labourlist--2020-02-09--Row explodes over data breach claims in Labour leadership election

Labour ’ s leadership election has become engulfed in a row over accusations relating to an alleged data breach by the campaign team of frontrunner Keir Starmer .
The Labour Party has reported members of Starmer ’ s campaign team to the Information Commissioner for allegedly hacking into the membership database , the BBC exclusively revealed on Sunday morning .
Starmer has strongly denied claims that members of his team engaged in “ data-scraping ” by unlawfully obtaining information from Labour ’ s Dialogue database – used for phonebanking – to improve their own targeting of potential supporters .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said : “ We categorically reject these nonsensical allegations and are incredibly disappointed that they have been leaked to the media .
“ We are still awaiting the party ’ s formal response to the serious concerns we and others had about access to Labour Party membership data.
” Earlier in the month , HuffPost UK reported that Rebecca Long-Bailey ’ s campaign had emailed supporters inviting them to phone bank for her – but they had included links to Dialogue , with full access to members ’ data .
Leadership candidates are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the party ’ s membership data until after the window for local party and affiliated organisation nominations has closed , which will be on February 14th .
Following the incident that saw emails sent out by Long-Bailey ’ s team with links to Dialogue , the party suspended its phone banking website .
It had been open for any campaign to potentially use .
LabourList understands that the move by Long-Bailey ’ s team was flagged up with Starmer ’ s team , which then looked at the campaign emails to investigate the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Starmer ’ s campaign subsequently wrote to the Labour Party to raise a complaint about the Long-Bailey campaign and/or the party itself breaching data , and then received letters about their own alleged wrongdoing .
Explaining the situation , Starmer ’ s campaign chair Jenny Chapman told the BBC : “ What happened was , another campaign sent out an email to thousands of their supporters saying ‘ please follow these links and you can make phone calls on behalf of our candidate ’ .
“ They then proceeded to do that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s phonebank , which obviously the Labour Party isn ’ t involved in the campaigns and is supposed to be neutral and separate.
” She added : “ We looked at it , discovered that that was indeed the case , that which we ’ d been alerted to .
We wrote to the party and said ‘ we think there ’ s something wrong here ’ .
“ And that was really the end of it as far as we were concerned .
But we were interested in finding out what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a very serious breach if that is what was going on .
“ The next thing you know , people on our campaign get letters saying ‘ actually we think you ’ ve done something wrong ’ , ” Chapman concluded , adding that the claims against her team were “ utter , utter nonsense ” .
The BBC has reported that Keir Starmer wrote to the party on Saturday evening and “ insisted they were investigating a means of penetrating the database – called Dialogue – with no intention to use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party ’ s tool can track log-ins .
Sources say Labour has only reported Starmer ’ s team because no members of Long-Bailey ’ s team logged into Dialogue , whereas Starmer ’ s compliance officer – and another team member – did .
Sources supportive of Starmer have expressed concern that the party ’ s report to the Information Commissioner alleging a data breach appears to have been leaked to the BBC ’ s John Pienaar .
“ Whoever decided to send these threatening letters to people on the Keir Starmer campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BBC really isn ’ t doing the Labour party or their preferred candidate any favours here , ” Chapman told Pienaar .
Lord Falconer , a minister during Tony Blair ’ s era , told Pienaar ’ s Politics that he assumed the move was intended to damage Starmer : “ It tells us much more about the sense of the left in Labour losing its grip on the party.
” A Labour spokesperson said : “ The Labour Party takes its legal responsibilities for data protection – and the security and integrity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seriously .
“ We have written to all leadership candidates to remind them of their obligations under the law and to seek assurances that membership data will not be misused .
”

Labour’s leadership election has become engulfed in a row over accusations relating to an alleged data breach by the campaign team of frontrunner Keir Starmer.
The Labour Party has reported members of Starmer’s campaign team to the Information Commissioner for allegedly hacking into the membership database, the BBC exclusively revealed on Sunday morning.
Starmer has strongly denied claims that members of his team engaged in “data-scraping” by unlawfully obtaining information from Labour’s Dialogue database – used for phonebanking – to improve their own targeting of potential supporters.
A spokesperson for Keir Starmer’s campaign said: “We categorically reject these nonsensical allegations and are incredibly disappointed that they have been leaked to the media.
“We are still awaiting the party’s formal response to the serious concerns we and others had about access to Labour Party membership data.”
Earlier in the month, HuffPost UK reported that Rebecca Long-Bailey’s campaign had emailed supporters inviting them to phone bank for her – but they had included links to Dialogue, with full access to members’ data.
Leadership candidates are not supposed to be given access to the party’s membership data until after the window for local party and affiliated organisation nominations has closed, which will be on February 14th.
Following the incident that saw emails sent out by Long-Bailey’s team with links to Dialogue, the party suspended its phone banking website. It had been open for any campaign to potentially use.
LabourList understands that the move by Long-Bailey’s team was flagged up with Starmer’s team, which then looked at the campaign emails to investigate the apparent breach of data protection laws.
Starmer’s campaign subsequently wrote to the Labour Party to raise a complaint about the Long-Bailey campaign and/or the party itself breaching data, and then received letters about their own alleged wrongdoing.
Explaining the situation, Starmer’s campaign chair Jenny Chapman told the BBC: “What happened was, another campaign sent out an email to thousands of their supporters saying ‘please follow these links and you can make phone calls on behalf of our candidate’.
“They then proceeded to do that, and found themselves accessing the Labour Party’s phonebank, which obviously the Labour Party isn’t involved in the campaigns and is supposed to be neutral and separate.”
She added: “We looked at it, discovered that that was indeed the case, that which we’d been alerted to. We wrote to the party and said ‘we think there’s something wrong here’.
“And that was really the end of it as far as we were concerned. But we were interested in finding out what had happened, because obviously it’s a very serious breach if that is what was going on.
“The next thing you know, people on our campaign get letters saying ‘actually we think you’ve done something wrong’,” Chapman concluded, adding that the claims against her team were “utter, utter nonsense”.
The BBC has reported that Keir Starmer wrote to the party on Saturday evening and “insisted they were investigating a means of penetrating the database – called Dialogue – with no intention to use it”.
LabourList understands that the party’s tool can track log-ins. Sources say Labour has only reported Starmer’s team because no members of Long-Bailey’s team logged into Dialogue, whereas Starmer’s compliance officer – and another team member – did.
Sources supportive of Starmer have expressed concern that the party’s report to the Information Commissioner alleging a data breach appears to have been leaked to the BBC’s John Pienaar.
“Whoever decided to send these threatening letters to people on the Keir Starmer campaign and then to leak it to the BBC really isn’t doing the Labour party or their preferred candidate any favours here,” Chapman told Pienaar.
Lord Falconer, a minister during Tony Blair’s era, told Pienaar’s Politics that he assumed the move was intended to damage Starmer: “It tells us much more about the sense of the left in Labour losing its grip on the party.”
A Labour spokesperson said: “The Labour Party takes its legal responsibilities for data protection – and the security and integrity of its data and systems – extremely seriously.
“We have written to all leadership candidates to remind them of their obligations under the law and to seek assurances that membership data will not be misused.”


labourlist--2020-02-08--Care about your community and want to make a difference? Become a councillor

Labour may be out of government in Westminster , but we are in power in Wales , and in hundreds of towns and cities throughout the UK .
Every day , our councillors in both Labour run authorities and in opposition , fly the flag for Labour values and make a meaningful difference to our local communities .
Being a councillor is a lot of work , but is extremely rewarding .
It is an honour to be elected to stand up for your community .
And it is important that our elected representatives mirror the diversity and experiences of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is lots we have been doing as a party , and more we can do , to encourage more people to get involved and stand to be councillors .
This includes supporting more women , BAME candidates , people from working class backgrounds , LGBT and disabled people to stand for election .
As well as the usual key asks from local government – better representation for councillors at all levels of the party , more resources and support for local elections , accountability for Association of Labour Councillors ’ subs and more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Labour ’ s national executive committee have been pushing for the party to do more to remove the barriers that prevent people standing for elected office .
A 2017 report by the Fawcett Society and the Local Government Information Unit looked at a number of issues facing women in local government .
Following on from this work , a cross-party group from local and national government is considering the changes that could be made to improve diversity and encourage more people from traditionally under-represented groups to stand to be councillors .
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leave for all councillors ; • Restoring councillors ’ access to pensions and consider a fair system for allowances so people from all backgrounds can afford to stand to be councillors ; • Increasing resources and funding for security at councillors ’ surgeries .
No one should be threatened or attacked while carrying out their duties ; • Tough action to tackle online abuse , which puts many people off getting involved in politics or public life .
This includes making social media companies take responsibility for some of the appalling abuse that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amending the all-women shortlist legislation to allow for AWS selections for directly elected mayoral posts ; • Introducing new legislation to allow for all-BAME shortlists ; • Increase awareness of the role of a councillor , the positive difference they make to our communities , how you can successfully balance it with other commitments and how to get involved and stand ; • Introducing more flexibility and better use of technology so shift workers and people with caring responsibilities can play an active role in council life and Labour Party meetings ; • @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , particularly emphasising supporting people from under-represented groups ; • Restoring access to government funding to support disabled people to stand for elected office .
Within Labour , we want to foster a welcoming , positive , inclusive atmosphere in local parties where people feel supported and encouraged to get involved .
This includes considering how meetings are run and chaired , the role of women ’ s forums and how application and selection processes can be improved .
There is also more the party is doing – and should be doing – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how many women , disabled and BAME candidates stand for selection and election , and how successful they are once selected as candidates .
There is important work to be done to encourage more trade union members to stand to be councillors ; I have attended excellent ‘ be a councillor ’ training sessions aimed at GMB members .
It is important that Labour supports and encourages these kind of activities to ensure we benefit from the valuable real life experience of trade union members and can encourage more people from manual/working class @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you are interested in making a difference and standing to be a councillor , there are some fantastic resources from the cross-party organisation Be a Councillor .
Get in touch with your local party and regional office to find out about training and events in your area .
Wherever you live , we need as many people as possible to stand up to Boris Johnson and provide our communities with a real alternative to Tory doom and gloom .

Labour may be out of government in Westminster, but we are in power in Wales, and in hundreds of towns and cities throughout the UK. Every day, our councillors in both Labour run authorities and in opposition, fly the flag for Labour values and make a meaningful difference to our local communities.
Being a councillor is a lot of work, but is extremely rewarding. It is an honour to be elected to stand up for your community. And it is important that our elected representatives mirror the diversity and experiences of the communities we come from.
There is lots we have been doing as a party, and more we can do, to encourage more people to get involved and stand to be councillors. This includes supporting more women, BAME candidates, people from working class backgrounds, LGBT and disabled people to stand for election.
As well as the usual key asks from local government – better representation for councillors at all levels of the party, more resources and support for local elections, accountability for Association of Labour Councillors’ subs and more opportunities to share best practice – councillors on Labour’s national executive committee have been pushing for the party to do more to remove the barriers that prevent people standing for elected office.
A 2017 report by the Fawcett Society and the Local Government Information Unit looked at a number of issues facing women in local government. Following on from this work, a cross-party group from local and national government is considering the changes that could be made to improve diversity and encourage more people from traditionally under-represented groups to stand to be councillors.
The Labour Party’s asks of central government include:
Introducing maternity, paternity and carers’ leave for all councillors;
Restoring councillors’ access to pensions and consider a fair system for allowances so people from all backgrounds can afford to stand to be councillors;
Increasing resources and funding for security at councillors’ surgeries. No one should be threatened or attacked while carrying out their duties;
Tough action to tackle online abuse, which puts many people off getting involved in politics or public life. This includes making social media companies take responsibility for some of the appalling abuse that takes place on their platforms;
Amending the all-women shortlist legislation to allow for AWS selections for directly elected mayoral posts;
Introducing new legislation to allow for all-BAME shortlists;
Increase awareness of the role of a councillor, the positive difference they make to our communities, how you can successfully balance it with other commitments and how to get involved and stand;
Introducing more flexibility and better use of technology so shift workers and people with caring responsibilities can play an active role in council life and Labour Party meetings;
Introducing more local government focused leadership training, particularly emphasising supporting people from under-represented groups;
Restoring access to government funding to support disabled people to stand for elected office.
Within Labour, we want to foster a welcoming, positive, inclusive atmosphere in local parties where people feel supported and encouraged to get involved. This includes considering how meetings are run and chaired, the role of women’s forums and how application and selection processes can be improved.
There is also more the party is doing – and should be doing – around equality monitoring to collect statistics on how many women, disabled and BAME candidates stand for selection and election, and how successful they are once selected as candidates.
There is important work to be done to encourage more trade union members to stand to be councillors; I have attended excellent ‘be a councillor’ training sessions aimed at GMB members. It is important that Labour supports and encourages these kind of activities to ensure we benefit from the valuable real life experience of trade union members and can encourage more people from manual/working class occupations to stand for office.
If you are interested in making a difference and standing to be a councillor, there are some fantastic resources from the cross-party organisation Be a Councillor. Get in touch with your local party and regional office to find out about training and events in your area. Wherever you live, we need as many people as possible to stand up to Boris Johnson and provide our communities with a real alternative to Tory doom and gloom.


labourlist--2020-02-08--Together, we will produce a genuinely bold and radical manifesto for London

Labour ’ s mayor of London , Sadiq Khan , is now seeking a mandate for a crucial second term , and is drawing on the experience and knowledge of members , affiliates , councillors and supporters in shaping the manifesto that we will fight the election on .
At Labour conference in Brighton last September , Sadiq asked for ideas about what the manifesto for the London elections on May 7th should look like .
He knows that elected politicians do not have a monopoly on great ideas and that the broadest possible discussion about policy is essential when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only for the next four years , but for the long-term future of London .
The general election result was a disaster for our party .
We now need to show Londoners that Labour will keep fighting but also keep learning , and is willing to offer innovative solutions to the real issues that they face in their lives – whether that ’ s addressing the housing crisis , providing support for businesses to grow , or improving air quality for our children .
Over the last few months we ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve ever embarked on in London .
Today , representatives from CLPs , Labour affiliates , trade unions , London Labour MPs , councillors , Labour Assembly members and our London regional executive came together to take part in a full day of policy workshops and discussions at our London policy forum .
Throughout the day participants engaged in vibrant discussions on issues from housing and community safety to transport , environment and more – putting forward their ideas to help create a manifesto that will benefit all Londoners .
The discussions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ensure that we build on the hard work Sadiq has already undertaken as mayor since 2016 – standing up for Londoners and proving what Labour can do in power .
The council estate boy and son of a bus driver , Sadiq is standing up for Londoners .
He has kept his promise to make commuting more affordable by freezing fares and introducing the unlimited hopper fare .
He has been tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime – investing in our community and sports projects to create more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fund 1,300 extra police by increasing council tax by 26p a week .
London gave Sadiq the opportunities to go from the council estate where he grew up to being mayor of the greatest city on earth .
Now he is working hard to ensure all Londoners get the opportunities that our city gave to him .
With Boris Johnson in charge at Westminster , it ’ s never been more important to have Sadiq in City Hall to help campaign against Tory cuts and fight for the rights of EU citizens .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I ’ d like to thank all those who are helping to shape the manifesto through their ideas and contributions .
I have no doubt that together , we will produce a genuinely bold and radical manifesto that we can all proudly campaign for in the run up to May 7th .
You can register for an early vote in the London mayoral elections here .

Labour’s mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, is now seeking a mandate for a crucial second term, and is drawing on the experience and knowledge of members, affiliates, councillors and supporters in shaping the manifesto that we will fight the election on. At Labour conference in Brighton last September, Sadiq asked for ideas about what the manifesto for the London elections on May 7th should look like.
He knows that elected politicians do not have a monopoly on great ideas and that the broadest possible discussion about policy is essential when developing a vision for our city – not only for the next four years, but for the long-term future of London.
The general election result was a disaster for our party. We now need to show Londoners that Labour will keep fighting but also keep learning, and is willing to offer innovative solutions to the real issues that they face in their lives – whether that’s addressing the housing crisis, providing support for businesses to grow, or improving air quality for our children.
Over the last few months we’ve seen the biggest and broadest consultation we’ve ever embarked on in London. Today, representatives from CLPs, Labour affiliates, trade unions, London Labour MPs, councillors, Labour Assembly members and our London regional executive came together to take part in a full day of policy workshops and discussions at our London policy forum.
Throughout the day participants engaged in vibrant discussions on issues from housing and community safety to transport, environment and more – putting forward their ideas to help create a manifesto that will benefit all Londoners.
The discussions at the workshops will shape the manifesto and ensure that we build on the hard work Sadiq has already undertaken as mayor since 2016 – standing up for Londoners and proving what Labour can do in power.
The council estate boy and son of a bus driver, Sadiq is standing up for Londoners. He has kept his promise to make commuting more affordable by freezing fares and introducing the unlimited hopper fare. He has been tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime – investing in our community and sports projects to create more opportunities for young Londoners and helping to fund 1,300 extra police by increasing council tax by 26p a week.
London gave Sadiq the opportunities to go from the council estate where he grew up to being mayor of the greatest city on earth. Now he is working hard to ensure all Londoners get the opportunities that our city gave to him.
With Boris Johnson in charge at Westminster, it’s never been more important to have Sadiq in City Hall to help campaign against Tory cuts and fight for the rights of EU citizens.
As chair of Sadiq’s campaign, I’d like to thank all those who are helping to shape the manifesto through their ideas and contributions. I have no doubt that together, we will produce a genuinely bold and radical manifesto that we can all proudly campaign for in the run up to May 7th. You can register for an early vote in the London mayoral elections here.


labourlist--2020-02-08--Why Labour should put more councillors in the upper chamber

The House of Lords is an almost all-appointed upper chamber , whose members are generally nominated by the two main political parties .
Once appointed , peers sit for life but can then attend more or less whenever they wish , never facing re-appointment or any form of election .
The power of the Lords is limited to amending or delaying non-financial bills and members follow a convention which acknowledges the primacy of the Commons .
The Salisbury Convention guarantees the passage of any bill for which an elected government in the House of Commons has a majority and made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in October 2017 recommended changes to the composition of the Lords , such as capping the size to 600 members and introducing 15-year fixed terms for new peers .
Those recommendations were backed without opposition in the House .
Crucial to the proposals was the twin objective of reducing the size of the chamber as it currently stands , and addressing the overall tendency for its numbers to increase as appointments are made by different Prime Ministers and parties .
The report recommended the introduction of a ‘ two-out-one-in ’ system , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ size of the House by ensuring that any new appointment could only be made once two existing members had left .
But nothing has actually changed .
Under Jeremy Corbyn , the Labour Party has only made seven appointments to the Lords on specific grounds , and has promised to scrap the Lords as currently constituted .
In nominating peers , the Labour leader required all new appointees to vote whenever possible for creating an elected upper chamber .
Of those seven appointments , I am the only local government representative – and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ council leader to be elevated to the Lords since Peter Smith of Wigan was ennobled in 1999 .
There are others with longer term local government associations , including former council leaders such as Jeremy Beecham , Steve Bassam , David Blunkett , Toby Harris , Bill Mackenzie and Dave Watts .
There is a more noticeable representation of local government within the Lib Dem group since its ranks were swelled disproportionately during the Cameron/Clegg coalition .
Indeed , the Lords now appears to be the only legislature in the UK where the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Analysis shows that nearly three-quarters of the 62 peers appointed in the second half of 2015 were former MPs , special advisers , or party aides .
Only four academics and two NGO or third-sector figures entered the Lords during this time , suggesting that little diversity or expertise was being brought into play .
Just over a quarter were women and only 6.4 % were from black or minority ethnic groups .
Territorial representation was particularly poor , with limited representation of those outside the southeast of England .
While the Lords @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we have the strongest available Labour voices there to make sure that the government is held to account , and that our party ’ s priorities are pushed as strongly as they can be with an 80-strong Tory majority in the House of Commons .
The upper chamber should contain people from various walks of life but also people who have expertise that can add to the overall contribution that the House makes , and I would argue that there is an untapped mine of that expertise in councils across the UK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics , not the political back office .
They are not elected as flatterers of the public and most try to speak with honesty and candour .
They do not see their reason for existence as a quest for short-term popularity .
Councillors have accepted that in the climate of a decade of continuing austerity they have an arduous role to perform .
They seek to do all they can to preserve communities , to safeguard treasured services , to promote wellbeing but also to take tough decisions because there is no escape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ balanced budget .
Over the past month , I have heard some wonderful contributions to debates from Labour colleagues in the Lords and I bow to their incredible collective wisdom .
I also know from experience that our peers are very grateful for the expert briefings they receive from the Local Government Association .
But I would like to see more of my local government colleagues sitting alongside us on those red benches while we battle the interminable intolerance of the Boris Johnson government .

The House of Lords is an almost all-appointed upper chamber, whose members are generally nominated by the two main political parties. Once appointed, peers sit for life but can then attend more or less whenever they wish, never facing re-appointment or any form of election.
The power of the Lords is limited to amending or delaying non-financial bills and members follow a convention which acknowledges the primacy of the Commons. The Salisbury Convention guarantees the passage of any bill for which an elected government in the House of Commons has a majority and made a manifesto commitment.
The Burns report in October 2017 recommended changes to the composition of the Lords, such as capping the size to 600 members and introducing 15-year fixed terms for new peers. Those recommendations were backed without opposition in the House. Crucial to the proposals was the twin objective of reducing the size of the chamber as it currently stands, and addressing the overall tendency for its numbers to increase as appointments are made by different Prime Ministers and parties.
The report recommended the introduction of a ‘two-out-one-in’ system, which would allow a gradual reduction in the size of the House by ensuring that any new appointment could only be made once two existing members had left. But nothing has actually changed.
Under Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party has only made seven appointments to the Lords on specific grounds, and has promised to scrap the Lords as currently constituted. In nominating peers, the Labour leader required all new appointees to vote whenever possible for creating an elected upper chamber.
Of those seven appointments, I am the only local government representative – and indeed I am the first serving Labour council leader to be elevated to the Lords since Peter Smith of Wigan was ennobled in 1999. There are others with longer term local government associations, including former council leaders such as Jeremy Beecham, Steve Bassam, David Blunkett, Toby Harris, Bill Mackenzie and Dave Watts.
There is a more noticeable representation of local government within the Lib Dem group since its ranks were swelled disproportionately during the Cameron/Clegg coalition. Indeed, the Lords now appears to be the only legislature in the UK where the Lib Dems have any significant presence.
Analysis shows that nearly three-quarters of the 62 peers appointed in the second half of 2015 were former MPs, special advisers, or party aides. Only four academics and two NGO or third-sector figures entered the Lords during this time, suggesting that little diversity or expertise was being brought into play. Just over a quarter were women and only 6.4% were from black or minority ethnic groups. Territorial representation was particularly poor, with limited representation of those outside the southeast of England.
While the Lords exists, I believe it is important that we have the strongest available Labour voices there to make sure that the government is held to account, and that our party’s priorities are pushed as strongly as they can be with an 80-strong Tory majority in the House of Commons.
The upper chamber should contain people from various walks of life but also people who have expertise that can add to the overall contribution that the House makes, and I would argue that there is an untapped mine of that expertise in councils across the UK.
Councillors are the drivers of frontline politics, not the political back office. They are not elected as flatterers of the public and most try to speak with honesty and candour. They do not see their reason for existence as a quest for short-term popularity.
Councillors have accepted that in the climate of a decade of continuing austerity they have an arduous role to perform. They seek to do all they can to preserve communities, to safeguard treasured services, to promote wellbeing but also to take tough decisions because there is no escape from the legal imposition of setting a balanced budget.
Over the past month, I have heard some wonderful contributions to debates from Labour colleagues in the Lords and I bow to their incredible collective wisdom. I also know from experience that our peers are very grateful for the expert briefings they receive from the Local Government Association. But I would like to see more of my local government colleagues sitting alongside us on those red benches while we battle the interminable intolerance of the Boris Johnson government.


labourlist--2020-02-08--Elected leaders, pensions and pizza – local government leadership hustings

Three of the Labour leadership candidates and Jim McMahon took to the stage at the Labour Local Government conference today .
Keir Starmer was absent as his mother-in-law is unwell and McMahon stood in for the Camden MP .
The hustings was a bit livelier and benefitted from a quick-fire , yes/no answer round , introduced without the prior knowledge of the leadership contenders .
The format of the debate did , again , serve to restrict the discussion as the contenders still couldn ’ t really enter into actual debates – however a few barbs were thrown .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidates to some key promises .
Should councillors be entitled to membership of the local government pension scheme ?
Would you argue for more seats on the national executive committee for councillors ?
Should Labour groups retain the right to elect their leaders ?
Yes .
Complete agreement from all the candidates on every point .
And there was a lot of agreement throughout the discussion today , mostly that Labour should champion the work of our Labour local authorities and with each candidate agreeing that our councillors are brilliant .
Emily Thornberry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couple of occasions with challenges aimed at Rebecca Long-Bailey .
First , she challenged her on encouraging diversity among the people who stand as our local authority representatives .
The Islington MP explained that her borough made sure that they never had a panel of three white men in the selection process .
Cutting across the format of the debate , she interrupted to directly ask Long-Bailey whether she thought Labour should be doing this across the country .
Later in the hustings , Thornberry told the room she had to hold several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I know some people had to be up late eating pizza .
But I tell you I did all of these different jobs all at the same time and supported the leader.
” The audience winced – along with Lisa Nandy , who ’ s face was a picture – at the reference to Long-Bailey having said she was forced to stay up all night re-doing work deleted by a Labour frontbencher who quit during the 2016 coup .
Ironically , this came at a point in the hustings when the candidates were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also just told the crowd that she didn ’ t think criticisms of Labour colleagues should be made publicly .
“ Ooh , meow !
We love each other really .
I was working very hard – I will have everybody know .
We did have to eat pizza , ” Long-Bailey replied .
The crowd laughed as she added : “ We shouldn ’ t attack each other publicly under any circumstances.
” Thornberry had a good time of it generally , getting the biggest cheer of the event as she declared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cuddly hopeless lefties have got to be over .
It ’ s got to be over .
We can be cuddly we can be lefty but we have to be in power ” .
A pot-shot at the left .
And with her digs at Long-Bailey , this seemed to be her plan for the day .
McMahon gave a good account for Starmer and was well received when he committed the candidate to campaign to give councillors pensions once again .
Nandy ’ s key messages throughout were about the culture within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s set the tone and the culture right in this party.
” We got frustratingly little in terms of structural devolution , which the candidates have begun to discuss in the contest .
At one point Nandy did take aim aim at Starmer ’ s emphasis on federalism – she said that it wouldn ’ t “ cut it ” as people living in parts of north Wales felt as removed from Cardiff as they do from Westminster .
In the previous hustings , she has seemed to be positioning for Starmer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a shame we didn ’ t explore this a bit more , and the format is largely to blame for this .
Debates are , obviously , interesting when the candidates disagree .
And there were some key points where we got to see some differentiation , but the short , rigidly sequential speaking slots with limited opportunity to reply continue to frustrate that .

Three of the Labour leadership candidates and Jim McMahon took to the stage at the Labour Local Government conference today. Keir Starmer was absent as his mother-in-law is unwell and McMahon stood in for the Camden MP. The hustings was a bit livelier and benefitted from a quick-fire, yes/no answer round, introduced without the prior knowledge of the leadership contenders. The format of the debate did, again, serve to restrict the discussion as the contenders still couldn’t really enter into actual debates – however a few barbs were thrown.
The quick-fire round was illuminating, committing the candidates to some key promises. Should councillors be entitled to membership of the local government pension scheme? Would you argue for more seats on the national executive committee for councillors? Should Labour groups retain the right to elect their leaders? Yes. Complete agreement from all the candidates on every point. And there was a lot of agreement throughout the discussion today, mostly that Labour should champion the work of our Labour local authorities and with each candidate agreeing that our councillors are brilliant.
Emily Thornberry kicked it up a notch on a couple of occasions with challenges aimed at Rebecca Long-Bailey. First, she challenged her on encouraging diversity among the people who stand as our local authority representatives. The Islington MP explained that her borough made sure that they never had a panel of three white men in the selection process. Cutting across the format of the debate, she interrupted to directly ask Long-Bailey whether she thought Labour should be doing this across the country.
Later in the hustings, Thornberry told the room she had to hold several positions at once, adding: “I know some people had to be up late eating pizza. But I tell you I did all of these different jobs all at the same time and supported the leader.” The audience winced – along with Lisa Nandy, who’s face was a picture – at the reference to Long-Bailey having said she was forced to stay up all night re-doing work deleted by a Labour frontbencher who quit during the 2016 coup. Ironically, this came at a point in the hustings when the candidates were discussing Labour infighting, and she had also just told the crowd that she didn’t think criticisms of Labour colleagues should be made publicly. “Ooh, meow! We love each other really. I was working very hard – I will have everybody know. We did have to eat pizza,” Long-Bailey replied. The crowd laughed as she added: “We shouldn’t attack each other publicly under any circumstances.”
Thornberry had a good time of it generally, getting the biggest cheer of the event as she declared that “the days of just being cuddly hopeless lefties have got to be over. It’s got to be over. We can be cuddly we can be lefty but we have to be in power”. A pot-shot at the left. And with her digs at Long-Bailey, this seemed to be her plan for the day. McMahon gave a good account for Starmer and was well received when he committed the candidate to campaign to give councillors pensions once again. Nandy’s key messages throughout were about the culture within the party, saying: “Let’s set the tone and the culture right in this party.”
We got frustratingly little in terms of structural devolution, which the candidates have begun to discuss in the contest. At one point Nandy did take aim aim at Starmer’s emphasis on federalism – she said that it wouldn’t “cut it” as people living in parts of north Wales felt as removed from Cardiff as they do from Westminster. In the previous hustings, she has seemed to be positioning for Starmer’s second preferences. But it’s a shame we didn’t explore this a bit more, and the format is largely to blame for this. Debates are, obviously, interesting when the candidates disagree. And there were some key points where we got to see some differentiation, but the short, rigidly sequential speaking slots with limited opportunity to reply continue to frustrate that.


labourlist--2020-02-08--Our disabled people’s commission can identify barriers and deliver change

Labour has traditionally led the way in challenging ableism .
More recently , this has meant standing up to central government ’ s austerity-driven regime of benefit-slashing .
Even amidst this climate , there is more that Labour councils could be doing to minimise the impact of austerity on local residents .
This is why one of the key commitments made by the mayor of Lewisham , Damien Egan , was to establish a disabled people ’ s commission for Lewisham .
The commission was proposed to explore the position of disabled people in Lewisham , and produce a report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ council .
And we hope the local authority will commit to fully implementing the recommendations we make .
As an experienced disability activist , I was offered the role of chairing the commission .
I am delighted to be taking part in shaping the way the commission will work , and in ensuring that it doesn ’ t simply produce another toothless report .
The number of applications to sit on the commission massively exceeded the number of places available , and I was delighted by the enthusiasm the local community showed towards @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have tried , as far as possible , to select a representative body of people , and we are beginning the process of having regular meetings at the end of January , when we will be planning out the work for the year .
The commission will cover all areas of the council , from education , planning , libraries and the built environment , to adult social care , housing and benefits .
We will explore the barriers faced by disabled people in Lewisham , using a model known as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This focuses not only on the conditions that individuals have , but the barriers that are placed in the way of disabled people living in the world .
This could include matters as detailed as tactile paving and dropped kerbs , but will also look at issues such as charging for adult social care , and the way disabled people are consulted in the decisions made by the local authority .
The first commission of this kind took place in Hammersmith and Fulham .
One of their key recommendations was that proper co-production @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to make the experience of disabled people central to all decision-making .
The commission will have regular meetings , but also public evidence-gathering sessions with groups of local D/deaf and disabled people , where we will be asking a series of questions about the barriers they face in the borough .
We will also be meeting with the mayor , councillors , and staff within the local authority to get a representative picture of the difficulties disabled people are perceived to face and the steps the council are taking to change this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the commission , please send them to [ email protected ] .

Labour has traditionally led the way in challenging ableism. More recently, this has meant standing up to central government’s austerity-driven regime of benefit-slashing. Even amidst this climate, there is more that Labour councils could be doing to minimise the impact of austerity on local residents.
This is why one of the key commitments made by the mayor of Lewisham, Damien Egan, was to establish a disabled people’s commission for Lewisham. The commission was proposed to explore the position of disabled people in Lewisham, and produce a report that provided analysis and recommendations to the council. And we hope the local authority will commit to fully implementing the recommendations we make.
As an experienced disability activist, I was offered the role of chairing the commission. I am delighted to be taking part in shaping the way the commission will work, and in ensuring that it doesn’t simply produce another toothless report.
The number of applications to sit on the commission massively exceeded the number of places available, and I was delighted by the enthusiasm the local community showed towards being a part of this project. I have tried, as far as possible, to select a representative body of people, and we are beginning the process of having regular meetings at the end of January, when we will be planning out the work for the year.
The commission will cover all areas of the council, from education, planning, libraries and the built environment, to adult social care, housing and benefits. We will explore the barriers faced by disabled people in Lewisham, using a model known as the ‘social model of disability’.
This focuses not only on the conditions that individuals have, but the barriers that are placed in the way of disabled people living in the world. This could include matters as detailed as tactile paving and dropped kerbs, but will also look at issues such as charging for adult social care, and the way disabled people are consulted in the decisions made by the local authority.
The first commission of this kind took place in Hammersmith and Fulham. One of their key recommendations was that proper co-production be implemented across decision-making in the council, to make the experience of disabled people central to all decision-making.
The commission will have regular meetings, but also public evidence-gathering sessions with groups of local D/deaf and disabled people, where we will be asking a series of questions about the barriers they face in the borough. We will also be meeting with the mayor, councillors, and staff within the local authority to get a representative picture of the difficulties disabled people are perceived to face and the steps the council are taking to change this situation. If you have any questions about the commission, please send them to [email protected].


labourlist--2020-02-08--Socialist Educational Association nominates Long-Bailey and Burgon

Socialist Educational Association , Labour ’ s only formally affiliated education organisation , has nominated Rebecca Long-Bailey and Richard Burgon for the party leader and deputy leader posts .
The socialist society , which seeks to inform and influence the development of education policies by the Labour Party , said : “ We are an open and democratic organisation .
“ Our 640 members decided on the nominations through a secure online balloting app with no prior recommendation from the association ’ s national executive committee.
” The SEA explained that Long-Bailey and Burgon “ showed they understood ” that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Service policy and “ take on the powerful interests currently running schools ” .
Commenting on the endorsement , Burgon tweeted : “ I am delighted to have received the nomination of the Socialist Educational Association – Labour ’ s only education affiliate .
“ I will be a campaigning deputy leader and I look forward to working with them to fight for a fully public and democratically accountable education system.
” Each leadership hopeful needs nominations from 5 % of Constituency Labour Parties – a total of 33 – or from three @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comprising 5 % of affiliated membership .
The only candidates who have not yet secured their places in the final rounds of their respective contests are Emily Thornberry for leader and Rosena Allin-Khan in the deputy race .

Socialist Educational Association, Labour’s only formally affiliated education organisation, has nominated Rebecca Long-Bailey and Richard Burgon for the party leader and deputy leader posts.
The socialist society, which seeks to inform and influence the development of education policies by the Labour Party, said: “We are an open and democratic organisation.
“Our 640 members decided on the nominations through a secure online balloting app with no prior recommendation from the association’s national executive committee.”
The SEA explained that Long-Bailey and Burgon “showed they understood” that Labour must go beyond the National Education Service policy and “take on the powerful interests currently running schools”.
Commenting on the endorsement, Burgon tweeted: “I am delighted to have received the nomination of the Socialist Educational Association – Labour’s only education affiliate.
“I will be a campaigning deputy leader and I look forward to working with them to fight for a fully public and democratically accountable education system.”
Each leadership hopeful needs nominations from 5% of Constituency Labour Parties – a total of 33 – or from three affiliates, including two trade unions, comprising 5% of affiliated membership.
The only candidates who have not yet secured their places in the final rounds of their respective contests are Emily Thornberry for leader and Rosena Allin-Khan in the deputy race.


labourlist--2020-02-08--For the sake of Labour councillors, bin the democracy review and start again

It ’ s not been easy as a council leader over the past four and a half years , supposedly forming part of the wider Labour Party ‘ family ’ .
And it was in this difficult context that the Labour Party ’ s 2017 democracy review spewed out a number of recommendations around how we organise ourselves in local government .
Some were examples of good practice that most Labour groups follow in any event .
But the review also included the ingenious recommendation that council leaders should be directly elected by the local party membership .
This vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taken place but before the new administration is up and running .
The proposal was no doubt the brainchild of a Momentum activist on work experience , because it certainly was not the result of anyone talking to Labour in local government .
In reality , for the past four and a half years , nobody from the upper echelons of our national leadership has talked in a meaningful way to local government – or begun to understand the genuine opportunities that working with us can offer .
The Local Government Association Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the proposal presents , as well as the basic practical problem of a Labour group potentially having a leader who is not their choice .
How could a Labour group function properly if the leader is not someone in which they have confidence ?
An example of the kind of problems that situation produces are evident from the Parliamentary Labour Party since 2015 .
It ’ s surely not something that anyone rational would want to extend to local government .
What is this proposal really about ?
It ’ s about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ getting rid of the vast majority of council leaders who are regarded by some within the higher ranks of our party as the last bastions of Blairism .
Forget that we are delivering innovative new policies , building new council homes , embedding the living wage and ethical care charter , promoting public health and protecting our most vulnerable residents from the excesses of the Tory government .
Instead , council leaders who were members of the Labour Party before 2015 are not to be trusted and need to be moved on .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by making sure that these leaders are answerable to the new membership , who only want those who are truly committed to the cult to be the leaders of their councils and Labour groups .
When you have just won a local election , your first priority should always be to start implementing your manifesto – actually getting things done for the benefit of your residents .
The democracy review proposals would put everything on hold during that crucial period , whilst potentially rival candidates campaign to be leader on the basis of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been in the manifesto .
The whole idea is ill-considered and juvenile .
Whoever wins the current leadership contest , something must change .
If you value local government , prove it .
Visit us and talk to us .
Not once has the leader or any senior shadow cabinet member been to Southwark in the last four and a half years to highlight the work we are doing or to demonstrate what Labour could do in national government .
But it ’ s not just Southwark – rarely do I find a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the same period .
Celebrate local government and our achievements .
A properly functioning Labour Party needs to genuinely have local government as its core – and not just mention us once a year in a speech and think ‘ job done ’ .
One way that the new leader could properly demonstrate that they have confidence in our local government leaders and councillors is to throw out the 2017 democracy review proposals and start again .
This time , it could be formulated with leaders and councillors at the heart of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pleasantly surprised to learn what we election-winners have to offer .

It’s not been easy as a council leader over the past four and a half years, supposedly forming part of the wider Labour Party ‘family’. And it was in this difficult context that the Labour Party’s 2017 democracy review spewed out a number of recommendations around how we organise ourselves in local government.
Some were examples of good practice that most Labour groups follow in any event. But the review also included the ingenious recommendation that council leaders should be directly elected by the local party membership. This vote would be conducted after local elections have taken place but before the new administration is up and running.
The proposal was no doubt the brainchild of a Momentum activist on work experience, because it certainly was not the result of anyone talking to Labour in local government. In reality, for the past four and a half years, nobody from the upper echelons of our national leadership has talked in a meaningful way to local government – or begun to understand the genuine opportunities that working with us can offer.
The Local Government Association Labour group has already highlighted the legal problems that the proposal presents, as well as the basic practical problem of a Labour group potentially having a leader who is not their choice. How could a Labour group function properly if the leader is not someone in which they have confidence? An example of the kind of problems that situation produces are evident from the Parliamentary Labour Party since 2015. It’s surely not something that anyone rational would want to extend to local government.
What is this proposal really about? It’s about control, and it’s about getting rid of the vast majority of council leaders who are regarded by some within the higher ranks of our party as the last bastions of Blairism. Forget that we are delivering innovative new policies, building new council homes, embedding the living wage and ethical care charter, promoting public health and protecting our most vulnerable residents from the excesses of the Tory government.
Instead, council leaders who were members of the Labour Party before 2015 are not to be trusted and need to be moved on. The best way of doing that is by making sure that these leaders are answerable to the new membership, who only want those who are truly committed to the cult to be the leaders of their councils and Labour groups.
When you have just won a local election, your first priority should always be to start implementing your manifesto – actually getting things done for the benefit of your residents. The democracy review proposals would put everything on hold during that crucial period, whilst potentially rival candidates campaign to be leader on the basis of policies that may or may not have been in the manifesto. The whole idea is ill-considered and juvenile.
Whoever wins the current leadership contest, something must change. If you value local government, prove it. Visit us and talk to us. Not once has the leader or any senior shadow cabinet member been to Southwark in the last four and a half years to highlight the work we are doing or to demonstrate what Labour could do in national government.
But it’s not just Southwark – rarely do I find a council leader who has had high-profile visits over the same period. Celebrate local government and our achievements. A properly functioning Labour Party needs to genuinely have local government as its core – and not just mention us once a year in a speech and think ‘job done’.
One way that the new leader could properly demonstrate that they have confidence in our local government leaders and councillors is to throw out the 2017 democracy review proposals and start again. This time, it could be formulated with leaders and councillors at the heart of any review process. You may be pleasantly surprised to learn what we election-winners have to offer.


labourlist--2020-02-10--Labour needs a politics of earning and belonging

“ This is the dawn of a new era , ” declared Boris Johnson an hour before Brexit .
He has exploited the opportunity of Brexit and realigned British politics .
The Conservatives have political domination but not yet hegemony .
It took Margaret Thatcher between 1979 and 1983 to secure the hegemony of the neoliberal settlement .
Can Johnson follow her success with his own brand of one nation Conservatism ?
It will require the consolidation of popular consent for his rule at the next election .
Is Labour capable of stopping a Conservative decade ?
To answer yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the scale of its fourth successive defeat .
Matthew Sowemimo has made an important contribution toward this end with his comprehensive analysis of the 2019 election , published by the centre left organisation Compass .
He describes the new Conservative coalition as ‘ the most diverse electoral coalition in the mass franchise era ’ .
It includes those on low incomes , the suburban middle class , rural voters and the very wealthy .
In contrast , Labour ’ s vote fell across all social classes .
It fell by 11 % amongst @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the party in 2017 .
It fell by 7 % amongst mortgage holders , by 12 % and 13 % in the North East and Yorkshire , and by a further 8 % in Scotland .
It fell most sharply in English towns where the Labour movement was once a way of life .
And to compound this estrangement of the working class , 47 % of DE social classes – those on the lowest incomes and who bore the brunt of austerity – voted Conservative .
Only two significant electoral groups @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , resist Conservative hegemony .
Labour thankfully had another good general election in London .
And across the country the 50 constituencies with the highest population of professionals moved toward Labour .
This reflects the profile of the party ’ s membership .
77 % are in social classes ABC1 .
The party , Sowemimo argues , now rests perilously on a narrow electoral coalition primarily based on the support of ethnic minority communities in the big cities .
However as he points out even Labour ’ s support amongst ethnic minorities fell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Conservatives under the first-past-the-post electoral system could see a repeat of Labour ’ s 2015 Scottish annihilation in England .
He concludes that the next election could be the party ’ s last stand .
Labour ’ s centrist politics inherited from the years of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown has been irrevocably beaten .
First by the electorate in 2010 and 2015 , then by Jeremy Corbyn in two party leadership contests , and again by voters in the EU referendum .
The soft left , once Labour ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and without leadership .
Despite the historical scale of the current leader ’ s political failure , Corbynism still dominates , defining the boundaries of debate in the leadership contest .
Some on the left believe that the path to Labour ’ s recovery lies in a politics of participation and democracy .
If Labour devolves power and ‘ gives back control ’ it will restore the trust it has lost .
But this argument offers a technocratic solution to an existential political problem .
The party has to ask itself why it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in every election since 2005 .
Why do the Tories keep winning ?
Blaming Brexit , the right wing media or English voters doesn ’ t count as an answer .
In creating a new Conservative cross-class coalition , Johnson has ended the neoliberal consensus of the last four decades .
In doing so he has inadvertently changed the primary agents of British politics .
Agents are those forces , groups or classes that play a leading role in producing a political settlement .
When Blair and Brown won New Labour ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adapted Labour to the four primary agents of the neoliberal settlement which were shaping British politics .
These were globalisation , the rise of the metropolitan middle class , social and market liberalism , and a managerialist and technocratic approach to politics .
David Cameron and George Osborne followed a similar political logic with their attempt at compassionate Conservatism .
Theresa May tried an alternative – she failed in short order , but the 2017 election laid the groundwork for the 2019 Conservative victory .
The four agents of the neo-liberal settlement are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are contesting their dominance and shaping the new era .
These are the nation state , the working class , social conservatism and democracy .
The liberal progressive politics of the Labour Party and the market liberalism of the Conservatives belong to the previous political era .
They are ill equipped for this new period .
The political battleground has shifted away from the middle classes in London and the large cities , to the new Tory working class seats and the 36 Labour marginals in the North and Midlands .
For both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the new political settlement will be won or lost .
To be an effective political force , Labour needs a politics of earning and belonging .
It must become once again a patriotic and internationalist party renewing the nation state , particularly in England , and refounding the union .
The 2008 financial crash and subsequent recession slowed down the rate of globalisation .
From 2015 , it flattened out .
The disruptive forces of hyper-globalisation are starting to be redressed .
Capitalist democracies are beginning to respond to the revolt of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Labour ’ s own campaign , ‘ Rebuilding Britain ’ , has been an exemplary of this trend .
David Edgerton in The Rise and Fall of the British Nation described how an economics of national development flourished between 1945 and the 1970s as the country rebuilt itself after the Second World War .
He associates this period with a developmental state , an “ unusually strong ” labour movement and the integration of the working class into the democratic system .
Labour ’ s 1945 and 1950 manifestoes were programmes of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ There is a need to rethink the case for a national capitalism in this age of economic inequality , political fracture and geopolitical uncertainty.
” The focus of a national economic development approach should be on what matters most to people – work , family and the places they live .
It should begin by addressing daily life and modernising the everyday economy of child and elder care , health , education , utilities , and the low wage sectors of hospitality , retail , food processing and supermarkets .
These are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ united and secure society .
By developing a national strategy around the everyday economy , Labour can start to bridge the divisions between towns , cities and regions , and between different classes and ethnic groups , and so rebuild its own coalition .
The party needs to prioritise a sense of belonging which is the task of living together in our multi-ethnic society .
Developing a shared sense of national identity is fundamental to social cohesion and upholding our democracy and the equality of citizen ’ s rights and obligations .
Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whose small-c conservative values extend beyond the concerns of liberalism and who do not always share its priorities .
These values are about attachment to a shared inheritance , to a society shaped by decision making from below , and to the making of a place and way of life which people can call their own .
The English are both conservative and liberal in our sentiments .
These dispositions are not party political .
They are qualities of mind and character that are woven into the fabric of our national culture .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ understood that a balance of both these dispositions is necessary for a society of individual liberty and human flourishing .
Liberals tend to view human progress as an act of individual will .
Conservatives believe inherited authority , institutions and traditions are essential for a harmonious and just social life .
One presses new ideas to their utmost consequences .
The other reasserts the best meaning and purposes of the old .
A Labour coalition capable of winning in England will be both radical and conservative .
Labour today is a party of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speaks the language of yesterday .
As the country moves on from Brexit and looks to the future , Labour risks being left behind .
To become a party of the new conjuncture and to begin its journey back to power Labour needs a politics of earning and belonging .
The party needs to embrace both liberal and conservative dispositions and so build a new , post-industrial national coalition .
To succeed in this task it must dig deep into its own traditions and history to rediscover some of its core values that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They are widely shared in the country .

“This is the dawn of a new era,” declared Boris Johnson an hour before Brexit. He has exploited the opportunity of Brexit and realigned British politics. The Conservatives have political domination but not yet hegemony. It took Margaret Thatcher between 1979 and 1983 to secure the hegemony of the neoliberal settlement. Can Johnson follow her success with his own brand of one nation Conservatism? It will require the consolidation of popular consent for his rule at the next election.
Is Labour capable of stopping a Conservative decade? To answer yes, the party will have to recognise the scale of its fourth successive defeat. Matthew Sowemimo has made an important contribution toward this end with his comprehensive analysis of the 2019 election, published by the centre left organisation Compass. He describes the new Conservative coalition as ‘the most diverse electoral coalition in the mass franchise era’. It includes those on low incomes, the suburban middle class, rural voters and the very wealthy.
In contrast, Labour’s vote fell across all social classes. It fell by 11% amongst the younger working class who had shifted to the party in 2017. It fell by 7% amongst mortgage holders, by 12% and 13% in the North East and Yorkshire, and by a further 8% in Scotland. It fell most sharply in English towns where the Labour movement was once a way of life. And to compound this estrangement of the working class, 47% of DE social classes – those on the lowest incomes and who bore the brunt of austerity – voted Conservative.
Only two significant electoral groups, the highly educated and ethnic minorities, resist Conservative hegemony. Labour thankfully had another good general election in London. And across the country the 50 constituencies with the highest population of professionals moved toward Labour. This reflects the profile of the party’s membership. 77% are in social classes ABC1.
The party, Sowemimo argues, now rests perilously on a narrow electoral coalition primarily based on the support of ethnic minority communities in the big cities. However as he points out even Labour’s support amongst ethnic minorities fell by 9%. A further swing to the Conservatives under the first-past-the-post electoral system could see a repeat of Labour’s 2015 Scottish annihilation in England. He concludes that the next election could be the party’s last stand.
Labour’s predicament
Labour’s centrist politics inherited from the years of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown has been irrevocably beaten. First by the electorate in 2010 and 2015, then by Jeremy Corbyn in two party leadership contests, and again by voters in the EU referendum.
The soft left, once Labour’s engine room of ideas, is ineffectual and without leadership. Despite the historical scale of the current leader’s political failure, Corbynism still dominates, defining the boundaries of debate in the leadership contest.
Some on the left believe that the path to Labour’s recovery lies in a politics of participation and democracy. If Labour devolves power and ‘gives back control’ it will restore the trust it has lost. But this argument offers a technocratic solution to an existential political problem. The party has to ask itself why it has lost the popular vote in England in every election since 2005. Why do the Tories keep winning? Blaming Brexit, the right wing media or English voters doesn’t count as an answer.
The new political era
In creating a new Conservative cross-class coalition, Johnson has ended the neoliberal consensus of the last four decades. In doing so he has inadvertently changed the primary agents of British politics. Agents are those forces, groups or classes that play a leading role in producing a political settlement.
When Blair and Brown won New Labour’s landslide in the 1997 election they had adapted Labour to the four primary agents of the neoliberal settlement which were shaping British politics. These were globalisation, the rise of the metropolitan middle class, social and market liberalism, and a managerialist and technocratic approach to politics.
David Cameron and George Osborne followed a similar political logic with their attempt at compassionate Conservatism. Theresa May tried an alternative – she failed in short order, but the 2017 election laid the groundwork for the 2019 Conservative victory.
The four agents of the neo-liberal settlement are now being superseded by new ones which are contesting their dominance and shaping the new era. These are the nation state, the working class, social conservatism and democracy.
The liberal progressive politics of the Labour Party and the market liberalism of the Conservatives belong to the previous political era. They are ill equipped for this new period. The political battleground has shifted away from the middle classes in London and the large cities, to the new Tory working class seats and the 36 Labour marginals in the North and Midlands. For both parties it is terra incognito. Here the new political settlement will be won or lost.
A politics of earning and belonging
To be an effective political force, Labour needs a politics of earning and belonging. It must become once again a patriotic and internationalist party renewing the nation state, particularly in England, and refounding the union.
The 2008 financial crash and subsequent recession slowed down the rate of globalisation. From 2015, it flattened out. The disruptive forces of hyper-globalisation are starting to be redressed. Capitalist democracies are beginning to respond to the revolt of their populations by repairing their domestic social contracts. Labour’s own campaign, ‘Rebuilding Britain’, has been an exemplary of this trend.
David Edgerton in The Rise and Fall of the British Nation described how an economics of national development flourished between 1945 and the 1970s as the country rebuilt itself after the Second World War. He associates this period with a developmental state, an “unusually strong” labour movement and the integration of the working class into the democratic system.
Labour’s 1945 and 1950 manifestoes were programmes of national economic development – Edgerton argues: “There is a need to rethink the case for a national capitalism in this age of economic inequality, political fracture and geopolitical uncertainty.”
The focus of a national economic development approach should be on what matters most to people – work, family and the places they live. It should begin by addressing daily life and modernising the everyday economy of child and elder care, health, education, utilities, and the low wage sectors of hospitality, retail, food processing and supermarkets. These are the basic building blocks of a more united and secure society. By developing a national strategy around the everyday economy, Labour can start to bridge the divisions between towns, cities and regions, and between different classes and ethnic groups, and so rebuild its own coalition.
The party needs to prioritise a sense of belonging which is the task of living together in our multi-ethnic society. Developing a shared sense of national identity is fundamental to social cohesion and upholding our democracy and the equality of citizen’s rights and obligations.
Labour has to afford recognition to those voters whose small-c conservative values extend beyond the concerns of liberalism and who do not always share its priorities. These values are about attachment to a shared inheritance, to a society shaped by decision making from below, and to the making of a place and way of life which people can call their own.
The English are both conservative and liberal in our sentiments. These dispositions are not party political. They are qualities of mind and character that are woven into the fabric of our national culture. The liberal political philosopher John Stuart Mill understood that a balance of both these dispositions is necessary for a society of individual liberty and human flourishing.
Liberals tend to view human progress as an act of individual will. Conservatives believe inherited authority, institutions and traditions are essential for a harmonious and just social life. One presses new ideas to their utmost consequences. The other reasserts the best meaning and purposes of the old. A Labour coalition capable of winning in England will be both radical and conservative.
Labour today is a party of the previous era. The leadership debate speaks the language of yesterday. As the country moves on from Brexit and looks to the future, Labour risks being left behind. To become a party of the new conjuncture and to begin its journey back to power Labour needs a politics of earning and belonging.
The party needs to embrace both liberal and conservative dispositions and so build a new, post-industrial national coalition. To succeed in this task it must dig deep into its own traditions and history to rediscover some of its core values that have been marginalised in recent decades. They are widely shared in the country.


labourlist--2020-02-10--Labour leadership race turns sour with alleged data breaches

If the Iowa caucus results that threw the US Democratic Party presidential primaries into chaos weren ’ t enough of a political rollercoaster for you , we now have the historic outcome of the 2020 Irish general election .
It was not Brexit but the housing crisis , failures in the health service and other domestic issues that dominated the campaign , which allowed Sinn Féin to win the most first preferences .
The Labour Party was squeezed by their success , and did poorly , still tarnished by its associated with austerity .
We don ’ t yet know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other to form a coalition government , but the developments are well worth following – in the long term as well as over the next few weeks , because support for a border poll appears to be very popular among young Irish voters .
The UK Labour Party is having a very interesting time of its own as the leadership race has turned sour .
Over the weekend , the party apparently reported Keir Starmer ’ s campaign team to the Information Commissioner for an alleged data breach , and this letter was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claim that they hacked into a party database and illegally obtained information on members was described as “ utter , utter nonsense ” by campaign chair Jenny Chapman yesterday .
So , what happened exactly ?
Team Keir say they were alerted to emails sent out by Rebecca Long-Bailey ’ s campaign that included links to Dialogue , Labour ’ s phonebanking system .
This took place at the start of the month .
It appeared that the candidate had been encouraging supporters to use party membership data , to which none of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close on February 14th .
Team RLB said they were simply using resources from the 2019 general election campaign that had not been updated .
An understandable mistake .
It ’ s not as if the problem with their campaign is lack of data anyway – they have plenty of that thanks to Momentum .
Starmer ’ s camp then went to investigate the links .
Again , understandably , they wanted to have a poke around to see how exactly Dialogue was used and – purposefully or not – promoted by their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing so , sources say they went further than Long-Bailey ’ s team by logging into Dialogue , which has led to two members of Team Keir being reported by the party and no members of Team RLB being reported .
The whole series of events seems quite ridiculous when it was the party in the first place that should have closed access to Dialogue ( now suspended ) .
And it is the fact that the letter was leaked to the BBC , making this dispute public , which has really angered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of “ dirty tricks ” are everywhere now .
In other news , don ’ t miss our exclusive from Emily Thornberry ’ s campaign today .
The leadership hopeful says she would remove decisions over arms exports from political control and transfer responsibility for them to an independent body of legal experts .
Politicians – namely Boris Johnson , Jeremy Hunt and Liam Fox – are the ones who have signed off unlawful arms exports to Saudia Arabia in recent years , after all .
She has written a comment piece setting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be implemented through ‘ The Robin Cook Act ’ .
Thornberry is the only candidate in either race not to have secured a place on the ballot paper yet .
She needs 15 more local parties to nominate her by Friday .
Take a look at our rolling list for the latest CLP nominations , which saw Jeremy Corbyn ’ s own patch of Islington North go narrowly to Starmer rather than Long-Bailey by just three votes .
Again , he benefitted from second preferences .
It wasn ’ t a particularly surprising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ north London MP and the members will have agreed strongly with his stance on Brexit , but it does add to the impression that his lead is now unassailable .

If the Iowa caucus results that threw the US Democratic Party presidential primaries into chaos weren’t enough of a political rollercoaster for you, we now have the historic outcome of the 2020 Irish general election. It was not Brexit but the housing crisis, failures in the health service and other domestic issues that dominated the campaign, which allowed Sinn Féin to win the most first preferences. The Labour Party was squeezed by their success, and did poorly, still tarnished by its associated with austerity. We don’t yet know how the parties will negotiate with each other to form a coalition government, but the developments are well worth following – in the long term as well as over the next few weeks, because support for a border poll appears to be very popular among young Irish voters.
The UK Labour Party is having a very interesting time of its own as the leadership race has turned sour. Over the weekend, the party apparently reported Keir Starmer’s campaign team to the Information Commissioner for an alleged data breach, and this letter was then leaked to the BBC. The claim that they hacked into a party database and illegally obtained information on members was described as “utter, utter nonsense” by campaign chair Jenny Chapman yesterday. So, what happened exactly?
Team Keir say they were alerted to emails sent out by Rebecca Long-Bailey’s campaign that included links to Dialogue, Labour’s phonebanking system. This took place at the start of the month. It appeared that the candidate had been encouraging supporters to use party membership data, to which none of the contenders should have access until nominations close on February 14th. Team RLB said they were simply using resources from the 2019 general election campaign that had not been updated. An understandable mistake. It’s not as if the problem with their campaign is lack of data anyway – they have plenty of that thanks to Momentum.
Starmer’s camp then went to investigate the links. Again, understandably, they wanted to have a poke around to see how exactly Dialogue was used and – purposefully or not – promoted by their rivals against the rules. But in doing so, sources say they went further than Long-Bailey’s team by logging into Dialogue, which has led to two members of Team Keir being reported by the party and no members of Team RLB being reported. The whole series of events seems quite ridiculous when it was the party in the first place that should have closed access to Dialogue (now suspended). And it is the fact that the letter was leaked to the BBC, making this dispute public, which has really angered Starmer’s campaign team. Allegations of “dirty tricks” are everywhere now.
In other news, don’t miss our exclusive from Emily Thornberry’s campaign today. The leadership hopeful says she would remove decisions over arms exports from political control and transfer responsibility for them to an independent body of legal experts. Politicians – namely Boris Johnson, Jeremy Hunt and Liam Fox – are the ones who have signed off unlawful arms exports to Saudia Arabia in recent years, after all. She has written a comment piece setting out her policy idea, which would be implemented through ‘The Robin Cook Act’.
Thornberry is the only candidate in either race not to have secured a place on the ballot paper yet. She needs 15 more local parties to nominate her by Friday. Take a look at our rolling list for the latest CLP nominations, which saw Jeremy Corbyn’s own patch of Islington North go narrowly to Starmer rather than Long-Bailey by just three votes. Again, he benefitted from second preferences. It wasn’t a particularly surprising result, considering Starmer is a neighbouring north London MP and the members will have agreed strongly with his stance on Brexit, but it does add to the impression that his lead is now unassailable.


labourlist--2020-02-10--Excl: Thornberry vows to put arms export decisions under independent control

Labour leadership candidate Emily Thornberry has announced in a LabourList article today that she would remove decisions over arms exports from political control and transfer responsibility for them to an independent body .
The Shadow Foreign Secretary has revealed that if elected to the top job as Jeremy Corbyn ’ s successor , she would introduce a ‘ Robin Cook Act ’ – named after the late MP and former Foreign Secretary who resigned over the Iraq war in 2003 .
The piece of legislation – named after the Labour politician whom Thornberry has described as an early “ mentor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ awarding arms export licenses into the hands of an independent panel of experts .
The reformed system would be based on the 1997 model crafted by New Labour in government when then-Chancellor Gordon Brown made the Bank of England independent and gave it responsibility for setting interest rates .
LabourList understands that the MP for Islington South and Finsbury , who has held Labour ’ s foreign affairs brief since June 2016 , wanted to set out this policy at the party ’ s 2017 conference but it was not approved by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her policy idea , Thornberry has written that she would aim for “ permanent reform of the arms export regime ” and put decisions relating to the arms trade “ in the hands of a panel of independent legal experts who care only about compliance with international law ” .
Under her plan , these experts would be “ interviewed and appointed not by ministers , but by the cross-party Commons Committee on Arms Export Controls ” , and “ required to explain publicly their decisions every month ” .
The Committees on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up of four select committees – business and enterprise ; defence ; foreign affairs ; international development – which work together to scrutinise the UK ’ s arms exports .
Official figures revealed last summer that the UK is the world ’ s second largest arms exporter , and sales to Saudi Arabia , the UAE , Qatar and other countries in the Middle East comprised almost 80 % of its 2018 exports worth £14bn in total .
The court of appeal also ruled in June that British arms sales to Saudi Arabia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson , Jeremy Hunt and Liam Fox and other key ministers had illegally signed off arms exports .
According to the Campaign Against Arms Trade , which brought and won the legal case , the UK has licensed £5.3bn worth of arms to Saudi forces since the war in Yemen began in March 2015 .
The conflict has killed over 100,000 people .
Thornberry is the only one of the Labour leadership or deputy leadership candidates who has yet to secure their place on the ballot paper .
She needs nominations from 15 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ final round .

Labour leadership candidate Emily Thornberry has announced in a LabourList article today that she would remove decisions over arms exports from political control and transfer responsibility for them to an independent body.
The Shadow Foreign Secretary has revealed that if elected to the top job as Jeremy Corbyn’s successor, she would introduce a ‘Robin Cook Act’ – named after the late MP and former Foreign Secretary who resigned over the Iraq war in 2003.
The piece of legislation – named after the Labour politician whom Thornberry has described as an early “mentor” – would put the process of awarding arms export licenses into the hands of an independent panel of experts.
The reformed system would be based on the 1997 model crafted by New Labour in government when then-Chancellor Gordon Brown made the Bank of England independent and gave it responsibility for setting interest rates.
LabourList understands that the MP for Islington South and Finsbury, who has held Labour’s foreign affairs brief since June 2016, wanted to set out this policy at the party’s 2017 conference but it was not approved by the leader’s office.
Setting out her policy idea, Thornberry has written that she would aim for “permanent reform of the arms export regime” and put decisions relating to the arms trade “in the hands of a panel of independent legal experts who care only about compliance with international law”.
Under her plan, these experts would be “interviewed and appointed not by ministers, but by the cross-party Commons Committee on Arms Export Controls”, and “required to explain publicly their decisions every month”.
The Committees on Arms Export Controls in parliament is made up of four select committees – business and enterprise; defence; foreign affairs; international development – which work together to scrutinise the UK’s arms exports.
Official figures revealed last summer that the UK is the world’s second largest arms exporter, and sales to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and other countries in the Middle East comprised almost 80% of its 2018 exports worth £14bn in total.
The court of appeal also ruled in June that British arms sales to Saudi Arabia were unlawful, which meant that Boris Johnson, Jeremy Hunt and Liam Fox and other key ministers had illegally signed off arms exports.
According to the Campaign Against Arms Trade, which brought and won the legal case, the UK has licensed £5.3bn worth of arms to Saudi forces since the war in Yemen began in March 2015. The conflict has killed over 100,000 people.
Thornberry is the only one of the Labour leadership or deputy leadership candidates who has yet to secure their place on the ballot paper. She needs nominations from 15 more local parties to be in the final round.


labourlist--2020-02-10--To make Britain a force for good, I’d introduce the Robin Cook Act

When I first stood for Islington South and Finsbury – the Lib Dems ’ number one target seat in the country in the post-Iraq election – Robin Cook came and spent a day campaigning with me .
He told everyone he spoke to that I ’ d been on all the same marches against the war as him , so voting against me to register a protest against the war made no sense .
We talked a lot that day about how he ’ d felt undermined from within when it came to making a reality of his famous ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it came to ending the sale of arms to human rights abusers , just because they were our allies .
And more in sorrow than anger , he spoke about what a predictable mess things had become in Iraq .
A few months later , he was gone .
It was one of the saddest days of my political life , both because he was a giant of the movement and because I ’ d lost a mentor just after I ’ d found him .
But I ’ ve never forgotten the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time I ’ ve confronted a new foreign policy issue over the last four years , I find myself asking : “ What would Robin do ?
” .
I believe there are three key principles and policies that flow from those lessons .
First , you can ’ t play favourites when it comes to countries who are abusing human rights or breaching international law .
As Robin himself said in 1999 , we must never “ turn a blind eye to how other governments behave and a deaf ear to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s why I ’ ve criticised this government ’ s bowing and scraping attitude to countries like Israel , China and Bahrain , and why any government I lead will instead use our position on the UN Security Council to call out all abuses from all countries on the biggest stage .
Second , you should never embark on a military intervention unless you ’ re clear about the mission , the exit strategy , what will happen in the aftermath , and have clear international backing for your actions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took on Kosovo , East Timor and Sierra Leone , and why he felt ethically obliged to resign over Iraq .
It ’ s also why Labour would introduce a War Powers Act , so parliament can hold us to account on those tests before voting on any proposed intervention .
And it ’ s why I would personally lead the revival and reform of the ‘ Responsibility to Protect ’ doctrine – a great achievement , but it has been appropriated by hawkish warmongers in the US and UK to justify illegal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And third , we must make Britain – to use Robin ’ s phrase – “ a force for good in the world ” .
We must never let other priorities , like trade , cloud our judgement and allow our government ’ s foreign policy to be devolved to foreign leaders who are clearly a force for bad , from Egypt ’ s Sisi and the Philippines ’ Duterte to Donald Trump and Crown Prince Bin Salman .
Those priorities will stick with me if I ’ m Labour leader .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the job that Robin Cook never could , as he told me sorrowfully that day in 2005 .
As he said , he was stymied in his efforts to make his reforms to the arms export licensing regime work in practice , because of the pressure he was under to put other trade and security considerations first when it came to certain countries .
And as we ’ ve seen from the last five years in Yemen , exactly the same problem persists today .
I previously agreed with shadow cabinet colleagues that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regime by obliging the government to provide transparent evidence on the basis for its decisions and on the proposed end-use of each consignment , and that ministers should take independent advice from non-governmental experts before making their decisions .
But my concern about only going that far is that any future Tory government could just change the legislation again , and go back to their old ways .
We need to make changes that will be effectively binding on every future government .
So , just as Gordon Brown did in 1997 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ independent and gave it full control of interest rates , a decision no future government would ever dare reverse , I would achieve the same permanent reform of the arms export regime .
I would legislate to take those decisions entirely out of the hands of politicians .
I would put them instead in the hands of a panel of independent legal experts who care only about compliance with international law , to be interviewed and appointed not by ministers , but by the cross-party Commons Committee on Arms Export Controls , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ required to explain publicly their decisions every month .
And I ’ ll call it the Robin Cook Act .

When I first stood for Islington South and Finsbury – the Lib Dems’ number one target seat in the country in the post-Iraq election – Robin Cook came and spent a day campaigning with me. He told everyone he spoke to that I’d been on all the same marches against the war as him, so voting against me to register a protest against the war made no sense.
We talked a lot that day about how he’d felt undermined from within when it came to making a reality of his famous ‘ethical foreign policy’, especially when it came to ending the sale of arms to human rights abusers, just because they were our allies. And more in sorrow than anger, he spoke about what a predictable mess things had become in Iraq.
A few months later, he was gone. It was one of the saddest days of my political life, both because he was a giant of the movement and because I’d lost a mentor just after I’d found him. But I’ve never forgotten the lessons he taught me, and every time I’ve confronted a new foreign policy issue over the last four years, I find myself asking: “What would Robin do?”.
I believe there are three key principles and policies that flow from those lessons. First, you can’t play favourites when it comes to countries who are abusing human rights or breaching international law. As Robin himself said in 1999, we must never “turn a blind eye to how other governments behave and a deaf ear to the cries for help of their people”.
That’s why I’ve criticised this government’s bowing and scraping attitude to countries like Israel, China and Bahrain, and why any government I lead will instead use our position on the UN Security Council to call out all abuses from all countries on the biggest stage.
Second, you should never embark on a military intervention unless you’re clear about the mission, the exit strategy, what will happen in the aftermath, and have clear international backing for your actions. That’s the approach Robin took on Kosovo, East Timor and Sierra Leone, and why he felt ethically obliged to resign over Iraq.
It’s also why Labour would introduce a War Powers Act, so parliament can hold us to account on those tests before voting on any proposed intervention. And it’s why I would personally lead the revival and reform of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ doctrine – a great achievement, but it has been appropriated by hawkish warmongers in the US and UK to justify illegal interventions and wars of regime change.
And third, we must make Britain – to use Robin’s phrase – “a force for good in the world”. We must never let other priorities, like trade, cloud our judgement and allow our government’s foreign policy to be devolved to foreign leaders who are clearly a force for bad, from Egypt’s Sisi and the Philippines’ Duterte to Donald Trump and Crown Prince Bin Salman.
Those priorities will stick with me if I’m Labour leader. But I’ll also seek to complete the job that Robin Cook never could, as he told me sorrowfully that day in 2005. As he said, he was stymied in his efforts to make his reforms to the arms export licensing regime work in practice, because of the pressure he was under to put other trade and security considerations first when it came to certain countries. And as we’ve seen from the last five years in Yemen, exactly the same problem persists today.
I previously agreed with shadow cabinet colleagues that we would legislate to reform the licensing regime by obliging the government to provide transparent evidence on the basis for its decisions and on the proposed end-use of each consignment, and that ministers should take independent advice from non-governmental experts before making their decisions.
But my concern about only going that far is that any future Tory government could just change the legislation again, and go back to their old ways. We need to make changes that will be effectively binding on every future government.
So, just as Gordon Brown did in 1997, when he made the Bank of England independent and gave it full control of interest rates, a decision no future government would ever dare reverse, I would achieve the same permanent reform of the arms export regime. I would legislate to take those decisions entirely out of the hands of politicians.
I would put them instead in the hands of a panel of independent legal experts who care only about compliance with international law, to be interviewed and appointed not by ministers, but by the cross-party Commons Committee on Arms Export Controls, and – like the Bank of England – required to explain publicly their decisions every month. And I’ll call it the Robin Cook Act.