Analysis Breaking Exclusive News

Exclusive: ‘Conference only sovereign while it’s in session’ – Starmer/Evans’s excuse for ignoring motions

Labour right plumbs new depths in its determination to disenfranchise and disempower members and unions

As a supposedly democratic institution, under Labour’s rules, the party’s supreme authority is not Keir Starmer. It’s certainly not David Evans, nor even the National Executive Committee (NEC). It’s the party’s annual conference – which is why the Labour right went to such extremes to rig the vote to protect David Evans from rejection by conference in Brighton last September.

But that conference also strongly backed a motion to support sanctions against Israel because of its apartheid regime and its treatment of Palestinians. And both Keir Starmer and his then-foreign affairs spokeswoman Lisa Nandy immediately said they rejected it – and certainly did nothing to implement the democratic decision by Labour’s supposedly sovereign body.

And the right’s excuse for this arrogance?

Well, according to them – as advised to members of the NEC after this high-handed and self-entitled behaviour was questioned during a recent NEC meeting – conference is sovereign. But only when it’s actually in session.

In other words, any decision made by the representatives of Labour’s millions of union affiliates and rapidly-dwindling membership are binding – for the four or so days a year that conference actually meets. The rest of the time, Starmer and his henchpeople are free to do, say and decide whatever the hell they feel like, without regard for party democracy.

Of course, Starmer and Nandy didn’t even wait that long before dismissing the Israel sanction vote, but there you go.

Democracy has been gutted, p***ed on and cast aside by the current Labour regime. And naturally, their media pals are saying not a word about it.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and 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 doing its job.

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


  1. The Labour Party has been hijacked by Charlatans just international and corporate elite puppets running the party now all wanna be Blair millionaires.

  2. Similar to how they claim his 10 pledges to the membership only applied during that suspiciously well-financed leadership campaign.

    1. There was nothing suspicious about the knight’s well-funded leadership campaign.
      I seem to remember a 50,000 quid bung from a member of the Jewish Leadership Council.
      Certainly enough to ensure that the Labour leadership was bought and paid for by the apologists for the Apartheid State of Israel.

    2. 10 pledges to British Board of Deputies. It seem that he believes that he is on a mission from God & responsible to no one else; it’s hard to argue with God. I have a problem with any leader who takes instructions from any religious leaders; the Labour Party should be independent of such ideologies., only ‘Socialist’ values.

  3. Absolute rubbish – the decisions taken by the sovereign body ie the Conference Delegates at Annual Conference are BINDING on the whole party until rescinded by the sovereign body at a subsequent Annual Conference. Its called party democracy, a concept that Starmer and Evans are unfamiliar with.

    1. and there was I thinking that it has been common practice for years to ignore motions from the floor of conference and there was a separate process that determined which policies made it into the manifesto.

      1. Steve H I think the following from the Rule Book covers the point
        Clause 1
        4. The Party shall give effect, as far as may be
        practicable, to the principles from time to time
        approved by Party conference
        Of course the difficulty for Starmer (and what has caused him to adopt his ludicrous stance) is that the last Conference accepted the United Nation’s position on Israel – that it is an Apartheid State.
        Starmer is unwilling accept either the party’s position or the UN’s as he is a Friend of the Apartheid state and has persecuted anyone who does not agree with the politics and practicalities of Zionism. Therefore he has to try to negate/circumvent the Conference decision by undermining the authority of Conference
        I think we can expect another spate of expulsions for “antisemitism” when individuals and CLPs voice their dismay and/or disgust at his latest antics.

      2. Smartboy – How long were you a member? Haven’t you realised yet that every rule has a get-out clause

        “The Party shall give effect, as far as may be

      3. Yes like Blue Keef’s 10 Commitments, not to mention his ability to Loophole, Bend and Twist the Law as required, a Motion and Policy will be a piece of cake!
        A TORY’S Word, Spoken or Written is worth less than his/her morning bowel movement, in your hand!

      4. Q: Blue Keef, whatever happened to your 10 Commiitments?
        A: ‘They were not practicile.’
        Q: But, Blue Keef those were all perfectly achievable Promises you made.
        A: ‘Look, it’s like this, they were not practicile.’
        Q: But Blue Keef, you’re not answering the question, why did you not fulfill your promises?
        A: ‘Now look as l’ve already stated, they were not practicile.’……………’Give me your hand, just give me your hand and I will give you the answer!’

      5. That’s rich coming from you steveh. You’ve been bragging on here in recent weeks that Conference passed policies in order to claim that the current Party regime will carry them out at the next elections.

        Which is it son? It’s make your mind up time. You not having it both ways.

      6. Dave – Oh please calm down and re-read my comment.

        “and there was I thinking that it has been common practice for years to ignore motions from the floor of conference and there was a separate process that determined which policies made it into the manifesto.”

        The policies I quoted were announced by a member of the shadow cabinet during their speech to conference. I’m surprised you didn’t know that already.

      7. The Conference motion called for sanctions against Israel because … etc. etc.
        I am puzzled as to how it is “impracticable” for the “leadership” to adhere to that decision and to, likewise, call for sanctions.
        Webster : “capable of being put into practice or of being done or accomplished”.
        So Starmer in incapable of saying :”I call for sanctions to be placed on Israel”?
        One wonders why he is so incapable.

      8. Steve H
        This rule means that unless they are impracticable Conference resolutions become policy. No reasonable person would or could interpret it differently. However Starmer has done so and is thereby showing himself to be the unreasonable and unreasoning fanatic that he is – God help the country if he ever becomes PM

      9. nellyskelly – Oh dear

        ??? Have you finally managed to come up with an answer?

      10. You know SteveH of the years that I have seen your posts here on Skwawkbox. I have to say I feel sorry for you, your Anti-UK Labour Party, Pro-Thatcher’s Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour Party TORY agenda has not convinced anyone, yet you keep trying. Do you believe one day everyone will see the sunshine radiating from Blue Keef’s but, while he continues to behave like a complete and utter TWUNT!? Keep trying though, your frustration is rather humorous.

      11. nellyskelly – So which of the scores of policies that were announced by shadow ministers at this year’s conference were Tory policies.

      12. nellyskelly – I must have missed that, could you either provide a link to your reply or repeat it.


      14. nellyskelly – All I can see is another of your rants. Let me know when you’ve managed to work out which of the policies announced at this years conference iare RW

      15. YESTERDAY

        SteveH: “………Which of the scores of policies announced and/or confirmed at this year’s conference are RW or Tory.”

        nellykskelly: “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!


        SKWAWKBOX (SW):
        “Exclusive: ‘Conference only sovereign while it’s in session’ – Starmer/Evans’s excuse for ignoring motions

        Labour right plumbs new depths in its determination to disenfranchise and disempower members and unions”

        SteveH: “and there was I thinking that it has been common practice for years to ignore motions from the floor of conference and there was a separate process that determined which policies made it into the manifesto.”

        The Neo-New-Labour Party TORIES will say whatever gullible ears want to hear. They simply change the policies for their OWN Thatcherite Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour Party TORY agenda.
        All they are after is a vote, we already know who/what they are, as soon as they had the vote, the desperate taken in by their TORY LIES will soon be “THE UNDESERVING POOR”!
        Even by your own comment above their left motions mean nothing. Add the fact that they are Anti-Socialist Thatcherite Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour Party TORIES and we know who they are by their actions/behaviour 2015 to date. When you decide to employ someone, you don’t go by what they say they can do, you go by what they did in the past.
        I thought I would spell it out for you as you’re clearly struggling today, I see lots of “I don’t………….’s” from you!

      16. nellyskelly – Well thanks for confirming what I said above.
        I didn’t ask for a couple of rants I asked for a straightforward answer to a simple question.

        It really isn’t at all difficult to understand.
        Which of the policies that were announced by members of the shadow cabinet at this years conference are RW Tory policies

      17. JFC! They are Neoliberal TORIES, I have commented numerous times that their promises are as meaningless and pointless as they are!
        It is their Actions of past and present that predicts future Policies and Politics!
        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!

        SteveH: “and there was I thinking that it has been common practice for years to ignore motions from the floor of conference and there was a separate process that determined which policies made it into the manifesto.”

        SKWAWKBOX (SW):
        “Exclusive: ‘Conference only sovereign while it’s in session’ – Starmer/Evans’s excuse for ignoring motions

        Labour right plumbs new depths in its determination to disenfranchise and disempower members and unions”

        What is the point in asking me about Right Wing/Tory Motions from a TORY Conference where you yourself commented that Conference Motins are pointless and futile. Perhaps wait for the pointless Neoliberal Neo-New-Labour TORY Manifesto. Then we’ll equate it with their actions and past events to clearly see their loopholes. Skwawkbox announced the first steps of what’s to come, and I, AGAIN commented on this and their past TORY NASTINESS, more than plenty.
        Your question to provide you with those Motions is a Pointless Question based on your own comment alone!
        Anyway why would I have ANY idea what motions were voted for/against at a NEOLIBERAL NEO-NEW-LABOUR TORY PARTY CONFERENCE!? That dear has nothing to do with me, unlike you, I detest the damned things, especially the ones who did everything in their power to destroy a UK Labour Party Government in 2017 and 2019!
        Now I REALLY HOPE you find this oversimplification of my answer to your dilemma.
        I do suggest however you go and take your Meds, a Hot Milk and have an early night, you appear frazzled.

  4. Steve H is right about the long history of the leadership-and the PLPs- refusal to implement policies decided on by Conference.
    Where he is wrong is in omitting to mention that, back in the days of Morgan Phillips and Arthur Deakin the power of the CLPs was much greater than it is today. For a start every sitting MP had to be re-adopted by the CLP before each election. The ordinary member of the party has never had less power than he does today.
    Not that it matters- the Labour Party is, effectively finished, as is every other Social Democratic party in Europe. Like them it has has devoured its base: there is nothing much left of the old Socialist CLPs but the real betrayal was in the acceptance, by Kinnock, Blair and Brown of the castration of the Unions. Without powerful Unions and vibrant dedicated socialist membership Labour is nothing but a dying tradition headed by careerists, idiots and cardboard cut out Macchiavellis and spivs.

    1. bevin – I probably neglected to mention them because one of them dead before I was born whist the other died when I was still in short trousers.
      The industrial and political landscape of 70 or 80 years ago was a completely different world from today. It is time you caught up with which century we are in.

  5. The knight that the majority of the members voted for and continue to fund has declared himself as the “Sovereign body and your dear leader a fascist dictator and supported by his Secretary “the supreme” authority.are in charge and out of control and theres nothing you can do about it other than kick the habit of funding fascism…..its not rocket science and if you need a social club try bird 🐦watching its far less dangerous than supporting the Labour party.

    1. Joseph – You’re the one that has chosen to live in what is effectively a one party state that maintains itself in power through fear, imprisonment, torture and extra judicial killings whist your elected dictator enriches himself and his family through corruption and nepotism.

      1. Seems Joseph did well then. Because that’s Britain in a nut shell.

        A one party state. Check. Maintains power through fear etc. Check (new public disturbance laws being pushed through can have you banged up for spreading disease). Julian Assange. Check. Mark Duggan. Check. Family enriched at the top. Check

      1. So going to a country originally to help provide clean water and sanitation for a very good few years and then having our flights cancelled to paris because of the virus makes me lack credibility.Steve H its just happened that we had to settle here and we love it. and assimilate but don’t think that anyone’s fooled by CIA sour grapes just because Cambodia has sided with our close neighbour and Comrades China.
        Not everyone can bend the knee to the USA or even need to.I can understand your frustration with your leader and the way they stomp the members who are the wrong type of jew or just ordinary broad church members who have a brain and a pulse, but its your shit show and so enjoy yourself whilst going down the toilet

  6. Looks like the Labour party cyber attack is having consequences for running party business, with access to membersnet being unavailable for four weeks (at the time of writng – it’s now five weeks). This has implications for how CLPs conduct selection meetings etc and will be used to further side line the left.

    “Local parties have now been unable to access membership data for a month. I asked for secretaries to be contacted regularly even if there is no firm date for resolution and, until then, advised on how to run trigger ballots, council and parliamentary candidate selections, AGMs and other meetings without knowing who is entitled to participate. We are all open to challenge at any time if anything goes wrong”.

