Analysis Announcement News

Video: coming this week on Socialist Telly – new film ‘Anatomy of a Witchhunt’ exposes Labour right’s purge

‘Exposé of a political hypocrite’ documents the Labour right’s cowardly assault on party’s best activists

A landmark film covering the impact of the Labour regime’s anti-left witch-hunt with have its streaming premiere on Socialist Telly this week. The film, made by award-winning Liverpool film-makers Phil Maxwell and Hazuan Hashim, interviews left activists hit by the smear campaign and the purge the smears were used to justify – and the towering hypocrisy on the part of the Labour leadership that lies behind it.

The film’s global premiere took place in Liverpool last week to a standing ovation from the audience at the city’s famous Casa, which was founded by striking dockworkers – and Skwawkbox interviewed the film’s makers:

The packed audience also heard contributions from some of the film’s participants including Audrey White, the famous feminist and socialist who was played by Oscar-winner Glenda Jackson in the prize-winning film Business as Usual and who received hefty damages from the Jewish Chronicle for a ‘litany of lies’ against her that were amplified by the national media, playwright Tayo Aluko, who recreated Paul Robeson’s stand against the McCarthyite witch-hunt in the US, Jewish Wirral councillor Jo Bird, who was expelled by the party and hounded by the Labour regime in collusion with the Tories even after the expulsion, and Rona Heron, one of a group of Liverpool councillors who quit or were expelled for refusing to vote for massive cuts to vital city budgets.

The movie is a powerful dissection of Keir Starmer’s tenure and the the Labour right’s tactics, as the team’s press release notes:

‘The Anatomy Of A Witch Hunt’ is the film every Socialist has been waiting for: An investigation into the Labour Party under the leadership of Keir Starmer.

Over two years in the making ‘The Anatomy Of A Witch Hunt’ begins with the general election in 2019 and investigates the purge of Labour Party members following the election of Starmer as leader.

Did the new leader who said he would never write for the S*n newspaper and initially praised Jeremy Corbyn make Labour more electable? What happened to the 10 policy pledges Starmer made during his campaign to become leader?

What are Labour members who’ve left or been expelled from the Party doing now? Are they still campaigning?

The filmmakers Hazuan Hashim and Phil Maxwell were ideally placed to document the Witch Hunt as members of Wavertree Constituency Labour Party. The expulsion of the ‘Wavertree 4’ mirrored expulsions that were to follow across the UK. Both filmmakers were expelled from the Labour Party before the completion of the film.

With Tariq Ali, Kevin Bean, Councillor Jo Bird, Paul Filby, Councillor George Knibb, Ken Loach, Councillor Sarah Morton, Councillor Anna Rothery, Minnie Stacey, Audrey White and many more.

Actor, activist and writer Tayo Aluko plays Paul Robeson in a reconstruction of the investigations by the ‘House Un-American Activities Committee’ of alleged communists conducted by Senator McCarthy.

Hazuan Hashim said: “We were able to capture a rising tide of dissent in the Party as the attack on members increased during the two years of shooting. The film shows the determination of former members to continue fighting for the Socialist beliefs and policies that had a renaissance under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn.” Phil Maxwell said: “The film gives a voice to those who were subjected to abuse of their human rights when they were Party members. At the same time the film is replete with optimism thanks to the inspirational voices of those who are continuing to campaign for Justice, Peace and Socialism.”

The film will stream this week on Socialist Telly’s YouTube and Twitter channels and on the Skwawkbox Facebook page. Watch out for an announcement in the next day or two of the exact date and time.

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. So?

      That the only contribution you could bring yerself to make?

      Go on, get it off yer chest. We know as much as you do that you’re dying to – so allow me to spur you on.

      ‘Exposé of a political hypocrite’

      The hypocrite being referred to, is keef. Your idol is being rightfully trashed by those self-appointed guardians of the left.

      And you’re allowing them to!! Time for your missus to get the anti-chew spray out again.

      1. Sir Keith Starmer is an obvious dissembler and Establishment tool doing EXACTLY as instructed by Mandelson who CRAVES a return to FRONTLINE politics🪳

        Sir Keith’s other user is the Blair creature of slime, shiftiness and sewage of George Bush Jnr🪳 The Blair creature has been CRAVING a return to the UK limelight, ever since even the despots it serviced, sussed that the creature’s main aim was accumulating as much money as possible as quickly as possible = a self server. Blair is a deadly parasite just like they the despots are🪳

        bad ! Bad !! BAD news!!!

  1. 1️⃣. WHO was doing the witch hunting❔
    2️⃣. WHEN were they identified❔
    3️⃣. WHAT was done to stop the witch hunters and saboteurs❔

    4️⃣. WHAT has been learnt, and WHAT will be done from now on❔

    1. Regards your first question signpost, I think just about everyone who follows Skwawkbox knows the main culprits that conspired in the A/S black op smear campaign – ie Margaret Hodge and Ruth Smeeth and Iain Austin and John Mann and the JLM and the CAA and LAA and BoD etc, etc, along with the MSM and the Jewish newspapers of course.

      I don’t quite get your second question, as they weren’t ‘identified’, as such, and became known to us – those of us who are on the left that is – by playing a part and conspiring in the black op.

      As for your third question, what do you suggest could have been done to stop them?

      As for your fourth question – which is of course TWO questions – when you say ‘what has been learnt’, I assume – given that you have repeated as much on literally hundreds and hundreds of occasions during the course of the past couple of years or so – that you don’t think that anything was ‘learnt’. That said, could you explain what you think it is that SHOULD have been learnt, and who exactly should have learnt it. As for the other question you ask, who are you addressing it to exactly? Given that you don’t specify who the question is addressed to (or is it just a general question to posters on this site?), perhaps you could tell us all what YOU think should be done from now on.


      I think that the vast majority of people who follow Skwawkbox would agree that the A/S smear campaign first really kicked off with the Ken Livingstone/Naz Shah episode in April 2016, and that the main target was Jeremy of course. Anyway, when asked at the time if there was an antisemitism crisis in the Party, Jeremy denied that there was, and THIS was the reaction as reported in the Mail (and right across the MSM):

      ‘Labour in crisis over ‘anti-semitic’ scandal: MPs demand Corbyn gets his ‘head out of the sand’ after Red Ken is SUSPENDED for claiming Hitler backed moving the Jews to Israel…..’

      Jeremy Corbyn tonight denied Labour was facing an anti-Semitism crisis despite being forced to suspend his old friend Ken Livingstone for claiming Hitler was a ‘Zionist’.

      Mr Livingstone made the incendiary comments as he waded into the row over anti-Semitic Facebook posts by Labour MP Naz Shah, who was suspended by Mr Corbyn yesterday after hours of pressure.

      Senior Labour MPs tonight expressed horror at the attempt to play down the explosive row, which has rocked the party just a week before crucial elections.

      Former minister Ian Austin told MailOnline: ‘Just seven days from polling day and instead of knocking on doors like the rest of us, Ken Livingstone is treating us to his weird views on Adolf Hitler and his offensive views on Jewish people.

      ‘The media are talking about nothing else, the party is having to suspend people on almost a daily basis and Jeremy thinks there’s no problem?’

      Mr Austin continued: ‘It looks like a pretty big problem to everyone else. Labour’s reputation is being destroyed and instead of pretending there’s no problem Jeremy needs to act and he needs to act now.’

      John Woodcock, a senior backbencher, told MailOnline: ‘Many thousands of Labour members will be bewildered by the hideous remarks of Ken Livingstone and are looking to Jeremy Corbyn to swipe the moment and tackle Labour’s anti-Semitism problem.

      ‘He must not bury his head in the sand in the face of this madness.’

      1. Smartboy I hold a Irish passport and was brought up in a strong Irish Catholic area and was born in the republic of Ireland west cork.From 68I was involved in the civil rights movement in Ulster and I am a international member of “ourselves alone” mainly fundraising and bringing awareness to a British people the injustice that is the state of Ulster.and British crown rule… no but my heart is with the Irish republic and my soul is socialist. ITs very easy to be lulled into a false sense of security and the assembly is democracy….we shall see on Thursday \friday but the word is that no Catholic 1st minister will be aceppted whatever the majority decide.and that smartboy is the reality of living in a Partitioned Ulster.

      2. Reply to Joseph O Keefe at 2.54pm
        According to Sinn Fein’s website they are a progressive party dedicated to the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement (power sharing) with Unionists in order to achieve a peaceful forward looking society leading eventually to a new united Ireland.
        You claim to be a member of Sinn Fein but the bigoted language you use in your hate filled posts reminds me of nothing more than the late Ian Paisley’s rants He was a dinosaur too.

      3. Smartboy…..You are letting personal dislike bleed through because I tell a few home truths about the labour party and those that fund them with their subs.I am no different to a Palestinian when I want our country back and to compare me to paisley is very insulting….The GFA I support with the goal of a united Ireland and a socialist Irish republic across the whole of Ireland.Ulster is a thorne in the side of the objective of one Ireland and partitioned with armoured vehicles and Crown forces is seen by me as a temporary transition and a painful one.that we must suffer for our goals…The economic black hole of Ulster will not be tolerated by a British people already suffering themselves so why criticise and describe the situation in partitioned Ulster as being nothing different to Scotland or Wales.?…..Reality of armed forces patrolling streets and a armed police force is a reality of Britain in Ulster and thats never going to be “normal life or acceptable to the a partitioned Ireland that your leader wants to maintain as part of Britain.

      4. Reply to Joseph O’keefe
        If that is genuinely your opinion then you are entitled to it but your toxic posts discredit Sinn Fein who you claim to support and they undermine Sinn Fein’s stated position which is to promote peace equality inclusiveness tolerance and respect for all. These are central to the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement
        In my opinion people like your do a of of harm for while you are sitting safely in Cambodia stirring up hatred in the name of Sinn Fein some poor lad in Belfast might just pay the price for your bigotry.

      5. .smarmyboy….My toxic posts….you are deranged if you think that my wanting a united Ireland is bigoted,or not wanting to see the increasing number of peace walls and troops off the streets is bigoted
        Get over yourself you nasty little man and get a hold of your dangerous comments that only belittle your comments.especially as you know full well I support the GFA and have said so many times since your personal attacks started over your trans lobby mates.This is nothing to do with Ireland and more to do with you getting your nickers in a twist once again.

    2. Signpost not windchimes To answer your question 1the list is endless but numero uno the parliamentry labour party.2….the Blair years but they have been around since the formation of the labour party .3…..nothing…..4…..nothing its too late the battle carys on a few miles across the water for a democratic socialist Sinn Fein who expect to win the British elections for government at stormont on Thursday but denied power in a Partitioned Ulster by the establishment and Crown forces.The possibility of a new socialist party in Britain will be decided by the working class after the calamity thats unfolding before your eyes now.And the neo liberal alliance in the Irish republic will be swept away by the current population of Ireland who despite being one of the wealthier countrys in the world are denied the basics of life for working class people a roof over their heads and enough food for a family to enjoy life..Neo liberals and the one world order have destroyed life as we knew it in Britain and Ireland.

      1. Ps….good questions Signpost but whilst people continue to vote for a candidate most unlike themselves and the working class,then we will as a movment in Britain get nowhere.The fact that ordinary people would consider voting for somone with a title in one of the establishment flunkeys profession says all you need to know about the labour party and the members that voted for extinction.¡

      2. Reply to Joseph o Keefe
        Sinn Fein shares power with The Democratic Unionist party( DUP) in Ulster as these are the two largest parties elected to government. The deputy First Minister in the parliament is a Sinn Fein party leader. Sinn Fein came second to the Democratic Unionists in the last election and therefore could not nominate the First Minister who is DUP. This is understandable – the DUP are the majority party. Also Sinn Fein the DUP and all the smaller parties hold ministerial office across the Departments. It is completely inaccurate and unfair therefore to say that they are ” denied power “by the establishment and Crown forces”.
        There are local elections coming up and the electorate will either vote Sinn Fein or not. Things may well change and they could be the majority party or lose seats but irrespective of that, at this time Sinn Fein holds very powerful positions in the Ulster government.
        The Assembly is currently suspended by the DUP because of issues around Brexit . The last time it was suspended, it was suspended by Sinn Fein because of a failed heating scheme. However in both instances the ministers ( Sinn Fein DUP and others) continued to run their departments.

      3. Smartboy I am talking about thursdays vote and the response that will be from the conservative and unionist party in collaboration with the DUP..
        I am suprised that you are even interested in the ocuppied part of Ireland and the coming earthquake in Irish politics although like me I hope you are pleased to see the rise of a democratic socialist party Sinn Fein ..Maybe you can learn a thing or two comrade about Ireland.

      4. Reply to Joseph O keefe
        Why are you surprised I am interested in the “occupied” party of Ireland? What more do I need to learn about Ireland? Was I wrong to say Sinn Fein holds powerful positions in the Assembly? Was I wrong to say they might gain or lose seats in the elections which are up coming?
        According to you , you were raised in Bolton, lived and engaged in Labour party politics for 40 years and made a very good living in various parts of England, before moving to France and then on to Cambodia – so what exactly do you think makes you an expert in Irish affairs?

      5. May I enter this debate just tom point out one misconception.
        It is inaccurate to say that Sinn Fein occupy powerful positions (or, indeed, that any minister in the NI Assembly does so). All actions of the Assembly must be signed off by both the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister before they can be implemented. This means that no significant changes can be made – an ideal position for HMG.
        This will not change if Sinn Fein become the largest party in the assembly because the DUP will be able to block any changes they do not agree with. They could still block the “Irish Language Act” if they so chose.
        What would be significant, were Sinn Fein to become the largest group in the NIA, is that it could be an indication that there might be a majority in favour of a referendum on whether or not to leave the UK

      6. I disagree Goldbach -The Northern Ireland Assembly members are in the same position as the Scottish parliamentary and Welsh assembly in terms of them governing their respective areas e.g. the can decide how to spend their budget but the amount allocated to them is decided by Westminister , same applies to taxation etc. That’s how any devolved government works
        Where Northern Ireland is different is that the whole Assembly shares power with the largest party appointing a First Minister and the second largest party appointing the Deputy First Minister. Then the parties get their pick of the government departments they wish to head taking into account their electoral mandate. The parties also have the power of veto and as you say there has to be cross party agreement before any changes can be implemented
        The reason for this departure from the norm is that power sharing is necessary to try to overcome the history of violence and division in Ulster and its sectarian nature .

      7. I think that I must be being a bit obtuse. It happens as we get older.
        I can’t see what it is I said that you disagree with.
        Maybe I didn’t make it clear that I was referring to the need for cross-party agreement for any measures to proceed in NI. So, the NI Assembly is in a different situation from the Welsh Assembly or the Scottish Parliament.

      8. Reply to Goldbach
        Unfortunately I was a bit obtuse too and missed the point you were making. (despite my name I’m no Spring Chicken either)

  2. I doubt we get an answer from the forever noonoo management. They are presently back inthe past in around 1997, celebrating a war criminal’s move into Downing Street…..

  3. John Pullman’s documentary, “Witchhunt”, was released in 2019. It’s well worth watching.
    This new film should build on what we saw in 2019, and show the trajectory of the LP over the past two years or so.
    Here’s “Witchhunt”, if there’s anyone who hasn’t seen it.

  4. Slightly off topic, but only slightly:

    The CAA (the so-called Campaign Against Antisemitism) have taken to describing Jeremy Corbyn as ‘the antisemite Jeremy Corbyn’, or ‘the antisemitic former leader of the Labour Party’ (at, or near, the start of the article!). Here’s a bunch of examples in which they do so, either in the headline, or in the ‘article’, or BOTH: Here’s a couple of examples::


      If Jeremy Corbyn is an antisemite, as the CAA repeatedly describe him as, then he must have made antisemitic comments (or at least one), and if that is the case, then why haven’t the CAA (and the JLM and LAA and BoD et al) reported him to the police as such. I think we can safely assume that they haven’t as, if they HAD, they would undoubtedly have reported that they’d done so AND, it would of course have been all over the MSM that they HAD.

      And the fact that neither THEY, or any of the other groups and organisations HAVE, tells us all we need to know about THEM, even though we know it already, and have done for a long time. But, the fact that they haven’t at any point done so is actual proof in itself that their claims are fraudulent and vexatious and malicious.

      1. Reply to Allan Howard
        We and nearly all the contributors to this site know that Jeremy Corbyn is NOT an antisemite. So do most of the bigots who accuse him.
        In my opinion any individuals or organisations which say Jeremy is antisemitic are continuing to engage in the co- ordinated smear campaign they started in earnest in 2017.
        Smearing Jeremy, a good and decent man who hasn’t a racist bone in his body is genuinely undermining the ability of all anti-racists to combat antisemitism. They should be ashamed of themselves.

  5. We all understand that the anti-semitism campaign against socialists is a load of lies and complete nonsense.
    The actual antisemitism in the Labour Party consists of the old imperialist attitude towards Palestinians as an inferior race, incapable of governing themselves. It was that ideology, promoted by Zionists and, to our shame, many ‘socialists’ in the party which sustained Labour’s long indifference to Israeli crimes.
    Corbyn, like the majority of grassroots members realised that it is impossible to be both a socialist and an apologist for Israel- a position which a majority of Jewish members of the Party have long understood.
    As to Starmer and the PLP, most of them are neither anti-semites nor philosemites- they are imperialists. Apart from their worship of the powerful they lack any principles at all and are beyond redemption.
    I wish Jeremy would resume his place as part of the collective leadership of the socialist movement, currently so weakened by sectarianism and other forms of careerist opportunism. The continued agony of the people of Palestine is an issue around which all socialists should rally. As British Labour party members we have a special and historic duty to repair the crimes, largely of omission, that he 19454 government committed. Without the connivance of Atlee, the cabinet, the Trade Union affiliated members and the PLP the betrayal of our Arab comrades would have been impossible.
    The time is ripe for a public campaign to leave NATO, which we have all long known to be nothing more than a convenient way for the US to organise its non-sovereign european auxillaries into a global alliance against popular democracy. As NATO members we are part of a club which is responsible not only for war crimes but for the killing, torturing and disappearing of tens of thousands in places like Colombia, Haiti and Brazil.
    It is small wonder that a party so deeply tainted by its connections to imperialist and fascist powers should prove so incapable of defending the interests of British workers, which are, and always have been ,diametrically opposed to those who profit from the Empire.

    1. bevin, who is the ‘we’ you refer to when you say that ‘The time is ripe for a public campaign to leave NATO, which we have all long known to be nothing more than a convenient way for the US to organise its non-sovereign european auxillaries into a global alliance against popular democracy’? As for the time being ‘ripe’, I would suggest that it’s the very opposite given what’s happening in Ukraine. And who exactly is going to organise such a campaign? According to a poll conducted last year, twice as many people on average regard NATO favourably as those who regard it unfavourably:

      In your post you also say the following:

      I wish Jeremy would resume his place as part of the collective leadership of the socialist movement, currently so weakened by sectarianism and other forms of careerist opportunism.

      Could you elaborate about the sectarianism and the careerist opportunism?


      1. It does not tell you what the question is though!

        And we can hardly expect people to accept arguments that they have not actually heard.

        I think we have to start exposing the danger to our lives from NATO and then we can win over some people to our cause. The war in the Ukraine makes it even more important than ever to expose this deception.

        NATO is a fraud and always has been:

      2. Yet again – as bevin did – you speak of ‘we’ Tony. Who is this ‘we’ comprised of, and how are they going to start exposing the danger to our lives etc? Who is going to organise the campaign to expose the danger?

        The point I’m making is that I so often read comments on various left-wing blogs in which people are saying ‘we’ have to start a campaign about such and such, and that’s IT, and they never explain who is going to organise the campaign (to bring it to the attention of the public), or HOW they’re going to bring the matter to the attention of the public. So could you – and Bevin – fill in some of the details. Thanks

      3. And bevin, I’d be grateful if you could elaborate about the sectarianism and careerist opportunism in the socialist movement that you speak of as I’ve not come across anything to that effect myself, and must have missed it all.


    2. Bevin….US military budget 833 billion with thirty billion of arms for Ukraine commited ….Russia 65 billion military budget….All these billions with Britain having made a commitment via the conservative government of three billion to the Ukraine and Europe billions more.billions.We are living in a world of lunatics were the ordinary people suffer.and even a full belly in Britain is a minor achievement and a warm house is a luxury….Whatever happened to the brave new world were automation and sophisticated weapons would make life easier for the working class.and safer.?

      1. “Whatever happened”

        Unfortunately saddo Putin’s hubris and his delusions of imperialist expansion is what happened.

  6. Yes SteveH, AND..?

    LAW was formed in October 2017 and proscribed in July 2021. Given that its purpose was to challenge unjustified suspensions and expulsions of Labour party members in relation to allegations of antisemitism, its proscription serves an ruthlessly political end, which does not reflect well on Sir Keir Duplicity Starmer.

    LAW, Resist, the Labour in Exile Network and Socialist Appeal) were proscribed because Starmer ensured the NEC decided “these organisations are not compatible with Labour’s rules or our aims and values.”

    The ‘rules’, ‘aims, and ‘values’ that LAW is allegedly incompatible with are those of the neoliberal Right and blairite neocon wings of the Labour party

    LAW members rightly “believe that the Working Definition of Antisemitism of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance has, as one objective, to conflate antisemitism with critiques of Zionism and Israel and that the controversy over allegations of antisemitism in the Labour Party is to a large extent a result of rivalry between its different wings.” (wiki)

    Sponsors of the group include Moshé Machover, Ken Loach, Noam Chomsky, Alexei Sayle and Ian Hodson, president of the Bakers Union and tens of thousands of former party members.

  7. Off-topic, but the leaflet arrived last evening, slotted silently and furtively through my letterbox.

    ‘Vote for the smarmer-imposed candidate’. Endorsed by former New Brighton councillor, former mayor and former leader of Wirral labour group, pot haircut**…The same Hackett as told me he’s out of politics altogether and wanted nothing to do with smarmerist labour.

    Both smarmerist labour and that lying gobshite can kiss my arse.

    **I’ve never seen so many endorsements for a council candidate on a leaflet in me life. The two other new Brighton labour councillors, Illeagle rotherham, keef…I doubt they even know who she is ffs.

  8. A Google search of the name powell wilde brings up a gwyn powell wilde Twitter account…lives in New Brighton.

    Here’s gwyn’s Twitter… Not hard to see why the missus was selected 😙🎶

    Liverpool FC (figures)
    An unrepentant bliarite (figures massively)
    Anti racist but also Anti BDS (figures immensely, supporting an apartheid state while claiming to be non-racist…hypocrisy on a monumental scale, only matched by the dear leader’s)

    Also…A seeker of TRUTH and social (???)

    An unrepentant bliarite, ‘seeking the truth’. Jesus wept.

  9. Ooops! I said “Not hard to see why the missus was selected’when I meant to say: ‘shoehorned in’

    My bad. 😕

    PS. (The reptile) Hackett’ll be getting a piece of my mind when I see him next. I’ll remind the lying, duplicitous, shady bastard of a few uncomfortable truths that I can’t repeat on here.

    1. I couldn’t stomach watching Starmer after the first few phrases
      – but smiled to hear the not-left-wing commentator
      respond with a sigh “Blair, Ed Balls, .. ” while rolling her eyes and saying in effect “but these are YESTERDAY’s men – we need someone with some new ideas “.

      If your only “idea” is to win an election – the populace will see this
      for what it is ..

      And why does NO-ONE tell Starmer that Blair schmoozed up
      to Putin from the start when he was doing to Chechnya what he
      is doing now to Ukraine – viz reducing it to rubble. At the same
      time Corbyn criticised Blair and asked him why he was
      supporting Putin and inviting him to visit the UK?

      PS There is a good radio 4 series on at 1.45pm each day:
      “What really happened in the nineties ..?” and today it was
      about Russia. It is the sort of program you need to listen to
      carefully and I will listen again as it was complicated.

  10. Keef (in that interview):” You don’t look backwards to go forwards”

    Keef (in every other interview): “I was DPP, I used to prosecute terrorists….”

    1. Toffee, I was a Labour member during the 1990’s and can see the same strategy being played out again. Even same themes, the same language (slightly modified not to look too similar).

      Keith says he came into politics to win – Blair said the same.

      ” You don’t look backwards to go forwards” – used to be “the future not the past”.

      Starmer prioritises law and order – was tough on crime, tough on the causes etc (not the cost of living crisis, Starmer’s answer is a one off windfall tax which won’t solve energy problems long term).

      Sleaze being weaponised (at least Blair had some credibility on that one).

      The only difference I can see, is instead of Mandy’s “you’ll vote Labour because the left have nowhere else to go”, is it’s now “your a Tory enabler”.

      1. “Tough on Crime, tough on the causes of crime”

        – expect UK inarceration figures to go through the roof under a “show-me-your-papers” starmer-type Labour government.

        Don’t vote Labour on 5th May.

      2. Agreed, Nemtona.

        I meself was a labour member ONLY during the early/mid-90’s. I was out not long bliar got shut of clause IV as the writing was on the wall. I still to this day feel queasy that I actually voted his return to government.

        As for the credibility RE: sleaze, it didn’t take long… bliar himself…mandleslime & robinson..plunkett …mandelslime AGAIN…hoon, hewitt, byers (liars), blears, martin, bliar’s (still freeloading) tart…hain…

        NO different to what we see today. It’s inherent in their culture. Parasites the bleedin’ lot.

  11. Sounds a cracker which should be watched by millions! Would love it to be shown on Channel Four, one in the eye for the Tories & Right Wing Labour before the profiteers come for it.

  12. No one who follows UK politics could be in any doubt multi-millionaire, London lawyer Starmer has no interest in socialism or leading a discernibly leftish party or implementing any radical change.
    On the political spectrum Starmer’s views are best described as classic right-wing (social & economic conservatism) and authoritarian. A Starmer led govt it’ll be more like other members of the same tag-team taking over, going through the motions taking their turn – the facade of democracy.

    So the real question is; who sent him, and who are those pulling Starmer’s strings? Who are the hidden players subverting our democracy for their own selfish ends?

    Related. I’ve never been particularly a fan of Andy Burnham, seeing him as too New Labourish, but compared to Starmer he’d be a refreshing improvement. His recent comments about building a federal UK and scrapping the outrageous, unelected HoL should be standard views in 2022 but under Starmer they’e now quite radical.

  13. It’s a real scandal what’s happened within the Labour party.

    An overt legal acceptable form of discrimination, based on members’ political views, views, lest we forget, the Labour party was established to represent. But Labour leftists have no one speaking up for them in the media so the suffering is largely unreported.

    The same people who get all morally righteous about ‘uprooting’ antisemitism in the party and forcing out those who don’t worship at the altar of US dominated NATO, are quite happy to treat leftists with intense prejudice; revealing their expressed concern for others is a sham. Does anyone doubt Labour’s ruthless right have used the antisemitism issue and the NATO support test as political weapons; they weaponise everything they can to attack the left.

    The vacuous daily guff from columnists and btl comments on the guardian want us to forgive and forget. Pretend Starmer’s Labour is worth supporting because Johnson is a bad man. Such logic renders politics meaningless.

    1. ⇈ 1,000+

      True, ‘the left’ is impeded and obstructed by a total lack of presence on the MSM as Andy says, so how can we improve the reach, authority and influence/popularity of sites like Skwawkbox?

      1. It’ll come when the pain kicks in. And it’s coming.

        Currently, 40% exist or even subsist. At the other end, 40% are living well. Once pain starts to hurt them, they will begin to notice others. Then change maybe possible.

        But the bigger problem is this is perfidious Albion. Change isn’t always for the better, and if the same top 40% continue the show, it’ll stay the same for the rest.

        It’s always been about that 40%

    1. Never forget; SIR Keith Rodney starmer SNEERED at the pub landlord;

      “I DON’t have to LISTEN to the LIKES of YOU‼️‼️‼️

      Says it all

      “I DON’t have to LISTEN to the LIKES of YOU🔵🔵🔵

  14. Andy and qwertboi, do you think that ‘the left’ is impeded in no small part because it continues to assume that Labour is its rightful home? Is it naive to think that an exodus from what Labour has become would be a liberating move and create a space for its views that are currently crowded out by an authoritarian right in charge of Labour? So much energy is expended on here castigating Starmer – I believe he (and his party) have become irrelevant to many and whatever benefits may accrue from being under the sheltering wing of a national party seem dwarfed by the suffocation of difference Labour is intent on enforcing. The continuing presence of ‘the left’ within Labour aids its legitimation: bereft of its presence, Labour could not hide from the fact that it is a less competent version of the Tories.

    1. Tim – I agree with you to some extent but without PR there is little hope that any new party will make any progress. You only have to look at the Greens to see that. 2.5% of the vote and 1 seat (instead of the 15+ seats they would have under a PR system). Given that ‘the left’ can’t currently offer a credible alternative to Labour and they would be wasting their time anyway under FPTP and the only route that they have to PR is through a Labour led government then why are they doing everything they can to thwart Labour’s electoral chances. Surely instead of obsessing about scoring petty little pyrrhic victories against Starmer ‘the left’ would be far better employed in campaigning for Labour so that they can use the introduction of PR for their own longer term objectives of achieving representation in parliament.

      1. Thats because you cannot add up
        Ceterus Paribus
        All other things being equal
        Produces working majorities on a minority of the the vote
        At best you might hold the balance of power and its a certainty every RW lunatic fringe group would jump on the bandwagon
        Will only work when the checks ans balances are concreted into your democracy
        In case you haven’t noticed the fuckers are taking the piss at the moment

    2. “ you think that ‘the left’ is impeded in no small part because it continues to assume that Labour is its rightful home?’

      Mmmmm, great question Tim White. Yes! Before Starmer and the neoliberal robots who serve him and his sponsors, Labour represented hope for me personally. It was the party my Great Granny taught me was here for a reason! But since Starmer, I see the party is essentially constrained by its Fabian DNA, its timidity, its sense of entitlement and its disinclination to seek fundamental change (as once it did). Top-down, centralising and bureaucratic (in a bad way), the Labour party actually makes a virtue out of being not-very reformist, complacent about democracy and a comfortable gravy train trough for politicians of a certain type.

      Corbyn suggested it didn’t have to be any of those things, but the vehemence with which many in the Labour party (and many other parts of the Labour Movement too) smeared and denigrated everything Jeremy stood for, convinced me that either the party itself or the people who are in it, are part of the problem: Their radicalism is too tame, too formulaic, too predictable. The new blood and energised youth that Jeremy attracted persuaded me briefly that the party could be different.

      Maybe it could have been, but the vested interests of the neoliberal status quo are as likely to be Labourites, as Tories or Liberals.

      The clunkedness with which Starmer arrived and the swift ease and speed with which he intentionally tried to remove the vision, hope and optimism (The green new deal, the determination to be for the Many not the 0.001% Few, etc.) and then the arrival of a pre-planned pandemic ’emergency’ with legislation enablement, persuaded me that the party and its history is part of the problem. FPTP and the MSM are the rest of it.

      Democratic socialism needs a new ‘home’, a new party. If we don’t create it, we proscribe ourselves, condemn democratic socialism to irrelevance and our people to technological feudalism or worse.

      1. qwertboi – As I said above without PR you are wasting your time, and your only route to PR is through a Labour government. You are just going to have to put your prejudices about Keir to one side for a while, you shouldn’t lose sight of your goal of ‘the left’ having MPs in parliament who were elected on a left wing manifesto.

      2. “your only route to PR is through a Labour government….”

        No disrespect SteveH, but Keir is much more dangerous to me and my class than the possibility that he might chose to not 10-Pledges a once-stated liking for electoral reform. Without the indivisibility of socialism and democracy, Labour needs FPTP every bit as much as the Conservatives and the ruling class.

      3. qwertboi – The academic studies disagree with you. Over the years Labour has been disadvantaged by FPTP.

  15. SteveH, as I don’t follow the machinations of Labour you may be able to tell me if they unequivocally guarantee to remove FPTP as soon as they take power. If the answer is no then why would I hold my nose to vote for them?

    1. Tim – I fully expect that it will become policy at this year’s conference. There was a proposal at the the 2021 conference but that was defeated by the Unions (principally Unite) despite 83% of the membership supporting PR BUT since then both Unite and the CWU have voted to change their policy and now officially support PR for general elections and the other affiliated Unions are all having votes on this before the next conference. Given the overwhelming support of the membership and the support of Unite it is almost certain to be passed as Labour policy at this years conference.

      1. Thanks for the insight SteveH. Can you link to any verification or e4vidence or thought-pieces on the TU reactions to the proposal? I suspect that I’ll agree with you on this, but it’d be good to see the analysis with my own eyes.

    2. Tim – The problem you (indeed, all of us) have is that, if a motion is passed at conference, it may well seem to be LP policy but there is no guarantee that the hierarchy will implement it.
      Didn’t Starmer say that the primacy of Conference only operates during the conference; he is free to have his own policies once the conference is over.

      1. goldbach you are correct, Starmer and Evans have decreed that conference is only sovereign when it’s in session. Even if PR was in a Labour manifesto, there is no guarentee that it will be acted on.

        In 1997 Labour’s manifesto had stated its original position as:

        “We are committed to a referendum on the voting system for the House of Commons. An independent commission on voting systems will be appointed early to recommend a proportional alternative to the first-past-the-post system”. Lord Roy Jenkins was appointed to review and report.

        By 2001, following the Jenkins Commission, the Labour manifesto now stated:

        “We will review the experience of the new systems (in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) and the Jenkins report to assess whether changes might be made to the electoral system for the House of Commons. A referendum remains the right way to agree any change for Westminster”.

        And in the 2005 manifesto, reference to the Jenkins Report itself (Jenkins had died in 2003) was dropped.

        In 1998, my then Labour MP brought a copy of the Jenkins report to a CLP meeting as we wanted to discuss the reports findings. From the front of the meeting, he held it up, said here’s the report, it’s crap, he then dramatically threw it into the bin and refused any questions.

        Blair has recently said in a New Statesman interview that he wants to advise the next Labour government on policy. Who would trust either Starmer or his adviser?

      2. goldbach – In reality hasn’t that always been the case, there has always been a filtering process to decide which policies actually make it into the manifesto. However Given the level of support that there is for PR from both the membership and the Unions plus Keir’s support for PR there is little doubt that PR will make it into the manifesto

      3. Mmm?
        I seem to recall a Conference motion that was passed recently with a significant level of support that led to Starmer’s claim that he did not accept that this was LP policy.
        As regards PR – I’ll believe it when I see it (in the manifesto). In the unlikely event that we have a Starmer government in the future, I’ll eat bacon, black pudding and pork sausages if he actually brings in PR.

  16. Goldbach, you make a valid point and even if it were to make to a GE manifesto, well, Starmer and pledges don’t seem to agree with each other.

    1. Tim – There is one thing that you can be certain of, if the Tories get in next time there will be zero chance of a change to PR and zero chance of ‘the left’ gaining representation in parliament for the foreseeable future. As I’ve said above, ‘the left’ currently aren’t in a position to offer a credible alternative to Labour. What have you got to lose (you might even save some money on lost deposits).

      1. Given Starmer and Co’s purging of the left-wing membership during the past twenty months or so, it does seem HIGHLY unlikely that he and his right-wing buddies are gonna do anything that could possibly lead to the left gaining representation in Parliament. Why would you do that when you’ve been doing every single thing you can think of to ‘exorcise’ the left from main-stream politics since shortly after being elected leader.

      2. Allan – I guess we will both have to wait and see who is proved to be right.

      3. Note that SteveH doesn’t try to refute the fact that Starmer and Co have been purging the left from the Party for the past twenty months or so, and obviously doesn’t have any problem with Starmer and his buddies doing that! Yes, SteveH is a supporter of a fascist (who pretended he was a Jeremy Corbyn supporter on this site for several years whilst Jeremy was leader!).

      4. Allan – Running around calling everyone a fascist isn’t going to impress anyone, it just makes you look stupid and desperate.

    2. and remember, Starmer has shown that he will put material into his manifesto, only to deny it and refute it once elected (10 Pledges).

  17. Starmer was apparently in favour of PR in early 2020. I’ve since read that he has now gone cold on the idea. Just like his 10 leadership pledges.

      1. goldbach – It has taken them a while to get there but the members, the Unions and the leadership having now worked out that Labour haven’t been served well by FPTP and are now in unison.
        The PR system that Keir introduced has unquestionably led to a fairer and more representative outcome, what’s not to like.

      2. “Is that why Keir introduced PR for Labour’s internal NEC elections?

        No! He’s scared of OMOV (it gave us Corbyn) – the way anti-democrats often are…

      3. qwertboi – What possible objection could you have to an STV system that resulted in a much fairer and a more representative outcome.

  18. In other news – Attempted assassination of Gustavo Petro, left candidate in Colombian elections.

  19. I think Skwawkbox needs to know a little more about the history of the ‘world famous Casa’. It was not founded by striking dockworkers, it was taken over by Jimmy McGovern & chums & was owned by Saleh Mohamed. The idea started in the Somali Club, a cellar on Parliament Street, Liverpool 8 in the late ’70s, Saleh worked upstairs in the ‘restaurant’ preparing amazing curries & small-meat, but downstairs was a mixture of great jukebox, as well as births & deaths. All human life could be found there, amongst other things. I was taught how to rock steady because there wasn’t enough room for anything else.

    Rumours of the demise of the Somali Club led a group of friends seeking an alternative venue which was found in a street called Hope, almost half way between Paddy’s Wig Wam (catholic) & the Protestant Cathedral. The building was a mess & the basement was full of building rubble. I shared a flat with Ali, a young Somali who worked on the door of the Somali Club & we helped dig out the Hope Street cellar with our bare hands. There was always a contradiction between owning a ‘seedy’ nightclub that served alcohol & other members of the muslim community. I was asked if I would consider being ‘the licensee’. The amazing jukebox came with us as the club quickly became a Mecca for arty bohemians as well as Mike McCartney, Margi Clarke & Jimmy McGovern; a place to go drinking when you didn’t want to go home. It was always crowded & so an extension was considered for ‘live’ music. A drinking buddy of mine (Ken Worral) was an architect & planning permission obtained, much to our surprise. The Casablanca was an upside down version of the Somali Club (owned by Ali Mohamed & Irish Sally); but the food was now served in the basement, cheap & delicious as always ‘the very best curries in town’.

    We were all very pleased when ‘the dockers’ took over the building as Saleh decided to retire. Another chapter has been added, but the club is ‘the Casablanca’ & a real part of history on the edge of Toxteth. Great music; great food; great culture.


Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: