don’t bother, Duncan.

        Our learned friend referred to by me as ‘the wee fella’ can only do what smarmer did when fronted about nationalisation on the Marr show.

        “But it doesn’t say nationalise”

        As cowardly and cretinous as his idol.

      3. Because let’s not forget that
        “Public ownership is NOT nationalisation”

        Isn’t that right, wee fella?

      4. I need not bother with your link.

        Only you and the rest of your smarmerite cultists would keep trying to squirm out of your dear leader’s abject shithousery and idiocy.

        Here you are using Corbyn era documents but keefs distanced himself from each and every one of the 2019 policies that he pledged he’d maintain.

        That makes him better than Corbyn according to you, so why are you using said corbyn-era documents to promote your useless failure of a supposed leader?

        Keef hasn’t told us what nationalisation is only what he thinks it isn’t which, unsurprisingly, is in total contradiction of the overwhelming consensus AND correct definition.

        The man’s so involved with himself as some sort of legal demi-god he thinks he can act as he pleases. By the way, has he won a legal challenge as party leader yet?

        How the absolute fuck he got to become DPP with his interpretation of rules and his imbecilic semantics is beyond me.

        Dummkopf-schmitt doesn’t get anything right, but calling keef a second-rate lawyer’ was the nearest he’s ever been to bring on the money… Keef’s not even tenth rate.

      5. Toffee – Please yourself, I can’t say I’m surprised.
        Heaven forbid that you should educate yourself so that you don’t have to rant in wild generalities to cover for your lack of knowledge

      6. Lack of knowledge?

        Yeah, alright clever fella. 52 still more than 48 is it?

        Bevan, Attlee & co were all remainers were they?

        Public ownership NOT nationalisation anymore?

        Keef leading by 20 points is he?

        More members now than under Corbyn, is there?

        Try getting just ONE thing right before you tell ANYONE they lack knowledge, divvy.

    4. Stop putting “the left” in quotes, SteveH. Their status as the left isn’t in question and you can’t assume most of the party are actually thrilled with Starmer’s total abandonment of socialism.

      1. All manner of bloggers, vanity websites etc use this tactic. Whatever they find politically, socially or culturally offensive, they blame the “Left”. The SNPs’ weird politics, the Demoncrats, the BBC, Owen Jones on and on. The left is what they want it to be. That is until brexit. They stutter because it does not compute, lexit, oh dear.

  5. …and, still, there are people telling me, ‘If you don’t vote for Southside Labour, you’ll let the Tories in.’

    I point out to them, we could, now, be into the fifth year of a Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Government, had it not been for the treachery of those people, now, in the Shadow Cabinet, and asking Democratic Socialists to vote for them is a bit of a stretch.

    It would be like letting kleptomaniacs loose in a knick-knack store – as we’ve already seen.

    1. At least they’ll own any loss.

      They’re relying on the idea ‘oppositions don’t win elections – Govts lose them’ to an absurd degree. They think voters will turn to them in desperation and offering a compelling vision, hope or expectation of change isn’t needed. They are probably in for a shock given many of the millions who voted Corbyn remember the unhappy 2003-2010 New Labour years and endorsing that is anathema. In a choice between voting for that, or not voting at all(apathy), not voting will win by a landslide.

      Most of the shad cab have the guardian-esque revisionist view of the New Labour years too, one that omits the fact Labour shed millions of votes between 1997-2005 and only clung on in 2005, because in former hardline Home Secretary Michael Howard the Tories picked the one person who could make Blair look less horrific. By 2010 Labour members were demanding a return to real discernibly Labour policies again, the demands came before Corbyn became leader in 2015.

      The present day return to New New Labour has no mandate whatsoever, and Starmer had to repeatedly lie to get where he is. I don’t get why the unions aren’t kicking off more about it? For this team that Starmer’s assembled won’t repeal anti-trade union laws(Trade Union Act), that is for sure. They’re the self proclaimed ‘party of business,’ naively spouting, that all profit, regardless of the business model or monopoly that generated it, is good.

