labourlist--2020-01-26--Sunday shows: McCluskey on Brexit, Long-Bailey, antisemitism and open selections

Unite general secretary Len McCluskey discussed the general election defeat , the ongoing Labour leadership and deputy elections and his union ’ s decision to nominate Rebecca Long-Bailey and Richard Burgon .
• On the election : “ Labour suffered a major , major defeat primarily as far as I ’ m concerned because of Brexit… The more we slid in to be perceived as a Remain party , the more the consequences were going to be felt in our heartlands… There was a feeling of betrayal.
” • On whether Long-Bailey would be a continuation of Corbyn : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s fair on Becky to talk in terms of ‘ continuity Corbyn ’ .
She is her own individual… It will be her vision.
” • On whether Corbyn ’ s policies lost Labour the election : “ That was virtually solely down to Brexit… Two years ago , Jeremy Corbyn was loved .
What happened in the last two years ?
Brexit.
” Added : “ The policies that Labour stood for , and the policies that Rebecca Long-Bailey supports , are extremely popular amongst the electorate.
” • On antisemitism and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to sign up to the Board of Deputies ’ ten pledges : “ Both Dawn and Richard have made it clear that they believe that there is need for more debate and discussion about a couple of the points that in the Board of Deputies ’ ten pledges… I think that ’ s perfectly legitimate and for people to call for them to be kicked out of the race is utter nonsense.
” '' There was a feeling of betrayal – the Labour party have betrayed them '' Unite General Secretary @ LenMcCluskey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down .
He tells @ skynewsniall he argued against the party advocating for a second referendum.
# Ridge pic.twitter.com/HzrD2P6cMF The Labour deputy contender Ian Murray , the party ’ s only remaining MP in Scotland , discussed his thoughts on independence and said that he is the “ change candidate ” in the deputy leadership race .
• On his bid : “ I have to be the change candidate because the country is screaming out for the Labour Party to change.
” • On whether the job of the deputy is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yes , the deputy should unite the party and be loyal to the leader but should also be a critical friend.
” • On whether the candidates who refused to sign the ten pledges of the Board of Deputies should be removed from the race : “ There ’ s a much wider issue here , actually… It ’ s about all the Jewish organisations and communities coming together to try and help us find a system to rid the Labour Party of the cancer of antisemitism.
” • Pressed again on whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the contest : “ I would encourage people to not bury their heads in the sand with this anymore.
” • Asked what he offers that is different to the other candidates : “ I win my marginal seat by building that broad coalition of support… I want to do that right across the country.
” • On whether he would ever back a second independence referendum : “ Well , that ’ s not for me to decide.
” • Asked if Scotland should be allowed a referendum if the SNP get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Well , that would be up to the Prime Minister to decide… If we disagree with the ends , let ’ s not facilitate the means when we ’ re principally against it.
” • Asked why he thinks Scottish Labour should not be autonomous : “ The Scottish Labour Party has complete autonomy already .
People misunderstand this… Why don ’ t we use all of the autonomy of the Scottish Labour Party first , and then see where that goes ?
” '' The country are screaming out for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leader candidate @ IanMurrayMP says he is the `` change '' candidate in the race and the party needs someone who can have `` hard conversations '' with its leader .
Len McCluskey also sat down in conversation with Andrew Marr this morning , discussing the election defeat last month and the ongoing Labour leadership elections .
• On whether he takes some responsibility for the defeat : “ I think all of us have to take some responsibility.
” • On Brexit : “ Labour spent two years , 18 months , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party… At the end of the day , a policy was arrived at and we suffered the consequences of that.
” • On whether he was wrong to have supported the call for a general election before Brexit : “ I think it was a trap and I would have preferred to have had Brexit resolved much earlier.
” But added : “ Once the SNP and the Liberal Democrats had made it clear that they were going to support the government , then Labour was committed to a general election.
” • @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electorally : “ Of course .
We never handled the antisemitism issue correctly .
We should have done things quicker .
And again , you pay the consequences.
” • On whether antisemitism was weaponised against Corbyn : “ I ’ m absolutely convinced that there were those individuals who opposed Jeremy Corbyn ’ s election right from the beginning , who used the antisemitism issue… The issue was not well handled .
It provided ammunition for Corbyn ’ s enemies who used it .
Lots of people were genuinely concerned – I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there were others who were disingenuous.
” • Marr suggested that this did not sound like an apology .
McCluskey said : “ Apology for what ?
I ’ m on record for apologising if any members of the Jewish community was hurt by what was happening in the Labour Party… I ’ m also on record for saying every single antisemite in the Labour Party needs to be kicked out.
” • Asked about United Left publicly supporting Long-Bailey and Burgon ahead of the union executive ’ s vote : “ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ small group of people to make that decision and to publicise it.
” But added : “ They came to this meeting , I know , with an open mind .
I don ’ t think that they were influenced by this small cabal of individuals who met somewhere and came out with a statement.
” • On Unite ’ s decision to back Long-Bailey : “ I think she ’ s brave , courageous .
Her capabilities are beyond doubt… She ’ s someone who believes in lots of the radical policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ few years but she has something else as well.
” • On whether Long-Bailey is the ‘ continuity Corbyn ’ candidate : “ She is an individual completely different from Jeremy Corbyn .
And I don ’ t know that she agrees with all his policies… I think she agrees with the radical nature of the alternative that Labour offers the electorate .
But she ’ ll have her different views about what her priorities are.
” • On why she is a better choice than Keir Starmer : “ It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on who can unite the party , who can take that message back to our heartlands and indeed to the rest of the nation… My union believes Becky is the person to do that.
” • On picking Burgon over Angela Rayner for deputy : “ Angie was excellent , first class .
And of course that ’ s the debate – you can only choose one .
My executive decided to choose Richard and that ’ s where we stand.
” • On Long-Bailey supporting open selections : “ Becky gave a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She basically said having open selection stops the internal fights and arguments that can occur in order to get a trigger ballot.
” • On his personal support for open selections : “ At the moment , all Labour MPs could be up for election if there ’ s a trigger ballot – and that trigger ballot goes on forever .
By having an open selection , it means everyone knows they ’ re up for accountability.
” • Asked about future relations between unions and the government : “ Working with trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Prime Minister .
If he tries to take on the trade unions , then it would be a fundamental mistake for him.
” Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay also appeared to discuss the government ’ s trade negotiation objectives for the next phase of Brexit .
He told Marr that he believes HS2 should go ahead .

Ridge on Sunday
Unite general secretary Len McCluskey discussed the general election defeat, the ongoing Labour leadership and deputy elections and his union’s decision to nominate Rebecca Long-Bailey and Richard Burgon.
On the election: “Labour suffered a major, major defeat primarily as far as I’m concerned because of Brexit… The more we slid in to be perceived as a Remain party, the more the consequences were going to be felt in our heartlands… There was a feeling of betrayal.”
On whether Long-Bailey would be a continuation of Corbyn: “I don’t believe it’s fair on Becky to talk in terms of ‘continuity Corbyn’. She is her own individual… It will be her vision.”
On whether Corbyn’s policies lost Labour the election: “That was virtually solely down to Brexit… Two years ago, Jeremy Corbyn was loved. What happened in the last two years? Brexit.” Added: “The policies that Labour stood for, and the policies that Rebecca Long-Bailey supports, are extremely popular amongst the electorate.”
On antisemitism and the refusal of two of the candidates to sign up to the Board of Deputies’ ten pledges: “Both Dawn and Richard have made it clear that they believe that there is need for more debate and discussion about a couple of the points that in the Board of Deputies’ ten pledges… I think that’s perfectly legitimate and for people to call for them to be kicked out of the race is utter nonsense.”
"There was a feeling of betrayal – the Labour party have betrayed them" Unite General Secretary @LenMcCluskey says Labour let voters in leave seats down. He tells @skynewsniall he argued against the party advocating for a second referendum.#Ridge pic.twitter.com/HzrD2P6cMF — Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) January 26, 2020
The Labour deputy contender Ian Murray, the party’s only remaining MP in Scotland, discussed his thoughts on independence and said that he is the “change candidate” in the deputy leadership race.
On his bid: “I have to be the change candidate because the country is screaming out for the Labour Party to change.”
On whether the job of the deputy is to be loyal to the leader: “Yes, the deputy should unite the party and be loyal to the leader but should also be a critical friend.”
On whether the candidates who refused to sign the ten pledges of the Board of Deputies should be removed from the race: “There’s a much wider issue here, actually… It’s about all the Jewish organisations and communities coming together to try and help us find a system to rid the Labour Party of the cancer of antisemitism.”
Pressed again on whether Dawn Butler and Burgon should remain in the contest: “I would encourage people to not bury their heads in the sand with this anymore.”
Asked what he offers that is different to the other candidates: “I win my marginal seat by building that broad coalition of support… I want to do that right across the country.”
On whether he would ever back a second independence referendum: “Well, that’s not for me to decide.”
Asked if Scotland should be allowed a referendum if the SNP get a majority in the 2021 election: “Well, that would be up to the Prime Minister to decide… If we disagree with the ends, let’s not facilitate the means when we’re principally against it.”
Asked why he thinks Scottish Labour should not be autonomous: “The Scottish Labour Party has complete autonomy already. People misunderstand this… Why don’t we use all of the autonomy of the Scottish Labour Party first, and then see where that goes?”
"The country are screaming out for the Labour party to change" Labour deputy leader candidate @IanMurrayMP says he is the "change" candidate in the race and the party needs someone who can have "hard conversations" with its leader. Live: https://t.co/AkhnRms6xe#Ridge pic.twitter.com/qeWmHEnDJo — Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) January 26, 2020
The Andrew Marr Show
Len McCluskey also sat down in conversation with Andrew Marr this morning, discussing the election defeat last month and the ongoing Labour leadership elections.
On whether he takes some responsibility for the defeat: “I think all of us have to take some responsibility.”
On Brexit: “Labour spent two years, 18 months, sliding into being perceived as a Remain party… At the end of the day, a policy was arrived at and we suffered the consequences of that.”
On whether he was wrong to have supported the call for a general election before Brexit: “I think it was a trap and I would have preferred to have had Brexit resolved much earlier.” But added: “Once the SNP and the Liberal Democrats had made it clear that they were going to support the government, then Labour was committed to a general election.”
On antisemitism and whether that cost Labour electorally: “Of course. We never handled the antisemitism issue correctly. We should have done things quicker. And again, you pay the consequences.”
On whether antisemitism was weaponised against Corbyn: “I’m absolutely convinced that there were those individuals who opposed Jeremy Corbyn’s election right from the beginning, who used the antisemitism issue… The issue was not well handled. It provided ammunition for Corbyn’s enemies who used it. Lots of people were genuinely concerned – I have no problem with that – but there were others who were disingenuous.”
Marr suggested that this did not sound like an apology. McCluskey said: “Apology for what? I’m on record for apologising if any members of the Jewish community was hurt by what was happening in the Labour Party… I’m also on record for saying every single antisemite in the Labour Party needs to be kicked out.”
Asked about United Left publicly supporting Long-Bailey and Burgon ahead of the union executive’s vote: “I think it was completely wrong of a small group of people to make that decision and to publicise it.” But added: “They came to this meeting, I know, with an open mind. I don’t think that they were influenced by this small cabal of individuals who met somewhere and came out with a statement.”
On Unite’s decision to back Long-Bailey: “I think she’s brave, courageous. Her capabilities are beyond doubt… She’s someone who believes in lots of the radical policies that have been developed over the last few years but she has something else as well.”
On whether Long-Bailey is the ‘continuity Corbyn’ candidate: “She is an individual completely different from Jeremy Corbyn. And I don’t know that she agrees with all his policies… I think she agrees with the radical nature of the alternative that Labour offers the electorate. But she’ll have her different views about what her priorities are.”
#Marr asks Unite General Secretary Len McCluskey what differentiates Rebecca Long-Bailey from Jeremy Corbyn
https://t.co/HWt568sn6Q pic.twitter.com/bTc2E9xSf7 — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) January 26, 2020
On why she is a better choice than Keir Starmer: “It’s about trying to make a judgement call on who can unite the party, who can take that message back to our heartlands and indeed to the rest of the nation… My union believes Becky is the person to do that.”
On picking Burgon over Angela Rayner for deputy: “Angie was excellent, first class. And of course that’s the debate – you can only choose one. My executive decided to choose Richard and that’s where we stand.”
On Long-Bailey supporting open selections: “Becky gave a brilliant answer on Friday at Unite. She basically said having open selection stops the internal fights and arguments that can occur in order to get a trigger ballot.”
On his personal support for open selections: “At the moment, all Labour MPs could be up for election if there’s a trigger ballot – and that trigger ballot goes on forever. By having an open selection, it means everyone knows they’re up for accountability.”
Asked about future relations between unions and the government: “Working with trade unions would be a clever move for the Prime Minister. If he tries to take on the trade unions, then it would be a fundamental mistake for him.”
Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay also appeared to discuss the government’s trade negotiation objectives for the next phase of Brexit. He told Marr that he believes HS2 should go ahead.


labourlist--2020-01-26--Starmer calls for federal UK to deliver “radical devolution of power”

Labour leadership candidate Keir Starmer is set to call for a new federal structure in the United Kingdom that would aim to deliver a “ radical devolution of power ” .
Under his proposal for a shift away from the “ status quo ” , a “ radical shake-up of the constitution ” would be designed to “ redistribute power , wealth and opportunity ” across the country .
The plan , which is being unveiled on Monday , would involve developing a written constitution through “ consultation and discussion with communities across the UK ” .
Announcing the policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quo is not working .
People are crying out for more control , power and say over their own lives and local communities .
This can ’ t be delivered by tinkering around the edges or with short-term fixes .
“ We need to end the monopoly of power in Westminster and spread it across every town , city , region and nation of the United Kingdom .
We have to end the status quo and put power , wealth and opportunity back into the hands of the people .
“ We need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ devolution of power and resources .
This will involve building a new long-term political and constitutional consensus .
I believe that could best be built on the principle of federalism .
“ But this can ’ t just be about handing power from one group of politicians to another .
I want to empower people to have a real say in their workplace , in the communities they ’ re part of and over the public services they use .
“ We will only repair the shattered trust in politics by letting people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affect their lives.
” Gordon Brown recently made the case for a “ constitutional revolution ” that would go beyond “ cosmetic ” ideas such as moving the House of Lords to York – a move reportedly being considered by the government .
The former Labour Prime Minister confirmed at the time that he would be announcing his backing for a Labour leadership candidate once the second stage of nominations comes to an end .
The fresh focus on constitutional issues by Starmer , who was the first to make the ballot paper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspended his campaign for several days .
The official party hustings scheduled to take place in Leeds on Saturday was cancelled as the Holborn MP needed to support his family after his mother-in-law became critically ill. Starmer will now resume his leadership campaign , travelling to Scotland , England and Wales where he plans to discuss how Labour can “ put power , wealth and opportunity back into the hands of the people ” .
His campaign team has confirmed that the contender will spell out his own proposals for democratic reform of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week , after Rebecca Long-Bailey announced her support for open selections .

Labour leadership candidate Keir Starmer is set to call for a new federal structure in the United Kingdom that would aim to deliver a “radical devolution of power”.
Under his proposal for a shift away from the “status quo”, a “radical shake-up of the constitution” would be designed to “redistribute power, wealth and opportunity” across the country.
The plan, which is being unveiled on Monday, would involve developing a written constitution through “consultation and discussion with communities across the UK”.
Announcing the policy, Starmer said: “The status quo is not working. People are crying out for more control, power and say over their own lives and local communities. This can’t be delivered by tinkering around the edges or with short-term fixes.
“We need to end the monopoly of power in Westminster and spread it across every town, city, region and nation of the United Kingdom. We have to end the status quo and put power, wealth and opportunity back into the hands of the people.
“We need a new constitutional settlement: a large-scale devolution of power and resources. This will involve building a new long-term political and constitutional consensus. I believe that could best be built on the principle of federalism.
“But this can’t just be about handing power from one group of politicians to another. I want to empower people to have a real say in their workplace, in the communities they’re part of and over the public services they use.
“We will only repair the shattered trust in politics by letting people take back control of the decisions that affect their lives.”
Gordon Brown recently made the case for a “constitutional revolution” that would go beyond “cosmetic” ideas such as moving the House of Lords to York – a move reportedly being considered by the government.
The former Labour Prime Minister confirmed at the time that he would be announcing his backing for a Labour leadership candidate once the second stage of nominations comes to an end.
The fresh focus on constitutional issues by Starmer, who was the first to make the ballot paper with early nominations, comes after he suspended his campaign for several days.
The official party hustings scheduled to take place in Leeds on Saturday was cancelled as the Holborn MP needed to support his family after his mother-in-law became critically ill.
Starmer will now resume his leadership campaign, travelling to Scotland, England and Wales where he plans to discuss how Labour can “put power, wealth and opportunity back into the hands of the people”.
His campaign team has confirmed that the contender will spell out his own proposals for democratic reform of the Labour Party itself later in the week, after Rebecca Long-Bailey announced her support for open selections.


labourlist--2020-01-26--Key takeaways from Open Labour’s leadership hustings

With Keir Starmer ’ s campaign still suspended as he supports his family after his mother-in-law became critically ill , the Holborn MP sent a speech to be read out and a video to be shown at the hustings instead .
He tweeted the video on Sunday morning .
All three women expressed lots of personality , and each communicated their answers with admirable clarity and often a remarkably direct approach .
Emily Thornberry in particular brought the hustings alive with blunt responses , such as “ I hate the SNP ” .
She also described Boris Johnson as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remarks , she made a direct appeal to local parties , advising members to tell each other : “ Get Thornberry on the ticket .
She ’ s bloody good.
” Lisa Nandy was typically thoughtful .
She stood out on the panel on the immigration question , to which she could offer an unambiguous reply that advocated freedom of movement because “ we believe it is better ” .
She was also praised by audience members for her detailed answer on trans rights , highlighting the case of a constituent and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ when we argue about 2030 or 2050 , we let Tories off the hook ” , in relation to a decarbonisation target , was criticised by Labour for a Green New Deal but aligned with her GMB endorsement .
( The union , along with affiliate group SERA , originally argued for a motion without a deadline at conference . )
Rebecca Long-Bailey did best when she talked about getting through to voters who aren ’ t paying attention .
Making the case that Labour had some of its best policies in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them properly ” , she said the party gave the impression that it was “ trying to save ” voters – not empower them .
She said her family was working-class but “ we didn ’ t know we were working-class ” .
One of the biggest rounds of applause was for Nandy ’ s answer on the work-capability assessment and the effect of the cuts on disabled people .
“ When Iain Duncan Smith got a knighthood , ” she said , “ it rewarded a system that broke people ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reminder that turning your attention to the Tories is always a good way to get Labour members on board – that is , after all , why they joined .
The hustings used a different format from the one employed for the official party hustings in Liverpool last weekend .
Instead of getting just 40 seconds to answer each question , they had 90 seconds , which significantly improved the debate .
Perhaps the procedures committee will opt to vary the format for Labour ’ s next hustings .
Richard Burgon promised to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the style of John Prescott , rather than a “ mischief maker ” , and emphasised his support for open selections .
He also wants to create a pledge card , as under Tony Blair ’ s leadership in 1997 .
He made clear that he was pitching to the Labour left without being particularly negative .
Ian Murray stressed that he was Labour ’ s only Scottish MP and pointed out that if the party only wins his seat at the next election it would require an unprecedented 13 % swing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should stop talking about “ Corbynites ” and instead have “ one ‘ ite ’ , which is unite ” .
He came across , as in all other hustings , as incredibly knowledgeable and with a clear unique selling point ( being Scottish ) .
Dawn Butler said she would be “ like John Prescott but without punching anyone ” .
She outlined a new “ CORE strategy – campaign , organise , recruit , educate ” .
She called Boris Johnson an “ Oxbridge educated toe rag ” and repeated her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Butler was charming and brought tons of wit and personality to the hustings .
Angela Rayner said the party “ didn ’ t feel like Open Labour ” in the 2019 election , and vowed to “ blow open our democratic structure ” .
During the hustings , she announced a new policy : “ real people ’ s peerages ” , whereby members and trade union affiliates would oversee Labour ’ s nominations until the party was able to abolish the House of Lords .
She had significant support in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Allin-Khan highlighted her personal background .
She emphasised party unity , criticising how trigger ballots were held shortly before the election and said Labour must “ democratise our party , but let ’ s not do it in a way that damages us ” .
She delivered a high-energy performance and well-considered answers .
The most notable aspect of the deputy hustings was that it opened up the conversation about an independent complaints system .
It exposed the confusion in the party over the demand to “ make the party ’ s disciplinary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Board of Deputies , all ten of which have been signed by Murray , Rayner and Allin-Khan but not Butler nor Burgon .
Asked how such a process would work in practice , Burgon pointed out that other candidates had vowed to “ take responsibility ” for cases although this would contradict the independence of that process .
Rayner said “ we can not outsource it ” , though the demand involves just that unless it is interpreted as simply a call for independent oversight or advice , which is not @ @ @

Leadership hustings
With Keir Starmer’s campaign still suspended as he supports his family after his mother-in-law became critically ill, the Holborn MP sent a speech to be read out and a video to be shown at the hustings instead. He tweeted the video on Sunday morning.
All three women expressed lots of personality, and each communicated their answers with admirable clarity and often a remarkably direct approach. Emily Thornberry in particular brought the hustings alive with blunt responses, such as “I hate the SNP”. She also described Boris Johnson as a “buffoon”. In her concluding remarks, she made a direct appeal to local parties, advising members to tell each other: “Get Thornberry on the ticket. She’s bloody good.”
Lisa Nandy was typically thoughtful. She stood out on the panel on the immigration question, to which she could offer an unambiguous reply that advocated freedom of movement because “we believe it is better”. She was also praised by audience members for her detailed answer on trans rights, highlighting the case of a constituent and the current waiting times.
Her remark that “when we argue about 2030 or 2050, we let Tories off the hook”, in relation to a decarbonisation target, was criticised by Labour for a Green New Deal but aligned with her GMB endorsement. (The union, along with affiliate group SERA, originally argued for a motion without a deadline at conference.)
Rebecca Long-Bailey did best when she talked about getting through to voters who aren’t paying attention. Making the case that Labour had some of its best policies in 2019 but “didn’t convey them properly”, she said the party gave the impression that it was “trying to save” voters – not empower them. She said her family was working-class but “we didn’t know we were working-class”.
One of the biggest rounds of applause was for Nandy’s answer on the work-capability assessment and the effect of the cuts on disabled people. “When Iain Duncan Smith got a knighthood,” she said, “it rewarded a system that broke people’s lives”. This was a keen reminder that turning your attention to the Tories is always a good way to get Labour members on board – that is, after all, why they joined. The hustings used a different format from the one employed for the official party hustings in Liverpool last weekend. Instead of getting just 40 seconds to answer each question, they had 90 seconds, which significantly improved the debate. Perhaps the procedures committee will opt to vary the format for Labour’s next hustings.
Deputy leadership hustings
Richard Burgon promised to be a “campaigning deputy” in the style of John Prescott, rather than a “mischief maker”, and emphasised his support for open selections. He also wants to create a pledge card, as under Tony Blair’s leadership in 1997. He made clear that he was pitching to the Labour left without being particularly negative.
Ian Murray stressed that he was Labour’s only Scottish MP and pointed out that if the party only wins his seat at the next election it would require an unprecedented 13% swing to win overall. He argued that we should stop talking about “Corbynites” and instead have “one ‘ite’, which is unite”. He came across, as in all other hustings, as incredibly knowledgeable and with a clear unique selling point (being Scottish).
Dawn Butler said she would be “like John Prescott but without punching anyone”. She outlined a new “CORE strategy – campaign, organise, recruit, educate”. She called Boris Johnson an “Oxbridge educated toe rag” and repeated her ‘Something Inside So Strong’ piece. Butler was charming and brought tons of wit and personality to the hustings.
Angela Rayner said the party “didn’t feel like Open Labour” in the 2019 election, and vowed to “blow open our democratic structure”. During the hustings, she announced a new policy: “real people’s peerages”, whereby members and trade union affiliates would oversee Labour’s nominations until the party was able to abolish the House of Lords. She had significant support in the room with many applause lines.
Rosena Allin-Khan highlighted her personal background. She emphasised party unity, criticising how trigger ballots were held shortly before the election and said Labour must “democratise our party, but let’s not do it in a way that damages us”. She delivered a high-energy performance and well-considered answers.
The most notable aspect of the deputy hustings was that it opened up the conversation about an independent complaints system. It exposed the confusion in the party over the demand to “make the party’s disciplinary process independent” – a key pledge of the Board of Deputies, all ten of which have been signed by Murray, Rayner and Allin-Khan but not Butler nor Burgon.
Asked how such a process would work in practice, Burgon pointed out that other candidates had vowed to “take responsibility” for cases although this would contradict the independence of that process. Rayner said “we cannot outsource it”, though the demand involves just that unless it is interpreted as simply a call for independent oversight or advice, which is not the same.


labourlist--2020-01-27--Does the Labour Party have a problem with women in leadership?

Women in leadership – the itch that the Labour Party just can ’ t seem to scratch .
It ’ s the promise we tell ourselves , but never quite stick to .
It ’ s the soundbite we all use , but rarely put into action when it actually matters .
Labour ’ s leadership election is in full swing and , while the current line-up is still dominated by women , Keir Starmer was the first candidate to make the ballot and he is the definite favourite of many .
The first hurdle of MP nominations saw him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the required number , and YouGov polls have him as the clear winner .
He is far ahead of the others in terms of local party nominations .
It ’ s a long campaign , of course , but these early signs send a clear message about the direction of this election , and an even clearer one about the way we all think about leadership .
What has interested me most about the early stages of this election is the language used .
Starmer has the ‘ authority ’ we need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He is ‘ Prime Ministerial ’ , a ‘ safe pair of hands ’ and – perhaps the most gendered of the bunch – a ‘ statesman ’ .
To me , these simple combinations of words and phrases don ’ t just serve to compliment the frontrunner of a leadership race .
They tell a story of a desire for masculinity at the top of our party and an internalised misogyny that spreads across our whole movement .
This isn ’ t even a new concept ; academics have been talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for generations , with studies showing that in most contexts when we say ‘ leader ’ , we really mean ‘ man ’ .
I don ’ t blame Labour members for building perceptions of leadership on principles that fundamentally favour men – after all , we ’ re all basing our votes on decades upon decades of male Labour leadership .
None of us know what a Labour Party led by a woman looks like , because we ’ ve never given ourselves the opportunity to see it .
This isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not about any individual running in this election , or in any other .
And it ’ s certainly not about electing a woman for the sake of electing a woman .
We all want to elect the best possible candidate to rebuild our reputation , to lead us through the next five years of painful opposition and to win us a Labour government .
But why is it that every time we come to elect our next leader , that best possible candidate is never a woman ?
What does it say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matters most , we can ’ t seem to allow ourselves to see a woman as the person we should all be following ?
I grew up in a South Walian family that had the Labour Party at its very heart .
Our bedtime stories were about our party ’ s brave , fierce and powerful heroes ; the time my granddad heard Aneurin Bevan speak in his hometown of Tredegar ; the fierce fight to elect Keir Hardie in neighbouring Merthyr Tydfil ; the way Clement Attlee and his government transformed our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heard about the women .
Wherever you look in our movement ’ s journey , women are there because women were always there , in the shadows of history .
They were the pioneering women behind the Matchgirls ’ Strike of 1888 , years before the Labour Party even formed and yet so often forgotten .
They were the socialist suffragettes , fighting for enfranchisement based on neither gender nor class .
They were the women of Ford Dagenham , refusing to take no for an answer and demanding equal pay .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than ever .
The Prime Minister is a known misogynist , set to lead his party ’ s tenth year of government , building on a legacy that saw austerity hit vulnerable women harder than anyone .
Yet the Labour Party won ’ t elect a woman for leader until we challenge ourselves to be better .
I ’ m proud that our party has stood up to champion equality when it matters most , but I ’ m also not afraid to say that we have a problem with women , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
This election gives us that opportunity .
I hope we take it so that , when I have grandchildren of my own , the stories I tell will include brave , fierce and powerful women too .

Women in leadership – the itch that the Labour Party just can’t seem to scratch. It’s the promise we tell ourselves, but never quite stick to. It’s the soundbite we all use, but rarely put into action when it actually matters. Labour’s leadership election is in full swing and, while the current line-up is still dominated by women, Keir Starmer was the first candidate to make the ballot and he is the definite favourite of many.
The first hurdle of MP nominations saw him storm ahead with over 60 more nominations than the required number, and YouGov polls have him as the clear winner. He is far ahead of the others in terms of local party nominations. It’s a long campaign, of course, but these early signs send a clear message about the direction of this election, and an even clearer one about the way we all think about leadership.
What has interested me most about the early stages of this election is the language used. Starmer has the ‘authority’ we need to win, we’re told. He is ‘Prime Ministerial’, a ‘safe pair of hands’ and – perhaps the most gendered of the bunch – a ‘statesman’. To me, these simple combinations of words and phrases don’t just serve to compliment the frontrunner of a leadership race. They tell a story of a desire for masculinity at the top of our party and an internalised misogyny that spreads across our whole movement. This isn’t even a new concept; academics have been talking about the inherent masculinity of leadership features for generations, with studies showing that in most contexts when we say ‘leader’, we really mean ‘man’.
I don’t blame Labour members for building perceptions of leadership on principles that fundamentally favour men – after all, we’re all basing our votes on decades upon decades of male Labour leadership. None of us know what a Labour Party led by a woman looks like, because we’ve never given ourselves the opportunity to see it.
This isn’t about Starmer. It’s not about any individual running in this election, or in any other. And it’s certainly not about electing a woman for the sake of electing a woman. We all want to elect the best possible candidate to rebuild our reputation, to lead us through the next five years of painful opposition and to win us a Labour government. But why is it that every time we come to elect our next leader, that best possible candidate is never a woman? What does it say about our movement that, when it matters most, we can’t seem to allow ourselves to see a woman as the person we should all be following?
I grew up in a South Walian family that had the Labour Party at its very heart. Our bedtime stories were about our party’s brave, fierce and powerful heroes; the time my granddad heard Aneurin Bevan speak in his hometown of Tredegar; the fierce fight to elect Keir Hardie in neighbouring Merthyr Tydfil; the way Clement Attlee and his government transformed our community and country. But we never heard about the women.
Wherever you look in our movement’s journey, women are there because women were always there, in the shadows of history. They were the pioneering women behind the Matchgirls’ Strike of 1888, years before the Labour Party even formed and yet so often forgotten. They were the socialist suffragettes, fighting for enfranchisement based on neither gender nor class. They were the women of Ford Dagenham, refusing to take no for an answer and demanding equal pay.
We need a woman to lead us now more than ever. The Prime Minister is a known misogynist, set to lead his party’s tenth year of government, building on a legacy that saw austerity hit vulnerable women harder than anyone. Yet the Labour Party won’t elect a woman for leader until we challenge ourselves to be better. I’m proud that our party has stood up to champion equality when it matters most, but I’m also not afraid to say that we have a problem with women, and it’s time to confront it. This election gives us that opportunity. I hope we take it so that, when I have grandchildren of my own, the stories I tell will include brave, fierce and powerful women too.


labourlist--2020-01-27--Labour leadership candidates grapple with ideas for constitutional reform

Although the official Labour Party leadership hustings set to be held on Saturday was cancelled , the deputy one went ahead – as did the full Open Labour version on Sunday in Nottingham .
Keir Starmer couldn ’ t make it , but the soft left group organised hustings for both sets of candidates .
With a different format , offering 90 seconds for responses rather than 40 , the debate was hugely improved as candidates offered detailed answers .
Let ’ s hope the party will follow suit .
The high quality of candidates in both races was evident @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and wit , as well as thoughtful interventions on policy .
Check out my summary of key takeaways from the day , and a comprehensive Twitter thread .
Starmer has now resumed campaigning , and he ’ s back with a policy announcement .
The leadership candidate is calling for a new federal structure in the United Kingdom , which he says would deliver a “ radical devolution of power ” .
This shift away from the “ status quo ” would involve a written constitution developed through “ consultation and discussion with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not much flesh on the bones of this one yet , but Starmer will be touring the country this week – Scotland tomorrow , the North of England on Wednesday , then Wales – presumably to do just that .
This plan for federalism sounds remarkably like the speeches that have been delivered by Gordon Brown recently .
Pledging to “ fight , fight and fight again ” for the union in June , the former Prime Minister warned that “ narrow nationalism ” was putting the UK at risk .
Last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a “ constitutional revolution ” .
These points are serious and carry weight .
The risk , however , is that Starmer sounds non-committal when he talks about such abstract proposals .
Brexit and Scottish independence seem tangible , and a more complex scheme based on federalism must surely be discussed in concrete terms before it can gain traction .
This risk of sounding vague is shared by fellow leadership candidates Rebecca Long-Bailey and Lisa Nandy .
Three of them are now talking about devolving power to towns and building new constitutional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their policy offers .
Did Jess Phillips have a point when she said nobody in real life talks about “ this senate or that senate ” ?
Can any of this stuff about constitutional change excite members of the public or even the party ?
There is a danger that these ideas aimed at reducing the alienation felt by voters are alienating in themselves .
Nonetheless , Starmer is right that if he wants to argue against a second Scottish independence referendum , he needs an alternative solution – and this is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weakness on constitutional matters .

Although the official Labour Party leadership hustings set to be held on Saturday was cancelled, the deputy one went ahead – as did the full Open Labour version on Sunday in Nottingham. Keir Starmer couldn’t make it, but the soft left group organised hustings for both sets of candidates. With a different format, offering 90 seconds for responses rather than 40, the debate was hugely improved as candidates offered detailed answers. Let’s hope the party will follow suit. The high quality of candidates in both races was evident on Sunday – with tons of personality and wit, as well as thoughtful interventions on policy. Check out my summary of key takeaways from the day, and a comprehensive Twitter thread.
Starmer has now resumed campaigning, and he’s back with a policy announcement. The leadership candidate is calling for a new federal structure in the United Kingdom, which he says would deliver a “radical devolution of power”. This shift away from the “status quo” would involve a written constitution developed through “consultation and discussion with communities across the UK”. There is not much flesh on the bones of this one yet, but Starmer will be touring the country this week – Scotland tomorrow, the North of England on Wednesday, then Wales – presumably to do just that.
This plan for federalism sounds remarkably like the speeches that have been delivered by Gordon Brown recently. Pledging to “fight, fight and fight again” for the union in June, the former Prime Minister warned that “narrow nationalism” was putting the UK at risk. Last week, he talked about the need for a “constitutional revolution”. These points are serious and carry weight. The risk, however, is that Starmer sounds non-committal when he talks about such abstract proposals. Brexit and Scottish independence seem tangible, and a more complex scheme based on federalism must surely be discussed in concrete terms before it can gain traction.
This risk of sounding vague is shared by fellow leadership candidates Rebecca Long-Bailey and Lisa Nandy. Three of them are now talking about devolving power to towns and building new constitutional settlements, with lots of overlap between their policy offers. Did Jess Phillips have a point when she said nobody in real life talks about “this senate or that senate”? Can any of this stuff about constitutional change excite members of the public or even the party? There is a danger that these ideas aimed at reducing the alienation felt by voters are alienating in themselves. Nonetheless, Starmer is right that if he wants to argue against a second Scottish independence referendum, he needs an alternative solution – and this is a good time for Labour to tackle its weakness on constitutional matters.


labourlist--2020-01-27--The co-operative movement must be at the heart of rebuilding trust

There is still is a lot to be said about 2019 politically .
The most turbulent parliament in our recent history , culminating in the most devastating general election defeat for Labour since 1935 .
As many jump to the conclusion of what ‘ one thing ’ might fit a political agenda , we need to ensure that we look deeper into what has happened , and continues to happen , in our communities .
The most important message that came out of the election is that people have lost faith with the Labour Party and no longer trust it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Labour in our post-industrial heartlands has seen a gradual decline over the last 20 years .
A situation that has accelerated dramatically with more recent political events and resulted in large losses in the general election .
The current leadership debate has rightly shone a light on towns like Leigh in Greater Manchester .
It is apparent that de-industrialisation has left a gaping wound where a lack of investment – particularly on small-scale local infrastructure projects – has failed to ignite the inclusive growth desperately needed .
Coupled with cuts to public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more bleak .
It has left our communities reeling .
We have heard a lot from our Labour leadership candidates on how we can devolve power down to our communities but what we haven ’ t yet heard is exactly how are we going to do this , what structures need to be in place and how we rebuild that lost trust .
As a Co-operative Party member , the work that is already ongoing in our towns and cities never ceases to amaze me .
Co-operatives , as well as social enterprises @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in to take on the crucial work that local authorities can no longer afford to do .
Credit unions , community supermarket ventures and transport initiatives have been set up and have become an important lifeline to many .
The Greater Manchester Co-operative Commission was set up in 2018 to ensure that the city region stays at the forefront of the co-operative development and to draw on the already growing co-operative sector – from local businesses to large international organisations – with the aim of improving communities through placed-based approaches to community ownership @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days where communities can be dictated to by Westminster .
The one-size-fits-all policy approach has not worked for a long time .
With the launch of this report , we have an opportunity to ensure that the co-operative movement is at the heart of the rebuilding in Greater Manchester .
A bottom-up approach , allowing business and enterprise to thrive whilst ensuring the resources are placed where the need is greatest .
As we enter into a relative state of calm in Westminster , and with a Tory government firmly in place , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adopt models of co-operative practice to ensure we retain the stake that we need to hold onto in our communities .

There is still is a lot to be said about 2019 politically. The most turbulent parliament in our recent history, culminating in the most devastating general election defeat for Labour since 1935. As many jump to the conclusion of what ‘one thing’ might fit a political agenda, we need to ensure that we look deeper into what has happened, and continues to happen, in our communities.
The most important message that came out of the election is that people have lost faith with the Labour Party and no longer trust it to deliver socially or economically. Support for Labour in our post-industrial heartlands has seen a gradual decline over the last 20 years. A situation that has accelerated dramatically with more recent political events and resulted in large losses in the general election.
The current leadership debate has rightly shone a light on towns like Leigh in Greater Manchester. It is apparent that de-industrialisation has left a gaping wound where a lack of investment – particularly on small-scale local infrastructure projects – has failed to ignite the inclusive growth desperately needed. Coupled with cuts to public services, the situation could not be more bleak. It has left our communities reeling.
We have heard a lot from our Labour leadership candidates on how we can devolve power down to our communities but what we haven’t yet heard is exactly how are we going to do this, what structures need to be in place and how we rebuild that lost trust.
As a Co-operative Party member, the work that is already ongoing in our towns and cities never ceases to amaze me. Co-operatives, as well as social enterprises and community interest companies, are stepping in to take on the crucial work that local authorities can no longer afford to do. Credit unions, community supermarket ventures and transport initiatives have been set up and have become an important lifeline to many.
The Greater Manchester Co-operative Commission was set up in 2018 to ensure that the city region stays at the forefront of the co-operative development and to draw on the already growing co-operative sector – from local businesses to large international organisations – with the aim of improving communities through placed-based approaches to community ownership and economic development.
Gone are the days where communities can be dictated to by Westminster. The one-size-fits-all policy approach has not worked for a long time. With the launch of this report, we have an opportunity to ensure that the co-operative movement is at the heart of the rebuilding in Greater Manchester. A bottom-up approach, allowing business and enterprise to thrive whilst ensuring the resources are placed where the need is greatest.
As we enter into a relative state of calm in Westminster, and with a Tory government firmly in place, Labour will need to move quickly to adopt models of co-operative practice to ensure we retain the stake that we need to hold onto in our communities.


labourlist--2020-01-27--Baillie vs Kerr: Rolling list of Scottish Labour’s deputy leader nominations

Two candidates – Jackie Baillie and Matt Kerr – are competing for the backing of Constituency Labour Parties ( CLPs ) to enter the next stage of Scottish Labour ’ s deputy leadership race .
Baillie came through the first stage with 60 nominations from MPs , MSPs and councillors , while Kerr secured 33 .
A third candidate gained the required nominations – Pauline McNeill , who won the backing of 17 colleagues .
But she decided to drop out of the contest .
To secure their place on the final ballot , the two remaining candidates must either @ @ @ @ @ @ @ via affiliates .
Just like the UK Labour candidates for deputy and leader , the Scottish hopefuls will need to secure nominations from 5 % of CLPs – a total of four – or three affiliated organisations , including two trade unions , comprising 5 % of the affiliated membership .
The nomination period opened on January 20th and closes on February 14th .
Baillie has twice served as the acting leader of the Scottish Labour Party , but was removed from the cabinet by Richard Leonard in 2018 .
Kerr has strong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ councillor and former postie is the son of Andy Kerr , deputy general secretary of the communications union CWU .
Below is the list of nominations for the Scottish Labour deputy position .
( UK leader and deputy nominations from the CLP are included in brackets . )

Two candidates – Jackie Baillie and Matt Kerr – are competing for the backing of Constituency Labour Parties (CLPs) to enter the next stage of Scottish Labour’s deputy leadership race. Baillie came through the first stage with 60 nominations from MPs, MSPs and councillors, while Kerr secured 33. A third candidate gained the required nominations – Pauline McNeill, who won the backing of 17 colleagues. But she decided to drop out of the contest.
To secure their place on the final ballot, the two remaining candidates must either pass through the local party route or via affiliates. Just like the UK Labour candidates for deputy and leader, the Scottish hopefuls will need to secure nominations from 5% of CLPs – a total of four – or three affiliated organisations, including two trade unions, comprising 5% of the affiliated membership. The nomination period opened on January 20th and closes on February 14th.
Baillie has twice served as the acting leader of the Scottish Labour Party, but was removed from the cabinet by Richard Leonard in 2018. Kerr has strong trade union links – the left-wing Glasgow councillor and former postie is the son of Andy Kerr, deputy general secretary of the communications union CWU.
Last updated: 9.30pm, Friday, February 14th.
Below is the list of nominations for the Scottish Labour deputy position. (UK leader and deputy nominations from the CLP are included in brackets.)
Jackie Baillie – 40 nominations
Aberdeen Central (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Aberdeen Donside (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Aberdeen South and North Kincardine (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Aberdeenshire West (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Airdrie and Shotts (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Angus South (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Argyll and Bute (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Cumbernauld and Kilsyth (Lisa Nandy; Ian Murray)
Cunninghame North (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Dumbarton (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Dumfriesshire (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Dunfermline (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
East Kilbride (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
East Lothian (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Eastwood (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Edinburgh Eastern (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Edinburgh Pentlands (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Edinburgh Southern (Lisa Nandy; Ian Murray)
Galloway and West Dumfries (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Glasgow Anniesland (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Glasgow Cathcart (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Glasgow Pollock (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Glasgow Provan (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Glasgow Shettleston (Keir Starmer)
Glasgow Southside (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Greenock and Inverclyde (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Inverness and Nairn (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Linlithgow (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Moray (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Motherwell and Wishaw (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Paisley (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Renfrewshire North and West (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Renfrewshire South (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Rutherglen (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Stirling (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Strathkelvin and Bearsden (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Matt Kerr – 28 nominations
Almond Valley (Rebecca Long-Bailey; Richard Burgon)
Angus North and Mearns (Rebecca Long-Bailey; Angela Rayner)
Ayr (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Banffshire and Buchan Coast (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Caithness, Sunderland and Ross (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Clackmannanshire and Dunblane (Keir Starmer; Ian Murray)
Clydebank and Milngavie (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Coatbridge and Chryston (Keir Starmer; Richard Burgon)
Cowdenbeath (Emily Thornberry; Angela Rayner)
Cunninghame South (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Dundee City East (Rebecca Long-Bailey; Richard Burgon)
Dundee City West (Rebecca Long-Bailey; Richard Burgon)
Edinburgh Central (Rebecca Long-Bailey; Dawn Butler)
Edinburgh North and Leith (Keir Starmer; Dawn Butler)
Edinburgh Western (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Emily Thornberry; Angela Rayner)
Falkirk East (Emily Thornberry; Angela Rayner)
Falkirk West (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Glasgow Kelvin (Rebecca Long-Bailey; Dawn Butler)
Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Kirkcaldy (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Midlothian North and Musselburgh (Emily Thornberry Angela Rayner)
North East Fife (Keir Starmer; Angela Rayner)
Orkney (Rebecca Long-Bailey; Richard Burgon)
Perthshire North (Lisa Nandy; Ian Murray)
Perthshire South and Kinross-shire (Lisa Nandy; Ian Murray)
Uddingston and Bellshill (Rebecca Long-Bailey; Richard Burgon)


labourlist--2020-01-27--Affiliated union Community nominates Starmer and Rayner for leader posts

The national executive committee of Labour-affiliated trade union Community has opted to nominate Keir Starmer in the leadership election and Angela Rayner for the deputy leadership post .
Both candidates have already secured their place on the ballot paper , having been the first to do so in their respective races , after receiving the backing of major affiliates UNISON and Usdaw .
Starmer also won the endorsement of affiliated environment group SERA , while Rayner was supported by the party-affiliated National Union of Mineworkers ( NUM ) .
Each leadership candidate – including contenders for the deputy post – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local parties or three affiliated organisations , including two unions , amounting to 5 % of Labour ’ s affiliated membership .
Starmer and Rayner have now exceeded the requirements to pass through both the affiliate and local party routes to enter the final stage of the leadership contests .
Announcing the move , Community general secretary Roy Rickhuss said : “ Community believes Keir Starmer is the candidate most ready to meet this challenge .
His experience and vision are what the Labour Party needs to rebuild , win back the trust @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Labour government .
“ Community has also nominated Angela Rayner for deputy leader .
We believe she will help unite our fractured party , reinvigorate the Labour movement , and lead us into government .
“ While we were extremely impressed by most of the deputy leadership candidates , we also strongly encourage our members in CLPs to ensure Ian Murray makes the final ballot so that Labour members have the option of voting for him .
“ Labour wins when it embraces ideas from across our broad church and Ian being on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every nation and region of the UK matters to the Labour Party.
” Deputy leadership candidate Ian Murray commented : “ I welcome Community ’ s message to members across the UK to help me make the final ballot , and thank the union for recognising that a Scottish voice at the top of the UK party is critical.
” Community is known as a Corbynsceptic trade union , having endorsed Yvette Cooper in Labour ’ s 2015 leadership election and Owen Smith in 2016 .
Lisa Nandy has also won her place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s main leadership election .
Rebecca Long-Bailey needs only one more affiliate , while Emily Thornberry will likely need to be nominated by at least 33 local parties .

The national executive committee of Labour-affiliated trade union Community has opted to nominate Keir Starmer in the leadership election and Angela Rayner for the deputy leadership post.
Both candidates have already secured their place on the ballot paper, having been the first to do so in their respective races, after receiving the backing of major affiliates UNISON and Usdaw.
Starmer also won the endorsement of affiliated environment group SERA, while Rayner was supported by the party-affiliated National Union of Mineworkers (NUM).
Each leadership candidate – including contenders for the deputy post – must gain the nominations of either 33 local parties or three affiliated organisations, including two unions, amounting to 5% of Labour’s affiliated membership.
Starmer and Rayner have now exceeded the requirements to pass through both the affiliate and local party routes to enter the final stage of the leadership contests.
Announcing the move, Community general secretary Roy Rickhuss said: “Community believes Keir Starmer is the candidate most ready to meet this challenge. His experience and vision are what the Labour Party needs to rebuild, win back the trust of voters, and lead a transformative Labour government.
“Community has also nominated Angela Rayner for deputy leader. We believe she will help unite our fractured party, reinvigorate the Labour movement, and lead us into government.
“While we were extremely impressed by most of the deputy leadership candidates, we also strongly encourage our members in CLPs to ensure Ian Murray makes the final ballot so that Labour members have the option of voting for him.
“Labour wins when it embraces ideas from across our broad church and Ian being on the ballot sends a clear message that every nation and region of the UK matters to the Labour Party.”
Deputy leadership candidate Ian Murray commented: “I welcome Community’s message to members across the UK to help me make the final ballot, and thank the union for recognising that a Scottish voice at the top of the UK party is critical.”
Community is known as a Corbynsceptic trade union, having endorsed Yvette Cooper in Labour’s 2015 leadership election and Owen Smith in 2016.
Lisa Nandy has also won her place on the ballot paper in Labour’s main leadership election. Rebecca Long-Bailey needs only one more affiliate, while Emily Thornberry will likely need to be nominated by at least 33 local parties.


labourlist--2020-01-27--Leadership candidates must be held to the highest standards of climate justice

Labour ’ s leadership contest ultimately comes down to two questions : how are we going to win the next general election , and how will we address the political , economic and ecological crises our society faces ?
Fortunately , we already have a platform fit to meet that challenge , and one that unites us all .
At Labour conference in September , trade unions and Labour members of all stripes voted overwhelmingly in favour of a motion to deliver a truly radical Green New Deal .
Every candidate in the leadership contest has at least paid lip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with good reason .
British politics has finally started to wake up to the climate emergency .
As temperature records were shattered , landscapes burned and Extinction Rebellion joined the UK ’ s youth in the streets , more voters than ever said last summer that the environment was among their top concerns .
This has translated into strong public support for a Green New Deal .
Polling during the general election campaign found that 63 % of voters back these policies , with even huge numbers of Conservatives getting behind the rapid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all backgrounds want a programme of public investment to address the climate emergency by delivering better public transport , cleaner air , green jobs , warmer homes and democratically owned energy .
As polling has shown , a Green Industrial Revolution is strongly placed to win back support in the former ‘ heartland ’ seats lost in 2019 – providing the basis of a winning electoral coalition .
The climate crisis is the defining issue of our time , and Labour is uniquely placed to deliver the fair and democratic transition to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yet , during the 2019 campaign , the Green New Deal was just another policy on the list .
Siloed as a series of technical protocols in just one shadow cabinet brief , the Green New Deal ’ s potential to deliver a compelling social justice narrative and a vision of a better society was never realised .
Policies like Warm Homes for All or a million green jobs were either unknown or distant and fanciful to most voters – with no cohering narrative and no basis in real-life struggle , our programme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is crucial , not just to tackle the climate and ecological emergencies , but to reinvigorate our politics .
Built on the principles of public ownership and community decision-making over the transition to a green economy , it has the potential to win back our heartlands and transform our society .
If Labour ’ s 2019 manifesto suffered for prioritising economic transformation over political transformation , then the Green New Deal has the potential to achieve both .
Establishing ourselves as the credible party of climate justice will take grassroots organising and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that work by holding our leadership candidates to the highest standards of climate justice .
That is why Labour for a Green New Deal ( LGND ) has issued a challenge to every contender .
We have asked them for detailed answers to five key questions on how they will work with trade unions and communities to transform our economy so that it works for people and planet , not profit .
We have challenged them to take part in a climate hustings , where members can test the rigour of their rhetoric @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ scorecards ’ that will mark each leadership hopeful across ten key areas of a Green New Deal , including democratic ownership , migrant justice and universal services .
They will be assessed on the basis of their manifestos , contributions to hustings , answers to LGND ’ s five key questions and their track records , resulting in an overall score out of 100 .
With the climate on the verge of cataclysmic tipping points and an international cabal of right-wing ‘ strongmen ’ committed to doubling down on fossil fuels , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ambitions .
Preventing climate catastrophe has to mean public ownership across energy , water , transport and more to undertake the rapid decarbonisation which the market refuses to countenance , alongside a total end to all fossil fuel extraction .
What ’ s more , it means not resting on our laurels but organising now in workplaces , communities , local government and beyond to build the foundations of our new society .
We stand ready to build a powerful movement for a radical Green New Deal from below , able to bring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ existential threat of climate breakdown and build a new society of justice and equality .
Now we need a leader fit to meet that challenge .

Labour’s leadership contest ultimately comes down to two questions: how are we going to win the next general election, and how will we address the political, economic and ecological crises our society faces? Fortunately, we already have a platform fit to meet that challenge, and one that unites us all.
At Labour conference in September, trade unions and Labour members of all stripes voted overwhelmingly in favour of a motion to deliver a truly radical Green New Deal. Every candidate in the leadership contest has at least paid lip service to this unifying agenda – and with good reason.
British politics has finally started to wake up to the climate emergency. As temperature records were shattered, landscapes burned and Extinction Rebellion joined the UK’s youth in the streets, more voters than ever said last summer that the environment was among their top concerns.
This has translated into strong public support for a Green New Deal. Polling during the general election campaign found that 63% of voters back these policies, with even huge numbers of Conservatives getting behind the rapid decarbonisation of our economy.
Voters of all backgrounds want a programme of public investment to address the climate emergency by delivering better public transport, cleaner air, green jobs, warmer homes and democratically owned energy. As polling has shown, a Green Industrial Revolution is strongly placed to win back support in the former ‘heartland’ seats lost in 2019 – providing the basis of a winning electoral coalition.
The climate crisis is the defining issue of our time, and Labour is uniquely placed to deliver the fair and democratic transition to a sustainable economy that we urgently need. Yet, during the 2019 campaign, the Green New Deal was just another policy on the list.
Siloed as a series of technical protocols in just one shadow cabinet brief, the Green New Deal’s potential to deliver a compelling social justice narrative and a vision of a better society was never realised. Policies like Warm Homes for All or a million green jobs were either unknown or distant and fanciful to most voters – with no cohering narrative and no basis in real-life struggle, our programme lost relevance.
A Green New Deal is crucial, not just to tackle the climate and ecological emergencies, but to reinvigorate our politics. Built on the principles of public ownership and community decision-making over the transition to a green economy, it has the potential to win back our heartlands and transform our society. If Labour’s 2019 manifesto suffered for prioritising economic transformation over political transformation, then the Green New Deal has the potential to achieve both.
Establishing ourselves as the credible party of climate justice will take grassroots organising and a coherent narrative. But we must start that work by holding our leadership candidates to the highest standards of climate justice. That is why Labour for a Green New Deal (LGND) has issued a challenge to every contender.
We have asked them for detailed answers to five key questions on how they will work with trade unions and communities to transform our economy so that it works for people and planet, not profit. We have challenged them to take part in a climate hustings, where members can test the rigour of their rhetoric.
We have announced a series of ‘scorecards’ that will mark each leadership hopeful across ten key areas of a Green New Deal, including democratic ownership, migrant justice and universal services. They will be assessed on the basis of their manifestos, contributions to hustings, answers to LGND’s five key questions and their track records, resulting in an overall score out of 100.
With the climate on the verge of cataclysmic tipping points and an international cabal of right-wing ‘strongmen’ committed to doubling down on fossil fuels, we cannot afford to weaken our ambitions. Preventing climate catastrophe has to mean public ownership across energy, water, transport and more to undertake the rapid decarbonisation which the market refuses to countenance, alongside a total end to all fossil fuel extraction.
What’s more, it means not resting on our laurels but organising now in workplaces, communities, local government and beyond to build the foundations of our new society. We stand ready to build a powerful movement for a radical Green New Deal from below, able to bring Labour back to power, tackle the existential threat of climate breakdown and build a new society of justice and equality. Now we need a leader fit to meet that challenge.


labourlist--2020-01-27--Long-Bailey says 2016 coup plotter deleted shadow cabinet files

Left-wing candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey has said that shadow cabinet files were deleted by a frontbench Labour colleague who resigned during the 2016 leadership challenge .
The contender to replace Jeremy Corbyn in the ongoing internal election was speaking at a retirement party for Ronnie Campbell , the former Labour MP for Blyth Valley who retired last month .
Long-Bailey appeared to suggest that a member of the shadow Treasury team in 2016 deleted shared files when MPs stepped down en-masse shortly before a leadership challenge took place .
She told the audience how she watched Rob Marris , then MP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his shadow ministerial role during a committee meeting in parliament .
Long-Bailey said he “ flounced off ” .
Describing the unfolding events , the Corbynite frontrunner added that she had a “ feeling that something wasn ’ t right ” and rushed back to her office where a staff member told her that shared files had gone .
The Salford and Eccles MP said : “ I went in and I spoke to John [ McDonnell ] and I started ranting and I think my exact words were , ‘ if they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of us then they ’ re going to have to carry me out kicking and screaming ’ .
And I sat in that office until about 3am going through all the clauses .
“ Richard Burgon was dragged in at one point .
Angela Rayner was dragged in and she got us a Domino ’ s pizza because we were starving .
And we got through the clauses and we went to the finance bill committee the next day fully prepared , and I was pretty good if I ’ m honest.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t ever want to see anything like that again .
We can never have anything like that happening again.
” Marris has told HuffPost UK that his assistant deleted the files because they were not the property of the party .
Commenting on the statement made by Long-Bailey , the ex-MP said : “ She is trying to imply I stole Labour Party information.
” He added : “ My assistant removed from the computer documents which my office created using my parliamentary expenses .
That information was not paid for by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for by parliament and it belonged to me.
” Fellow leadership candidates Keir Starmer and Lisa Nandy were serving on Labour ’ s frontbench at the time , and joined the ‘ coup ’ – stepping down from their respective roles during the spate of resignations .
Successive announcements of shadow frontbench and junior Labour MPs culminated in the 2016 leadership election , in which Owen Smith lost to Corbyn .
Long-Bailey also told audience members at the event that she had been expecting a hung parliament as the “ worst case scenario @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a recording leaked to HuffPost UK .
“ We had a few wobbly people on the doorstep because of Brexit , but I thought everything was going to be alright , ” the Shadow Business Secretary said .
Long-Bailey has explained that her leadership campaign initially got off to a slow start because she had been working on the getting Labour into government rather than preparing a “ ready-made ” bid for the top job .

Left-wing candidate Rebecca Long-Bailey has said that shadow cabinet files were deleted by a frontbench Labour colleague who resigned during the 2016 leadership challenge.
The contender to replace Jeremy Corbyn in the ongoing internal election was speaking at a retirement party for Ronnie Campbell, the former Labour MP for Blyth Valley who retired last month.
Long-Bailey appeared to suggest that a member of the shadow Treasury team in 2016 deleted shared files when MPs stepped down en-masse shortly before a leadership challenge took place.
She told the audience how she watched Rob Marris, then MP for Wolverhampton South West, resign from his shadow ministerial role during a committee meeting in parliament. Long-Bailey said he “flounced off”.
Describing the unfolding events, the Corbynite frontrunner added that she had a “feeling that something wasn’t right” and rushed back to her office where a staff member told her that shared files had gone.
The Salford and Eccles MP said: “I went in and I spoke to John [McDonnell] and I started ranting and I think my exact words were, ‘if they think they are going to get rid of us then they’re going to have to carry me out kicking and screaming’. And I sat in that office until about 3am going through all the clauses.
“Richard Burgon was dragged in at one point. Angela Rayner was dragged in and she got us a Domino’s pizza because we were starving. And we got through the clauses and we went to the finance bill committee the next day fully prepared, and I was pretty good if I’m honest.”
She added: “I don’t ever want to see anything like that again. We can never have anything like that happening again.”
@RLong_Bailey on top form at Ronnie Campbell’s retirement do in Blyth with a powerful insight into her part in the Shadow Treasury operation during the mass resignation of Labour MP’s clearly shows how strong & able she is to lead in high-pressure situations like this#RLB4Leader pic.twitter.com/OFzNPBOkv4 — John R Taylor (@JOHNROYTAYLOR) January 27, 2020
Marris has told HuffPost UK that his assistant deleted the files because they were not the property of the party. Commenting on the statement made by Long-Bailey, the ex-MP said: “She is trying to imply I stole Labour Party information.”
He added: “My assistant removed from the computer documents which my office created using my parliamentary expenses. That information was not paid for by the shadow Treasury team, it was paid for by parliament and it belonged to me.”
Fellow leadership candidates Keir Starmer and Lisa Nandy were serving on Labour’s frontbench at the time, and joined the ‘coup’ – stepping down from their respective roles during the spate of resignations.
Successive announcements of shadow frontbench and junior Labour MPs culminated in the 2016 leadership election, in which Owen Smith lost to Corbyn.
Long-Bailey also told audience members at the event that she had been expecting a hung parliament as the “worst case scenario” at the 2019 election, according to a recording leaked to HuffPost UK.
“We had a few wobbly people on the doorstep because of Brexit, but I thought everything was going to be alright,” the Shadow Business Secretary said.
Long-Bailey has explained that her leadership campaign initially got off to a slow start because she had been working on the getting Labour into government rather than preparing a “ready-made” bid for the top job.
Update, January 30th: Rob Marris has written a comment piece to point out that Long-Bailey’s story is inaccurate as the committee was not the next day but almost five days later. Her team has issued a response that says Long-Bailey “actually worked through the night for 5 consecutive nights and over the weekend… as months and months of work had been deleted by Rob Marris & his team”.


labourlist--2020-01-27--Why Labour was right to offer a fresh EU referendum in the 2019 election

There have been many attempts to explain why Labour did so badly in the general election in December .
Some are genuine , actually looking at the data , but others seem to be mere affirmations of previous – often strongly held – views .
This is more photoshop than reflection ; seeing what you want to see to fit your view , rather than looking in a mirror and accepting that there are wrinkles , spots and grey hairs , even if you ’ d rather there were not .
Some claim that Labour should have supported the Tory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have even offered to allow the public a say on the actual outcome .
They are wrong .
Faced not just with Brexit , but a particularly damaging Theresa May/Boris Johnson deal , we were right to insist that something so different from what was promised should go back to the people to be endorsed or rejected , even if we had formed a government and been able to attenuate it .
Where we fell short was on the complexity of how we would get to the referendum , and the perceived ambiguity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The background was that public opinion in general , and Labour supporters in particular , had not – as many had expected – rallied behind the result of the 2016 referendum .
On the contrary , and to the surprise of some , overall opinion actually edged the other way .
Every opinion poll bar one in 2019 showed a majority would vote to Remain in a new referendum .
In the general election , some 53 % voted for parties demanding a new referendum , so it was far from being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , got 43 % for the Conservatives – only one percentage point more than Theresa May did in 2017 .
It is telling that this shift of opinion against Brexit took place despite Labour not doing very much to drive it .
For a long time , Labour said it would ‘ respect ’ the result of the 2016 referendum .
Even when the industrial scale of the lies told by Johnson ’ s Leave campaign , and its law breaking , became apparent .
Belatedly , after huge losses to the Greens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elections , Labour policy shifted to backing a second referendum but without explicitly committing to campaigning for Remain .
If , instead , we had continuously and vociferously made the case that Brexit would turn out to be a disaster , wrecking our economy , destroying jobs , threatening our rights and our security , then opinion would have shifted further still against Brexit .
And Labour would have been leading that charge , not shedding crucial votes to the other opposition parties .
Some in the party argued that we had to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to lose Leave voters .
That ambiguity doesn ’ t seem to have helped .
And let us remember , the one-third of Labour voters supporting Brexit at the time of the referendum back in 2016 shrunk as Brexit became increasingly seen as a Tory mess .
Even in Leave seats , most Labour voters were Remainers in all but a few cases .
Of those Labour voters who still prefer Brexit , not all rated this issue as more important than other issues , and would not desert Labour for this reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about perhaps less than a tenth of our 2017 Labour voters , albeit unevenly distributed , who were willing to go so far as to not vote for us because they support Brexit .
In a forlorn attempt to placate this shrinking minority of Labour Leavers , we lost far more Remainers .
That ’ s why the Lib Dem , SNP and Green votes went up by over five percentage points – far more than the Tory rise of one percentage point , and mostly at Labour ’ s expense .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opposition parties attacked Labour for being too weak in opposing Brexit .
We ’ d have done better to keep those votes and work harder at persuading the Leavers .
Had we made the case for Remain – week in , week out – before and during the election campaign , instead of hiding from it , the number of Labour Leavers would have shrunk still further and we would also have retained more Remainers .
Instead , party policy – based on a statement adopted without debate , through a procedure that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respond to and endorsed the next day by conference – forced Labour activists into convoluted explanations on the doorstep ; describing how we would take a position after the election once we had hopefully negotiated a new deal , which we may or may not campaign to support in a new referendum .
It doesn ’ t require a communications expert to know that this was a far less effective message than Johnson ’ s blunt – if disingenuous – ‘ get Brexit done ’ , or the LibDem/Green/SNP/Plaid ‘ stop Brexit ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ facile stereotypes that are bandied about , such as the claim that working-class voters are overwhelmingly pro-Brexit or that it is a north-south divide .
In the 2016 referendum , most working-class people in work voted Remain .
Conversely , most working-class voters not in work , mainly retirees , voted Leave – a much more subtle division than portrayed in the majority of London-centric media debates .
And , as for the north of England , it had much the same division between cities and small towns as the south – Liverpool @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Newcastle all voted Remain .
Several ‘ red wall ’ seats were lost to the Tories by margins smaller than the number of votes we lost to the LibDems and Greens .
And the most northern part of the UK , Scotland – where a Labour comeback is desperately needed – was overwhelmingly Remain .
Simple generalisations don ’ t work in analysing this .
Labour was right to offer a second referendum – not simply as an electoral tactic , but because it was the right thing to do .
Brexit is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what was promised in 2016 by Johnson ’ s Leave campaign , and will be damaging for Britain .
Its effects would certainly make the implementation of any progressive programme , such as Labour ’ s domestic manifesto , more difficult .
It was in the national interest – and the interest of working people in particular – to oppose Johnson ’ s Brexit .
To have backed away from offering a public vote would have been plain wrong and made us look unprincipled .
The election was lost for many reasons , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just one of them , and not the most important one .
But in any case , the result is that with just 43 % of the vote , 29 % of the electorate , Johnson now has 100 % of the power , having also eliminated his internal Tory critics .
Yet his claims of a ‘ mandate ’ for his Brexit deal on the back of that is tenuous indeed .
Especially as he is taking it further and claiming a mandate for a very hard Brexit .
There are now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic alignment with Donald Trump ’ s USA , an eventual breakup of the UK if Scotland goes for independence , and of conflict reappearing in Northern Ireland .
The British people are looking at a trajectory of decline in public services , a weakening of workplace rights , and a damaged political system that rewards a populist leader telling blatant lies .
Millions of voters will be at the front line as jobs are lost and services suffer under this Tory Brexit .
They needed a Labour Party , and government , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case for remaining a member of the EU .
We let them down .

There have been many attempts to explain why Labour did so badly in the general election in December. Some are genuine, actually looking at the data, but others seem to be mere affirmations of previous – often strongly held – views. This is more photoshop than reflection; seeing what you want to see to fit your view, rather than looking in a mirror and accepting that there are wrinkles, spots and grey hairs, even if you’d rather there were not.
Some claim that Labour should have supported the Tory Brexit presented by Boris Johnson and not have even offered to allow the public a say on the actual outcome. They are wrong. Faced not just with Brexit, but a particularly damaging Theresa May/Boris Johnson deal, we were right to insist that something so different from what was promised should go back to the people to be endorsed or rejected, even if we had formed a government and been able to attenuate it. Where we fell short was on the complexity of how we would get to the referendum, and the perceived ambiguity about how we would campaign in it.
The background was that public opinion in general, and Labour supporters in particular, had not – as many had expected – rallied behind the result of the 2016 referendum. On the contrary, and to the surprise of some, overall opinion actually edged the other way. Every opinion poll bar one in 2019 showed a majority would vote to Remain in a new referendum. In the general election, some 53% voted for parties demanding a new referendum, so it was far from being an unpopular position. Johnson, meanwhile, got 43% for the Conservatives – only one percentage point more than Theresa May did in 2017.
It is telling that this shift of opinion against Brexit took place despite Labour not doing very much to drive it. For a long time, Labour said it would ‘respect’ the result of the 2016 referendum. Even when the industrial scale of the lies told by Johnson’s Leave campaign, and its law breaking, became apparent. Belatedly, after huge losses to the Greens and the Lib Dems in the European elections, Labour policy shifted to backing a second referendum but without explicitly committing to campaigning for Remain.
If, instead, we had continuously and vociferously made the case that Brexit would turn out to be a disaster, wrecking our economy, destroying jobs, threatening our rights and our security, then opinion would have shifted further still against Brexit. And Labour would have been leading that charge, not shedding crucial votes to the other opposition parties.
Some in the party argued that we had to take an ambiguous position in order not to lose Leave voters. That ambiguity doesn’t seem to have helped. And let us remember, the one-third of Labour voters supporting Brexit at the time of the referendum back in 2016 shrunk as Brexit became increasingly seen as a Tory mess. Even in Leave seats, most Labour voters were Remainers in all but a few cases. Of those Labour voters who still prefer Brexit, not all rated this issue as more important than other issues, and would not desert Labour for this reason alone. So we are talking here about perhaps less than a tenth of our 2017 Labour voters, albeit unevenly distributed, who were willing to go so far as to not vote for us because they support Brexit.
In a forlorn attempt to placate this shrinking minority of Labour Leavers, we lost far more Remainers. That’s why the Lib Dem, SNP and Green votes went up by over five percentage points – far more than the Tory rise of one percentage point, and mostly at Labour’s expense. They should have gone down. The other opposition parties attacked Labour for being too weak in opposing Brexit. We’d have done better to keep those votes and work harder at persuading the Leavers. Had we made the case for Remain – week in, week out – before and during the election campaign, instead of hiding from it, the number of Labour Leavers would have shrunk still further and we would also have retained more Remainers.
Instead, party policy – based on a convoluted national executive committee statement adopted without debate, by a written a procedure that most NEC members didn’t respond to and endorsed the next day by conference – forced Labour activists into convoluted explanations on the doorstep; describing how we would take a position after the election once we had hopefully negotiated a new deal, which we may or may not campaign to support in a new referendum. It doesn’t require a communications expert to know that this was a far less effective message than Johnson’s blunt – if disingenuous – ‘get Brexit done’, or the LibDem/Green/SNP/Plaid ‘stop Brexit’.
Nor should we fall for the facile stereotypes that are bandied about, such as the claim that working-class voters are overwhelmingly pro-Brexit or that it is a north-south divide. In the 2016 referendum, most working-class people in work voted Remain. Conversely, most working-class voters not in work, mainly retirees, voted Leave – a much more subtle division than portrayed in the majority of London-centric media debates. And, as for the north of England, it had much the same division between cities and small towns as the south – Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, York, Newcastle all voted Remain. Several ‘red wall’ seats were lost to the Tories by margins smaller than the number of votes we lost to the LibDems and Greens. And the most northern part of the UK, Scotland – where a Labour comeback is desperately needed – was overwhelmingly Remain. Simple generalisations don’t work in analysing this.
Labour was right to offer a second referendum – not simply as an electoral tactic, but because it was the right thing to do. Brexit is turning out to be so different from what was promised in 2016 by Johnson’s Leave campaign, and will be damaging for Britain. Its effects would certainly make the implementation of any progressive programme, such as Labour’s domestic manifesto, more difficult. It was in the national interest – and the interest of working people in particular – to oppose Johnson’s Brexit. To have backed away from offering a public vote would have been plain wrong and made us look unprincipled.
The election was lost for many reasons, with ambiguity in our Brexit position being just one of them, and not the most important one. But in any case, the result is that with just 43% of the vote, 29% of the electorate, Johnson now has 100% of the power, having also eliminated his internal Tory critics. Yet his claims of a ‘mandate’ for his Brexit deal on the back of that is tenuous indeed. Especially as he is taking it further and claiming a mandate for a very hard Brexit.
There are now very real risks of a geo-political and economic alignment with Donald Trump’s USA, an eventual breakup of the UK if Scotland goes for independence, and of conflict reappearing in Northern Ireland. The British people are looking at a trajectory of decline in public services, a weakening of workplace rights, and a damaged political system that rewards a populist leader telling blatant lies. Millions of voters will be at the front line as jobs are lost and services suffer under this Tory Brexit. They needed a Labour Party, and government, that was prepared to vigorously make the case for remaining a member of the EU. We let them down.