labourlist--2020-06-18--Black people “over-policed as citizens and under-policed as victims”, says Labour MP

Bell Ribeiro-Addy has said that current drug policy in the UK “ exemplifies the way black people are over-policed as citizens and under-policed as victims ” , and called for an “ open discussion ” on reform .
Speaking ahead of a Labour Campaign for Drug Policy Reform online event this evening , the Streatham MP said that “ the arguments for legislation are as much a matter of social justice as they are a matter of public health ” .
She highlighted how black people “ face far more serious consequences ” than their white counterparts if caught with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tory politicians had admitted to drug use with “ no consequences at all ” .
The event , chaired by Ribeiro-Addy and featuring a panel including Release executive director Niamh Eastwood , mayor of Lewisham Damien Egan and a representative from Operation Black Vote will take place from 7pm tonight .
One of 11 public meetings being held by the campaign group , it will focus on racial disparity and discrimination in relation to drug policy .
You can register for the event for free here .
Commenting ahead of the event , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last ten years has been overtly ideological , characterised by irresponsible cuts .
In yet another public health failure , the UK has become the drug overdose capital of Europe with the government refusing to consider any forms of legalisation as a solution in spite of a barrage of evidence .
“ The current situation exemplifies the way black people are over-policed as citizens and under-policed as victims .
If you get caught with drugs as a young black man in my area , you ’ ll likely face far more serious @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the other hand , most of the candidates for a Conservative party leadership contest can admit to taking drugs and face no consequences at all .
“ There is nothing more important than preserving the life of our citizens , and our current polices are definitely not doing that .
The arguments for legalisation are as much a matter of social justice as they are a matter of public health .
We need to have an open discussion about drug reform that puts people above politics.
” According to Home Office figures , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is widening , with black people being stopped and searched almost ten times more than white people .
The campaign says that this “ bears no correlation ” to drug use or supply .
On the importance of drug policy reform , the campaign group founder and Labour MP Jeff Smith said : “ We can ’ t ignore the role that our country ’ s drug laws play in worsening racial injustice .
“ Black and minority ethnic people are disproportionately arrested and prosecuted for drugs-related offences , excessively targeted by police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impacted by county lines exploitation .
As an anti-racist party and a party of social justice , changing these laws should be an urgent priority for Labour .
“ I ’ m glad that the Labour Campaign for Drug Policy Reform is hosting this timely event , bringing together Labour members and supporters , community representatives , and those personally affected , to discuss what a fair and just approach to drug policy needs to look like .
”

Bell Ribeiro-Addy has said that current drug policy in the UK “exemplifies the way black people are over-policed as citizens and under-policed as victims”, and called for an “open discussion” on reform.
Speaking ahead of a Labour Campaign for Drug Policy Reform online event this evening, the Streatham MP said that “the arguments for legislation are as much a matter of social justice as they are a matter of public health”.
She highlighted how black people “face far more serious consequences” than their white counterparts if caught with drugs, and pointed out that high-profile Tory politicians had admitted to drug use with “no consequences at all”.
The event, chaired by Ribeiro-Addy and featuring a panel including Release executive director Niamh Eastwood, mayor of Lewisham Damien Egan and a representative from Operation Black Vote will take place from 7pm tonight.
One of 11 public meetings being held by the campaign group, it will focus on racial disparity and discrimination in relation to drug policy. You can register for the event for free here.
Commenting ahead of the event, Ribeiro-Addy said: “Drugs policy over the last ten years has been overtly ideological, characterised by irresponsible cuts. In yet another public health failure, the UK has become the drug overdose capital of Europe with the government refusing to consider any forms of legalisation as a solution in spite of a barrage of evidence.
“The current situation exemplifies the way black people are over-policed as citizens and under-policed as victims. If you get caught with drugs as a young black man in my area, you’ll likely face far more serious consequences than your white counterparts. On the other hand, most of the candidates for a Conservative party leadership contest can admit to taking drugs and face no consequences at all.
“There is nothing more important than preserving the life of our citizens, and our current polices are definitely not doing that. The arguments for legalisation are as much a matter of social justice as they are a matter of public health. We need to have an open discussion about drug reform that puts people above politics.”
According to Home Office figures, the racial gap in stop and search is widening, with black people being stopped and searched almost ten times more than white people. The campaign says that this “bears no correlation” to drug use or supply.
On the importance of drug policy reform, the campaign group founder and Labour MP Jeff Smith said: “We can’t ignore the role that our country’s drug laws play in worsening racial injustice.
“Black and minority ethnic people are disproportionately arrested and prosecuted for drugs-related offences, excessively targeted by police for stop and search, and heavily impacted by county lines exploitation. As an anti-racist party and a party of social justice, changing these laws should be an urgent priority for Labour.
“I’m glad that the Labour Campaign for Drug Policy Reform is hosting this timely event, bringing together Labour members and supporters, community representatives, and those personally affected, to discuss what a fair and just approach to drug policy needs to look like.”


labourlist--2020-06-18--Forward Momentum: Let’s have the courage to make the case for migrants’ rights

When the news came out that Dominic Cummings broke the lockdown to visit his wife and son , Tory MPs were falling over themselves to defend him , preaching family values .
Yet on the very same day – contradicting a promise made earlier this year – the Home Office drew up plans to terminate the system of reuniting unaccompanied child refugees with their families in the UK .
And it was not the first time that the Tories have used the cover of the pandemic to impose draconian anti-migrant laws .
Just a week earlier , parliament voted for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the borders with Europe and give the Home Secretary sweeping powers to rewrite immigration rules .
The government is planning to label low-paid migrants as “ unskilled ” and bar them from entering the country .
This , of course , includes many key workers who are now hailed as heroes .
The Tories apparently see no contradiction between clapping for them on Thursday and voting their rights away the following Monday .
Tory attacks on immigrants , awful as they are , come as no surprise .
We all remember Theresa May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Windrush scandal tearing families and communities apart .
Despite performative apologies , no lessons have been learned : the government continues to deport lifelong UK residents with no connections to their country of origin , and the ‘ hostile environment ’ remains intact .
However , much as Labour likes to pride itself on being an ‘ anti-racist party ’ , its record is mixed at best .
From Jim Callaghan ’ s Commonwealth Immigrants Act , often described as one of the most nakedly racist pieces of legislation in recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scapegoating of asylum seekers and Ed Miliband ’ s infamous “ controls on immigration ” mugs , our party has a long history of triangulating to deeply xenophobic ideas .
Under Jeremy Corbyn , the rhetoric quickly shifted and the leadership had a lot of important things to say about the need to support refugees , and the positive contributions that migrants make to our society .
But a meaningful change in policy was slower to follow .
The 2017 manifesto , although in many ways inspiring , still committed to ending free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to public funds ” policy that leaves many migrants destitute and homeless , and had little to say on many aspects of the hostile environment agenda .
It took members organising from the grassroots up to make sure that Labour had a policy that reflected our values .
In 2017 , I helped set up the Labour Campaign for Free Movement with the aim of championing the rights of all migrants .
We spoke at Constituency Labour Party meetings , organised events , wrote articles and passed motions .
In January 2019 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Tory immigration bill , it was party members who caused a U-turn .
At last year ’ s Labour conference , party members and trade union delegates voted on our motion to defend and extend free movement , close detention centres , end all hostile environment measures , give migrants equal access to the NHS and social security , and extend voting rights to all UK residents .
It passed near-unanimously , to a standing ovation .
Throughout these years , Momentum shied away from the topic .
It had little to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommend prioritising our motion and waited until the last minute before endorsing it – despite many Momentum activists feeling passionately about the need to support and defend migrants .
While it was a positive development that Momentum , for the first time , campaigned for policy at last year ’ s Labour conference , most members had no say over the policies that their organisation chose to support .
We at Forward Momentum believe this needs to change , and that members must be trusted to have the decisive say on the policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have shifted Labour ’ s policy on migrants ’ rights , the left needs to defend it .
But not just that – it is time to also turn outwards to wider society .
In the last decade , public opinion has already been moving in the right direction , and a recent Ipsos MORI survey found discussions about the contributions of migrants to be the main reason .
Imagine how much more we can achieve if Momentum throws its energy into dispelling myths , raising awareness and building solidarity .
With @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics for the foreseeable future , this work is more vital than ever .
All Forward Momentum candidates for the upcoming national coordinating group elections are standing on a policy platform that calls for Momentum to “ link up with socialists across the world to develop an internationalist response to Covid-19 , centred on migrants ’ rights and combating nationalism ” .
As we have set out , Momentum should “ support community struggles and push the Labour Party to advocate for free movement of people , safe passage for refugees , universal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the closure of detention centres , and the full voting rights for all residents ” .
It is not the role of socialists to pander to a stereotypical idea of a “ traditional working-class voter ” , often patronisingly portrayed as closed-minded and bigoted .
It is our job to organise with and speak to the communities we live in , to change hearts and minds and convince the majority that things can change for the better .
Let ’ s organise national days of action , let ’ s use Momentum ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ rights campaigns , let ’ s join migrant workers on picket lines .
We know that a British builder , nurse or delivery driver has more in common with their Romanian or Jamaican colleagues than they do with Boris Johnson and his Etonian friends .
Let ’ s have the courage to make that case .

When the news came out that Dominic Cummings broke the lockdown to visit his wife and son, Tory MPs were falling over themselves to defend him, preaching family values. Yet on the very same day – contradicting a promise made earlier this year – the Home Office drew up plans to terminate the system of reuniting unaccompanied child refugees with their families in the UK.
And it was not the first time that the Tories have used the cover of the pandemic to impose draconian anti-migrant laws. Just a week earlier, parliament voted for the immigration bill, which will close the borders with Europe and give the Home Secretary sweeping powers to rewrite immigration rules. The government is planning to label low-paid migrants as “unskilled” and bar them from entering the country. This, of course, includes many key workers who are now hailed as heroes. The Tories apparently see no contradiction between clapping for them on Thursday and voting their rights away the following Monday.
Tory attacks on immigrants, awful as they are, come as no surprise. We all remember Theresa May’s ‘Go Home’ vans and the Windrush scandal tearing families and communities apart. Despite performative apologies, no lessons have been learned: the government continues to deport lifelong UK residents with no connections to their country of origin, and the ‘hostile environment’ remains intact.
However, much as Labour likes to pride itself on being an ‘anti-racist party’, its record is mixed at best. From Jim Callaghan’s Commonwealth Immigrants Act, often described as one of the most nakedly racist pieces of legislation in recent memory, to New Labour’s scapegoating of asylum seekers and Ed Miliband’s infamous “controls on immigration” mugs, our party has a long history of triangulating to deeply xenophobic ideas.
Under Jeremy Corbyn, the rhetoric quickly shifted and the leadership had a lot of important things to say about the need to support refugees, and the positive contributions that migrants make to our society. But a meaningful change in policy was slower to follow. The 2017 manifesto, although in many ways inspiring, still committed to ending free movement and extending the “no recourse to public funds” policy that leaves many migrants destitute and homeless, and had little to say on many aspects of the hostile environment agenda.
It took members organising from the grassroots up to make sure that Labour had a policy that reflected our values. In 2017, I helped set up the Labour Campaign for Free Movement with the aim of championing the rights of all migrants. We spoke at Constituency Labour Party meetings, organised events, wrote articles and passed motions. In January 2019, when Labour was planning to abstain on the Tory immigration bill, it was party members who caused a U-turn. At last year’s Labour conference, party members and trade union delegates voted on our motion to defend and extend free movement, close detention centres, end all hostile environment measures, give migrants equal access to the NHS and social security, and extend voting rights to all UK residents. It passed near-unanimously, to a standing ovation.
Throughout these years, Momentum shied away from the topic. It had little to say on immigration, didn’t recommend prioritising our motion and waited until the last minute before endorsing it – despite many Momentum activists feeling passionately about the need to support and defend migrants. While it was a positive development that Momentum, for the first time, campaigned for policy at last year’s Labour conference, most members had no say over the policies that their organisation chose to support. We at Forward Momentum believe this needs to change, and that members must be trusted to have the decisive say on the policies for which Momentum campaigns.
Now that we have shifted Labour’s policy on migrants’ rights, the left needs to defend it. But not just that – it is time to also turn outwards to wider society. In the last decade, public opinion has already been moving in the right direction, and a recent Ipsos MORI survey found discussions about the contributions of migrants to be the main reason. Imagine how much more we can achieve if Momentum throws its energy into dispelling myths, raising awareness and building solidarity.
With the fallout from Covid-19 set to define politics for the foreseeable future, this work is more vital than ever. All Forward Momentum candidates for the upcoming national coordinating group elections are standing on a policy platform that calls for Momentum to “link up with socialists across the world to develop an internationalist response to Covid-19, centred on migrants’ rights and combating nationalism”. As we have set out, Momentum should “support community struggles and push the Labour Party to advocate for free movement of people, safe passage for refugees, universal access to public services and funds, the closure of detention centres, and the full voting rights for all residents”.
It is not the role of socialists to pander to a stereotypical idea of a “traditional working-class voter”, often patronisingly portrayed as closed-minded and bigoted. It is our job to organise with and speak to the communities we live in, to change hearts and minds and convince the majority that things can change for the better. Let’s organise national days of action, let’s use Momentum’s resources and platforms to support migrants’ rights campaigns, let’s join migrant workers on picket lines. We know that a British builder, nurse or delivery driver has more in common with their Romanian or Jamaican colleagues than they do with Boris Johnson and his Etonian friends. Let’s have the courage to make that case.


labourlist--2020-06-19--Labour Tenants United: Put the right to housing above landlords’ profits

Decades of piecemeal reforms in an unreformable private rented sector has created a complex and daunting market .
With the Covid-19 crisis comes a potential catalyst for tenants ’ revolution , as the raw deal for renters is exposed as a scam .
Tenants unions , charities and a variety of left think tanks have been quick to call for swift action such as a moratorium on evictions .
But the Tories ’ record shows that they will be more than willing to unravel this short-term safety net than craft it into a new normal for renters .
With government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school meals , the Tories are again at risk of revealing their weakness on welfare issues and compassion for ordinary people .
If the opposition frontbench decides to put the needs of renters first , Keir Starmer ’ s success at the despatch box can help us expose this record to ensure renters are protected from the fallout of the crisis .
It also provides an opportunity for Labour to reimagine a bold , long-term policy package that puts renters ’ right to shelter and housing above landlords wanting to own property and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the support of hundreds of activists and in solidarity with tenants ’ unions , we founded Labour Tenants United – a campaign to ensure that Labour is as representative of tenants as possible , and to have policy proposals that reflect that representation .
In this modern age of rentier capitalism , in a market that reflects the domination of those privileged enough to own property at the expense and welfare of everyone else , we should be acting as the political wing of tenants ’ unions in the same spirit in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of trade unions .
Rental prices have increased by over 7 % since January 2015 according to the Office for National Statistics .
Combined with stagnation in wages and coupled with a pandemic and recession , you can see why you would expect us to see further hardship for renters across the country .
A recent poll by Opinium found that one in five of those who had been financially affected by the Covid lockdown had been forced to choose between food and bills or paying rent .
One in four said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their home , move in with friends or parents , or request an earlier end to their tenancy due to the crisis .
If the everyday maliciousness of unscrupulous transaction fees and lack of concern for maintenance are also factored in , we believe that it is time to propose a brighter vision for a housing sector .
A vision that concentrates on the needs of its occupants as its core value , instead of uniquely protecting landlords ’ pockets .
As such , we ’ ve brought together policy proposals that reflect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of coronavirus , as well as presenting a bold , long-term package of support to bail out the rented sector .
Among other ideas , our proposals include policies to : • immediately extend the moratorium on possession claims and evictions ; • suspend the obligation to pay rent to landlords by tenants for the duration of the coronavirus crisis ; • and introduce controls so that landlords can not keep tenants paying for the cost of the pandemic for years down the line .
These are policies that can focus on supporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflecting the duties that landlords owe in providing safe and affordable homes , with the bonus that it could attract many of the voters we lost in 2019 .
As such , this ought to be a relatively basic but essential approach for the Labour Party to support and develop as we continue to expose the Tories ’ lack of action for renters .
You can see and support the full Labour Tenants United policy proposals , and Labour members can vote and comment on them , on the national policy forum website @ @ @ @ @ @ @ follow us on Twitter and sign up to our mailing list here .

Decades of piecemeal reforms in an unreformable private rented sector has created a complex and daunting market. With the Covid-19 crisis comes a potential catalyst for tenants’ revolution, as the raw deal for renters is exposed as a scam. Tenants unions, charities and a variety of left think tanks have been quick to call for swift action such as a moratorium on evictions. But the Tories’ record shows that they will be more than willing to unravel this short-term safety net than craft it into a new normal for renters.
With government U-turns on the furlough scheme and free school meals, the Tories are again at risk of revealing their weakness on welfare issues and compassion for ordinary people. If the opposition frontbench decides to put the needs of renters first, Keir Starmer’s success at the despatch box can help us expose this record to ensure renters are protected from the fallout of the crisis. It also provides an opportunity for Labour to reimagine a bold, long-term policy package that puts renters’ right to shelter and housing above landlords wanting to own property and earn profit.
That is why, with the support of hundreds of activists and in solidarity with tenants’ unions, we founded Labour Tenants United – a campaign to ensure that Labour is as representative of tenants as possible, and to have policy proposals that reflect that representation. In this modern age of rentier capitalism, in a market that reflects the domination of those privileged enough to own property at the expense and welfare of everyone else, we should be acting as the political wing of tenants’ unions in the same spirit in which we organise as the political wing of trade unions.
Rental prices have increased by over 7% since January 2015 according to the Office for National Statistics. Combined with stagnation in wages and coupled with a pandemic and recession, you can see why you would expect us to see further hardship for renters across the country. A recent poll by Opinium found that one in five of those who had been financially affected by the Covid lockdown had been forced to choose between food and bills or paying rent. One in four said that they had already had to voluntarily leave their home, move in with friends or parents, or request an earlier end to their tenancy due to the crisis.
If the everyday maliciousness of unscrupulous transaction fees and lack of concern for maintenance are also factored in, we believe that it is time to propose a brighter vision for a housing sector. A vision that concentrates on the needs of its occupants as its core value, instead of uniquely protecting landlords’ pockets. As such, we’ve brought together policy proposals that reflect this need for action in the context of coronavirus, as well as presenting a bold, long-term package of support to bail out the rented sector. Among other ideas, our proposals include policies to:
immediately extend the moratorium on possession claims and evictions;
suspend the obligation to pay rent to landlords by tenants for the duration of the coronavirus crisis;
ban all evictions under Section 21 permanently;
and introduce controls so that landlords cannot keep tenants paying for the cost of the pandemic for years down the line.
These are policies that can focus on supporting the most vulnerable in our society through reflecting the duties that landlords owe in providing safe and affordable homes, with the bonus that it could attract many of the voters we lost in 2019. As such, this ought to be a relatively basic but essential approach for the Labour Party to support and develop as we continue to expose the Tories’ lack of action for renters. You can see and support the full Labour Tenants United policy proposals, and Labour members can vote and comment on them, on the national policy forum website. For updates on the campaign, follow us on Twitter and sign up to our mailing list here.


labourlist--2020-06-19--Come together, right now: a review

Come together, right now: a review

The government has officially given up on its coronavirus tracing app in yet another embarrassing U-turn that anyone paying attention will have spotted miles away .
Experts repeatedly warned that Apple and Google would not change their systems at the request of Matt Hancock , and the Health Secretary has now belatedly come to terms with that reality .
Jon Ashworth ’ s latest LabourList Covid-19 update is withering in its assessment of the development .
And in other news , after an interview with Preet Kaur Gill MP , we can exclusively reveal that Labour is set to keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to re-establish the department .
But the main Labour story of the day is the publication of Labour Together ’ s 2019 general election review .
This huge piece of work was jointly commissioned by LabourList , and I joined Ed Miliband , Shabana Mahmood , Manuel Cortes and many others to be a commissioner .
The project started back in December , and we have been meeting regularly since then – including virtually during the coronavirus crisis – to discuss the report and contribute to it .
The final report is comprehensive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in detail at the defeat last year , the campaign itself and finally the way forward .
It brings together tons of original research and analysis .
It can be torturously difficult to have these conversations in the Labour Party .
Frankly , every time I tweet , send a morning email or publish an article , I brace myself for a backlash that might leave me shaken for the rest of the week .
Critical engagement is brilliant , but too often the products of hard work in the party are unfairly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for this review so far is really encouraging , however : it has been welcomed by the leadership , Momentum , Progress and many in between .
I think that shows that the review has succeeded in proving that it was not conceived with a factional agenda but instead with a determination to offer an honest analysis of what went wrong and dozens of genuinely helpful recommendations .
The Tories turned out more non-voters than Labour did , the review finds .
Labour lost all types of voters everywhere , apart from in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a terrible defeat .
And it can be put down to concerns over the leadership , Brexit position and the manifesto not being seen as deliverable , but also its roots stretch back over the last two decades .
The key conclusion here is that a new leader and Brexit being ‘ done ’ will not solve these problems : the party desperately needs an overhaul of its strategy , organisation and campaigning infrastructure .
The report ’ s findings on the results , the ground and online campaigns , the digital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than enough evidence for that .
The review isn ’ t all doom and gloom .
It doesn ’ t shy away from spelling out the scale of the challenge : Labour would need to increase its number of MPs by 60 % , which would be unprecedented , to win a majority of one .
Yet it also makes lots of interesting and positive interventions – from setting out a political strategy that could build a broad enough coalition of voters to coming out strongly in favour of community organising ; from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s digital tools to suggesting concrete ways of improving the relationship between the party and members .
Here is my initial write-up , here you can read the whole thing ( which is very much worth doing ) , and there will be lots more comment and analysis on LabourList in the coming days .
You can even discuss the report with commissioners on Monday evening by signing up here .
Enjoy .

The government has officially given up on its coronavirus tracing app in yet another embarrassing U-turn that anyone paying attention will have spotted miles away. Experts repeatedly warned that Apple and Google would not change their systems at the request of Matt Hancock, and the Health Secretary has now belatedly come to terms with that reality. Jon Ashworth’s latest LabourList Covid-19 update is withering in its assessment of the development. And in other news, after an interview with Preet Kaur Gill MP, we can exclusively reveal that Labour is set to keep its shadow international development team and pledge to re-establish the department.
But the main Labour story of the day is the publication of Labour Together’s 2019 general election review. This huge piece of work was jointly commissioned by LabourList, and I joined Ed Miliband, Shabana Mahmood, Manuel Cortes and many others to be a commissioner. The project started back in December, and we have been meeting regularly since then – including virtually during the coronavirus crisis – to discuss the report and contribute to it. The final report is comprehensive: 140 pages long, it looks in detail at the defeat last year, the campaign itself and finally the way forward. It brings together tons of original research and analysis.
It can be torturously difficult to have these conversations in the Labour Party. Frankly, every time I tweet, send a morning email or publish an article, I brace myself for a backlash that might leave me shaken for the rest of the week. Critical engagement is brilliant, but too often the products of hard work in the party are unfairly received in bad faith. The reception for this review so far is really encouraging, however: it has been welcomed by the leadership, Momentum, Progress and many in between. I think that shows that the review has succeeded in proving that it was not conceived with a factional agenda but instead with a determination to offer an honest analysis of what went wrong and dozens of genuinely helpful recommendations.
The Tories turned out more non-voters than Labour did, the review finds. Labour lost all types of voters everywhere, apart from in London, compared with 2017. It was a terrible defeat. And it can be put down to concerns over the leadership, Brexit position and the manifesto not being seen as deliverable, but also its roots stretch back over the last two decades. The key conclusion here is that a new leader and Brexit being ‘done’ will not solve these problems: the party desperately needs an overhaul of its strategy, organisation and campaigning infrastructure. The report’s findings on the results, the ground and online campaigns, the digital operation and the internal divisions constitute more than enough evidence for that.
The review isn’t all doom and gloom. It doesn’t shy away from spelling out the scale of the challenge: Labour would need to increase its number of MPs by 60%, which would be unprecedented, to win a majority of one. Yet it also makes lots of interesting and positive interventions – from setting out a political strategy that could build a broad enough coalition of voters to coming out strongly in favour of community organising; from establishing how to open up Labour’s digital tools to suggesting concrete ways of improving the relationship between the party and members.
Here is my initial write-up, here you can read the whole thing (which is very much worth doing), and there will be lots more comment and analysis on LabourList in the coming days. You can even discuss the report with commissioners on Monday evening by signing up here. Enjoy.


labourlist--2020-06-19--An unappy ending – Ashworth’s Covid-19 update

We were promised a world-beating test and trace system with a shiny new app by June .
Instead last night , in the government ’ s latest screeching U-turn , the Matt Hancock app was unceremoniously junked .
This app once a central part of the government ’ s response to the pandemic .
Digital technology and smartphones were to be our saviour .
Hancock initially said that the app would be rolled out nationally in mid-May .
When asked repeatedly about the delay , the government had insisted that the launch was only a few weeks away .
Technology @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that its approach was flawed and would lead to failure .
Months ago , other countries realised the same and moved to models based on technology provided by Apple and Google .
Given that one in five 65-year-olds and over don ’ t own a smartphone and with evidence that only around 50 % of pensioners , unemployed and those in low-paid jobs were likely to download the app according to surveys , I have always been deeply concerned that a digital approach was likely to exacerbate existing health inequalities .
This U-turn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another example of where the government ’ s response has been slow and badly managed .
It ’ s something I called for back in May , when I wrote to the Health Secretary calling for the government to show greater flexibility in its approach to developing an app , including learning from technology companies .
Other countries like Germany moved to this decentralised approach much earlier in April , and were able to launch their app this week with huge download rates and few privacy concerns .
For the UK , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
Ministers need to tell us how much taxpayers ’ money has been wasted on private firms throughout this sorry episode .
It ’ s now likely to cause further delay to an app that is already way behind schedule .
The racing-loving Health Secretary tried to justify his latest shambles last night by saying he was always supportive of both developing an NHS app and supporting an Apple-Google alternative .
He was always ‘ backing both horses ’ , he insisted .
Well , that is horses**t , to keep with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the impact that this chaos will have on the public , and what it will mean for keeping our constituents and their loved ones safe .
The government ’ s current approach is particularly concerning when you look at the statistics from the government ’ s contact tracing programme .
Published yesterday , the latest figures show that a quarter of people who tested positive for coronavirus have not been contacted by NHS Test and Trace .
There is a clearly a gaping hole in the system that urgently needs to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of minor objection .
So far we have seen over 64,000 excess deaths , over 16,000 deaths in care homes across the UK , and at least 300 health and care staff have lost their lives .
Is it any wonder that people are deeply concerned about Boris Johnson pushing ahead with easing lockdown measures when the virus continues to circulate and infect people ?
This is why I have continued to press for an effective test , trace and isolate strategy , led by local expertise to break the chains of transmission @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a concerted effort in areas we know are at risk of high levels of infection .
Yesterday I called for routine testing of all staff in the NHS and social care sectors to help minimise transmission of Covid-19 .
A fifth of coronavirus infections among hospital patients and almost nine in ten infections among healthcare workers may have been caught in hospital .
But a recent study from Imperial suggested that weekly testing of healthcare workers is “ estimated to reduce their contribution to transmission by 25-33 % , on top of reductions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Regular testing of all NHS staff is now be an urgent priority .
Weekly testing of all healthcare workers reduces the spread of the virus and helps protect NHS staff and patients .
Eventually resetting the NHS to continue treating Covid and non-Covid patients is going to have to take priority .
This should include putting in place infection control measures to make sure patients can continue to safely receive their care .
There is still a long way to go to defeat this virus .
Saving lives and minimising harm will depend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control are in place .
That means a resourced system to find cases , test them , track their contacts , isolate people with the proper financial support they need .

We were promised a world-beating test and trace system with a shiny new app by June. Instead last night, in the government’s latest screeching U-turn, the Matt Hancock app was unceremoniously junked.
This app once a central part of the government’s response to the pandemic. Digital technology and smartphones were to be our saviour. Hancock initially said that the app would be rolled out nationally in mid-May. When asked repeatedly about the delay, the government had insisted that the launch was only a few weeks away.
Technology expert after technology expert warned the government that its approach was flawed and would lead to failure. Months ago, other countries realised the same and moved to models based on technology provided by Apple and Google.
Given that one in five 65-year-olds and over don’t own a smartphone and with evidence that only around 50% of pensioners, unemployed and those in low-paid jobs were likely to download the app according to surveys, I have always been deeply concerned that a digital approach was likely to exacerbate existing health inequalities.
This U-turn is unsurprising. And it is yet another example of where the government’s response has been slow and badly managed. It’s something I called for back in May, when I wrote to the Health Secretary calling for the government to show greater flexibility in its approach to developing an app, including learning from technology companies. Other countries like Germany moved to this decentralised approach much earlier in April, and were able to launch their app this week with huge download rates and few privacy concerns.
For the UK, though, this late change has wasted precious time. Ministers need to tell us how much taxpayers’ money has been wasted on private firms throughout this sorry episode. It’s now likely to cause further delay to an app that is already way behind schedule.
The racing-loving Health Secretary tried to justify his latest shambles last night by saying he was always supportive of both developing an NHS app and supporting an Apple-Google alternative. He was always ‘backing both horses’, he insisted. Well, that is horses**t, to keep with the equestrian theme.
The real worry is the impact that this chaos will have on the public, and what it will mean for keeping our constituents and their loved ones safe. The government’s current approach is particularly concerning when you look at the statistics from the government’s contact tracing programme. Published yesterday, the latest figures show that a quarter of people who tested positive for coronavirus have not been contacted by NHS Test and Trace. There is a clearly a gaping hole in the system that urgently needs to be addressed.
These are not mere points of minor objection. So far we have seen over 64,000 excess deaths, over 16,000 deaths in care homes across the UK, and at least 300 health and care staff have lost their lives. Is it any wonder that people are deeply concerned about Boris Johnson pushing ahead with easing lockdown measures when the virus continues to circulate and infect people?
This is why I have continued to press for an effective test, trace and isolate strategy, led by local expertise to break the chains of transmission of this deadly virus. That means a concerted effort in areas we know are at risk of high levels of infection. Yesterday I called for routine testing of all staff in the NHS and social care sectors to help minimise transmission of Covid-19.
A fifth of coronavirus infections among hospital patients and almost nine in ten infections among healthcare workers may have been caught in hospital. But a recent study from Imperial suggested that weekly testing of healthcare workers is “estimated to reduce their contribution to transmission by 25-33%, on top of reductions achieved by self-isolation following symptoms”.
Regular testing of all NHS staff is now be an urgent priority. Weekly testing of all healthcare workers reduces the spread of the virus and helps protect NHS staff and patients. Eventually resetting the NHS to continue treating Covid and non-Covid patients is going to have to take priority. This should include putting in place infection control measures to make sure patients can continue to safely receive their care.
There is still a long way to go to defeat this virus. Saving lives and minimising harm will depend on ensuring the fundamentals of infectious disease control are in place. That means a resourced system to find cases, test them, track their contacts, isolate people with the proper financial support they need.


labourlist--2020-06-19--There is hope to be found in the reasons for Labour’s 2019 defeat

It is far too early to say what politics will look like after the huge changes we are living through as a result of Covid-19 and the Black Lives Matter protests .
A new politics will emerge – and when it does , Labour needs to understand its past to be able to choose its future .
Under Keir Starmer , the party has a new lease of life .
But to have a hope of winning the next election , it needs to have an accurate understanding of why it lost the last four .
Labour for a European @ @ @ @ @ @ @ general election identifies four main reasons why Labour lost , and lost so badly .
The party leadership , and Jeremy Corbyn in particular , were significant factors in Labour ’ s defeat .
Corbyn was the most unpopular leader of a major party heading into an election since this data was first recorded .
The leadership was the number one reason given for not voting Labour by all voters who voted for another party , including former Labour voters who defected , regardless of who they defected to .
The problem was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The party leadership made a number of unforced errors between 2017 and 2019 – including failure to act over antisemitism , prevaricating over Brexit and failing to prioritise national security after the Skripal poisonings – that collectively undermined public support .
We should acknowledge , too , that Labour has fielded unpopular leaders in four successive elections – and has lost all four .
If Labour wants to win next time , it needs to ensure that its leaders are popular .
Policy alone will not get the party over the line .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brexit put Labour in an impossible situation but this is far from the truth .
Based on polling Labour had the opportunity in late 2018 to support a second referendum and pick up a swathe of votes , shoring up marginal seats and putting themselves in contention to win an election .
Instead months of internal wrangling over the party ’ s Brexit position culminated in a decision to support a second referendum but without backing Remain .
This alienated Remain supporters without giving the space to make a serious pitch to Leavers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote splintered , which was catastrophic for Labour .
We should remember that the Conservatives had the same problem as Labour .
Their vote was also split between Leave and Remain but they responded more effectively , and more ruthlessly , to the changed electoral landscape in order to win .
They chose to fully support the majority of their voters , who were Leavers .
They successfully consolidated the Leave vote and held onto most of their Remain voters despite advocating a very hard Brexit policy .
Conservative Remainers were in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than they were a hard Brexit .
For Labour , Brexit is a missed opportunity – a Conservative government prioritising ideology and a policy that will inflict huge damage to our economy could have been used to Labour ’ s advantage if opposed robustly .
Labour has paid the electoral price .
The country will pay the economic and social cost .
But to win next time , Labour must look beyond the unique reasons for its 2019 failure .
Its electoral problems predate both Jeremy Corbyn ’ s leadership and the Brexit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have played a significant role .
In the 1970s and 1980s , class was a significant determinant of party vote , but from the 1990s onwards it has become progressively less important .
Labour is no longer simply the party of the working class , indeed since as far back as 2001 more Labour voters have come from ABC1 than C2DE social classes .
In contrast , the influence of age , education and housing tenure has grown dramatically .
Labour voters are now likely to be young , educated and living in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that Labour voters are now concentrated in cities , meaning that Labour has a tendency to pile up large numbers of votes in safe seats in cities but find it harder to win votes in towns , which are generally more marginal .
The electoral map of 2024 will bear little resemblance to the map of 2005 when Labour last won .
Finally , people ’ s voting behaviour has become far more influenced by their views on social issues such as immigration and minority rights .
The Brexit referendum exacerbated divides @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote Remain , and social conservatives , who tended to vote Leave .
In 2019 , as many as 90 % of the population had a settled view on Brexit .
For many , it was the primary determinant of their vote , above economic policies or party loyalty .
This values divide predates Brexit .
Labour ’ s poor showing in the 2015 general election was in part down to social conservatives moving away from the party .
Both the 2017 and 2019 elections saw Labour become even more dependent on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not make the mistake of thinking that because Brexit is in progress this divide will disappear .
People change their values slowly over time .
It is in the Conservatives ’ interest to stoke the culture war to consolidate socially conservative votes .
They will look for ways to do that even without Brexit on the front pages .
Regardless , the majority of Labour ’ s vote is socially liberal .
Labour can not win without these voters , nor can it win with their votes alone .
To gain a majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ values-based voters and others who are motivated by the economy or public services .
One factor that can help Labour is the stark difference between Leave voters who traditionally voted Labour and those who traditionally voted Conservative .
In 2019 , many of these people voted Conservative but they are not the same .
Traditional Conservative Leavers were primarily motivated by Brexit , but traditional Labour Leavers were primarily motivated by 50,000 nurses and 40 hospitals .
With more compelling leadership and a stronger campaign Labour can win these former supporters back .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to its values while offering specific and credible policies to attract wider support .
The Conservatives have promised greater state intervention ( and have been forced into it by the coronavirus crisis ) but this is an uncomfortable , divisive and ultimately implausible position given their basic commitment to laissez-faire economics and a pared back state .
Labour needs to exploit these contradictions .
There were other factors involved in Labour ’ s defeat .
The manifesto was confused and poorly communicated , especially in comparison with the Conservatives ’ focused campaign which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brexit , the NHS and police .
Labour ’ s ground campaign was mismanaged , meaning that resources were misdirected and marginals needlessly lost .
Labour ’ s long-term failure to respond to its collapse in Scotland again robbed it of seats that must be won to form a majority .
Clarity on Scottish independence and investment in a true recovery north of the border must be a priority for the new leadership team .
There is hope to be found in the reasons for Labour ’ s defeat .
Brexit and immigration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more space for a debate on economics and the role of the state where Labour is much stronger .
The leadership candidate who consistently polled best with the general public is the party ’ s new leader , and is doing incredibly well .
Other factors , like the changing determinants of voting behaviour , are long-term changes that should have been acknowledged and responded to years ago but still can be .
Now is the time to engage with these issues and learn the lessons .
Four years will pass soon enough @

It is far too early to say what politics will look like after the huge changes we are living through as a result of Covid-19 and the Black Lives Matter protests. A new politics will emerge – and when it does, Labour needs to understand its past to be able to choose its future. Under Keir Starmer, the party has a new lease of life. But to have a hope of winning the next election, it needs to have an accurate understanding of why it lost the last four.
Labour for a European Future’s report on the 2019 general election identifies four main reasons why Labour lost, and lost so badly. The party leadership, and Jeremy Corbyn in particular, were significant factors in Labour’s defeat. Corbyn was the most unpopular leader of a major party heading into an election since this data was first recorded. The leadership was the number one reason given for not voting Labour by all voters who voted for another party, including former Labour voters who defected, regardless of who they defected to.
The problem was broader than Corbyn as an individual. The party leadership made a number of unforced errors between 2017 and 2019 – including failure to act over antisemitism, prevaricating over Brexit and failing to prioritise national security after the Skripal poisonings – that collectively undermined public support. We should acknowledge, too, that Labour has fielded unpopular leaders in four successive elections – and has lost all four. If Labour wants to win next time, it needs to ensure that its leaders are popular. Policy alone will not get the party over the line.
Second, Brexit. Some argue that Brexit put Labour in an impossible situation but this is far from the truth. Based on polling Labour had the opportunity in late 2018 to support a second referendum and pick up a swathe of votes, shoring up marginal seats and putting themselves in contention to win an election. Instead months of internal wrangling over the party’s Brexit position culminated in a decision to support a second referendum but without backing Remain. This alienated Remain supporters without giving the space to make a serious pitch to Leavers. The result was that the anti-Brexit vote splintered, which was catastrophic for Labour.
We should remember that the Conservatives had the same problem as Labour. Their vote was also split between Leave and Remain but they responded more effectively, and more ruthlessly, to the changed electoral landscape in order to win. They chose to fully support the majority of their voters, who were Leavers. They successfully consolidated the Leave vote and held onto most of their Remain voters despite advocating a very hard Brexit policy. Conservative Remainers were in the end more afraid of a Corbyn government than they were a hard Brexit.
For Labour, Brexit is a missed opportunity – a Conservative government prioritising ideology and a policy that will inflict huge damage to our economy could have been used to Labour’s advantage if opposed robustly. Labour has paid the electoral price. The country will pay the economic and social cost.
But to win next time, Labour must look beyond the unique reasons for its 2019 failure. Its electoral problems predate both Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership and the Brexit referendum. Long-term demographic and political changes have played a significant role.
In the 1970s and 1980s, class was a significant determinant of party vote, but from the 1990s onwards it has become progressively less important. Labour is no longer simply the party of the working class, indeed since as far back as 2001 more Labour voters have come from ABC1 than C2DE social classes.
In contrast, the influence of age, education and housing tenure has grown dramatically. Labour voters are now likely to be young, educated and living in rented or social accommodation. One consequence is that Labour voters are now concentrated in cities, meaning that Labour has a tendency to pile up large numbers of votes in safe seats in cities but find it harder to win votes in towns, which are generally more marginal. The electoral map of 2024 will bear little resemblance to the map of 2005 when Labour last won.
Finally, people’s voting behaviour has become far more influenced by their views on social issues such as immigration and minority rights. The Brexit referendum exacerbated divides between social liberals, who tended to vote Remain, and social conservatives, who tended to vote Leave. In 2019, as many as 90% of the population had a settled view on Brexit. For many, it was the primary determinant of their vote, above economic policies or party loyalty.
This values divide predates Brexit. Labour’s poor showing in the 2015 general election was in part down to social conservatives moving away from the party. Both the 2017 and 2019 elections saw Labour become even more dependent on the votes of social liberals.
Labour must not make the mistake of thinking that because Brexit is in progress this divide will disappear. People change their values slowly over time. It is in the Conservatives’ interest to stoke the culture war to consolidate socially conservative votes. They will look for ways to do that even without Brexit on the front pages.
Regardless, the majority of Labour’s vote is socially liberal. Labour cannot win without these voters, nor can it win with their votes alone. To gain a majority, Labour needs a broad coalition of values-based voters and others who are motivated by the economy or public services.
One factor that can help Labour is the stark difference between Leave voters who traditionally voted Labour and those who traditionally voted Conservative. In 2019, many of these people voted Conservative but they are not the same. Traditional Conservative Leavers were primarily motivated by Brexit, but traditional Labour Leavers were primarily motivated by 50,000 nurses and 40 hospitals. With more compelling leadership and a stronger campaign Labour can win these former supporters back.
This means that Labour must stay true to its values while offering specific and credible policies to attract wider support. The Conservatives have promised greater state intervention (and have been forced into it by the coronavirus crisis) but this is an uncomfortable, divisive and ultimately implausible position given their basic commitment to laissez-faire economics and a pared back state. Labour needs to exploit these contradictions.
There were other factors involved in Labour’s defeat. The manifesto was confused and poorly communicated, especially in comparison with the Conservatives’ focused campaign which spoke directly to voters’ priorities – Brexit, the NHS and police. Labour’s ground campaign was mismanaged, meaning that resources were misdirected and marginals needlessly lost. Labour’s long-term failure to respond to its collapse in Scotland again robbed it of seats that must be won to form a majority. Clarity on Scottish independence and investment in a true recovery north of the border must be a priority for the new leadership team.
There is hope to be found in the reasons for Labour’s defeat. Brexit and immigration are fading as headline issues, allowing more space for a debate on economics and the role of the state where Labour is much stronger. The leadership candidate who consistently polled best with the general public is the party’s new leader, and is doing incredibly well. Other factors, like the changing determinants of voting behaviour, are long-term changes that should have been acknowledged and responded to years ago but still can be. Now is the time to engage with these issues and learn the lessons. Four years will pass soon enough.


labourlist--2020-06-19--Momentum Renewal: The Labour left needs to focus on party branches

Over the past few years , Momentum has focused much of its energies into organising the left for the key institutions of power in Labour – the national executive committee ( NEC ) , parliamentary selections and conference delegates .
Those were absolutely the right priorities for Momentum during those first heady years with limited resources and under intense strain – and there have been some fantastic victories .
The left has dominated conference each year since Jeremy Corbyn was elected .
We have won every internal one-member-one-vote election until our split slate during the last NEC election .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a huge piece of work that will transform selections across the party .
We have made huge gains in regional party structures – all in the face of a hostile establishment that tried to destroy our movement from the outset .
And in parliamentary selections , we have won in 55 % of all contests where we endorsed a candidate .
The work done in that period has left us with a continued presence in the structures and internal life of the Labour Party , even now that Corbyn is gone .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our attention on those issues , what has happened since is that other areas of the movement have been neglected .
From Momentum ’ s perspective , this primarily means the branches – the lifeblood of our movement – where most of our activists interact on a day-to-day basis with the Labour Party .
It is local branches that are the keys to all other institutions of power in Labour : local branches control the predominantly delegate-led Constituency Labour Party ( CLP ) structures , and CLPs in turn dominate local campaigning priorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delegates to local policy forums , the bodies in control of campaigning .
CLPs elect candidates to the regional boards , the bodies that oversee selection and vetting processes for councillors and MPs .
Without a base in branches and CLPs , it is impossible to get candidates selected for either the local council or constituency .
During the early membership surge under Corbyn , many Labour members for the first time came face-to-face with often decaying branch structures and hostile local branch executives .
Local party structures remain a bastion for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engaging fully in the life of our party .
Dominated by complicated bureaucratic processes , ‘ freeze dates ’ for elections to multiple different board and committees , and a complex rulebook with often opaque or deliberately withheld standing order books , it ’ s this battleground more than any other which stymied the left ’ s progress in the Labour Party .
And yet for the last few years , Momentum nationally has been almost entirely absent in this arena .
For me , this has been the biggest failing of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Momentum nationally has been buried deep inside the machinery of the leader of the opposition ’ s office , prioritising the long-term strategic goals of the organisation and propping up the leadership .
That has been a time-consuming and resource-intensive exercise , and building our branches has taken second place .
But now – cut off from the leader ’ s office but retaining our influence and a membership organisation of several tens of thousands – this is the time we need to seriously refocus our strength in helping socialist Labour members organise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I am currently standing for Momentum ’ s national coordinating group ( NCG ) on the Momentum Renewal slate and , if elected , refocusing our party towards the branches will be one of my top priorities .
Momentum Renewal has already committed to relocating our office to the North of England – an essential element in a strategy to break from the sociology and mindset of the London bubble .
However the process of strengthening our branch organisation must go much further than that .
I have been heartened to see the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ network in recent years – one that now spans the length and breadth of the country .
Councillors are vital in transforming local parties : as the representatives of local members , they can interact and communicate with the membership , lead on local campaigns and adopt natural leadership positions in their parties .
This network continues to grow – and as it does , we will be able to further coordinate councillor activities linking Labour to communities and rebuilding trust with our voters .
To complement this work , I would like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the development of policy for Labour .
Due to the structure of our policymaking , member engagement with policymaking is one of the best mechanisms to spark debate in local branches , bring the left together around key issues and engage members with national politics .
Momentum should be using radical policy initiatives far more to lobby those in power – but also to mobilise members around practical discussions , and engage them with the functions of Labour .
From the top of the organisation , I would like to see regular engagement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with key strategic policy goals drawn up on an annual basis and a concerted effort to push key policies through conference .
In relation to this , Momentum must be far more attuned to local government politics and we should be leading campaigns on local political issues .
Members need to be given the resources and capacity to respond to local events , recruiting new members to Labour and engaging in grassroots campaigns which unite us with other groups like ACORN and trade unions .
Momentum should be the go-to gateway for dedicated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party – and into local government .
Activist education and training is also essential if we are to maintain a large network of activists operating in our party .
To navigate Labour ’ s procedures , but also to learn transferable organisational skills , build confidence and take on local leadership roles in our movement .
If Momentum successfully builds our party branches , they will be a solid foundation for the left to continue to grow in Labour – a foundation less vulnerable to the twists and turns of national politics and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to thrive , there can ’ t be a better place to start .

Over the past few years, Momentum has focused much of its energies into organising the left for the key institutions of power in Labour – the national executive committee (NEC), parliamentary selections and conference delegates. Those were absolutely the right priorities for Momentum during those first heady years with limited resources and under intense strain – and there have been some fantastic victories.
The left has dominated conference each year since Jeremy Corbyn was elected. We have won every internal one-member-one-vote election until our split slate during the last NEC election. We helped push through the democracy review, a huge piece of work that will transform selections across the party. We have made huge gains in regional party structures – all in the face of a hostile establishment that tried to destroy our movement from the outset. And in parliamentary selections, we have won in 55% of all contests where we endorsed a candidate.
The work done in that period has left us with a continued presence in the structures and internal life of the Labour Party, even now that Corbyn is gone. But whilst it was completely correct to focus our attention on those issues, what has happened since is that other areas of the movement have been neglected. From Momentum’s perspective, this primarily means the branches – the lifeblood of our movement – where most of our activists interact on a day-to-day basis with the Labour Party.
It is local branches that are the keys to all other institutions of power in Labour: local branches control the predominantly delegate-led Constituency Labour Party (CLP) structures, and CLPs in turn dominate local campaigning priorities and messaging. Branches and CLPs elect delegates to local policy forums, the bodies in control of campaigning. CLPs elect candidates to the regional boards, the bodies that oversee selection and vetting processes for councillors and MPs. Without a base in branches and CLPs, it is impossible to get candidates selected for either the local council or constituency.
During the early membership surge under Corbyn, many Labour members for the first time came face-to-face with often decaying branch structures and hostile local branch executives. Local party structures remain a bastion for the Labour right – a bottleneck preventing members engaging fully in the life of our party. Dominated by complicated bureaucratic processes, ‘freeze dates’ for elections to multiple different board and committees, and a complex rulebook with often opaque or deliberately withheld standing order books, it’s this battleground more than any other which stymied the left’s progress in the Labour Party. And yet for the last few years, Momentum nationally has been almost entirely absent in this arena.
For me, this has been the biggest failing of our organisation – though an understandable one. Momentum nationally has been buried deep inside the machinery of the leader of the opposition’s office, prioritising the long-term strategic goals of the organisation and propping up the leadership. That has been a time-consuming and resource-intensive exercise, and building our branches has taken second place. But now – cut off from the leader’s office but retaining our influence and a membership organisation of several tens of thousands – this is the time we need to seriously refocus our strength in helping socialist Labour members organise and mobilise at the coal face.
I am currently standing for Momentum’s national coordinating group (NCG) on the Momentum Renewal slate and, if elected, refocusing our party towards the branches will be one of my top priorities. Momentum Renewal has already committed to relocating our office to the North of England – an essential element in a strategy to break from the sociology and mindset of the London bubble. However the process of strengthening our branch organisation must go much further than that.
I have been heartened to see the development of Momentum’s national councillor network in recent years – one that now spans the length and breadth of the country. Councillors are vital in transforming local parties: as the representatives of local members, they can interact and communicate with the membership, lead on local campaigns and adopt natural leadership positions in their parties. This network continues to grow – and as it does, we will be able to further coordinate councillor activities linking Labour to communities and rebuilding trust with our voters.
To complement this work, I would like to see Momentum engaging far more in the development of policy for Labour. Due to the structure of our policymaking, member engagement with policymaking is one of the best mechanisms to spark debate in local branches, bring the left together around key issues and engage members with national politics. Momentum should be using radical policy initiatives far more to lobby those in power – but also to mobilise members around practical discussions, and engage them with the functions of Labour. From the top of the organisation, I would like to see regular engagement with our members on policy ideas – with key strategic policy goals drawn up on an annual basis and a concerted effort to push key policies through conference.
In relation to this, Momentum must be far more attuned to local government politics and we should be leading campaigns on local political issues. Members need to be given the resources and capacity to respond to local events, recruiting new members to Labour and engaging in grassroots campaigns which unite us with other groups like ACORN and trade unions. Momentum should be the go-to gateway for dedicated community and Labour activists into the Labour Party – and into local government.
Activist education and training is also essential if we are to maintain a large network of activists operating in our party. To navigate Labour’s procedures, but also to learn transferable organisational skills, build confidence and take on local leadership roles in our movement.
If Momentum successfully builds our party branches, they will be a solid foundation for the left to continue to grow in Labour – a foundation less vulnerable to the twists and turns of national politics and national elections. For us to continue to thrive, there can’t be a better place to start.


labourlist--2020-06-19--Who Labour lost in 2019 – and why

Who Labour lost in 2019 – and why

One of the most comprehensive public post-mortems of an election defeat ever has just been published .
The 2019 Election Review from Labour Together , commissioned jointly with LabourList , includes fresh , previously unpublished research conducted by my organisation Datapraxis .
During the first three months of this year , we conducted a deep-dive into our unique dataset of hundreds of thousands of polling responses from YouGov , aiming to find out which voters Labour lost in 2019 , where , why , and how it might win again .
We were able to build on work we conducted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and electoral battlegrounds , and to advise Labour and other progressive campaigns .
The election review research was revealing and cathartic .
Understanding what went wrong is just the beginning of getting things right .
Data can not tell the whole story , but it can correct misunderstandings and reveal blind spots .
This article provides a short overview of some of our most important and startling findings .
Labour lost people on all sides .
Our data indicates that it lost around 1.9 million who voted Labour in 2017 and Remain in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who voted Leave in 2016 and Labour in 2017 .
Crucially , it also lost almost a million referendum non-voters – a mostly younger and often overlooked group , whose turnout for Labour in 2017 played a vital role in in delivering the unexpected hung parliament result , but who then became gradually disillusioned .
Labour gained only around a million swing voters from other parties in 2019 to compensate for its losses , and only 450,000 directly from the Tories – far fewer than in the previous two elections .
Most of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in any case far more receptive to Labour ’ s identity and messages than Leavers .
Once again , Labour ’ s main gains came from a new group of around 1.8 million mostly young 2017 non-voters .
But in 2019 , our data indicates that the Conservatives succeeded in turning out around two million 2017 non-voters , doing a significantly better turnout job than Labour this time , and vastly outstripping the Tory turnout effort in 2017 .
This group looks very different to those who Labour turned out .
They are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voted Leave in the referendum .
But the rest were for the most part habitual non-voters , who had also sat out the referendum , but whose clearest characteristic was an overwhelming and intense negativity towards Jeremy Corbyn .
These estimates are based on 2019 YouGov vote recall data from 206,060 respondents , the largest sample available in the UK , using a combination of YouGov ’ s nationally representative schema and Datapraxis political weighting .
The data includes many people with lower levels of political interest or inclination to turn out , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We believe its quality and scale helps to understand turnout , abstention and patterns in the key battlegrounds more deeply than more traditional smaller-sample research methods .
We found that Labour ended up losing around 1.1 million Remain voters to Remain parties in 2019 , plus around 600,000 to abstention and 240,000 to the Tories .
It lost around 800,000 Leave voters to the Tories , over 200,000 to Remain parties and around 600,000 to abstention , but less than 200,000 to the Brexit Party ( whose vote collapsed during the campaign , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ get Brexit done ” ) .
The majority of its lost referendum non-voters , again around 600,000 , went back to not voting rather than switching to other parties .
Even I had expected the majority of the 1.8 million 2017 voters Labour lost to abstention in 2019 to be Leave voters .
But our data suggests that they were split more or less evenly between Remain , Leave and referendum non-voters .
The results could have been even worse : more than one in three of people who said at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they wanted to vote for the Lib Dems , the Greens or Plaid Cymru ended up voting instead for Labour , either tactically or through persuasion , increasing its vote share by millions .
And almost half of the 1.4 million Labour Leave voters who the party ended up retaining had been undecided or voting for other parties at the start of the campaign .
Without regaining these voters , the defeat would have been even more seismic .
Our analysis of the seats Labour lost found that here , too , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two-million strong group of 2017 non-voters they turned out .
Labour Leave voters seem to have made up a slight majority of the party ’ s lost voters in the 40 seats which were lost most heavily ; but this was not true of the 20 narrowest marginals .
Losses from all categories of voters played a role in the battleground defeats .
To investigate the contested reasons behind the defeat , we combined a wide range of YouGov-licensed datasets with message-testing we conducted during the campaign , and a semantic analysis of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people ’ s views of Labour , segmenting the results by how people say they voted .
Our findings were stark and clear .
The most predictive factors we found for switching away from Labour in 2019 were the view that a Corbyn-led government was the most serious danger facing the country ; voting in the 2019 European Parliament elections ( which Labour hardly contested , but became a conveyor-belt for defection to Leave and Remain rivals ) ; views of leadership ; and political self-identification – with Labour mostly retaining a minority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left-wing , but losing more centrist voters .
We found that the three main factors behind Labour ’ s losses were antipathy to the leadership ( often associated with perceptions of weakness or incompetence , a shift to the far-left and/or antisemitism ) ; Brexit-driven switching ; and concerns about the affordability or credibility of the manifesto ( although individual policies were mostly quite well supported ) .
These three factors were interwoven , but the leadership factor was the most significant and consistent across all groups .
Tragically , even many of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 disliked Jeremy Corbyn by the end .
Only among less than a million defectors to the Tories or the Brexit Party does the main driver of switching seem to have been Brexit – and even for them , leadership and the other factors loomed large .
Most 2017 Labour voters who ended up abstaining in 2019 said that factors other than Brexit were more important to them , and this was even true of the abstaining Leavers .
Datapraxis will publish a full report on our findings in the coming weeks , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 Election Review ( which was itself drawn up by a commission involving leading figures from across Labour ’ s broad church ) .
Most importantly , we have begun conducting detailed work on how Labour can rebuild a winning coalition , bringing people together from across the scattered voter tribes of Britain .
In his article launching the review , Ed Miliband wrote : “ The Herculean task of winning the next election will require vision , imagination , discipline and unity .
Every part of our movement must be part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a starting point not just for winning an election but what really matters : a radical transformation of our country.
” It is time for Labour to turn its face to the future .
This renewal project will take years and involve many hard choices .
But we can understand and address the causes of the loss – and there are plenty of reasons for hope .
Leadership demands values and ideas , but it also requires listening to the people , learning from them in all their diversity , and understanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are receptive or resistant .
Politics should be a living dialogue with the voters , not a top-down monologue .
I believe Labour can win the next election without compromising its courage or values .
It will take an extraordinary swing , but this is a volatile and extraordinary time .

One of the most comprehensive public post-mortems of an election defeat ever has just been published. The 2019 Election Review from Labour Together, commissioned jointly with LabourList, includes fresh, previously unpublished research conducted by my organisation Datapraxis.
During the first three months of this year, we conducted a deep-dive into our unique dataset of hundreds of thousands of polling responses from YouGov, aiming to find out which voters Labour lost in 2019, where, why, and how it might win again. We were able to build on work we conducted during the election to map the message and electoral battlegrounds, and to advise Labour and other progressive campaigns.
The election review research was revealing and cathartic. Understanding what went wrong is just the beginning of getting things right. Data cannot tell the whole story, but it can correct misunderstandings and reveal blind spots. This article provides a short overview of some of our most important and startling findings.
Labour lost people on all sides. Our data indicates that it lost around 1.9 million who voted Labour in 2017 and Remain in 2016, as well as 1.8 million who voted Leave in 2016 and Labour in 2017. Crucially, it also lost almost a million referendum non-voters – a mostly younger and often overlooked group, whose turnout for Labour in 2017 played a vital role in in delivering the unexpected hung parliament result, but who then became gradually disillusioned.
Labour gained only around a million swing voters from other parties in 2019 to compensate for its losses, and only 450,000 directly from the Tories – far fewer than in the previous two elections. Most of these were Remain voters, who were in any case far more receptive to Labour’s identity and messages than Leavers. Once again, Labour’s main gains came from a new group of around 1.8 million mostly young 2017 non-voters.
But in 2019, our data indicates that the Conservatives succeeded in turning out around two million 2017 non-voters, doing a significantly better turnout job than Labour this time, and vastly outstripping the Tory turnout effort in 2017. This group looks very different to those who Labour turned out. They are older, and almost half of them voted Leave in the referendum. But the rest were for the most part habitual non-voters, who had also sat out the referendum, but whose clearest characteristic was an overwhelming and intense negativity towards Jeremy Corbyn.
These estimates are based on 2019 YouGov vote recall data from 206,060 respondents, the largest sample available in the UK, using a combination of YouGov’s nationally representative schema and Datapraxis political weighting. The data includes many people with lower levels of political interest or inclination to turn out, who pollsters often struggle to reach. We believe its quality and scale helps to understand turnout, abstention and patterns in the key battlegrounds more deeply than more traditional smaller-sample research methods.
We found that Labour ended up losing around 1.1 million Remain voters to Remain parties in 2019, plus around 600,000 to abstention and 240,000 to the Tories. It lost around 800,000 Leave voters to the Tories, over 200,000 to Remain parties and around 600,000 to abstention, but less than 200,000 to the Brexit Party (whose vote collapsed during the campaign, as its supporters switched to the Conservatives to “get Brexit done”). The majority of its lost referendum non-voters, again around 600,000, went back to not voting rather than switching to other parties.
Even I had expected the majority of the 1.8 million 2017 voters Labour lost to abstention in 2019 to be Leave voters. But our data suggests that they were split more or less evenly between Remain, Leave and referendum non-voters.
The results could have been even worse: more than one in three of people who said at the start of the 2019 campaign that they wanted to vote for the Lib Dems, the Greens or Plaid Cymru ended up voting instead for Labour, either tactically or through persuasion, increasing its vote share by millions. And almost half of the 1.4 million Labour Leave voters who the party ended up retaining had been undecided or voting for other parties at the start of the campaign. Without regaining these voters, the defeat would have been even more seismic.
Our analysis of the seats Labour lost found that here, too, the Tories’ greatest gains were from the two-million strong group of 2017 non-voters they turned out. Labour Leave voters seem to have made up a slight majority of the party’s lost voters in the 40 seats which were lost most heavily; but this was not true of the 20 narrowest marginals. Losses from all categories of voters played a role in the battleground defeats.
To investigate the contested reasons behind the defeat, we combined a wide range of YouGov-licensed datasets with message-testing we conducted during the campaign, and a semantic analysis of tens of thousands of open-ended responses about people’s views of Labour, segmenting the results by how people say they voted. Our findings were stark and clear.
The most predictive factors we found for switching away from Labour in 2019 were the view that a Corbyn-led government was the most serious danger facing the country; voting in the 2019 European Parliament elections (which Labour hardly contested, but became a conveyor-belt for defection to Leave and Remain rivals); views of leadership; and political self-identification – with Labour mostly retaining a minority who describe themselves as fairly or very left-wing, but losing more centrist voters.
We found that the three main factors behind Labour’s losses were antipathy to the leadership (often associated with perceptions of weakness or incompetence, a shift to the far-left and/or antisemitism); Brexit-driven switching; and concerns about the affordability or credibility of the manifesto (although individual policies were mostly quite well supported). These three factors were interwoven, but the leadership factor was the most significant and consistent across all groups. Tragically, even many of the 2017 voters Labour hung onto in 2019 disliked Jeremy Corbyn by the end.
Only among less than a million defectors to the Tories or the Brexit Party does the main driver of switching seem to have been Brexit – and even for them, leadership and the other factors loomed large. Most 2017 Labour voters who ended up abstaining in 2019 said that factors other than Brexit were more important to them, and this was even true of the abstaining Leavers.
Datapraxis will publish a full report on our findings in the coming weeks, complementing and underpinning Labour Together’s 2019 Election Review (which was itself drawn up by a commission involving leading figures from across Labour’s broad church). Most importantly, we have begun conducting detailed work on how Labour can rebuild a winning coalition, bringing people together from across the scattered voter tribes of Britain.
In his article launching the review, Ed Miliband wrote: “The Herculean task of winning the next election will require vision, imagination, discipline and unity. Every part of our movement must be part of it. We hope our report can be a starting point not just for winning an election but what really matters: a radical transformation of our country.”
It is time for Labour to turn its face to the future. This renewal project will take years and involve many hard choices. But we can understand and address the causes of the loss – and there are plenty of reasons for hope. Leadership demands values and ideas, but it also requires listening to the people, learning from them in all their diversity, and understanding where those who seem further from you are receptive or resistant. Politics should be a living dialogue with the voters, not a top-down monologue. I believe Labour can win the next election without compromising its courage or values. It will take an extraordinary swing, but this is a volatile and extraordinary time.