    1. Thanks for pointing that out nemtona. Although I have annuled my payments to the party, I refuse to tell them that I no-longer consider myself a member (for that would imply some respect for them), and, must admit, even when fully-committed, active, and dues-paying, I used members-net less and less. Thank heaven members like you exist.

  7. Skwawky can you not ban the arrogant illiterate prick who professes to be headhunted by three schools in the Caribbean but instead spends all day on here annoying people?

    He’s already admitted he goes out of his way to get a rise out of people, and finds it ‘exhilirating’.

    I’m all for hearing a differing view, but the problem child known as steve h purposely twists and turns more times than a rattlesnake with a hernia from one thread to the next.

    Ban the tory enabling gobshite ffs.

    1. He’ll only reappear as Dame Margaret Hodge’s alter ego or something. Just ignore the Turd Polisher.

      1. Thank you for a much needed smile. Dame Hodge’s alter ego indeed!

    2. I know it’s difficult but wouldn’t the better strategy be totally ignoring all the posts! As ‘baz2001’ says he would probably reappear…

  8. Thank you, thank you, thank you Steve Walker for reporting this. “Democracy has been gutted, p***ed on and cast aside by the current Labour regime. And naturally, their media pals are saying not a word about it.”

    And why would they?

    “Among many similar globalist states, The UK State is a public-private partnership between government, financial institutions, multinational corporations, global think tanks, and well funded third sector organisations, such as so called non governmental organisations (NGO’s) and large international charities.

    Through a labyrinthine structure of direct funding, grant making and philanthropy, the UK State is a cohesive globalist organisation that works with selected academics, scientific institutions and mainstream media (MSM) outlets to advance a tightly controlled, predetermined narrative. This designed consensus serves the the interests and global ambitions of a tiny group of disproportionately wealthy people.

    This group of parasites, often misleadingly referred to as the “elite,” exploit all humanity for their own gain and to consolidate and enhance their power. They control the money supply and the global debt, which is a debt owed to them.

    Human beings are forced to pay tax which, via government procurement, flows directly to the private corporations they own. War, security, infrastructure projects, education and health care provide profits and are used by the parasite class to socially engineer society.

    Globally, they fund all political parties, with any realistic chance of gaining power, they own the MSM and spend billions lobbying policy makers.

    Through think tanks and the actions of “independent” political activists, such as the FPAction Network, they directly fund political campaigns in exchange for the politician’s loyalty to them, not to the electorate.

    Through their tax exempt grant making foundations, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), they control the scientific, medical and academic orthodoxy.

    This global network of oligarchs is moving towards the final stages of its long held plan to construct a single global system of governance. Often referred to as the New World Order (NWO)……

    Source: Iain Davies

    Our Opponents are currently in charge of the Labour Party.

    1. Officially infested by TORIES since Blair gnawed his way into Parliament via the sewers of Westminster, dragging Reagan/Thatcher’s Flavour of Neoliberalism with a HUGE dollop of Neoconservativism on top, in behind him! By no means the first of many infiltration, but certainly the most successful Occupation/Colonisation/Infestation! They did the same in the USA 1 Party under 2 colours, sadly most people are overly indoctrinated and obsessively vote “Labour” their Neoliberal Corporate Brand/Logo/Namesake. Understandably so, expectation is that Labour/Democrats are for The PEOPLE, it could have been 2017/2019 but The PEOPLE fucked up or the Omnilateral Commission and Electorallateral Commission Fucked The PEOPLE over, by using their insecure Ballot Box transportation loophole!
      We have to decide how to deal with this en masse, Socialists are down to about 10/15 in the HoC! If we want ANY representation for The PEOPLE in Parliament we need a Plan Fast, I am not convinced a bunch of new Parties is the answer!

      1. nellyskelly – Democracy can be a bugger when you’re only a small minority.

      2. That pet is a most pathetic attempt at gaslighting. Your Trolling Credibility is sinking lower than it started with. Not to mention Far Right with Racist undertones!

      3. nellyskelly – Gaslighting?
        What have I said above that is inaccurate❓
        How are you any different from those who make false accusations of anti-Semitism❓
        What have I ever said on these pages that is racist❓

      4. 1. I didn’t say you lied!
        1a. Who was talking about minorities and lack of democracy? I certainly was not! NOTE UNDERTONES OF!
        Your comment had NOTHING to do with the thread or my comment, I am not interested diverting further than these timelines, if failed British Democracy and how The PEOPLE, were robbed by the Elites/Establishment comes up again, we can discuss it, untill then squeak, kindly FUCK OFF!
        2. That would be you, dear!
        3. Sorry Diane Abbott but your cases of severe racism is still under the Far Right White Zionist Anti-Socialist Thatcherite Neo-New-Labour Party TORIES’ rug, but hey Democracy can be a bugger when you’re only a small minority.
        3a. You recently brought out the ‘Pulling out the Race Card” in a comment! That is true Far Right Racist, Shut Down the Conversation, talk!

      5. nellyskelly – Oh dear, yet more hyperbole Are you incapable of constructing a cogent argument?

      6. That would be you, stalking people in the comments section to spew your old overused Neoliberal TORY Tripe, being an utter nuisance.
        You’d be best off not commenting to people who’s replies you don’t like.
        I certainly wouldn’t mind!

      7. nellyskelly – Nobody compelled you to respond to my comment and you were the one who chose to respond with false accusations that you can’t substantiate.
        ………..and now you are whining and playing the victim.

      8. Geezas Fuck! Okay Mr Ego you win, you’re so fantastic, you’re so clever, what a man of mice, all hail SteveH the rat man!

        PS I replied to Quertboi you replied to me!
        Accusations 😂
        Victim 😂😂

      9. nellyskelly – Calm down, you’ll do yourself an injury. 🤯

  9. Such a lot of deflecting posts from SteveH early-on in the comments section. I wonder why?

      1. Quite right steveieh, please accept my apology – the observation I made applied to the previous story (and a good few others) more than to this one, BUT:

        your 12.08 post finds you defending authority for the sake of it (which I can’t remember you ever doing under our previous leader):
        steveh 12.08 “and there was I thinking that it has been common practice for years to ignore motions from the floor of conference and there was a separate process that determined which policies made it into the manifesto.”

        There’s a world-of-difference between denying the authority of the NEC (unless it’s sitting) and the usual sort of sneak-management you allude to.

      2. qwertboi – I’m sorry but I don’t understand the point you are trying to make. Give it another try.

      3. “Give it another try”

        Ignoring NEC and going against its decisions because it’s not sitting (i.e. questioning its authority) is very different than trying to ignore a particular decision (and hoping no-one notices) –

        I might be ‘unobservant’ but Margaret Hodge’s announcement of her decision never to stand aagin for election as MP, makes me wish there was a g*d to thank. It would seem realer if I could…..

        No. It’s real enough. YIPPEEEEE!

  10. So by that logic the NEC and GS were only elected for the 4 days of Conference and the Leader for the few hours of the Leadership results meeting?
    Right Wing Labour Boneheads!
    We have the politically lightweight, EC worshippers, often middle class liberal members to blame for all of this, you can fool some of the people some of the time!

    1. Bazza – Labour would have been decimated in the 19GE without the ABC2 vote. Labour had more middle class voters than working class (C2DE) voters in the 19GE. 15% more of the working class voted Tory than voted Labour. For the first time ever the Tories could legitimately claim to be the party of the working class.

      1. Very true, SteveH. A theme often promoted by the “All that is solid” blogger (can’t remember his name) is that in the 21c, the socialist class model looks strange (to a conventional marxist) because most of the lest’s electoral and ideological supporters are socio-economic As, Bs and C1s instead of, as was once the case, Ds and Es. This is very true I find – and ,if Leeds NW clp is anything to go by, the very wealthy lawyer members, medical members and business-operator members are often ‘lefter’ than the others. But are we surprised? When a middle class person earns 60 – 80K and their kids (with their support) can’t even afford a deposit for a house?

  11. Old Bexley and Sidcup (UK Parliament) by-election result:

    CON: 51.5% (-13.1)
    LAB: 30.9% (+7.4)
    REFUK: 6.6% (+6.6)
    GRN: 3.8% (+0.6)
    LDEM: 3.0% (-5.3)

    Conservative HOLD. *34% turnout.

    Southside are spinning this as a good result.

    With the govt at the height of its unpopularity due to sleaze and Brexit and the LD vote all but evaporating, it’s a disaster. Where is the enthusiasm for Labour under Starmer?

    And while it’s true Corbyn didn’t do well in by-elections, he at least had the excuse of relentless, viciously negative media coverage and constant PLP sniping. There was always the leftist manifesto come a GE to enthuse and get the base out. The Tories can be confident lots of their vote simply stayed home or didn’t use the postal vote in protest, but come the GE… Labour have no guarantees this vote tally won’t be reflected in any GE, if the campaign goes as badly for evasive Starmer (Marr interviews) as many expect. Labour could well drop below 30% and get ~7m votes come a GE.

    1. Mmmm, thanks for analysis, Andy. I’m sure you’re right. Also, makes me thnk that increased TO is key. When we say that JC recovered Blair and Brown’s lost 5million vottes, what actually happenend was that people who were demotivated to vote started voting again (and gave them to Labour).

      1. qwertboi-

        You can imagine the negative online reaction, when they produce a manifesto stripped of all the goodies that drove Corbyn’s incredibly enthusiastic ‘youthquake’ support – the demographic domination among the under 50s.

        Scrapping tuition fees – gone, National free fibre broadband network plan – dumped. More widely, no mention of renationalisations, no commitment to repeal anti-trade union laws. A Tory-lite manifesto, a terrible backlash, followed by the inevitable crushing defeat. Oh-so-predictable.

      2. Andy – What manifesto, it will be a while before that is published. Which of Labour’s policies are Tory, There are plenty to choose from, shadow ministers announced dozens of them at this years conference.

    2. Update..


      Labour claims similar result nationwide would put it ‘within touching distance of majority government’

      Jeez, if that’s the official line they’re more deluded than first thought. Are they seriously contending you can extrapolate a GE outcome from a lowly 34% turnout by-election? Do they think that’ll be the turnout come a GE?

      Sir Keir Starmer won’t be worried, he’ll have things lined up from his post-election patrons; be it cushy non-executive directorships and/or an advisory roles with a US investment bank. But the average Labour MP should be very nervous about any early ‘snap’ election. They’ve disenfranchised their left base and the unions, so just who is going to canvass for them?

    3. If the Tories can only get 38% of their vote out at the next GE they’ll be sunk without trace. Despite the very low turnout Labour held onto 62% of their vote.

      1. The Tories put very little campaign effort in.

        There’s little sign Starmer’s New Labour reheated Blairism act is playing out as per ’94-97.

        This is the nearest I can find from 1996 – under 2 years into Blair’s leadership – comparable with Starmer now:

        1996 South East Staffordshire by-election.

        Party Candidate Votes % ±%

        Labour Brian Jenkins 26,155 60.1 +22.0

        Conservative Timothy James 12,393 28.5 –22.2

        Liberal Democrats Janette Davy 2,042 4.7 –4.9

      2. Bit clearer.

        1996 South East Staffordshire by-election.

        Party Candidate……… (Votes) (%) ( ±%)

        Labour Brian Jenkins: (26,155) (60.1) +22.0

        Conservative Timothy James: (12,393) (28.5) –22.2

        Liberal Democrats Janette Davy : (2,042) (4.7) –4.9

      3. You know that’s rubbish. Whatever you may say about Tories, they always come out to vote when needed. I’ve seen taxi’s lined up full of people who couldn’t tell you their own names escorted into the polling station in 2017.

      4. SteveH-

        “If the Tories can only get 38% of their vote out at the next GE they’ll be sunk without trace. Despite the very low turnout Labour held onto 62% of their vote.”

        No one thinks that’s going to happen though.

        With all the critical press coverage they’ve had recently, and Starmer’s gentle press treatment, Labour should be romping home in these tests were they building real momentum.

        The true test will come next year in May 2022’s big tests. With serious talk coming from Kuenssberg, Telegraph. ,Times et al that Johnson’s planning for a 2023 winter election (4 years since Dec 2019). Labour MPs could hit the panic button if Labour get trounced in May, ejecting Starmer in an attempt to to save their electoral skins?

      5. Andy – You are more than welcome to come back and tell me all about it when it has happened. As I’ve said in the past you should be careful what you wish for.

      6. SteveH-

        “As I’ve said in the past you should be careful what you wish for.”

        That’s just it though. I think the Tories ARE disreputable, I long for a Labour party I can feel good about supporting again. Under Starmer /Evans I feel politically homeless, I know many feel completely bereft because of Starmer’s lies and the way he stole the leadership on a false prospectus.

        If Starmer were a business he’d be prosecuted under the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 for misleading consumers(the membership).

        The Local elections are the best way to show dissatisfaction with Labour for previous supporters because local govt has been so disempowered over the years, it’s the best, painless way of showing the PLP what can happen to their seats come a GE.

      7. In GE19 turnout wasn’t the issue that cost Labour votes. Brexit was. (I won’t say anything about Sir Wee, sleekit, cowrin, tim’rous beastie Starmer, Peter M’son or PV2 – cos I’m really happy at Margaret Hodge’s surprising decision not to stand at next election)

      8. qwertboi – I don’t think I’ve claimed anywhere that turnout was the problem for the 19GE, why would I when the contemporary polling indicated that the biggest problem was Jeremy (35%), Brexit was 2nd (19%). Admittedly it was a complex situation but the primary reasons were clear. We actually went into the 19GE with most of the polls showing that ⅔ of the electorate were actively expressing a dislike for JC (you can very easily check this for yourself).
        I too am pleased to see that Hodge is standing down, she is a very divisive figure. I think you may be surprised by the number of MPs that stand down at the next election which is I guess why Labour have already started the process of asking MPs to confirm whether they intend to stand at the next GE. I wonder if the left is preparing itself for multiple PPC selections, or at least lining up their excuses.

  12. Skwawkbox’s Exclusive: “‘Conference only sovereign while it’s in session’ – Starmer/Evans’s excuse for ignoring motions” will soon look archically liberal and olde-worlde:

    A 17min video you might one day regret not seeing and fighting:

  13. This is errant nonsense. The sovereignty of Conference is not time limited. As the Sovereign body it may make decisions which are binding until such time as a future conference alters them.

    I assume that the noble knight at some point in his legal education will have read Dicey and Bagehot in regard to the UK constitution (not written but informal, or by convention). One of the central principles of the UK system is the absolute sovereignty of the Queen in Parliament. Is Keith suggesting that Parliamentary sovereignty only exists when Parliament is in session? So what happens when Parliament goes into recess, or when dissolved prior to an election? Should we assume that when Parliament goes into recess it is no longer sovereign and statutory law does not have any force? I look forward to the next recess and seeing Keith mowing down (some more) cyclists and then explaining to the Peelers that it is ok because Parliamentary sovereignty is suspended so the Road Traffic Acts don’t have any force.

    Just apply the logic of this proposition to any other body. A Company makes decisions in its annual shareholders meeting but once the meeting ends they are no longer binding. Is a Court Judgement only binding when the Court is sitting? If Conference ceases being sovereign at the close of Conference then does this mean any rule changes no longer have force? If they do then why are only rule changes binding? There are a multitude of examples, it really is an utterly preposterous notion.

    Quite frankly this is a disgrace. It is disrespectful of Party members and in my opinion verges on unethical behaviour as regards the Bar to put forward so ridiculous a legal proposition. Once again though we face the situation that as absurd and disgusting as it is there is little to nothing that can be done. The NEC is packed by Keith’s sycophants combined with a swing vote that seems to mostly leave its backbone in the cloakroom. Again we experience righteous anger but tinged by impotence.

  14. Thank you for that BVD ..for a brilliant analysis.

    Of course what comes out of Southside is completely devoid of logic ..

    I have oft said the Parl. Labour Party has too many Lawyers and not
    enough Scientists in that we need people who can assemble a logical
    argument. However it appears I was biased in that Lawyer Starmer
    is not typical

    PS The IHRA “Definition” makes me choke with its lack of rigour –
    yet there are so called academics who actually cite it ..

      1. Johnsco1 – yes – I made a mistake in omitting them

        The PLP needs STEM people ..

        Scientists, Mathematicians, Engineers, Technologists ..


  15. Keef is as legally versed as a cat is in algebra. Just how the absolute fool he ever got past his exams is a mystery to me.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: