Party’s determination to oust left-winger reflects contempt of Labour regime for unions
Left-wing West Derby MP Ian Byrne is currently fighting for his political life against the determination of the Labour regime to replace him with a pliant right-winger – one who won’t show up Keir Starmer and co by actually fighting hunger and inequality and genuinely being working-class, rather than the ‘son of a toolmaker (who owned the factory)’.
That authoritarian determination saw such intense rigging of results in the ‘trigger’ process that decided whether there would be a contest that the official appointed to oversee it refused to sign off on the ‘result’ – and was promptly removed by the party and replaced by the London regional office, which has been accused of extensive anti-democratic conduct, extending domestic abuse perpetrated against Muslim woman MP Apsana Begum and even ‘criminal’ data breaches in its own territory.
The party’s push to remove Byrne has also seen Labour break its own rules to lock Byrne out of party communications platforms, preventing him from emailing members – while the right-wing staffer, whom the party wants to install in the safe seat (despite unanswered allegations of bullying and hate speech toward a young disabled woman), is reportedly able to freely email campaign messages and media to members.
But Byrne has the backing of the party grassroots – and mass support of the unions that are supposed to be the backbone of the party and movement. He announced in a tweet today that he has the formal support of almost the entire array of affiliated unions, including some who would normally swing right:
And small wonder. Byrne is the current MP of the Year for his work fighting hunger and poverty – which the Labour right hates him for – a fight he was involved in long before he was an MP and has pursued relentlessly since he was elected, to the benefit of ‘working poor’ people in and out of unions as well as of others struggling against the Tories’ cruelty and manufactured hardships.
The fact that Labour remains determined to oust Byrne at any cost, despite this mass grassroots and union backing underlines the contempt and arrogance with which the party regime regards the working-class heart of the movement, ignores the plight of the poor and despises the democratic rights of its members.
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.
Ignoring what was going on in the background – three years ago, The Labour Party was a, thoroughly, professional political party, in comparison to the infantile, spiteful shambles it is today.
The inmates of Bedlam have escaped and are wreaking havoc, on what was once, a prospective government.
Well, theirs are the names that will go down in history as the enablers and wreckers.
Very strange, how they can’t see that.
Well, theirs are the names that will go down in history as the enablers and wreckers.
https://media.tenor.com/zYSZRlnWRAsAAAAC/bothered-catherine-tate.gif
Brilliant! I so hope it works.
Brilliant! I so hope it works. We can’t afford to lose Ian Byrne as an MP.
Jenw2049 the way it works it is 50/50: 50% of the vote is allocated to Trade Unions and Socialist Societies affiliated to the Labour Party and the other 50% of the vote is allocated to Labour Party branches. A candidate that reached 50% voting against the trigger isn’t triggered.
I am not from Liverpool but I have chequed online and I believe they are 7 Labour Party CLP’s branches. Hence, every branch counts for 1/7 of the 50% vote.
It would be interesting to know how many Trade Union branches are affiliated (every single branch counts as 1 branch) Hence, Unite can have 3 affiliated branches to the CLP, GMB 1, Unison 2, etc them each affiliated Socialist Society branch affiliated to the CLP will count as one branch. Hence, for the sake of argument let us say that they are 10 affiliated Trade Union branches and 6 socialist society branches the vote of each one will count 1/16.
Therefore, let’s us imagine that 2 Socialist Societies voted in favour of triggering Ian Byrne while all the Trade Union branches voted against it triggering him. In this scenario with only 1 CLP’s branch voting against triggering Byrne, he will have won the vote and shouldn’t have been triggered.
This is why all this is smack of corruption at the very top.
Hence, if the Trade Union block (no surprising) is supporting Ian Byrne then the reason that Byrne has been triggered it must be that some Socialist Societies affiliated to the CLP have voted in favour to trigger him.
The way the trigger ballots work the Trade Union and Socialist Societies have 50% of the block vote and Labour Party branches the other 50%.
I am to understand that every single Labour Party branch in the CLP voted in favour to trigger Ian Byrne? Because otherwise the votes in favour of Labour Party branches surely must have cancelled the vote against Byrne by a few branches of Socialist Societies voting in favour of triggering him. I cannot imagine most Socialist Societies voting in favour of triggering him. Skwawkbox details please how many Socialist Societies are affiliated to the CLP?
No wander the regional official refused to sign on the result!!
so, Maria, would that mean that even a single affiliated socialist society could – along with rigged ward votes at branch/clp level – trigger an incumbent?
i) how can we see the recorded results of these ballots?
ii) is the original regional representative appointed by Labour’s NEC to run the ‘trigger’ process(and who refused to sign off on the supposed ‘result’) the only source of evidence, i.e. can it be validated by any other(s) or official party records?
One thing is clear: Labour is not trying to be beyond reproach here, even without further verification and detail of results, the current leadership is hardly fostering a united membership. The opposite seems to be its intent.
Starmer must be very confident that the billionaires’ MSM can deliver Downing Street and the Levers of Power to the chicken coup-ers currently running the party. (But then again, the Ukraine war, engineered food and energy Price Hikes and covid political scam suggest he might be right).
Qwetboi I reply to your questions in order:
Yes you are correct a single socialist society in favour to trigger an incumbent could force a trigger if enough Labour Party branches vote in favour too. Once a 51% of the vote is in favour of triggering the whole trigger process starts.
i) The CLP’s Secretary should keep records of the results. The way Trade Unions vote is via their Political Officer, so let’s say that Unite has 3 affiliated branches, the Regional Political Officer will cast three votes and inform the CLP’s Secretary.
ii) No, but since when adhering to the rules is something that David Evans’ practices?
This is madness. It should be a shoe in. As usual, dark deeds at South Side, even though everyone in the party has seen the Labour Files. Starmer has been given his orders so that’s that. Your subs and hard work are enabling this comrades.
It’s time disgraceful behaviour like this was taken through the courts. This is the only way that Starmer and his cronies can be taken on!It appears that the Labour Party, at a whim, can break as many rules as they want to install puppets. Let’s Crowdfund a legal challenge to as many of these disgraceful, possibly illegal, decisions that is possible before it is too late. We could start with this case should he be de-selected. It has gone on for far too long. A total disgrace
Mike I am for it, we could do it but we need to raise at least 500K to be sure that we can take matters to the very end.
At the very least we will be able to bankrupt the Fascist Labour Party.
The Right Wing political Nincompoops are now in control in the Right Wing Labour Party.
When I was a member I always found the Right: poorly read, frightened of being radical, believing in the Great Man or Woman of History Thesis (this great Leader, often looking like Blair, would top down, sort out all of our problems from above?), and devoid of IDEAS!
And as they lack IDEAS to win on they in desperation revert to the dark arts which in the short term work but in the longer term will be their downfall.
In my view Right Wing Labour are Barbarians who will screw the poor, manage Neo-Liberal capitalism, offer us crumbs, and will bomb other countries at the drop of a hat at the behest of the USA.
The diverse working class deserve better.
Need 620 a National List of Jeremy Corbyn Independents or Enough Is Enough candidates.
Pity that those ill read barbarbarians screwed the intellectual elites of the left. It’s all very well being clever and all the rest that entails but it counts for nought if the ref is standing above you reaching no 10.
It is frustrating that we cannot do anything to counter
this blatantly undemocratic, corrupt Labour HQ.
Unfortunately Jeremy Corbyn’s experience in defending
a law suit teaches us it is beyond everyones financial
means.
Youn never can tell though! Some people have won
against all expectations – am hoping against hope for
Pamela Fitzpatrick and have contributed a small amount.
They appear to be starting in a modest way with their
demand so maybe that will succeed and they can move on
from there?
Well done HFM!
Thanks for alerting me about Pamela Fitzpatrick.
“Pamela Fitzpatrick was a long standing member of the Labour Party, Labour Councillor for 8 years and was the Unite backed Parliamentary candidate in Harrow East in 2019. She has worked in the voluntary sector for over 30 years, set up a legal advice centre in Harrow in 2010 and has been an active trade Union member for 40 years. She is caught up in the injustice of Labours retrospectively applied disciplinary process.
“In 2015 she was one of 4 people who set up Harrow for Corbyn. From that point onwards she has been subjected to abuse and harassment, vexatious complaints and defamation. Her family have also been targeted.
“In 2018 one of the men responsible for her harassment was suspended from the party due to those allegations of harassment of Pamela and by numerous other people. In July 2021 Pamela was notified by the Governance and Legal Unit that the case against the man in question was to be heard by a panel. She was invited to give evidence to the panel as a victim. It had taken the party some 3 years to deal with issues of serious and sustained abuse
“However, in August 2021 Pamela was told that she was now under investigation for being a member of Socialist Appeal. The sole reason given for this assertion was that she had given an interview to Socialist Appeal in May 2020 on why she was applying to be the General Secretary of the Labour Party. As a councillor, active trade unionist and Director of a legal advice centre Pamela has given interviews to numerous organisations. The NEC had only proscribed Socialist Appeal in July 2021, at the same time that Pamela‘s complaint of harassment was due to be heard. This was nearly two years after Pamela had given the interview to Socialist Appeal. Pamela is not and never has been a member of socialist appeal and has told the party so. But nonetheless the Labour Party applied the rule retrospectively and expelled Pamela on 19th November 2021. The party took just 3 months to expel Pamela, in sharp contrast to 3 years it took to have a hearing about the abuse she was subjected to.
“She was given no hearing and no knowledge as to who was on the panel, what the legal advice was or whether it was a unanimous decision. She has now been waiting for an appeal hearing for almost a year She has made subject access requests which have been ignored. She has sent emails to the party asking for an update on her case but has received no reply or even acknowledgement. Meanwhile the man accused of abusing and harassing Pamela and many others have been welcomed back into the party.”
Folks
If its corrupt then bring in the authorities
FFS
First Class Honours Degree in the Bleedin Obvious
Bent as a nine bob note
If your democracy has been traduced what do you do
It’s no longer the Labour Party just call it Conservative Mk2 so they may as well pack in calling themselves a Socialist party and change it to Tories Mk2 ?
Instead of contributing up to £ 500k to take the corrupt Labour Party to court – We could use a sum like that to launch a new party.
How many leaflets / emails / facebook shots could we buy with that sort of money !
I’ve contributed to support Pamela Fitzpatrick
BUT
Comrades – We really cannot carry on like this..
Maybe, but Ian Byrne needs to beat the monsters who are subjecting him to all this. In only 3 years as an MP and SCG caucus member, his victory against the oppressive ‘new management’ regime matters more than I ever thought possible. The Regime can only be beaten IN and BY the Labour party members. It’s not yet time to totally write Labour off.
A new party is more likely if Byrne is trampled-on by Labour’s vote rigging, voter lock-outs, serious and sustained abuse of members and its secret and dishonest anti-democratic shenanigans.
Qwertboi, both Corbyn and Byrne should stand as independents in their seats if the Labour Party refuse to file them as candidates.
I believe both of them can win these seats because:
1- The are locals and well like it by their communities
2- I cannot see not left within the Labour Party standing against either of them
3- They will win against a right wing Labour wannabe because the local resident trust them.
It is a very similar situation with Aspire in Tower Hamlets destroyed the local Labour Party. Labour went against a popular major well like it across the different communities in Tower Hamlets and it paid a heavy price. They could them spearhead a new Party.
Johnsco1, as qwertboi say it isn’t a matter of launching a new Party when the material conditions are against us, first we need to debilitate the Labour Party to make it die by a thousand cuts and in the process change the material conditions.
“it isn’t a matter of launching a new Party when the material conditions are against us, first we need to debilitate the Labour Party to make it die by a thousand cuts and in the process change the material conditions
That’s the crux of the matter and good strategy too.
It causes me a big problem: I can’t stand to be a party member and to partly finance the WEFing of anti-democratic and anti-socialist Labour, BUT only members can fight-back and restore Labour (as I said above, only current members can be the Resistance and fight-back for Ian Byrne and only they can stop the Starmer anti-democracy/anti-socialism Regime.
qwertboi, I left Labour after last year Conference, the stench of Fascism emanating from the Party was too much for me to bear.
What I am doing is putting the levies I not longer pay to the Party in a jar. Let’s say that Byrne decide to take the Party to Court, I will donate to the crowdfund and so would others.
Taken the Party to Court by a seating MP over its corrupt practices is due to gather the type of publicity the Tories, LibDems are going to use against Labour on the doorstep. More importantly, it would drain the Party financially. Thus, making the Party less able to fight an election.
What we need to ensure is that we help in the campaigns of members of the SCG, we need to keep a Socialist presence in the Party.
The more seats the Starmer and co lose at the next election the better. We could even be in a position of filing a member of the SCG for the leadership. The reason the threshold was upped to 20% is because the right of the Party finds 15% to close for comfort.
As a Trade Union member affiliated to the Party and paying the political fund I am going to have a vote as to whom is the leader still.
I rather have a socialist offering a real opposition to the Tories that a Labour government fronted by Starmer & co.
Most of the left appears interested in liking our wounds, yes we lost the General Election in 2019 but who was still the Party’s leader in early 2020? Who forced the Tories to agreed to Furlong? Corbyn
Have a look at the Tory manifesto of 2019:
– No mention of austerity
-ban on fracking
-ban on section 21 housing evictions
The Tories made these electoral pledges in 2019 because they were facing the left of the Labour Party as the opposition.
With Starmer as the opposition
-Liz Truss was in favour of abandoning the pledge to ban fracking and was looking at re-starting it.
-the Tories appear to have forgotten about banning housing evictions under section 21.
-Once again the Tories are talking austerity
So for those on the left that are so blind a carry on repeating Labour is always better in government than the Tories, they are mistaken. If we cannot have a socialist in N.10 is better to have Labour in opposition but with the left of the Labour Party in charge.
I am a Spaniard, something imprinted on all Spaniard’s minds is that to win battles it isn’t the number that matters the most but, how effective you use the numbers that you have. It took the Romans 200 years to overrun the Iberian peninsula, the Romans never took Scotland. The SNP destroyed Labour’s stronghold in Scotland under FPTP, so I could be done it those on the left leave the Labour Party and stop repeating the mantra Labour is better than Tory.
Well at the moment Pamela is our best hope –
plus the expelled group who are challenging
the Time Lord form of justice.
And anyway – Pamela deserves some support –
we need more like her !
Thursday’s MS told us “workers ‘paying a high price for 12 years of Tory misrule’ as Bank of England warns of longest recession since records began”.
The cost of a Starmer Govt. – to our freedom, civil rights and, yes, to our finances too – would be higher.
Starmer, like Biden, is a fraudulent wolf in sheep’s clothing.
qwertboi – Can you confirm whether or not this is correct?
I am told that, in your neck of the woods, LP meetings are being cancelled because there is “insufficient business to warrant the expense”. With the state of the country and all that is going on around the world, how come there can be “insufficient business’? Or are we simply seeing the outcome when members are not allowed to debate anything of note?
I don’t know goldbach. The last meeting I attended (Dec 2020) was a filibuster slap in the face. A motion of no confidence in Keir Starmer and David Evans could not be tabled because of obviously orchestrated filibustering to run-down the clock. Since then, former members have been personae non gratae.
A quick search of the five local labour parties that have Labour MPs in Leeds tells me nothing too – even Burgen’s CLP (Leeds East) isn’t being maintained (last meeting listed was the July ’22 CLP AGM).
I just don’t know goldbach.
I suspect social media might be more informative. I never access any. What have you heard?
All I know is that a contact in the area told me that a meeting that s/he (no name, no pack drill) had been going to attend had been cancelled for such a reason.
Take note of the phrase ‘warrant the expense’ – Most likely due to the fact there is ‘insufficient business’
Keef told us he was a friend of business…So where’s the business gone? 430k members, don’t forget 😗🎵
Wow, an old CP dodge. The old ones are often the best. War, colour revolutions, domestic industrial turmoil, hungry kids and workers, financing extremists, bad housing, homelessness( where they?), fracking, convid, pathetic CSA report, Labour Files, they’re right insufficient business and that’s before you dismiss constituency matters. Unbelievable!!
I understand your dismay but I have expected these gambits from the off. Did you ever have the misfortune to read some of his articles? Trot, do as we tell you, stupid workers stuff. A vanguard is a vanguard, we can sort out the politics later on. Don’t get in the way, you have no idea what we’re creating.
Unions have proven to be paper tigers, they’ll do nothing.
I feel sorry for ian Byrne but hes flogging a dead horse in hoping to work inside the labour party.The labour party that fought for the working class and unions is long gone and dead.Face up to the truth comrades and help to remove this obscenity a.s.a.p…and we will then see a new Opposition to the politics of greed.
i) FPTP and ii), a viciously self-serving MSM (that ideologically fears democratic socialism) are two powerful disincentives (to a new party). As to resisting WEF/hard-right politics in the Labour party, it aint going so well – but, yes, something has to be done… (What would ‘the comeback kid’, Lula, do in our situation?). Whatever it is, we need to do it quickish and confidently.
Joseph Okeefe, I am not as old as you most probably but, the Labour Party never fought for the working class: it just talk the talk but never does the walk.
The Labour Party has always betrayed the working class starting by calling out the 1926 General Strike. Workers were still due to come out on strike, the Council of Actions were reporting on the success of the strike but the Labour Party called off the strike.
Did the Labour Party support the NUM in the 1980s during the miners strikes? No
So what is new? Starmer’s leadership no supporting the Trade Unions? Well it is business as usual as far as Labour is concerned.
Great post Maria. The labour party have often been on the wrong side but the socialists within it had parliamentary spokespeople of great stature. Then we had Kinnockio and victory at any cost no matter how unprincipled. Yes, I know that it runs deeper but some unions stood up and held the worst in check. Didn’t have to be members of the Labour Party in the unions to be influential. SDP used that fact as one of their fraud reasons to split the party, didn’t they? Castle, I can’t be in a party in which communists have a say. Not a quote but close. All the best. Do you remember groups like the Shop Stewards, Keep Left, etc etc. No chance to organise now, but they could then.
What would Lula do?
The situation is not analogous. Lula is part of a party that wasn’t trying to undermine the direction he wanted/wants to go in. They worked for years through local committees and activists building support. As soon as that approach was started in the LP, the big guns were brought out and there was utter destruction.
It would be a long road, but the only way forward is to start the process, distinct from the LP, without expecting any national electoral success for a good while, whilst building local campaigns. It took the Workers’ Party of Brazil a long time to get there.
Labour gave us the NHS and a social security system….now they work against us the working class who are invisible to the labour party.ITs true to say that they have been anti socialists for much of the time,but at least being working class and a union supporter was tolerated.I served in the labour party because it was the only voice available in a capitalist society and a class ridden society
I sincerely regret having wasted so many years inside the labour party and its taken the last few years to realise that real change cannot happen under a labour government and I regret that but its accurate in a country that still supports a archaic system of establishment privlage pomp and ceremony.
Starmers just one of many failures in one big con the labour party
The Sooner labour get out the way the better…!
Check out Joe Kent, Republican candidate for House of Representatives in one of the districts of Washington State. Although there are, inevitably, a few things that one might disagree with him about he talks an amazing amount of common sense about the military-industrial complex, forever wars, regime change, the permanent state etc. Could easily get elected on Tuesday.