      1. Quite.

        The 2003 election saw the number for ‘non of the above’ rise to 18 million. Consistently, election after election, the largest single bloc of voters. Though it is next to impossible to differentiate within this bloc between those who don’t turn up to register a vote and those who deliberately spoil their paper because their are no accurate figures produced for spoilt papers.

        Two observations occur:

        1. There is every likelihood (outside of some contrived event like some level of armed conflict or ballot fixing) that this will rise above 20 million next time around.

        2. Any company which ignored such a large potential base is asking for a good and deserved hiding. Rather than chasing the same voter base as the Tories any half competent political organisation would be courting that potential. The fact that what passes for the LP under its current regime actively avoids this at all costs speaks volumes in terms of the way it and they see the concept of the demos.

        The unspoken theme being that in addition to the pretorian attitude which divides the populace up between the ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ poor there exits an arrogant presumption which divides the populace into deserving and undeserving voters.

        This is not simply an issue within the LP but is in fact systemic to an ossified, broken, and unserviceable system which is way past its sell by date in terms of any recoverable efficacy.

        What passes for the demos here is a dead system walking simply because having been deliberately frozen in time as the perfect system (for who one might add?) to suit a decadent oligarchy there is simply no scope for progress and development.

    2. Unless we have a Party up and running with sitting MPs and Candidates for ~650 Constituencies, there is only one worthy use of our votes, VOTE THATCHER’S NEOLIBERAL NEO-NEW-LABOUR PARTY TORIES OUT! There is only ONE way to do that, vote for their strongest opponent.
      Sure vote for a New Little Party, Green Party, etc that will give you 1 or 2 TORY LEADERS Blue Keef and his Starmersstruppen at Thatcher’s Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour Party Parasite TORIES or BoJoke the Inbred at Thatcher’s Conservative Party TORIES!
      But hey, you’ll feel better about yourself.
      What have we gained as Democratic Socialists, sweet fuck all, Labour is by then 100% occupied by Thatcher’s Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour Party Parasite TORY SCUM and in Government aiming to destroy the last remaining 2/3 Democratic Socialist Exiles in the HoC or BoJoke gets in, but sacked and replaced with Psycho Polly, Raab, Williamson, Gove, Mogg, etc,etc,etc!
      The PEOPLE, have NO VOICE, go home, you don’t belong here in Parliament it’s “not for THE UNDESRVING POOR!” or we make a Pact to Tactically Vote OUT ALL THATCHER’S NEOLIBERAL NEO-NEW-LABOUR PARTY TORY SCUM whatever it takes!
      Vote IN ALL Democratic Socialists UK Labour Party MPs and Candidates and even if that is 5/10 we’ll have a voice FOR The PEOPLE and a Base of Democratic Socialists with all Tory Parasites removed and open to all the New Small Parties to reunite and work all of our Buts off in our CLP Community To TAKE THAT SEAT the following GE!
      We have Hope back and hopefully something to feel proud of regardless of who/what we voted to get the NEO-NEW-LABOUR TORY SCUM MP OUT OF OUR CLP SEAT!
      This is a war, of sorts, on so many levels rules cannot apply! Unless we just want to give up entirely for our Principles, with doffed cap and another 43/86/100/200 years of TORY HELL!

      1. nellykskelly – You need to lay off the mushrooms.
        Being a Tory enabler will hurt the disadvantaged, the vulnerable and society in general. Are you one of Boris’s useful idiots.

      2. The ONLY TORY here is YOU! You are Starmer’s enabler, Thatcher’s Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour Party Parasite TORIES are TORIES no less, more but not less.
        If I had to choose which TORY I hate most and which TORY is by far more Dangerous for The PEOPLE then I would most certainly say Thatcher’s Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour Party TORIES, by a mile.
        In the UK there are 1 of 2 Parties who can win the keys to Nr10 Thatcher’s Neoliberal Conservative Party TORIES or Thatcher’s Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour Party TORIES.
        2017/2019 The Democratic Socialist UK Labour Party vs The Neoliberal Conservative Party TORIES, there was a DIFFERENCE, there was a CHOICE, whatever the results were.
        The next GE with Conservative Party TORIES vs Neo-New-Labour Party TORIES THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE, THERE IS NO CHOICE!
        In fact enabling The Inbreed BoJoke is probably a far safer option than bringing Uber Zionist Blue Keef and his Starmersstruppen ANYWHERE NEAR Nr10!
        So in the next GE I will Proudly enable ANYONE, but the Fucking Bastard Neo-New-Labour Party Parasite TORIES who Connived, Smeared, Lied, Sabotaged, Propagandised, Couped, Stirred Division, etc, etc a Democratic Socialists UK Labour Party Government right out of The PEOPLE’S hands, The PEOPLE who needed it most the disadvantaged the “UNDESRVING POOR”!
        I would spit in their eye before voting for them!
        Perhaps get your TORY head out of your Lord and Master TORY Blue Keef’s Arse, quit slurping second hand Champagne and Caviar to try some Mushrooms, you may not be such a dull TORY Fuck, all your life!

      3. nellyskelly – You’re the one trying to justify to yourself that it is OK to vote Conservative.
        Which of the scores of policies announced and/or confirmed at this year’s conference are RW or Tory.

      4. 1. I don’t need to justify anything, certainly not to you.
        2. Thatcherite Neoliberal TORY Scum are Thatcherite Neoliberal TORY Scum, their promises are as meaningless and pointless as they are!
        It is their Actions of past and present that predicts their future Policies and Politics!
        They did everything in their power to prevent a UK Labour Party win 2017 and 2019, extending 43 years of Thatcherite Neoliberal TORY HELL, with not so much as a thought for “The UNDESRVING POOR”! That alone is enough to bullshit absolutely anything positive that may or may not have been announced at The Thatcherite Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour Party Parasite TORY Conference!

    3. And if they say that to me George Peel I say…Red Tory, Blue Tory, makes no difference. Same arse different cheeks.

  6. When I read this article I just shook my head- if Starmer was a genuine Labour leader who wanted a Labour government elected at the next election he wouldn’t do this. He is clearly out to destroy Socialism and Anti Zionism in the party, leave us unelectable at the next election and probably the one after in the hope that by 2030 we will be a totally neutered red Tory party and get enough MPs elected to form a government.
    It is up to the people of Liverpool to show Starmer what they think of his nasty tricks by “going on strike” – no campaigning or voting for Labour while Starmer continues his vicious and vindictive campaign against the reddest city in the country and our socialist and antiZionist brothers and sisters.

    1. Smartboy – Or the left in what is reputed to be the most left-wing city in the country could simply get off their collective arses and vote down this proposal

      1. This is disingenuous even for you steveh.

        We’ve been running for over twelve months now under a system in which the GS (confirmed at Conference via a gerrymandered vote which would shame a banana republic) and his regional apparatchiks suspend CLP’s and Branches; prevents and cancels meetings; rigs votes; and denies members their democratic voices; dictates how members spend their own funds they have raised; by dictat and bullying on pain of individual and group sanctions ranging from removal from the Party through to legal action.

        Any attempt by members to outvote this proposal will, as has been the case previously, ruthlessly suppressed using the exact same gerrymandered methods. Many of which have featured on this site over the past twelve months and beyond.

        The notion you are trying to sell here will not only not float it also outs you as a dishonest bad faith participant incapable of uttering a single word of truth. Preferring instead to spout outright lies for the untenable positions of a discreditable regime. It wouldn’t be so bad if you were any good at being a liar and a fraud.

      2. Dave – Oh dear, you’re actually really worried that ‘the left’ haven’t got the numbers to win this vote. If they had bothered to turn up for Branch meetings then this issue wouldn’t have arisen.
        Apathy has consequences.

      3. Reply to Steve H
        I think any moves to vote down the proposal would be held by Starmer’s regime to be in unconstitutional and any vote would be nullified as a result . Anyone who objected would be suspended then expelled for “antisemitism” within a week or two. You know the score as well as I do Steve H
        No, I think a “strike” is the most effective way for Liverpool to hit back.

      4. Smartboy – You can dream whatever you like but there is no guarantee that it will make sense outside your own head.

      5. Reply to Dave Hansell
        I posted my reply to Steve H before I read your post. I am in complete agreement with you Dave – you have summarised the situation perfectly.

      6. Steveh, here in the real world rather than the fantasy one in your own head we operate on the basis of empirical evidence.

        That evidence clearly demonstrates that whenever any deviation from the Stalinist line you are acting as as a shill for occurs at any level the party hierarchy and bureaucracy step in to cancel meetings, suspend CLP’s and Branches, and threaten members and party units with suspension and other disciplinary measures in any and every case – including spending their own money, what they can campaign on and what Motions they can and cannot debate.

        If you have evidence to the contrary I suggest you present it rather than sitting on the sidelines like a poor man’s Canute pretending you know WTF is going on. Failing that all you are doing by coming to the debating table with nothing of substance is embarrassing yourself.

  7. Where Starmer goes next – post-political career, will be interesting.

    If he flops terribly i.e. a Clegg-style wipeout circ. 2015’s GE, as many here think is inevitable, only then to be mysteriously snapped up by a big investment bank on a huge salary, it’ll speak volumes as to what’s really going on and how this is merely a sham virtual democracy, in which the losers are the voting public who naively believe they get to exercise democratic choice not seeing the controlling hands pulling the strings.

    1. Andy – If that happens I’m guessing he will return to his previous profession as a very successful human rights barrister.

      1. SteveH

        Given his record as DPP (esp. Assange ), his atrocious treatment of Labour members and leftist MPs; his disregard for rules and fair due process i.e. natural justice. Who’d want him anywhere near human rights?

        On the govt’s controversial Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act 2021 and Overseas Operations Bill barely a squeak from hUmAn rIgHts lawyer Sir Keir.

        Going by his time as Labour leader, Starmer might be good for infiltrating and spying on International Human Rights organizations, dealing with tricky cases, but that’s about it.

      2. Not sure they’d have him, since he’s made it clear, with things like his persecution of Assange, that he no longer supports human rights, but only the essentially Tory concept of “the national interest”.

    2. @andy

      Foregone conclusion that he will end up somewhere similar to Cleggy.

      Sir Nicholas William Peter Clegg ended up as Vice-President, Global Affairs and Communications. Breezing through Cleggys achievements, I see he helped exempt political statements from fact checking (fact checking LOL), helped stop the break up of faceache and accused by the EU commissioner of justice of misunderstanding EU law (gotta love that term. Any here feel they would get a similar treatment by the law?). EU felt faceache would undermine EU electorial rights.

      Being a member (he certainly is phallic!) of the Trilateral Commission, you can be sure he will get an even more plummier appointment, post politics. He’s already increased his bank balance substantially.

      1. @Nvla

        There is certainly some sort of exclusive network available to politicians who’ve protected the status quo, a network that ordinary mortals are excluded from.

        Lobbying is in the news due to recent Tory sleaze, but the way everyone who undermined Corbyn landed dream cushy jobs – jobs they weren’t qualified for – all having generally done very nicely or ended up in the Lords : Mann, Austin and Woodcock. Really seems quite sinister.

        The whole system is probably endemically corrupt and they couldn’t allow Corbyn to expose it. Jonathan Ashworth hinted at this in that 2019 leaked recorded phonecall, by saying officials could keep secrets from Corbyn if he entered No.10.

        We don’t live in country with anything like the transparency other European countries take for granted. And where there is high secrecy all sorts of bad things no doubt do go on. The UK has a disdainful elite who think they own the entire system and the MSM and Labour centrists like it that way.

      2. @andy

        Sadly, a very accurate post. It is what it is. It’s unlikely to change (except when the boss gets “swopped”)

        A chap called John Cleary posts on moon of Alabama. Some very interesting pieces of evidence about why things are the way you describe. I’d post a link but it’ll disappear. Worth tracking down.

    3. Andy – it will be the House of Lords for Starmer, lucrative directorships , consultancies, after dinner speeches, property portfolios, TV appearances, newspaper articles, a book or two – he will be well rewarded for the job he has done on the Labour party.

    4. There is always a need for people who have a certain mindset, in Texas, executioners.

      1. Wobbly – Which just goes to show how woefully ignorant you are. It wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say that Keir Starmer is responsible for saving the lives of more BAME people than any other person in Parliament.

  8. This sort of thing has happened by the back door on a number of occasions already. Where a CLP has failed to achieve a quorum (could it be that right wingers have just happened not to attend for a while) proposals have been brought to return to a delegate system in order to “relieve the committee” of the onerous task of carrying out business that could not be carried out because CLP meetings were not quorate. Members have voted in favour but have then found that the branch meetings get flooded and delegates elected before those on the left have spotted what’s happening.
    Right wingers then only turn up at meetings when something like selection of ward candidates is on the agenda. Members need to vote with their feet and let the right do the footslogging for a change if they’re so keen on being in control.

  9. Way off subject but you should all read this and watch the moving video.

    British authorities ‘refused to help’ the 27 people who drowned in the Channel despite boat being ‘5km into British waters’ – Evolve Politics

    One of the survivors of last week’s horrific mass drowning in the English Channel has claimed that British authorities refused to help them as their boat was sinking – despite their vessel reportedly being around 5km into British waters.
    In an interview with Kurdish broadcaster, Rudaw, Mohammed Shekha – one of only two survivors from the horrific events of last Tuesday – told how the group made desperate pleas to both British and French authorities in an attempt to raise the alarm.
    Describing how events unfolded, Shekha – who was visibly distressed throughout the interview

    1. Thank you. What sort of nation have we become? I had heard that there were attempts to interfere with lifeboats attempting to help.

  10. On a lighter note – I had been watching Nadine Dorries’ gig at the select committee and was sure that she reminded me of someone, but couldn’t think who. I have it now. Years ago, on the Bremner, Bird and Fortune show, the two Johns used to do dinner party sketches. Dorries is a reincarnation of the woman who played John Bird’s wife.

  11. I can see it is an on going fight for Liverpool Labour Party
    – however ..

    .. concerning the rule for Branche votes in CLP
    meetings as EITHER every member of a Branch has a vote
    at CLP meetings OR only Branche delegates have the vote..
    In our CLP we started with “All member” votes at CLP meetings
    but we then found the following – which I THINK is correct:

    If you have an All member vote then CLP meetings must be quorate
    with respect to number turning up as a proportion of the numbers in the
    CLP. If the meeting is NOT quorate then Motions may well be noted
    but do not have validity. After several CLP meetings which were NOT
    quorate we transferred to the delegate method.

    The delegate method means that each Branch has a certain number
    of delegates which (I think?) must have at least half females. The number of
    delegates per branch is generous and in our case there is no need for a vote –
    after several meetings – we are still looking for delegates for our Branch
    and it is the same for all Branches so far as I know.

    I might add that we do not have a safe Labour seat or safe Council seats ..
    but we have lately had a lot of member involvement in leafleting/canvassing etc.

    I suppose that it depends on the CLP as to which is fairest – or best and of course
    I may have misunderstood the rules. However if plenty of Left Wing LP members
    attend Branch meetings then left wing delegates will be elected and
    Starmer et al will be stopped – at least in this latest move against the left..

  12. This is what anti-democratic authoritarians always do. atttack and weaken anything that challenges their power.

    Who’da thought that an elected leader of Labour would ever feel justified to enfeeble the very thing that gives the Labour party its authority and validity – its membership?

    Starmer is not leader of Labour. He is its anti-leader.

    1. Without the MSM impetus to remove him Labour seem stuck with him.

      Members need to realise no one is going to do the heavy lifting for them, they have to rise to it themselves. Starmer is a socialist’s worst nightmare and yet they just collectively shrug their shoulders.

      Be in no doubt, were Starmer a Tory leader, the press would have triggered a leadership contest by now on the orders of their proprietors. Look how IDS and Theresa May came under press attack when proprietors threw in the towel thinking they couldn’t win a GE.

    2. qwertboi – If ‘the left’ have the numbers then they’ll win the vote, perhaps your time would be better utilised ensuring that you get the left vote out.

      1. What’s with you thinking this is a slight issue that can be fixed by an election?

      2. qwertboi – Are you getting your excuses in early?

        If you can’t win in Liverpool where can you win.

      3. If keef can’t open up the 20 point gap over de piffle YOU said he would, who can he open a gap up against?

      4. Toffee – You have so little faith in your own arguments that you are incapable of making a point without telling a lie.

        I have never said that. I have however referred people to this article on Stats for Lefties when this meme has cropped up in the past.

        Why isn’t Starmer 20pts ahead?

      5. Toffee – I don’t know what the exact membership numbers are but I doubt they have sunk below the level they were in Nov19 when Corbyn had lost over 15% of the membership.

      6. And more to the point, WHY isn’t keef 20 points ahead of THE most corrupt toerag government on history?


        And what’s the latest membership numbers? Are they still queueing round the block with subscription fees on hand, almost fighting each other to join, now that Corbyn’s no longer leader (nevermind labour MP) – y’know? Like YOU said they were, and would?

        Not so forthcoming with your smartarse answers now, are you sunshine? 🤔🤔🤫🤫

      7. lundiel – I did point out to some that disenfranchising themselves wasn’t perhaps the wisest decision they had ever made

      8. We’ve already gone, hundreds of thousands of us. You’ve won for now. I wouldn’t get too comfortable though.

      9. Of course, I thoroughly expect youll rely on me being as lazy as you think the left are by demanding I PROVE you said keef’s more popular than Corbyn and the numbers are higher than under Corbyn.

        Except I don’t need to. Just about everyone on here has been told the same by you at one time or another. Ask them if you think I’m lying.

      10. “getting your excuses in early?”
        I’m not an active member of the Labour party. Told you, I’m enjoying the show.

        Starmer’s so politically inept, he has no idea what he is causing.

      11. qwertboi – You may not be a member but you obviously have an active interest in the outcome.

      12. Why isn’t Starmer 20pts ahead?

        Because people know he is an abject liar, a deceiver, a fibber, a falsifier, a perjurer and a false leader.

        He’s the perfect leader to pasokify Labour and his racist backers together with the trilateral commission must be very, very happy with their purchase.

        Speaking for myself, I’m actually happy with his performance this week.

        The more Keir Starmer embraces the Labour right, the more complete his assimilation to them becomes. From ditching the ten pledges that got him elected, ruthlessly disposing of his enemies, and promoting and tossing aside lackeys who no longer please him, we’ve now regressed to constituency clique levels of pettiness. Like so many right wing councillors and student activists who believe themselves temporarily embarrassed Labour MPs, he’s becoming a caricature of them – the sort that believes lots of swearing and shafting your own side because you can are positive proofs of the bastardry and tough decisions one has to make in politics. Starmer knows he can’t sack Angela Rayner – he found that out the hard way. But the man has learned. She can’t be shifted, but he can make life difficult for her. His deliberate attempt to drive Angela from the headlines is a foretaste of more to come. Though Starmer should be careful. In his deputy he has someone who also doesn’t forget, nor forgives. Today saw the touching off of another low level conflict of briefing and counter-briefing just as we begin the long build to the next general election. Well done Keir Starmer for making your chances of winning that little bit more difficult.”

        He’s the caricature of a “dodgy lawyer” and probably thinks he’s leading Labour to an incisive victory. Poor soul, most people just see him as a bad Labour leader. Sir Keir Rodney who?

      13. qwertboi [- That isn’t what the link to Stats for Lefties says, are you trying to deceive people?

      14. SteveH –

        “Corbyn had lost over 15% of the membership.”

        Corbyn was under relentless attack and members were gaslighted by all MSM into believing even being a Labour party member was tantamount to being an anti-Semite, or terrorist supporter.

        We had Margaret Hodge on Sky News claiming it was just like 1930s Germany and she had a suitcase packed ready to flee in case Corbyn supporters came for her. None of this lunacy was even challenged. Outrageous nonsense was being thrown at the party.

        The media created an awful atmosphere around the party. It was relentless stuff that showed the UK media in its true despicable form.

        Made lots of people lose faith in the UK media.

      15. Andy – The problem was that Jeremy destroyed people’s trustin him by pissing all over his own USP.
        Did Jeremy actually achieve anything during his tenure as leader.

      16. SteveH

        That’s correct. Corbyn achieved very little despite being in a powerful position. But only because his party and press were making his life hell he was constantly firefighting within his own ranks. Around 60-70% of the PLP wanted him out from the get-go. PLP meetings were raucous affairs with all manner of bile thrown at him.

        Any moves to democratise CLP candidate selection processes(open selection) were met with howls of protest from the PLP and claims of Stalinist purges etc. from their press friends including the BBC. The guardian and BBC were key players in thwarting reform. Which is perverse considering the guardian in its editorials, used to campaign for UK primaries, citing AOC ‘s primary enabled breakthrough in the US.

        Just proves what ‘fair weather friends of democracy’ the centrists are. If it’s not going their way they take their ball away.

      17. Andy – “Around 60-70% of the PLP wanted him out” Coincidentally at the time of the 19GE a similar number of the electorate agreed with the PLP.

      18. SteveH-

        More indicative of the unrepresentative composition of the PLP than anything else. Many wouldn’t serve as shadow ministers.

        The PLP RW and centrists want to lock the UK electorate in a two-party democratic prison. Much like the two parties conspired to do in the US.

        Quite why you’re so enthusiastic about ‘Tory vs Tory-lite’ is beyond me?

      19. Andy – Things being beyond you doesn’t come as a surprise.

    3. The standard of political leadership in these islands is atrocious. Apart from incompetence they share a common hatred for the working class.

  13. ” Starmer’s so politically inept, he has no idea what he is causing.”

    Spot on!

    We were reminded on “Politics Live” that when May was going
    through a bad patch Corbyn was criticised by Blair for “only” being 6 points
    ahead! According to him this should have been 20 points!

    AS we know its is likely that someone else would have written the speech
    – and Johnson would have relied on winging it. Contrary
    to this May would have prepared beforehand and would not
    have been fazed at losing her place so what does that say
    about Starmer?

    I gave a clap of approval at this but my biggest cheer was because
    of a Brexit supporting journalist who reminded us that Starmer had
    been the architect of the second vote – which she reckoned
    stymied Corbyn’s chances.

    1. Hfm – The highest net satisfaction result Jeremy ever achieved was just 4% for 1 week only the rest of the time he was languishing well into the minus figures.
      We went into the 19GE with a massive two thirds of the electorate actively expressing a dislike for Corbyn

      1. SteveH-

        Corbyn’s ratings typically improved in the election campaign (certainly they did in 2017). The newspapers and Kuenssberg and other assorted BBC presenters esp. those on BBC 2’s Newsnight were relentlessly hostile, and campaigns were the only time he got a fair public hearing.

        Corbyn was always fighting that media caricature of him, which was brutal, in a way Starmer (one of their own) isn’t having to.

        What I’d ask you SteveH, is do you think all these establishment Tory presenters : Laura Kuenssberg , Nick Robinson, Robert Peston et al , all been highly at ease and chummy with Starmer, is a good or bad sign?

    2. Starmer , like the rest of the Blairites,is far too rigid in his thinking like some bureaucrats incapable of adapting to changed times.

      He doesn’t get the party’s left at all. The left are the backbone of the party’s electoral support whether he likes the fact or not, and always have been. He simply won’t get away with treating them like dirt.

      In 2005, 2010 and 2015 left-wing voters showed they can, and will, stay home if the offer is perceived as insulting or not worth voting for. Starmer and the people around him think all he has to do is simply reassemble the Blairites, put together some hollow manifesto offer, and everything will fall into place like it’s 1997. He and they are completely wrong. The left gave Blair the benefit of the doubt….

      After being burnt that isn’t going to happen again.

      1. Andy – The self appointed guardians of ‘the left’ are a small minority.

      2. Try telling that one to all the Councillors who lost votes and seats in the May elections and the by elections since.

        I’m sure they would be convinced by your unsubstantiated rantings and ravings steveh.

      3. I doubt very much that he has met too many members during his meteoric rise in the party, for which I blame the left.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: